This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Archive 10 | ← | Archive 15 | Archive 16 | Archive 17 | Archive 18 | Archive 19 |
As we now have a few gene therapies approved, how should this box be appropriately used? It's not a drug in the classic sense, and there are some parameters that could probably be added if "gene therapy" was a defined type. Natureium ( talk) 16:40, 20 December 2017 (UTC)
Why? A
gene therapy – "the therapeutic delivery of nucleic acid into a patient's cells as a
drug to treat disease.
[1]" – is a drug. The only difference between a gene therapy and other common types of pharmaceuticals is that a gene therapy is not a
small molecule drug; rather, a specific gene therapy is just genetic material (i.e., a relatively large molecule) coupled with a specific delivery vector to facilitate administration/absorption; this is analogous to a drug like
amphotericin B being encased in
solid lipid nanoparticles to enhance oral bioavailability – that's an example of a small molecule drug coupled to a specific delivery vector. Moreover, gene therapies are often referred to as drugs because they act like drugs (i.e., they satisfy the strictest definitions of a
drug and a
pharmaceutical drug, hence why all gene therapies are classified as
biopharmaceutical drugs) and go through the USFDA drug approval process. The USFDA also requires that drug prescribing information be published for all gene therapies, e.g., this is the Rx info for the gene therapy that was mentioned above,
voretigene neparvovec (trade name: Luxturna):
[2].
[note 1] As is evident from this drug's prescribing information, a number of existing drugbox fields are applicable to a gene therapy; so, why should we duplicate a large number of existing drugbox parameters in another template AND add a small number of additional required parameters relevant only to gene therapies in that template rather than to just add the small set of parameters to the drugbox in order to enable it to provide the relevant data for gene therapy pharmaceuticals?
FWIW, a gene therapy should not be put into an infobox that cover a "therapy" instead of the drugbox simply because the word therapy is included in the name in "gene therapy". That simply isn't a valid/sound argument. If it were, template:infobox drug should be merged into whatever infobox gene therapies are covered in because all pharmaceutical drugs are a form of pharmacotherapy. Seppi333 ( Insert 2¢) 22:32, 30 December 2017 (UTC)
References
LUXTURNA is an adeno-associated virus vector-based gene therapy indicated for the treatment of patients with confirmed biallelic RPE65 mutation-associated retinal dystrophy. Patients must have viable retinal cells as determined by the treating physician(s)."
References
Seppi333 ( Insert 2¢) 23:18, 30 December 2017 (UTC)
Edit: since gene therapies are typically only designed as a treatment for exactly one medical condition, you could also consider adding " Indication" as an LHS field and a user-specified medical condition as an RHS field for that parameter. Seppi333 ( Insert 2¢) 23:24, 30 December 2017 (UTC)
Also, all of these parameters are applicable to the "Clinical data" heading. Seppi333 ( Insert 2¢) 00:15, 31 December 2017 (UTC)
|type=
, next to compound, mab, vacc, comb? Best is: only when absolutely needed (hard exclusion check is needed of other parameters). If I understand this well, parameter usage needs editors who know about this, so will not use senseless parameters (plus this being wiki, an next editor will improve such situations).|type=
for gene therapies since they're an entirely different class of pharmaceutical relative to a compound/mab/vaccine/combo; given that we're also creating a specialized set of parameters for this class of therapeutics, it's appropriate to create a new |type=
for that reason as well. W.r.t. the question about clinical data, we could create a new section heading for this data if you'd prefer. I only stated that it should go under clinical data because that was the most relevant existing drugbox heading for that data. IMO, there's no reason that we shouldn't create a new heading for that data if you think that would be a better approach.
Seppi333 (
Insert 2¢)
23:04, 31 December 2017 (UTC)OK, after reading the template documentation, I now understand what input/output refers to. To make things more explicit, the following are suggested parameters for Voretigene neparvovec:
| type = gene_therapy | gene_therapy_type = viral_vector | viral_vector = adenovirus serotype 2 | delivery_method = | gene = [[RPE65]]
gene_therapy_type defines one of the following types of gene delivery/editing systems:
gene_therapy_type | output | comment |
---|---|---|
Viral vector | Viral vector | |
Bacterial vector | Bacterial vector | |
naked DNA | Naked DNA | |
DNA plasmid | DNA plasmid | |
CRISPR | CRISPR | |
zinc finger nucleases | Zinc finger nucleases | example: SB-913 |
siRNA | siRNA | not strictly gene therapy, but closely related |
delivery_method defines one of the following types of gene delivery systems:
delivery_method | output |
---|---|
Lipofection | Lipofection |
These are my initial thoughts. Boghog ( talk) 21:45, 31 December 2017 (UTC)
Proposed drugbox parameters for gene therapy (revised, Jan 1st)
|type=gene_therapy
(note: add new parameter value to an already existing parameter)
|gt_vector=
Viral vector (adenovirus, retrovirus, ...),
Bacterial vector (e. coli, ...)
|gt_nucleic_acid_type=naked DNA,
DNA plasmid,
siRNA, ...
|gt_editing_method=
CRISPR,
TALEN,
Zinc finger nucleases, ...
|gt_delivery_method=
Lipofection,
Electroporation,
Hydroporation, ...
Based upon the existing fields in amphetamine's drugbox and this Rx info:
Seppi333 ( Insert 2¢) 00:08, 31 December 2017 (UTC)
I agree with DePiep that decisions on which parameters to use should probably be made a case-by-case basis and rely on expert editor's knowledge . For example Pharmacokinetic data may appropriate to include for naked DNA/plasmids, but less likely to be appropriate for viral vectors. Similarily, Chemical and physical data would not be relevant for a viral vector, but may be appropriate for a naked DNA/plasmids. There are biopolymer drugs such as insulin (medication) with specific molecular weights which are listed in drugboxes. This should also be possible for naked DNA/plasmids. Boghog ( talk) 20:03, 31 December 2017 (UTC)
|bioavailability=
, |protein_bound=
, |metabolism=
, |metabolites=
, |onset=
, |elimination_half-life=
, |duration_of_action=
, and |excretion=
. I stated above that the pharmacokinetic parameters |onset=
, |duration_of_action=
, and |excretion=
are relevant to all gene therapies (for fairly obvious reasons: all therapies have an onset/duration of action and a pharmacotherapeutic agent either is excreted or it isn't – the means of excretion or lack thereof should be specified either way), but I figured the following 5 were not: |bioavailability=
, |protein_bound=
, |metabolism=
, |metabolites=
, and |elimination_half-life=
. Which of those 5 parameters are relevant or likely relevant to non-viral methods? I suppose there's no harm in leaving all of the pharmacokinetic parameters as allowed inputs when |type=gene therapy
is specified if it's not clear which ones are relevant at the moment. Also, you made a good point about including chemical and physical data.
Seppi333 (
Insert 2¢)
23:51, 31 December 2017 (UTC)
|type=gene therapy
is specified doesn't seem prudent at the moment. The only parameter that I know for certain is unequivocally irrelevant to all gene therapies is |addiction_liability=
.
Seppi333 (
Insert 2¢)
23:51, 31 December 2017 (UTC)
This is my resulting proposal to add section Gene therapy to {{ Infobox drug}}. It is a live demo in this talkpage, to be edited (to speed up the process)! - DePiep ( talk) 11:52, 24 March 2018 (UTC)
{{Infobox drug}} | |
Demo: gene therapy OUTDATED | |
Gene therapy | |
---|---|
gt target name | [gt target name] |
Vector | adenovirus serotype 2 |
Nucleic acid type | viral vector |
Editing method | RPE65 |
Delivery method | [not applicable here] |
| gt_target_gene = [gt target name] | gt_vector = adenovirus serotype 2 | gt_nucleic_acid_type = viral vector | gt_editing_method = [[RPE65]] | gt_delivery_method = [not applicable here]
| gt target name = | gt_vector = | gt_nucleic_acid_type = | gt_editing_method = | gt_delivery_method =
|type=
is not used. Section will show when any |gt_...=
has input.- DePiep ( talk) 11:52, 24 March 2018 (UTC)
Done. See Voretigene neparvovec. - DePiep ( talk) 15:30, 31 March 2018 (UTC)
|gt_target_gene=
and this should be the first displayed link under gene therapy. Sorry for not specifying this earlier. In addition, when using viral vectors, |gt_editing_method=
and |gt_delivery_method=
are implicit and do not need to be defined. These later parameters should be appropiate for CRISPR, TALEN, Zinc finger nucleases, but not for viral vectors.|gt_nucleic_acid_type=DNA or RNA
. Again, my apologizes for not specifying all of this earlier and paying attention to your demo.
Boghog (
talk)
19:03, 31 March 2018 (UTC)
|gt_target_gene=
as suggested. See
testcases11.|gt_target_gene=
to the template examples. I have also
added it to the sandbox and tweaked the wikilinks in the sandbox as discussed above. The logic of how the parameters are inter-related is as follows:
|gt_target_gene=
– mandatory for all types of gene therapy|gt_vector=
– if specified, then the remainder of the gt parameters should be removed or left blank|gt_target_gene=
Gamma globulin
, |gt_editing_method=
CRISPR
, |gt_nucleic_acid_type=naked DNA
. They have not as yet disclosed the |gt_delivery_method=
.
Boghog (
talk)
06:51, 1 April 2018 (UTC)
|gt_target_gene=
to prevent confusion. -
DePiep (
talk)
08:31, 1 April 2018 (UTC)At present the infobox contains the following label and parameter:
| label76 = Biological half-life | data76 = {{{elimination_half-life|}}}
However, as pointed out by D A Patriarche at User talk:D A Patriarche #question about half-life, the quantities representing the time for half of the substance to be eliminated and the time for the substance to lose one half of its initial effectiveness may be different values. Both of these are apparently possible meanings for "Biological half-life", according to the differing definitions found in our article and at dictionary.com. Our article also distinguishes between biological half-life and plasma half-life. The question therefore, is whether the present label is unambiguously the best, or whether it ought to be renamed to Elimination half-life or something else. It also raises the question of whether the values in our current infoboxes represent only the elimination half-life, or whether some are other values. There exists the possibility, if so, of adding another parameter to cope with two different quantities. What are others' thoughts? -- RexxS ( talk) 13:16, 12 May 2018 (UTC)
|elimination_half-life=
are in fact the standard elimination half-lifes. The only problem is the discrepancy between the label and parameter name and can be fixed by changing the label. Special cases such as endogenous vs. exogenous, can be specified as is currently done in
phenethylamine.
Boghog (
talk)
11:16, 14 May 2018 (UTC)
Classification of drugs by category like, OTC, "prescription only" and "narcotic list I,II,III,IV" is needed.
Official sources are http://www.ircp.anmv.anses.fr/ for drugs and https://www.legifrance.gouv.fr/affichTexte.do?cidTexte=JORFTEXT000000533085&dateTexte=20180620 for narcotics.
Angely ( talk) 14:22, 20 June 2018 (UTC)
|legal_FR=
, |legal_FR_comment=
. We need this:Can you give some examples in the French Wikipedia? fr:Héroïne does not help in this. - DePiep ( talk) 12:23, 21 June 2018 (UTC)
Hi, Can we add drug approval, withdrawal or even banned status per country or authority. Can we add this to Wikidata?
Some drugs are approved by US-FDA, UK-MHRA, EMEA, TGA or any local authority but are not approved by others. -- محمود ( talk) 23:33, 17 August 2018 (UTC)
|market_status=
. Can have "withdrawn", "test phase", etc. but better be empty when available (marketed), as a default. -
DePiep (
talk)
16:52, 19 August 2018 (UTC)Some vaccines such as hepatitis A vaccine come in both "attenuated and inactivated" types. How do we get this in the infobox? Just comes up as a "?" Doc James ( talk · contribs · email) 23:03, 18 August 2018 (UTC)
|vaccine_type=
is supposed to be from a limited list: see
doc. Do you want "attenuated and inactivated" to be added? Or should it allow free text? -
DePiep (
talk)
16:56, 19 August 2018 (UTC)
This
edit request to
Template:Infobox drug has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
Please replace all code from {{
Infobox drug}} with all code form {{
Infobox drug/sandbox}} (= put sandbox into live). Change: |vaccine_type=
input can now be free text too. Per edit request
#Vaccine (above).
DePiep (
talk)
19:11, 20 August 2018 (UTC)
the option to include more than one type, that is too much variants to put in the pre-formatted list. BTW, your example here " Attenuated or inactivated" link to two DAB pages :-( . - DePiep ( talk) 16:47, 22 August 2018 (UTC)
Information in the Pharmacokinetics data section needs to be improved to support specific data pertaining to the following:
Assistance would be very appreciated!
Twillisjr ( talk) 21:30, 4 September 2018 (UTC)
In mathematical acronym format (if possible) for those familiar in that specialty. Not half-life, estimation of effectiveness on the human body for total lifespan of drug usage. Twillisjr ( talk) 16:30, 6 September 2018 (UTC)
DePiep: There are different types of “resistance” such as microbial. I believe resistance may be a good term, but it may not cover all (is my concern). Thoughts? Twillisjr ( talk) 22:46, 6 September 2018 (UTC)
Other notes:
Ex;
Pharmacokinetics data (subsection):
Flu Shot: ’’’XYZ’’’ = Seasonal
AIDS Retroviral Therapy Sample: ‘’’XYZ’’’ = 2 Years
XYZ represents lifespan of drug effectiveness on the afflicted human body. Twillisjr ( talk) 21:40, 6 September 2018 (UTC)
When the drugbox (and chembox) are given a chemical formula using certain fields, the template automatically calculates the molecular weight. An editor has raised a concern that this needs to have citation ("automated calculations and other such nonsense is not an acceptable alternative to a reliable source presented cleanly in the infobox" and "I'd argue we very much do need to cite MW for a compound - seen MW being wrong for too long, far too often now."). While I agree there is lots of bogus scientific data on the internet, I disagree that basic math needs to be cited and {{ Chem molar mass}} actually does cite the molar masses used for the math. Any thoughts on having the infobox generate a footnote-ref with a link ("Calculated from chemical formula using the element molar masses referenced at Template:Chem molar mass/doc") or such?
References
There is one and only one formula for calculating MW. There maybe some slight differences in the data that is fed into the formula. One just needs to document the source of that data. There are separate formula for estimating error (I.e., propagation of error). Boghog ( talk) 13:57, 22 September 2018 (UTC)
|MolarMass=
input, |Formula=
input). {{Chem molar mass}} can use an improvement re uncertainties and standard rounding (TBD) in infoboxes. In the future, I can work on this. -
DePiep (
talk)
14:08, 22 September 2018 (UTC)
This
edit request to
Template:Infobox drug has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
Please copy /sandbox code into live template code ( diff).
Change: parameter |catname=
removed, because it is deprecated (removed) and now polluting
Category:Pages using Chem molar mass with unsupported parameters (0)
DePiep (
talk)
15:28, 10 February 2019 (UTC)
Maybe in {{ Chembox Hazards}} GHS data ( testcases), we could add: pictogram meaning in short text; statement code (phrase) links & tooltip. - DePiep ( talk) 09:44, 3 October 2018 (UTC)
Not sure how others feel about this, but we usually use a drugbox in articles on pharmacologically active compounds that are regulated as dietary supplements. Should this be an added as an input option? Seppi333 ( Insert 2¢) 04:02, 20 February 2019 (UTC)
|legal_US=
, |legal_US_comment=
, |legal_EU=
etc. Aren't these OK when used for food additives?To the infobox would be useful. Doses are something users often request. We could link to these pages for example maybe
https://www.drugs.com/dosage/azithromycin.html
Doc James ( talk · contribs · email) 05:55, 6 March 2019 (UTC)
I would say that
"| onset = " "| duration_of_action = "
Are clinical data. Well the ATC code would fit better under identifiers. Doc James ( talk · contribs · email) 19:13, 15 April 2019 (UTC)
This
edit request to
Template:Infobox drug/pregnancy category has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
Change AU to AU
so that the country name is shown on hover and that the cursor change on hover is not misleading.
This matches the format already found for the US section country name abbr of the drug/pregnancy category template. MosquitoBird11 ( talk) 16:24, 19 April 2019 (UTC)
This
edit request to
Template:Infobox drug has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
Please copy/paste all code from {{ Infobox drug/sandbox}} into {{ Infobox drug}} ( diff).
Change: add |DTXSID=
, |DTXCID2=
as identifer creating an external link to
CompTox Chemistry Dashboard. By default, the first value is read from Wikidata
DSSTox substance ID (P3117); this is overwriteable and suppressable.
Discussed: here at talk {{ Chembox}}. Test: here for aspirine. DePiep ( talk) 10:34, 22 April 2019 (UTC)
Dexter and laevus have to be written in smallcaps by IUPAC rules. E.g. l-Norpseudoephedrine. If you use smallcaps in drug_name the whole title becomes smallcaps.
Chemical and physical data | |
---|---|
Formula | C9H13NO |
Molar mass | 151.209 g·mol−1 |
| drug_name = {{sc|L}}-Norpseudoephedrine
Or:
| drug_name = {{sm|l}}-Norpseudoephedrine
Chembox is OK. Gyimhu ( talk) 04:01, 15 July 2019 (UTC)
Chemical and physical data | |
---|---|
Formula | C9H13NO |
Molar mass | 151.209 g·mol−1 |
<span>
for formatting. Using <small>L</small>
works fine.
DMacks (
talk)
05:33, 15 July 2019 (UTC)
{{Drugbox| drug_name = {{sm|l}}-Norpseudoephedrine}}
expands into:<table class="infobox" style="width:22em;border-spacing:2px;"><caption><span title="International nonproprietary name (INN): <templatestyles src="smallcaps/styles.css"/><span class="smallcaps">l</span>-Norpseudoephedrine"><templatestyles src="smallcaps/styles.css"/><span class="smallcaps">l</span>-Norpseudoephedrine</span></caption></table>
|title=
. {{Chembox}} does not use {{
Infobox}}. -
DePiep (
talk)
09:00, 15 July 2019 (UTC)
<table class="infobox" style="width:22em;border-spacing:2px;"><caption><span title="International nonproprietary name (INN): <templatestyles src="smallcaps/styles.css"/><span class="smallcaps">l</span>-Norpseudoephedrine"><templatestyles src="smallcaps/styles.css"/><span class="smallcaps">l</span>-Norpseudoephedrine</span></caption></table>
|drug_name=
, which is filled into the quoted title
attribute of the green <span>
. But the smallcaps formatting templates are inserting their a quoted strings (red src
and class
attributes). Are title attributes even allowed to have HTML/CSS, or are they only plaintext? When I hover over Gyimhu's first example, the tooltip contains an unprintable binary character; hovering over mine second example displays the raw HTML.|INN=<blank>
spoils it:{{Infobox drug/title |title={{sm|l}}-Norpseudoephedrine|INN=foo}}
→ l-NorpseudoephedrineEMA approval links no longer work (error 404) since EMA migrated to a new website. See for example Afamelanotide where EU licence link should lead here: https://www.ema.europa.eu/en/medicines/human/EPAR/scenesse. — kashmīrī TALK 14:52, 10 March 2019 (UTC)
https://www.ema.europa.eu/en/search/search/ema_group_types/ema_medicine?search_api_views_fulltext="%1"
https://www.ema.europa.eu/en/search/search/ema_group_types/ema_medicine/search_api_aggregation_ema_inn_common_name/"%1"
Hello, in case it is helpful, the urls for the medicine overview pages on the EMA website now all follow the same structure: ema.europa.eu/medicines/human/EPAR/<medicine invented name> If the name has two or more words, the spaces are replaced with - Libby EMAcomm ( talk) 18:01, 6 October 2019 (UTC)
Drugbox has only "IUPAC_name =" whereas Chembox has both "PIN =" and "SystematicName =". I suppose editors should know to use the "Preferred IUPAC Name" but it is useful to also have the systematic name listed where the PIN is a retained name. Any way to have all three in the Drugbox template (so existing articles aren't affected)? See Preferred IUPAC name and Paracetamol where this issue was found. 71.230.16.111 ( talk) 22:34, 14 October 2019 (UTC)
I plan to add RxNorm and SNOMED CT drug ingredient identifiers to the infobox. I will make the change first in sandbox. Following larger trend, the relationships would be fetched from Wikidata. EncycloABC ( talk) 15:13, 4 December 2019 (UTC)
This help request has been answered. If you need more help, you can , contact the responding user(s) directly on their user talk page, or consider visiting the Teahouse. |
{{
edit template-protected}}
here on this talk page to let template editors know that you'd like the changes be transferred to the live template.
Huon (
talk)
02:12, 17 December 2019 (UTC)Would it be possible to add a legal status for veterinary drugs? There are a two main scenarios:
Veterinary drugs additionally may be prescription only, or OTC. DferDaisy ( talk) 01:12, 30 January 2020 (UTC)
|PubChemSubstance=
parameterI don't understand why we have this parameter in the template. PubChem Substance entries on a chemical are depositor-supplied data pages on a chemical that are used in the corresponding PubChem Compound entry (see https://pubchemdocs.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/substances). There's a many-to-one relationship between PubChem Substance records and a PubChem Compound record for any given chemical. E.g., amphetamine PubChem Compound CID is 3007. Searching the PubChem Substance records for "amphetamine" yields about 6 pages of records, starting on page 2 and ending on page 8, that are associated with CID 3007, and most if not all the data in those substance records are included in the compound record.
Unless there's something I'm missing, the external link generated by |PubChemSubstance=
in the drugbox is at best redundant with the linked entry for the |PubChem=
parameter and at worst an utterly useless EL in the event that the linked substance ID contains no actual chemical information from the depositor. I propose that this parameter be deleted from the drugbox template.
Edit: I see that the documentation states: If no CID is available, which is usually the case when there is no structural information on PubChem, you may use one of the substance identifiers (SIDs)
; the choice of SID seems arbitrary. I don't think an SID link should be used as an alternative when a CID link doesn't exist.
Seppi333 (
Insert 2¢)
10:59, 25 December 2019 (UTC)
|PubChemSubstance=
was added in 2010
[10], after
this talk. It was to be showing only when no CID was entered. Currently the parameter is used
some 63 times.|KEGG=
).|PubChem=
ie CID; (EL will not work as expected). -
DePiep (
talk)
15:45, 1 March 2020 (UTC)The vaccine_type parameter doesn't support live virus vaccines. The adenovirus vaccine is a live vaccine that is not attenuated. [1]
Adenovirus Type 4 and Type 7 Vaccine, Live, Oral contains viable, selected strains of human adenovirus Type 4 and human adenovirus Type 7 prepared in human-diploid fibroblast cell cultures (strain WI-38). The virus strains have not been attenuated. The cells are grown and the virus growth maintained in Dulbecco’s Modified Eagle’s Medium, fetal bovine serum, and sodium bicarbonate. The virus is harvested, freed of particulate cellular material by filtration, formulated and dried by lyophilization. The dried virus material includes monosodium glutamate, sucrose, D-mannose, D-fructose, dextrose, human serum albumin, potassium phosphate, and plasdone C.
The final vaccine is composed of two tablets (one tablet of Adenovirus Type 4 and one tablet of Adenovirus Type 7) designed to pass intact through the stomach and release the live virus in the intestine. Each enteric-coated tablet contains an inner core tablet containing anhydrous lactose, microcrystalline cellulose, polacrilin potassium, magnesium stearate, and live adenovirus, either Type 4 or Type 7, at a potency of no fewer than 32,000 tissue-culture infective doses (4.5 log10 TCID50) per tablet. The outer tablet layer contains microcrystalline cellulose, magnesium stearate, and anhydrous lactose, with an enteric coating consisting of cellulose acetate phthalate, alcohol, acetone, and castor oil. The Type 7 tablet also contains FD&C Yellow #6 aluminum lake dye.
Whywhenwhohow ( talk) 23:13, 12 January 2020 (UTC)
|vaccine_type=
has options as listed
here. Do I understand you want to add option |vaccine_type=live virus
, and then which text (wikilinks) should it show? -
DePiep (
talk)
15:56, 1 March 2020 (UTC)|vaccine_type=virus
with output "Live virus".
Whywhenwhohow (
talk)
22:54, 1 March 2020 (UTC)
|vaccine_type=live
should be changed to something like |vaccine_type=live bacteria
to eliminate ambiguity. It doesn't have a wikilink.
Whywhenwhohow (
talk)
07:14, 2 March 2020 (UTC)|vaccine_type=Foo Bar
→ Foo Bar. Was mising in the documentation :-(It doesn't appear that the search term can be specified as a query parameter and the links redirect to the home search page at https://www.accessdata.fda.gov/scripts/cder/daf/
For example, for Aspirin
and for Ibuprofen
Whywhenwhohow ( talk) 00:54, 29 October 2019 (UTC)
The EMA and FDA license fields don't work. What are the plans to fix them? Does it make sense to display those fields when the links don't work? Here is a link to an archived discussion of the EU/EMA license /info/en/?search=Template_talk:Infobox_drug/Archive_17#EMA_licence_link
Whywhenwhohow ( talk) 19:23, 24 March 2020 (UTC)
This
edit request to
Template:Infobox drug has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
Some drugs, like vaccines, have more than two entries in external databases but the template does not support more than two entries other than for ATC and CAS by using supplemental. The Dengue vaccine contains four serotypes and there are four separate DrugBank entries and four separate UNII entries for each serotype. There are similar issues with other parameters in the template for other vaccines. Any thoughts on extending the multiple parameter limit past two or using supplemental for more parameters? Whywhenwhohow ( talk) 23:47, 6 December 2019 (UTC)
|DrugBank=
and |UNII=
to support more than two entries. Then, I will make edit template request.
Ckfasdf (
talk)
09:40, 17 February 2020 (UTC)
|DrugBank=
, |UNII=
, |CASNo=
, |ChEBI=
, |ChEMBL=
, |ChemSpiderID
, |DrugBank=
, |InChI=
, |KEGG=
, |PubChem=
, and |SMILES=
to support more than two entries as per discussion above.
Ckfasdf (
talk)
10:06, 17 February 2020 (UTC)
Let's see what we have. The requested list is (see right):
CASnumber DrugBank UNII ChEBI ChEMBL ChemSpiderID DrugBank InChI KEGG PubChem SMILES
CAS_number2
, for eighteen (18) identifiers/parameters. See
documentation.- CASNo
- CASNo1
- CASNo2
- CASNo3
- CASNo4
- CASNo5
- CASNoOther
- CASNo_Comment
<blank> 1 2 3 4 5
, plus Other
(used unedited, unformatted) and a generic _Comment
ATC, ...
|type=combo
,
Category:Drugs that are a combination of chemicals (497).| component1 =<!-- name, will be wikilinked --> | class1 =<!-- class of agent, needs manual wikilinking --> | (1 ... 4)
- DePiep ( talk) 01:34, 2 April 2020 (UTC)
Continued: I personally feel it's necessarily as it tells us not only the volume of distribution but also if the drug crosses the brain-blood barrier at a glance. Regards. -- Reciprocater (Talk) 11:55, 12 April 2020 (UTC)
This
edit request to
Template:Infobox drug/legal status has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
The Australian entries in this template have two problems, one easily fixable, one requing specialist knowledge. Firstly, the article they link to has been renamed - it is now Standard for the Uniform Scheduling of Medicines and Poisons. Secondly, all of the section links are invalid. Mostly this is simply because of differing capitalisation (e.g. #Pharmacy Medicine vs. #Pharmacy medicine) but in some cases the terminology is different (e.g. Dangerous poison vs Dangerous drug). this may reflect a change of legal approach or it may not be significant - only a subject matter expert would know. And to make matters worse, the capitalisation of the target article's sections is inconsistent - e.g. #Schedule 7: Dangerous Drug vs. #Schedule 8: Controlled drug vs. #Schedule 9: prohibited substance. I therefore request that at least the first problem should be fixed. I don't have the knowledge to request appropriate fixes for the second problem. Colonies Chris ( talk) 11:15, 15 May 2020 (UTC)
|answered=yes
edit here. -
DePiep (
talk)
18:52, 15 May 2020 (UTC)
|answered=yes
talkpage edit
above. This is not changing to preventing bugs etc., this is content change. Meanhile, by skipping the /sandbox and /testcase check (the proposed edit had done), you also introduced a bug; this is not
#Wise template editing.As of right now we have fields for the legal status of drugs in Australia, Brazil, Canada, Germany, New Zealand, the United Kingdom, the United States, and the United Nations conventions. Only two of these places aren't first-world countries, Brazil and the United Nations. This is in my view a problem as readers of Wikipedia come from all around the world and while it's not necessary to include every country's drug classification there are definitely some anglophone countries that should be added. India is a prime example. There are many Indians who read the English Wikipedia, in fact there are more Indian English speakers than there are people in every country listed above except Brazil and America, see
List of countries by English-speaking population. Adding a legal_IN
field to the infobox would be helpful to the many Indian English speakers that read Wikipedia. Likewise for Nigeria and Pakistan, both countries that have English as an official language and have more English speakers than there are people in many other countries represented in the infobox.
Chess
(talk) (please use {{
ping|Chess}}
on reply)
20:18, 19 May 2020 (UTC)
This
edit request to
Template:Infobox drug/legal status has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
I propose to update {{ Infobox drug}} with these edits:
|autoheaders=yes
,|below=
),|data_page=
logic: input overrules default page.
1. When set |autoheaders=yes
in the meta-infobox {{Infobox drug}}, all empty, idle headers are suppressed (headers with no data rows do not show). This replaces the more elaborate code like:
OLD: | header50 = {{#if:{{{sources|}}}{{{targets|}}}{{{receptors|}}}{{{agonists|}}}{{{antagonists|}}}{{{precursor|}}}{{{biosynthesis|}}} |[[Physiological]] data}}
NEW: | autoheaders = yes | header50 = [[Physiological]] data
2. In two cases, |headerN=some data
was semantically misused: data "Data page" and "Verification" was shown as a sole header (and would subsequentially be hidden for having no data rows ;-) ). I have changed the code to show these data rows either as datafield or as 'below'. See
/testcases11.
3.: |data_page=
allows adding a data page; otherwise an existing datapage is linked to (example:
Caffeine has
Caffeine (data page)). I changed the logic: when there is input, that page is linked to; otherwise the default pagename is used -- when existing. BTW, {{Infobox drug}} has
* seven such data pages; none set by |data_page=
i.e., all by default name.
These changes are mainly technical/logical; no content changes should appear. We need to be extra careful though for information disappearing (without warning apparently). One can check any article by previewing that article with edit {{Infobox drug/sandbox|name=abc|...}}
Comments or ideas? -
DePiep (
talk)
12:30, 27 June 2020 (UTC)
|header70 =
interacts with other sections=headers, via |metabolism=
(|header50
). Intentionally. Will take a better look at this shortly. -
DePiep (
talk)
23:58, 27 June 2020 (UTC)|metabolism=
. Works as expected. -
DePiep (
talk)
17:10, 29 June 2020 (UTC)This
edit request to
Template:Infobox drug has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
Please replace all live code with all sandbox code ({{ Infobox drug}} ← {{ Infobox drug/sandbox}}; diff).
Many drug leads contain two United States statistics drawn from ClinCalc Top 300 Drugs and each ClinCalc drug page. The first is the linear rank of the drug in terms of outpatient prescriptions. The second the number of prescriptions in millions. Both are not in fact hard facts but are extrapolated estimates made by a yearly poll.
At a recent discussion at WT:MED, it was noted that the linear figure is too precise vs reality: outside of the top 50, the drugs may move up and down the list by quite large amounts each year. Further the drop in sales after the top 3 drugs is more like exponential than linear, meaning that the top 3 is far more important than the top 10 which is far more important than the top 50 and so on. The top 300 is a fairly arbitrary cut-off on the source website, and many drugs in the bottom of the top 300 won't be in the list the following year, due to random fluctuations.
Could we find a way to indicate these prescription figures but without giving a linear figure like "is 207th most commonly prescribed", which is just too precise and hard relate to. Perhaps a linear number is stable enough and meaningful enough in e.g. the top 20? Could we use bigger chunks for others and just say "Top 50" or "Top 100" and maybe it isn't even worth noting after the top 100 or top 200?
Is there also some way we could document the meaning of these numbers, to indicate to a reader who wants to know, that these are extrapolations from a poll? -- Colin° Talk 18:17, 16 August 2020 (UTC)
This
edit request to
Template:Infobox drug#gene therapy has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
gt_gene_target
to gt_target_gene
(as in the example that follows). —
kashmīrī
TALK
04:54, 9 August 2020 (UTC)
In a recent discussion at WT:MED, it has been suggested that the WHO Essential Medicine status of a drug is better handled by an infobox element and a mention in body text, than warranting a long sentence in hundreds of article leads. Including that sentence is giving too much WP:WEIGHT to a characteristic of the drug which, while notable, is not nearly as important as, for example, its regulatory status or availability, neither of which are routinely documented in the lead.
The inclusion on the WHO EM list does not, sadly, convey any magical properties upon the drug: no manufacturer is compelled to make it widely and cheaply available to developing nations, and in fact many drugs on this list are widely unavailable outside of rich nations, and largely unaffordable. Nor is the inclusion of the drug an indication that it is among the safest and most effective of its class. For example, Amitriptyline is one of the few medicines on the list for depression, but, while effective, it is no longer a first-line choice in developed nations due to the high toxicity in overdose and low tolerability. In the UK, it is "not recommended" for depression, and mainly used for neuropathic pain in lower doses.
A further aspect of the EM list, which is not currently reflected in most mentions in articles, is that the list has "core" and "complementary" sub-lists. The former is the key one whereas the latter may include drugs that are more expensive or typically only prescribed by specialists.
Would it be possible to add an entry for WHO EMs, with values "Core", "Complementary" and some value perhaps to indicate if it is not on the list? Can we find an easy way to reference such entries (see here). -- Colin° Talk 18:05, 16 August 2020 (UTC)
This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Archive 10 | ← | Archive 15 | Archive 16 | Archive 17 | Archive 18 | Archive 19 |
As we now have a few gene therapies approved, how should this box be appropriately used? It's not a drug in the classic sense, and there are some parameters that could probably be added if "gene therapy" was a defined type. Natureium ( talk) 16:40, 20 December 2017 (UTC)
Why? A
gene therapy – "the therapeutic delivery of nucleic acid into a patient's cells as a
drug to treat disease.
[1]" – is a drug. The only difference between a gene therapy and other common types of pharmaceuticals is that a gene therapy is not a
small molecule drug; rather, a specific gene therapy is just genetic material (i.e., a relatively large molecule) coupled with a specific delivery vector to facilitate administration/absorption; this is analogous to a drug like
amphotericin B being encased in
solid lipid nanoparticles to enhance oral bioavailability – that's an example of a small molecule drug coupled to a specific delivery vector. Moreover, gene therapies are often referred to as drugs because they act like drugs (i.e., they satisfy the strictest definitions of a
drug and a
pharmaceutical drug, hence why all gene therapies are classified as
biopharmaceutical drugs) and go through the USFDA drug approval process. The USFDA also requires that drug prescribing information be published for all gene therapies, e.g., this is the Rx info for the gene therapy that was mentioned above,
voretigene neparvovec (trade name: Luxturna):
[2].
[note 1] As is evident from this drug's prescribing information, a number of existing drugbox fields are applicable to a gene therapy; so, why should we duplicate a large number of existing drugbox parameters in another template AND add a small number of additional required parameters relevant only to gene therapies in that template rather than to just add the small set of parameters to the drugbox in order to enable it to provide the relevant data for gene therapy pharmaceuticals?
FWIW, a gene therapy should not be put into an infobox that cover a "therapy" instead of the drugbox simply because the word therapy is included in the name in "gene therapy". That simply isn't a valid/sound argument. If it were, template:infobox drug should be merged into whatever infobox gene therapies are covered in because all pharmaceutical drugs are a form of pharmacotherapy. Seppi333 ( Insert 2¢) 22:32, 30 December 2017 (UTC)
References
LUXTURNA is an adeno-associated virus vector-based gene therapy indicated for the treatment of patients with confirmed biallelic RPE65 mutation-associated retinal dystrophy. Patients must have viable retinal cells as determined by the treating physician(s)."
References
Seppi333 ( Insert 2¢) 23:18, 30 December 2017 (UTC)
Edit: since gene therapies are typically only designed as a treatment for exactly one medical condition, you could also consider adding " Indication" as an LHS field and a user-specified medical condition as an RHS field for that parameter. Seppi333 ( Insert 2¢) 23:24, 30 December 2017 (UTC)
Also, all of these parameters are applicable to the "Clinical data" heading. Seppi333 ( Insert 2¢) 00:15, 31 December 2017 (UTC)
|type=
, next to compound, mab, vacc, comb? Best is: only when absolutely needed (hard exclusion check is needed of other parameters). If I understand this well, parameter usage needs editors who know about this, so will not use senseless parameters (plus this being wiki, an next editor will improve such situations).|type=
for gene therapies since they're an entirely different class of pharmaceutical relative to a compound/mab/vaccine/combo; given that we're also creating a specialized set of parameters for this class of therapeutics, it's appropriate to create a new |type=
for that reason as well. W.r.t. the question about clinical data, we could create a new section heading for this data if you'd prefer. I only stated that it should go under clinical data because that was the most relevant existing drugbox heading for that data. IMO, there's no reason that we shouldn't create a new heading for that data if you think that would be a better approach.
Seppi333 (
Insert 2¢)
23:04, 31 December 2017 (UTC)OK, after reading the template documentation, I now understand what input/output refers to. To make things more explicit, the following are suggested parameters for Voretigene neparvovec:
| type = gene_therapy | gene_therapy_type = viral_vector | viral_vector = adenovirus serotype 2 | delivery_method = | gene = [[RPE65]]
gene_therapy_type defines one of the following types of gene delivery/editing systems:
gene_therapy_type | output | comment |
---|---|---|
Viral vector | Viral vector | |
Bacterial vector | Bacterial vector | |
naked DNA | Naked DNA | |
DNA plasmid | DNA plasmid | |
CRISPR | CRISPR | |
zinc finger nucleases | Zinc finger nucleases | example: SB-913 |
siRNA | siRNA | not strictly gene therapy, but closely related |
delivery_method defines one of the following types of gene delivery systems:
delivery_method | output |
---|---|
Lipofection | Lipofection |
These are my initial thoughts. Boghog ( talk) 21:45, 31 December 2017 (UTC)
Proposed drugbox parameters for gene therapy (revised, Jan 1st)
|type=gene_therapy
(note: add new parameter value to an already existing parameter)
|gt_vector=
Viral vector (adenovirus, retrovirus, ...),
Bacterial vector (e. coli, ...)
|gt_nucleic_acid_type=naked DNA,
DNA plasmid,
siRNA, ...
|gt_editing_method=
CRISPR,
TALEN,
Zinc finger nucleases, ...
|gt_delivery_method=
Lipofection,
Electroporation,
Hydroporation, ...
Based upon the existing fields in amphetamine's drugbox and this Rx info:
Seppi333 ( Insert 2¢) 00:08, 31 December 2017 (UTC)
I agree with DePiep that decisions on which parameters to use should probably be made a case-by-case basis and rely on expert editor's knowledge . For example Pharmacokinetic data may appropriate to include for naked DNA/plasmids, but less likely to be appropriate for viral vectors. Similarily, Chemical and physical data would not be relevant for a viral vector, but may be appropriate for a naked DNA/plasmids. There are biopolymer drugs such as insulin (medication) with specific molecular weights which are listed in drugboxes. This should also be possible for naked DNA/plasmids. Boghog ( talk) 20:03, 31 December 2017 (UTC)
|bioavailability=
, |protein_bound=
, |metabolism=
, |metabolites=
, |onset=
, |elimination_half-life=
, |duration_of_action=
, and |excretion=
. I stated above that the pharmacokinetic parameters |onset=
, |duration_of_action=
, and |excretion=
are relevant to all gene therapies (for fairly obvious reasons: all therapies have an onset/duration of action and a pharmacotherapeutic agent either is excreted or it isn't – the means of excretion or lack thereof should be specified either way), but I figured the following 5 were not: |bioavailability=
, |protein_bound=
, |metabolism=
, |metabolites=
, and |elimination_half-life=
. Which of those 5 parameters are relevant or likely relevant to non-viral methods? I suppose there's no harm in leaving all of the pharmacokinetic parameters as allowed inputs when |type=gene therapy
is specified if it's not clear which ones are relevant at the moment. Also, you made a good point about including chemical and physical data.
Seppi333 (
Insert 2¢)
23:51, 31 December 2017 (UTC)
|type=gene therapy
is specified doesn't seem prudent at the moment. The only parameter that I know for certain is unequivocally irrelevant to all gene therapies is |addiction_liability=
.
Seppi333 (
Insert 2¢)
23:51, 31 December 2017 (UTC)
This is my resulting proposal to add section Gene therapy to {{ Infobox drug}}. It is a live demo in this talkpage, to be edited (to speed up the process)! - DePiep ( talk) 11:52, 24 March 2018 (UTC)
{{Infobox drug}} | |
Demo: gene therapy OUTDATED | |
Gene therapy | |
---|---|
gt target name | [gt target name] |
Vector | adenovirus serotype 2 |
Nucleic acid type | viral vector |
Editing method | RPE65 |
Delivery method | [not applicable here] |
| gt_target_gene = [gt target name] | gt_vector = adenovirus serotype 2 | gt_nucleic_acid_type = viral vector | gt_editing_method = [[RPE65]] | gt_delivery_method = [not applicable here]
| gt target name = | gt_vector = | gt_nucleic_acid_type = | gt_editing_method = | gt_delivery_method =
|type=
is not used. Section will show when any |gt_...=
has input.- DePiep ( talk) 11:52, 24 March 2018 (UTC)
Done. See Voretigene neparvovec. - DePiep ( talk) 15:30, 31 March 2018 (UTC)
|gt_target_gene=
and this should be the first displayed link under gene therapy. Sorry for not specifying this earlier. In addition, when using viral vectors, |gt_editing_method=
and |gt_delivery_method=
are implicit and do not need to be defined. These later parameters should be appropiate for CRISPR, TALEN, Zinc finger nucleases, but not for viral vectors.|gt_nucleic_acid_type=DNA or RNA
. Again, my apologizes for not specifying all of this earlier and paying attention to your demo.
Boghog (
talk)
19:03, 31 March 2018 (UTC)
|gt_target_gene=
as suggested. See
testcases11.|gt_target_gene=
to the template examples. I have also
added it to the sandbox and tweaked the wikilinks in the sandbox as discussed above. The logic of how the parameters are inter-related is as follows:
|gt_target_gene=
– mandatory for all types of gene therapy|gt_vector=
– if specified, then the remainder of the gt parameters should be removed or left blank|gt_target_gene=
Gamma globulin
, |gt_editing_method=
CRISPR
, |gt_nucleic_acid_type=naked DNA
. They have not as yet disclosed the |gt_delivery_method=
.
Boghog (
talk)
06:51, 1 April 2018 (UTC)
|gt_target_gene=
to prevent confusion. -
DePiep (
talk)
08:31, 1 April 2018 (UTC)At present the infobox contains the following label and parameter:
| label76 = Biological half-life | data76 = {{{elimination_half-life|}}}
However, as pointed out by D A Patriarche at User talk:D A Patriarche #question about half-life, the quantities representing the time for half of the substance to be eliminated and the time for the substance to lose one half of its initial effectiveness may be different values. Both of these are apparently possible meanings for "Biological half-life", according to the differing definitions found in our article and at dictionary.com. Our article also distinguishes between biological half-life and plasma half-life. The question therefore, is whether the present label is unambiguously the best, or whether it ought to be renamed to Elimination half-life or something else. It also raises the question of whether the values in our current infoboxes represent only the elimination half-life, or whether some are other values. There exists the possibility, if so, of adding another parameter to cope with two different quantities. What are others' thoughts? -- RexxS ( talk) 13:16, 12 May 2018 (UTC)
|elimination_half-life=
are in fact the standard elimination half-lifes. The only problem is the discrepancy between the label and parameter name and can be fixed by changing the label. Special cases such as endogenous vs. exogenous, can be specified as is currently done in
phenethylamine.
Boghog (
talk)
11:16, 14 May 2018 (UTC)
Classification of drugs by category like, OTC, "prescription only" and "narcotic list I,II,III,IV" is needed.
Official sources are http://www.ircp.anmv.anses.fr/ for drugs and https://www.legifrance.gouv.fr/affichTexte.do?cidTexte=JORFTEXT000000533085&dateTexte=20180620 for narcotics.
Angely ( talk) 14:22, 20 June 2018 (UTC)
|legal_FR=
, |legal_FR_comment=
. We need this:Can you give some examples in the French Wikipedia? fr:Héroïne does not help in this. - DePiep ( talk) 12:23, 21 June 2018 (UTC)
Hi, Can we add drug approval, withdrawal or even banned status per country or authority. Can we add this to Wikidata?
Some drugs are approved by US-FDA, UK-MHRA, EMEA, TGA or any local authority but are not approved by others. -- محمود ( talk) 23:33, 17 August 2018 (UTC)
|market_status=
. Can have "withdrawn", "test phase", etc. but better be empty when available (marketed), as a default. -
DePiep (
talk)
16:52, 19 August 2018 (UTC)Some vaccines such as hepatitis A vaccine come in both "attenuated and inactivated" types. How do we get this in the infobox? Just comes up as a "?" Doc James ( talk · contribs · email) 23:03, 18 August 2018 (UTC)
|vaccine_type=
is supposed to be from a limited list: see
doc. Do you want "attenuated and inactivated" to be added? Or should it allow free text? -
DePiep (
talk)
16:56, 19 August 2018 (UTC)
This
edit request to
Template:Infobox drug has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
Please replace all code from {{
Infobox drug}} with all code form {{
Infobox drug/sandbox}} (= put sandbox into live). Change: |vaccine_type=
input can now be free text too. Per edit request
#Vaccine (above).
DePiep (
talk)
19:11, 20 August 2018 (UTC)
the option to include more than one type, that is too much variants to put in the pre-formatted list. BTW, your example here " Attenuated or inactivated" link to two DAB pages :-( . - DePiep ( talk) 16:47, 22 August 2018 (UTC)
Information in the Pharmacokinetics data section needs to be improved to support specific data pertaining to the following:
Assistance would be very appreciated!
Twillisjr ( talk) 21:30, 4 September 2018 (UTC)
In mathematical acronym format (if possible) for those familiar in that specialty. Not half-life, estimation of effectiveness on the human body for total lifespan of drug usage. Twillisjr ( talk) 16:30, 6 September 2018 (UTC)
DePiep: There are different types of “resistance” such as microbial. I believe resistance may be a good term, but it may not cover all (is my concern). Thoughts? Twillisjr ( talk) 22:46, 6 September 2018 (UTC)
Other notes:
Ex;
Pharmacokinetics data (subsection):
Flu Shot: ’’’XYZ’’’ = Seasonal
AIDS Retroviral Therapy Sample: ‘’’XYZ’’’ = 2 Years
XYZ represents lifespan of drug effectiveness on the afflicted human body. Twillisjr ( talk) 21:40, 6 September 2018 (UTC)
When the drugbox (and chembox) are given a chemical formula using certain fields, the template automatically calculates the molecular weight. An editor has raised a concern that this needs to have citation ("automated calculations and other such nonsense is not an acceptable alternative to a reliable source presented cleanly in the infobox" and "I'd argue we very much do need to cite MW for a compound - seen MW being wrong for too long, far too often now."). While I agree there is lots of bogus scientific data on the internet, I disagree that basic math needs to be cited and {{ Chem molar mass}} actually does cite the molar masses used for the math. Any thoughts on having the infobox generate a footnote-ref with a link ("Calculated from chemical formula using the element molar masses referenced at Template:Chem molar mass/doc") or such?
References
There is one and only one formula for calculating MW. There maybe some slight differences in the data that is fed into the formula. One just needs to document the source of that data. There are separate formula for estimating error (I.e., propagation of error). Boghog ( talk) 13:57, 22 September 2018 (UTC)
|MolarMass=
input, |Formula=
input). {{Chem molar mass}} can use an improvement re uncertainties and standard rounding (TBD) in infoboxes. In the future, I can work on this. -
DePiep (
talk)
14:08, 22 September 2018 (UTC)
This
edit request to
Template:Infobox drug has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
Please copy /sandbox code into live template code ( diff).
Change: parameter |catname=
removed, because it is deprecated (removed) and now polluting
Category:Pages using Chem molar mass with unsupported parameters (0)
DePiep (
talk)
15:28, 10 February 2019 (UTC)
Maybe in {{ Chembox Hazards}} GHS data ( testcases), we could add: pictogram meaning in short text; statement code (phrase) links & tooltip. - DePiep ( talk) 09:44, 3 October 2018 (UTC)
Not sure how others feel about this, but we usually use a drugbox in articles on pharmacologically active compounds that are regulated as dietary supplements. Should this be an added as an input option? Seppi333 ( Insert 2¢) 04:02, 20 February 2019 (UTC)
|legal_US=
, |legal_US_comment=
, |legal_EU=
etc. Aren't these OK when used for food additives?To the infobox would be useful. Doses are something users often request. We could link to these pages for example maybe
https://www.drugs.com/dosage/azithromycin.html
Doc James ( talk · contribs · email) 05:55, 6 March 2019 (UTC)
I would say that
"| onset = " "| duration_of_action = "
Are clinical data. Well the ATC code would fit better under identifiers. Doc James ( talk · contribs · email) 19:13, 15 April 2019 (UTC)
This
edit request to
Template:Infobox drug/pregnancy category has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
Change AU to AU
so that the country name is shown on hover and that the cursor change on hover is not misleading.
This matches the format already found for the US section country name abbr of the drug/pregnancy category template. MosquitoBird11 ( talk) 16:24, 19 April 2019 (UTC)
This
edit request to
Template:Infobox drug has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
Please copy/paste all code from {{ Infobox drug/sandbox}} into {{ Infobox drug}} ( diff).
Change: add |DTXSID=
, |DTXCID2=
as identifer creating an external link to
CompTox Chemistry Dashboard. By default, the first value is read from Wikidata
DSSTox substance ID (P3117); this is overwriteable and suppressable.
Discussed: here at talk {{ Chembox}}. Test: here for aspirine. DePiep ( talk) 10:34, 22 April 2019 (UTC)
Dexter and laevus have to be written in smallcaps by IUPAC rules. E.g. l-Norpseudoephedrine. If you use smallcaps in drug_name the whole title becomes smallcaps.
Chemical and physical data | |
---|---|
Formula | C9H13NO |
Molar mass | 151.209 g·mol−1 |
| drug_name = {{sc|L}}-Norpseudoephedrine
Or:
| drug_name = {{sm|l}}-Norpseudoephedrine
Chembox is OK. Gyimhu ( talk) 04:01, 15 July 2019 (UTC)
Chemical and physical data | |
---|---|
Formula | C9H13NO |
Molar mass | 151.209 g·mol−1 |
<span>
for formatting. Using <small>L</small>
works fine.
DMacks (
talk)
05:33, 15 July 2019 (UTC)
{{Drugbox| drug_name = {{sm|l}}-Norpseudoephedrine}}
expands into:<table class="infobox" style="width:22em;border-spacing:2px;"><caption><span title="International nonproprietary name (INN): <templatestyles src="smallcaps/styles.css"/><span class="smallcaps">l</span>-Norpseudoephedrine"><templatestyles src="smallcaps/styles.css"/><span class="smallcaps">l</span>-Norpseudoephedrine</span></caption></table>
|title=
. {{Chembox}} does not use {{
Infobox}}. -
DePiep (
talk)
09:00, 15 July 2019 (UTC)
<table class="infobox" style="width:22em;border-spacing:2px;"><caption><span title="International nonproprietary name (INN): <templatestyles src="smallcaps/styles.css"/><span class="smallcaps">l</span>-Norpseudoephedrine"><templatestyles src="smallcaps/styles.css"/><span class="smallcaps">l</span>-Norpseudoephedrine</span></caption></table>
|drug_name=
, which is filled into the quoted title
attribute of the green <span>
. But the smallcaps formatting templates are inserting their a quoted strings (red src
and class
attributes). Are title attributes even allowed to have HTML/CSS, or are they only plaintext? When I hover over Gyimhu's first example, the tooltip contains an unprintable binary character; hovering over mine second example displays the raw HTML.|INN=<blank>
spoils it:{{Infobox drug/title |title={{sm|l}}-Norpseudoephedrine|INN=foo}}
→ l-NorpseudoephedrineEMA approval links no longer work (error 404) since EMA migrated to a new website. See for example Afamelanotide where EU licence link should lead here: https://www.ema.europa.eu/en/medicines/human/EPAR/scenesse. — kashmīrī TALK 14:52, 10 March 2019 (UTC)
https://www.ema.europa.eu/en/search/search/ema_group_types/ema_medicine?search_api_views_fulltext="%1"
https://www.ema.europa.eu/en/search/search/ema_group_types/ema_medicine/search_api_aggregation_ema_inn_common_name/"%1"
Hello, in case it is helpful, the urls for the medicine overview pages on the EMA website now all follow the same structure: ema.europa.eu/medicines/human/EPAR/<medicine invented name> If the name has two or more words, the spaces are replaced with - Libby EMAcomm ( talk) 18:01, 6 October 2019 (UTC)
Drugbox has only "IUPAC_name =" whereas Chembox has both "PIN =" and "SystematicName =". I suppose editors should know to use the "Preferred IUPAC Name" but it is useful to also have the systematic name listed where the PIN is a retained name. Any way to have all three in the Drugbox template (so existing articles aren't affected)? See Preferred IUPAC name and Paracetamol where this issue was found. 71.230.16.111 ( talk) 22:34, 14 October 2019 (UTC)
I plan to add RxNorm and SNOMED CT drug ingredient identifiers to the infobox. I will make the change first in sandbox. Following larger trend, the relationships would be fetched from Wikidata. EncycloABC ( talk) 15:13, 4 December 2019 (UTC)
This help request has been answered. If you need more help, you can , contact the responding user(s) directly on their user talk page, or consider visiting the Teahouse. |
{{
edit template-protected}}
here on this talk page to let template editors know that you'd like the changes be transferred to the live template.
Huon (
talk)
02:12, 17 December 2019 (UTC)Would it be possible to add a legal status for veterinary drugs? There are a two main scenarios:
Veterinary drugs additionally may be prescription only, or OTC. DferDaisy ( talk) 01:12, 30 January 2020 (UTC)
|PubChemSubstance=
parameterI don't understand why we have this parameter in the template. PubChem Substance entries on a chemical are depositor-supplied data pages on a chemical that are used in the corresponding PubChem Compound entry (see https://pubchemdocs.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/substances). There's a many-to-one relationship between PubChem Substance records and a PubChem Compound record for any given chemical. E.g., amphetamine PubChem Compound CID is 3007. Searching the PubChem Substance records for "amphetamine" yields about 6 pages of records, starting on page 2 and ending on page 8, that are associated with CID 3007, and most if not all the data in those substance records are included in the compound record.
Unless there's something I'm missing, the external link generated by |PubChemSubstance=
in the drugbox is at best redundant with the linked entry for the |PubChem=
parameter and at worst an utterly useless EL in the event that the linked substance ID contains no actual chemical information from the depositor. I propose that this parameter be deleted from the drugbox template.
Edit: I see that the documentation states: If no CID is available, which is usually the case when there is no structural information on PubChem, you may use one of the substance identifiers (SIDs)
; the choice of SID seems arbitrary. I don't think an SID link should be used as an alternative when a CID link doesn't exist.
Seppi333 (
Insert 2¢)
10:59, 25 December 2019 (UTC)
|PubChemSubstance=
was added in 2010
[10], after
this talk. It was to be showing only when no CID was entered. Currently the parameter is used
some 63 times.|KEGG=
).|PubChem=
ie CID; (EL will not work as expected). -
DePiep (
talk)
15:45, 1 March 2020 (UTC)The vaccine_type parameter doesn't support live virus vaccines. The adenovirus vaccine is a live vaccine that is not attenuated. [1]
Adenovirus Type 4 and Type 7 Vaccine, Live, Oral contains viable, selected strains of human adenovirus Type 4 and human adenovirus Type 7 prepared in human-diploid fibroblast cell cultures (strain WI-38). The virus strains have not been attenuated. The cells are grown and the virus growth maintained in Dulbecco’s Modified Eagle’s Medium, fetal bovine serum, and sodium bicarbonate. The virus is harvested, freed of particulate cellular material by filtration, formulated and dried by lyophilization. The dried virus material includes monosodium glutamate, sucrose, D-mannose, D-fructose, dextrose, human serum albumin, potassium phosphate, and plasdone C.
The final vaccine is composed of two tablets (one tablet of Adenovirus Type 4 and one tablet of Adenovirus Type 7) designed to pass intact through the stomach and release the live virus in the intestine. Each enteric-coated tablet contains an inner core tablet containing anhydrous lactose, microcrystalline cellulose, polacrilin potassium, magnesium stearate, and live adenovirus, either Type 4 or Type 7, at a potency of no fewer than 32,000 tissue-culture infective doses (4.5 log10 TCID50) per tablet. The outer tablet layer contains microcrystalline cellulose, magnesium stearate, and anhydrous lactose, with an enteric coating consisting of cellulose acetate phthalate, alcohol, acetone, and castor oil. The Type 7 tablet also contains FD&C Yellow #6 aluminum lake dye.
Whywhenwhohow ( talk) 23:13, 12 January 2020 (UTC)
|vaccine_type=
has options as listed
here. Do I understand you want to add option |vaccine_type=live virus
, and then which text (wikilinks) should it show? -
DePiep (
talk)
15:56, 1 March 2020 (UTC)|vaccine_type=virus
with output "Live virus".
Whywhenwhohow (
talk)
22:54, 1 March 2020 (UTC)
|vaccine_type=live
should be changed to something like |vaccine_type=live bacteria
to eliminate ambiguity. It doesn't have a wikilink.
Whywhenwhohow (
talk)
07:14, 2 March 2020 (UTC)|vaccine_type=Foo Bar
→ Foo Bar. Was mising in the documentation :-(It doesn't appear that the search term can be specified as a query parameter and the links redirect to the home search page at https://www.accessdata.fda.gov/scripts/cder/daf/
For example, for Aspirin
and for Ibuprofen
Whywhenwhohow ( talk) 00:54, 29 October 2019 (UTC)
The EMA and FDA license fields don't work. What are the plans to fix them? