Objectives: First steps to promote the proper use of medicines in remote islands and rural areas are as follows: (1) recognition of the profession of “pharmacist” from secondary-remote-island residents who do not have a pharmacy or drugstore or the opportunity for pharmacist contact and (2) an understanding by remote-island residents of the advantages of having a “family pharmacist.”
Methods: Repeated “medicine information and consultation sessions” for secondary-remote-island residents of Japan’s Nagasaki Prefecture were held.  Residents were then surveyed for changes in awareness of or demand for pharmacists and the nature of such changes.
Results: Before the information sessions, 29.7% of residents did not recognize the profession of pharmacy, but the extent of their recognition increased after information sessions were concluded.  They were asked “Who explains medicines in a way that is easy to understand ?”; more than half responded “doctors” before the information session, but after information sessions were concluded, those who said “pharmacists” increased.
Conclusion: Conducting “medicine information and consultation sessions” for residents of secondary-remote islands and rural areas enabled them to understand the profession of pharmacy.  The initiatives in the present study are first steps toward promoting proper use of medicines by residents of remote islands and rural areas who use “family pharmacies/pharmacists.”

Purpose: Romosozumab reportedly increases bone density in patients with severe osteoporosis; however, data on its clinical effects are limited. We conducted a multicenter retrospective survey to study the bone density-increasing effects of romosozumab and blood test-based predictive factors in patients with severe osteoporosis, examining its effects in clinical practice. Materials and Methods: This was a multicenter retrospective observational study. The subjects were patients with severe osteoporosis who were treated with romosozumab at the participating facilities. The increase in bone density was assessed by comparing bone density changes (as a percentage) in the lumbar spine, femoral neck, and total femur before and 12 months after administration using dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry. The association between changes in bone density at each site and pre-treatment bone metabolism markers (Tracp 5b, P1NP), serum calcium levels, nutritional status [Conut score: albumin, total cholesterol (TCho), and total lymphocyte count], and kidney function (eGFR) was assessed. Results: In both naïve patients and those switching from bone resorption inhibitors, the bone density increased significantly. In naïve patients, eGFR were positively associated with bone density in the total femur. In cases of switching from bone resorption inhibitors, correlations were found between Tracp 5b and lumbar spine bone mineral density (BMD), as well as between Tracp 5b, Alb, T-Cho, and eGFR in the total femur BMD. Conclusion Romosozumab administration significantly increases bone density in osteoporosis, and assessing key predictive factors is necessary to ensure clinical effectiveness.

Purpose: Romosozumab reportedly increases bone density in patients with severe osteoporosis; however, data on its clinical effects are limited. We conducted a multicenter retrospective survey to study the bone density-increasing effects of romosozumab and blood test-based predictive factors in patients with severe osteoporosis, examining its effects in clinical practice. Materials and Methods: This was a multicenter retrospective observational study. The subjects were patients with severe osteoporosis who were treated with romosozumab at the participating facilities. The increase in bone density was assessed by comparing bone density changes (as a percentage) in the lumbar spine, femoral neck, and total femur before and 12 months after administration using dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry. The association between changes in bone density at each site and pre-treatment bone metabolism markers (Tracp 5b, P1NP), serum calcium levels, nutritional status [Conut score: albumin, total cholesterol (TCho), and total lymphocyte count], and kidney function (eGFR) was assessed. Results: In both naïve patients and those switching from bone resorption inhibitors, the bone density increased significantly. In naïve patients, eGFR were positively associated with bone density in the total femur. In cases of switching from bone resorption inhibitors, correlations were found between Tracp 5b and lumbar spine bone mineral density (BMD), as well as between Tracp 5b, Alb, T-Cho, and eGFR in the total femur BMD. Conclusion Romosozumab administration significantly increases bone density in osteoporosis, and assessing key predictive factors is necessary to ensure clinical effectiveness.

Purpose: Romosozumab reportedly increases bone density in patients with severe osteoporosis; however, data on its clinical effects are limited. We conducted a multicenter retrospective survey to study the bone density-increasing effects of romosozumab and blood test-based predictive factors in patients with severe osteoporosis, examining its effects in clinical practice. Materials and Methods: This was a multicenter retrospective observational study. The subjects were patients with severe osteoporosis who were treated with romosozumab at the participating facilities. The increase in bone density was assessed by comparing bone density changes (as a percentage) in the lumbar spine, femoral neck, and total femur before and 12 months after administration using dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry. The association between changes in bone density at each site and pre-treatment bone metabolism markers (Tracp 5b, P1NP), serum calcium levels, nutritional status [Conut score: albumin, total cholesterol (TCho), and total lymphocyte count], and kidney function (eGFR) was assessed. Results: In both naïve patients and those switching from bone resorption inhibitors, the bone density increased significantly. In naïve patients, eGFR were positively associated with bone density in the total femur. In cases of switching from bone resorption inhibitors, correlations were found between Tracp 5b and lumbar spine bone mineral density (BMD), as well as between Tracp 5b, Alb, T-Cho, and eGFR in the total femur BMD. Conclusion Romosozumab administration significantly increases bone density in osteoporosis, and assessing key predictive factors is necessary to ensure clinical effectiveness.

