METHODS: Acute inflammation was produced by subplantar injection of 0.1 mL of 0.1% histamine into the right hind paw of each rat in the control and treatment groups. The degree of edema was measured before injection and at the time points of 30, 60, 120, 180, 240 and 300 min after injection. Changes of peritoneal vascular permeability were studied using Evans blue dye as a detector. Vascular permeability was evaluated by the amount of dye leakage into the peritoneal cavity in rats. To evaluate the inhibitory effect of AEBO on biochemical mediators of vascular permeability, the levels of nitric oxide (NO) and vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) were determined in histamine-treated paw tissues. The major constituents of AEBO were determined by gas chromatography-mass spectrometry (GC-MS) analysis.
RESULTS: AEBO produced a significant inhibition of histamine-induced paw edema starting at 60 min time point, with maximal percentage of inhibition (60.25%) achieved with a dose of 150 mg/kg of AEBO at 60 min time point. Up to 99% of increased peritoneal vascular permeability produced by histamine was successfully suppressed by AEBO. The expression of biochemical mediators of vascular permeability, NO and VEGF, was also found to be downregulated in the AEBO treated group. Gas chromatography-mass spectrometry (GC-MS) analysis revealed that the major constituent in AEBO was acetic acid.
CONCLUSIONS: The experimental findings demonstrated that the anti-inflammatory activity of AEBO was due to its inhibitory effect on vascular permeability, which was suppressed as a result of the reduced expression of biochemical mediators (NO and VEGF) in tissues. Our results contribute towards the validation of the traditional use of Bixa orellana in the treatment of inflammatory disorders.
Methods: A cross-sectional survey of 329 GPs and 548 pharmacists was conducted from May to November 2019. Participants answered a questionnaire focused on their i) current practice in the management of AR, ii) views on patient compliance, iii) understanding and usage of guidelines.
Results: Clinical history was the most preferred method to diagnose AR by 95.4% of GPs and 58.8% of pharmacists. Second-generation antihistamines were the most widely available treatment option in GP clinics and pharmacies (94.8% and 97.2%) and correspondingly the most preferred treatment for both mild (90.3%, 76.8%) to moderatesevere rhinitis (90.3%, 78.6%) by GPs and pharmacists, respectively. Loratadine was ranked as the most preferred 2nd generation antihistamines (GP vs pharmacists: 55.3% vs 58.9%). More than 90% of GPs and pharmacists ranked length and efficacy of treatment as important factors that increase patient compliance. Awareness of the ARIA guidelines was high among GPs (80%) and lower among pharmacists (48.4%). However, only 63.3% of GPs and 48.2% of pharmacists knew how to identify AR patients.
Conclusions: The survey in the 4 ASEAN countries has identified a need to strengthen the awareness and use of ARIA guidelines among the primary care practitioners. Adherence to ARIA guidelines, choosing the appropriate treatment option and prioritizing factors that increases patient compliance may contribute to better management outcomes of AR at the primary care practice.
Methods: The drug classification systems of the United States, the United Kingdom, Japan, Singapore, Malaysia, the Philippines, and Canada were selected to study alongside Thailand's system. The regulatory review was conducted through each country's drug regulatory agency website and available published research. Complementary interviews with drug regulatory authorities were conducted when written documentation was unclear and had limited access. Fifty-two common drugs were selected to compare their actual classifications across the different countries.
Results: All selected countries classified drugs into two major groups: prescription drugs and non-prescription drugs. The studied countries further sub-classified non-prescription drugs into 1-4 categories. Principles of drug classification criteria among countries are similar; they comprised of three themes: disease characteristics, drug safety profile, and other drug characteristics. Actual drug classification of antibiotics, dyslipidemia treatments, and hypertension treatments in Thailand are notedly different from other countries. Furthermore, 77.4% of drugs studied in Thailand fall into the behind-the-counter (dangerous) drug category, which varied from antihistamines to antibiotics, dyslipidemia treatments, and vaccines.
Conclusion: Thailand's drug classification criteria are comparable with other nations; however, there is a need to review drug classification statuses as many drugs have been classified into improper drug categories.