Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Pharmacology
This is the talk page for discussing WikiProject Pharmacology and anything related to its purposes and tasks. |
|
Archives: Index, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17Auto-archiving period: 90 days ![]() |
![]() | This project page does not require a rating on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||
|
![]() | WikiProject Pharmacology was featured in a WikiProject Report in the Signpost on 17 January 2009. |
|
This page has archives. Sections older than 90 days may be automatically archived by Lowercase sigmabot III when more than 10 sections are present. |
Hello
editHowdy folks, I’ve been invited by
WhatamIdoing to contribute here and at the Medicine project. I’m a subject matter expert in these fields with >15 yrs experience across various fields of medicine, including product development, patient care, and basic science. I welcome you to reach out for support with existing articles or to contribute to new topics. See you around! Gobucks821 (talk) 14:57, 17 January 2024 (UTC)
- @Gobucks821: A (rather belated!) welcome over here. There don't seem to be many of us watching WikiProject Pharmacology! Regardless, let's push on. It will be great to have you working on this project too! Klbrain (talk) 09:10, 7 May 2024 (UTC)
- Thnx much! Here if needed. I realized just today that I never joined the Medicine project, so I just did that today. Cheers! Gobucks821 (talk) 15:38, 3 August 2024 (UTC)
Integrate definitive new findings
editMuch of the staggering mortality rates and health care costs associated with drug-induced liver injury (DILI) is clearly linked to 11 drugs not well-known for their hepatotoxic risk, per the editorial accompanying https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jamainternalmedicine/fullarticle/2820267, which just came out.[1] Lets get this added to the 11 to 17 relevant articles, liver failure, etc.RememberOrwell (talk)
References
- ^ Torgersen, Jessie; Mezochow, Alyssa K.; Newcomb, Craig W.; Carbonari, Dena M.; Hennessy, Sean; Rentsch, Christopher T.; Park, Lesley S.; Tate, Janet P.; Bräu, Norbert; Bhattacharya, Debika; Lim, Joseph K.; Mezzacappa, Catherine; Njei, Basile; Roy, Jason A.; Taddei, Tamar H.; Justice, Amy C.; Lo Re, Vincent (24 June 2024). "Severe Acute Liver Injury After Hepatotoxic Medication Initiation in Real-World Data". JAMA Internal Medicine. doi:10.1001/jamainternmed.2024.1836. ISSN 2168-6106.
- This is a cohort study, which is classified as primary. Per WP:MEDRS, secondary sources (review articles) are needed to support medical claims. Furthermore the accompanying editorial describes this cohort study as an "innovative methodologic approach". We need to wait for this study to be evaluated in reliable secondary sources before citing those secondary sources. Boghog (talk) 05:46, 26 June 2024 (UTC)
- Thanks for the feedback and help. I see that per the verifiability policy, "If available, academic and peer-reviewed publications are usually the most reliable sources on topics such as history, medicine, and science." Given the size of the study, risk of bias, and the source (JAMA), it seems solid enough, but if reliable sources differ, that matters. I don't want to jump the gun, but I'm not convinced we need to wait. Also, the editorial IS a secondary source. LOL, you've made ~leetk (1337k) edits, Boghog. RememberOrwell (talk) 07:17, 26 June 2024 (UTC)
- Seven (stavudine (86.4 eptkpy), erlotinib, lenalidomide ?"or"? thalidomide, chlorpromazine, metronidazole, prochlorperazine, isoniazid) had 10+ events per 10 000 person-years (eptkpy), while ten (moxifloxacin, azathioprine, levofloxacin, clarithromycin, ketoconazole, fluconazole, captopril, amoxicillin-clavulanate, sulfamethoxazole-trimethoprim, ciprofloxacin) had 5-10 eptkpy. Eleven of these (64%) were not included in the highest hepatotoxicity category of LiverTox. RememberOrwell (talk) 05:23, 29 June 2024 (UTC)
- Thanks for the feedback and help. I see that per the verifiability policy, "If available, academic and peer-reviewed publications are usually the most reliable sources on topics such as history, medicine, and science." Given the size of the study, risk of bias, and the source (JAMA), it seems solid enough, but if reliable sources differ, that matters. I don't want to jump the gun, but I'm not convinced we need to wait. Also, the editorial IS a secondary source. LOL, you've made ~leetk (1337k) edits, Boghog. RememberOrwell (talk) 07:17, 26 June 2024 (UTC)
Requested move at Talk:Transgender hormone therapy#Requested move 15 July 2024
editThere is a requested move discussion at Talk:Transgender hormone therapy#Requested move 15 July 2024 that may be of interest to members of this WikiProject. RodRabelo7 (talk) 16:08, 21 July 2024 (UTC)
Request for excerpt of text, from Archiv der Pharmazie (1987)
editIn furtherance of editing an article, we would ask that any individual having access to a chemistry, pharmacology, or medical library that could give access to the following article,
- Rücker G, Neugebauer M, Neugebauer M, Heiden PG (December 1987). "Zur chemischen Stabilität des Fenetyllins" [The chemical stability of fenethylline]. Archiv der Pharmazie (in German). 320 (12): 1272–1275. doi:10.1002/ardp.198700045. PMID 3439867. S2CID 84235752.
that they copy and paste the relevant synthetic text into a Talk entry at the Fenethylline article. That article presents a scheme in the Synthesis section, and the aim of consulting this source is to verify that the Scheme reflects the content of this source (per WP:VERIFY). Specifically, the scheme shows conversion of theophylline into a 7-(β-chloroethyl)-analog by treatment of the parent compound with a 1,2-dihaloethane, and then conversion of that analog, by treatment with the free base of amphetamine, to the fenethylline product (a codrug composed of theophylline and amphetamine linked by a two carbon bridge).
Our presumption is that in performing the chemical stability studies reported in the Archiv der Pharmazie abstract, Rücker et al first had to prepare the chemical sample they studied, hence this paper might contain a proscribed, quotable (copyable) synthetic method, and perhaps a scheme corresponding to the one at the Fenethylline article. Any of the relevant quoted German text, pasted at Talk for that article, and any further comment you would wish to make, would be greatly appreciated, and would likely allow us to verify the information attributed to this source. Thank you. 98.206.30.195 (talk) 03:01, 26 July 2024 (UTC)
See my comment at Talk:Aclarubicin. Opinions welcome. Thanks, MidnightBlue (Talk) 22:31, 27 July 2024 (UTC)
- Actioned. Thanks. MidnightBlue (Talk) 13:02, 28 July 2024 (UTC)
Picropodophyllin
editThere is a promising draft Draft:Picropodophyllin that I do not have the expertise to approve or decline right now. As it is within the scope of this project - is the language used appropriate for a substance that is currently used only in clinical trials? Reconrabbit 12:11, 7 August 2024 (UTC)
- I've read the draft page. It's well-written, and reliably sourced, with the caveat that the sources are mostly minor scientific journals (but WP:MEDRS-compliant). Personally, I'd delete the bibliography section, which includes some not-yet-peer-reviewed preprints. I think the question for notability is what you noted: that the molecule is only in trials, not in actual use. Given that we have the heavily populated Category:Experimental cancer drugs, I think there is consensus that the topic can be accepted into mainspace. --Tryptofish (talk) 21:40, 7 August 2024 (UTC)
- I accepted it through AfC after commenting out the bibliography and altering some wording here and there. One possible concern is the use of Oncotarget in places. Reconrabbit 12:40, 8 August 2024 (UTC)