ライフサイエンスコーパス: nalmefene

1 ncytial virus 24 hrs after the first dose of nalmefene.

2 s further enhanced when co-administered with nalmefene.

3 eatment with an initial ameliorating dose of nalmefene.

4 melioration of the perception of pruritus on nalmefene.

5 and 24 hr after the administration of either nalmefene (1 mg or 1 microg/kg) or naloxone (2 mg or 2 m

6 ed (1:1) to 24 weeks of as-needed placebo or nalmefene 18 mg.

7 The effect of single dose nalmefene (18 mg) on changes in a priori defined striata

8 Low-dose nalmefene (25 mg/day) appeared efficacious and was assoc

9 l gambling were randomly assigned to receive nalmefene (25 mg/day, 50 mg/day, or 100 mg/day) or place

10 ix hundred and four patients (placebo = 298; nalmefene = 306),>/=18 years of age, with a diagnosis of

11 2.4 times greater with placebo compared with nalmefene (95% confidence interval, 1.05-5.59).

12 Animals were injected daily with nalmefene, a nonselective opioid receptor antagonist, an

13 Nalmefene, a pure opiate antagonist with a longer durati

14 These results suggest that nalmefene administration produces transient changes in t

15 Following chronic nalmefene administration, no significant change in eithe

16 Oral administration of the opioid antagonist nalmefene alone (up to 20 mg/kg) failed to show a signif

17 Patients treated with nalmefene also had fewer subsequent relapses (P<.03) tha

18 d receptors were 28.7 +/- 5.9 hr for 1 mg of nalmefene and 2.0 +/- 1.6 hr for 2 mg of naloxone.

19 times slower than plasma clearance times for nalmefene and naloxone, respectively.

20 However, combined oral dosing of nalmefene and subthreshold doses of AM251, a cannabinoid

21 ndings suggest that the prolonged effects of nalmefene are related to the slow dissociation of nalmef

22 Nalmefene blunts BOLD response in the mesolimbic system

23 rugs and that the pharmacokinetic profile of nalmefene can be tuned by varying the length of the alky

24 t Month 6, there was a significant effect of nalmefene compared with placebo in reducing the number o

25 therefore demonstrate that sustained plasma nalmefene concentrations can be achieved in both dog and

26 er was chosen to demonstrate that dog plasma nalmefene concentrations were dose-dependent at 1, 5 and

27 at a dose of 5mg-eq. nalmefene/kg and plasma nalmefene concentrations were measured over a four-week

28 eries of studies, three different lipophilic nalmefene derivatives were evaluated: the palmitate (C16

29 Nalmefene did not alter brain perfusion.

30 e the safety and efficacy of 2 doses of oral nalmefene for alcohol dependence.

31 fene are related to the slow dissociation of nalmefene from opioid receptors, which are not reflected

32 ression and liver enzymes were larger in the nalmefene group compared with placebo at Week 24.

33 gnment to the placebo or 20- or 80-mg/d dose nalmefene groups for 12 weeks.

34 ents showed that the 25 mg/day and 50 mg/day nalmefene groups had significantly different scores on t

35 id not differ between the 20- and 80-mg dose nalmefene groups.

36 Subjects who received nalmefene had a statistically significant reduction in s

37 improvement in some consumption outcomes for nalmefene (heavy drinking days per month: WMD, -2.0; 95%

38 cerebral mu opioid receptors by naloxone and nalmefene in eight normal volunteers.

39 as-needed use of the opioid system modulator nalmefene in reducing alcohol consumption in patients wi

40 cy and tolerability of the opioid antagonist nalmefene in the treatment of adults with pathological g

41 Nalmefene is a micro and delta opioid receptor antagonis

42 Nalmefene is a newer opioid antagonist that is structura

43 Nalmefene is an opioid antagonist which as a once-a-day

44 oral administration of the opiate antagonist nalmefene is associated with any beneficial effects in p

45 n dogs and in minipigs, at a dose of 5mg-eq. nalmefene/kg and plasma nalmefene concentrations were me

46 ons were dose-dependent at 1, 5 and 20mg-eq. nalmefene/kg.

47 n a sesame oil solution at a dose of 1mg-eq. nalmefene/kg.

48 These results suggest that nalmefene may have a favorable risk-to-benefit ratio whe

49 livered a fairly constant level of 0.2-0.3ng nalmefene/mL plasma for one month and since there was no

50 taking placebo (n = 289) and patients taking nalmefene (n = 290) were included in the efficacy analys

51 For naltrexone and nalmefene, NNHs for withdrawal from trials due to advers

52 Possible tolerance to nalmefene occurred in 3 patients.

53 Effects of naltrexone or nalmefene on alcohol intake were examined in continuous

54 to determine the effect of a single dose of nalmefene on striatal blood oxygen level-dependent (BOLD

55 nic administration of the opioid antagonist, nalmefene, on the binding activity of [11C]SCH23390 and

56 ed either a single injection of 10 (mg/kg of nalmefene or control vehicle solution 1 h prior to the P

57 ere chronically administered 10 mg/kg/day of nalmefene or vehicle for 7 days by an osmotic minipump.

58 an be achieved in both dog and minipig using nalmefene prodrugs and that the pharmacokinetic profile

59 is patient population, a number of potential nalmefene prodrugs were synthesized with the aim of prov

60 Nalmefene provides clinical benefit, constitutes a poten

61 This longer blockade of opioid receptors by nalmefene represents an advantage in the clinical manage

62 This is consistent with nalmefene's actions on opioid receptors, which modulate

63 hat in the presence of the alcohol infusion, nalmefene significantly reduced the BOLD response in the

64 Significantly fewer patients treated with nalmefene than patients given placebo relapsed to heavy

65 due to adverse events were more common with nalmefene than placebo.

66 Following acute administration of nalmefene, the binding potential of [11C]SCH23390 in the

67 were higher than corresponding means during nalmefene therapy in 13 (P = .002) and 12 (P = .013) pat

68 ienced marked exacerbation of pruritus after nalmefene therapy was suddenly discontinued.

69 action that did not preclude continuing with nalmefene therapy.

70 In mice, nalmefene treatment increased viral titers and was assoc

71 Treatment with nalmefene was effective in preventing relapse to heavy d

72 Blood levels of nalmefene were consistent with normal pharmacokinetics o

73 Similarly, both naltrexone and nalmefene were more effective in suppressing operant alc

74 2% of the subjects who received 25 mg/day of nalmefene were rated as "much improved" or "very much im

75 The dose of nalmefene, which initially was 2 mg orally twice daily,