Purpose: Romosozumab reportedly increases bone density in patients with severe osteoporosis; however, data on its clinical effects are limited. We conducted a multicenter retrospective survey to study the bone density-increasing effects of romosozumab and blood test-based predictive factors in patients with severe osteoporosis, examining its effects in clinical practice. Materials and Methods: This was a multicenter retrospective observational study. The subjects were patients with severe osteoporosis who were treated with romosozumab at the participating facilities. The increase in bone density was assessed by comparing bone density changes (as a percentage) in the lumbar spine, femoral neck, and total femur before and 12 months after administration using dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry. The association between changes in bone density at each site and pre-treatment bone metabolism markers (Tracp 5b, P1NP), serum calcium levels, nutritional status [Conut score: albumin, total cholesterol (TCho), and total lymphocyte count], and kidney function (eGFR) was assessed. Results: In both naïve patients and those switching from bone resorption inhibitors, the bone density increased significantly. In naïve patients, eGFR were positively associated with bone density in the total femur. In cases of switching from bone resorption inhibitors, correlations were found between Tracp 5b and lumbar spine bone mineral density (BMD), as well as between Tracp 5b, Alb, T-Cho, and eGFR in the total femur BMD. Conclusion Romosozumab administration significantly increases bone density in osteoporosis, and assessing key predictive factors is necessary to ensure clinical effectiveness.

Purpose: Romosozumab reportedly increases bone density in patients with severe osteoporosis; however, data on its clinical effects are limited. We conducted a multicenter retrospective survey to study the bone density-increasing effects of romosozumab and blood test-based predictive factors in patients with severe osteoporosis, examining its effects in clinical practice. Materials and Methods: This was a multicenter retrospective observational study. The subjects were patients with severe osteoporosis who were treated with romosozumab at the participating facilities. The increase in bone density was assessed by comparing bone density changes (as a percentage) in the lumbar spine, femoral neck, and total femur before and 12 months after administration using dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry. The association between changes in bone density at each site and pre-treatment bone metabolism markers (Tracp 5b, P1NP), serum calcium levels, nutritional status [Conut score: albumin, total cholesterol (TCho), and total lymphocyte count], and kidney function (eGFR) was assessed. Results: In both naïve patients and those switching from bone resorption inhibitors, the bone density increased significantly. In naïve patients, eGFR were positively associated with bone density in the total femur. In cases of switching from bone resorption inhibitors, correlations were found between Tracp 5b and lumbar spine bone mineral density (BMD), as well as between Tracp 5b, Alb, T-Cho, and eGFR in the total femur BMD. Conclusion Romosozumab administration significantly increases bone density in osteoporosis, and assessing key predictive factors is necessary to ensure clinical effectiveness.

Methods: The study participants were 249 patients who underwent intradiscal condoliase injection for LDH at nine participating institutions, including 241 patients with initial LDH (group C) and eight with recurrent LDH (group R). Patient characteristics including age, sex, body mass index, disease duration, intervertebral LDH level, smoking history, and diabetes history were evaluated. Low back pain/leg pain Numerical Rating Scale (NRS) scores and the Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) were used to evaluate clinical symptoms before treatment and at 6 months and 1 year after treatment. Results: Low back pain NRS scores (before treatment and at 6 months and 1 year after treatment, respectively) in group C (4.9 → 2.6 → 1.8) showed significant improvement until 1 year after treatment. Although a tendency for improvement was observed in group R (3.5 → 2.8 → 2.2), no significant difference was noted. Groups C (6.6 → 2.4 → 1.4) and R (7.0 → 3.1 → 3.2) showed significant improvement in the leg pain NRS scores after treatment. Group C (41.4 → 19.5 → 13.7) demonstrated significant improvement in the ODI up to 1 year after treatment; however, no significant difference was found in group R (35.7 → 31.7 → 26.4). Conclusions Although intradiscal condoliase injection is less effective for LDH recurrence than for initial cases, it is useful for improving leg pain and can be considered a minimally invasive and safe treatment method.

Objective: Histological verification of epithelioid cell granuloma is important in diagnosing sarcoidosis; tissue sampling is a worldwide requirement. In 2006, to reduce medical expenses and avoid invasive procedures, diagnostic criteria without histological verification were permitted by the Japanese government. In 2015, new diagnostic criteria, allowed clinical diagnoses based on only respiratory, ocular, and cardiac systems with at least a two-system involvement, increasing the need to sample tissue from clinically unevaluable organs in suspected sarcoidosis. This study aimed to compare the characteristics of patients who were diagnosed with sarcoidosis according to the 2006 and 2015 criteria.Materials and Methods: Using the 2015 version, we re-evaluated the characteristics of 264 patients with diagnosed or suspected sarcoidosis according to the 2006 criteria, at Jichi Medical University Hospital between 2004 and 2012 (clinical diagnosis, 84; histological diagnosis, 117; suspected sarcoidosis 63).Results: Thirty-nine patients were diagnosed with suspected sarcoidosis due to the absence of at least a two-system involvement; two patients had insufficient laboratory data suggestive of sarcoidosis. Six patients moved from suspected sarcoidosis to a histological diagnosis because of a greater leniency in the criteria for supportive findings. The 2015 diagnostic criteria excluded patients with organ involvement without a requirement for systemic steroids from the clinical diagnosis group. A case of schwannoma, erroneously placed in the clinical diagnosis group by the 2006 criteria, was reclassified according to the 2015 criteria.Conclusion: The 2015 version is preferable for clinically diagnosing sarcoidosis, even without histological specimens, and provides guidance for indications for systemic treatment.