No abstract available.

No abstract available.

No abstract available.

No abstract available.
Complementary Therapies*

No abstract available.
Lung Neoplasms* ; Lung*

No abstract available.
Lung Neoplasms* ; Lung*

No abstract available.
Internet*

BACKGROUND: Antihistamine drugs are used widely in many conditions. Although some antihistamines may cause a photosensitive reaction,many physicians are not awae of it. OBJECTIVE: For examination of the phototoxic potential of antihistamines, we performed the Candida albiecrns test which is simple, cheap, and good for the screening of many drugs. MEHTODS: Thirty microliters of each solute of various antihistamines were applied to the Sabraud dextrose agar plate in which Candida albicans were applied diffusly. Four hours after the application, 60J/cm fo UVA was irradiated for two days. The irradiated. plates and nonirradiated control ones were incubated in a dark room for 48 hours, and examined for lear zones arround the drug, which means a positive results for the phototoxic potential of the drugs. RESULTS: Mequitazine, thiethylperazine, perphenazine and cllorromazine showed positive results, whereas others did not. An additional Candida albicans test using 0.1%, 0.01%, and 0.001% of the positive drugs revealed tht chlorpromazine, thiethylperazine aderphenazine showed positive results at 0.1%, but negative at 0.01 and 0.001%. Mequitazine was niegative at 0.1, 0.01, and 0,001%, Additional studies of the Candida albicans test using 5% and 10% of the diphenhydramine and dimenhydrinate, those were known photosensitizers but they slowed negative results at this study and revealed very weak posit,ive result in 10% diphenhydramine. CONCLUSION: A photosensitive reaction such as photoallergy and persistent light react,ion may be triggered by the phenothiazine antihistamines. Negative result in 1%, and very weak positive results in 10% diphenhydramine may be due to different mechanism of phototoxicity, or the low phototoxic potential of diphenhydrainine.
Agar ; Candida albicans* ; Candida* ; Chlorpromazine ; Dermatitis, Photoallergic ; Dermatitis, Phototoxic* ; Dimenhydrinate ; Diphenhydramine ; Glucose ; Histamine Antagonists ; Mass Screening* ; Perphenazine ; Photosensitizing Agents ; Thiethylperazine

Currently, dissection of the axillary or regional lymph nodes is considered the standard staging procedure in breast cancer. However, accumulating evidence is becoming available that the sentinel node concept may provide the same or even better staging information. In the case of melanoma, it is proven that the histoiogical characteristics of the sentinel node reflect the histological characteristics of the distal part of the lymphatic basin. Morbidity can be reduced significantly by the use of sentinel node dissection as several authors have reported successful introduction of this technique into clinical practice. But in breast cancer patients, there are signigicant differences in practice relating to the technology, such as radiopharmaceuticals, injection sites, volume of injectate, combination with vital blue dye, preoperative lymphoscintigraphy, etc. Valuable reports on these topics appeared in recent journals. This review is a summary of those reports for nuclear physicians interested in sentinel node detection by lymphoscintigraphy in breast cancer patients.
Breast Neoplasms* ; Breast* ; Humans ; Lymph Nodes* ; Lymphoscintigraphy ; Melanoma ; Radiopharmaceuticals

No abstract available.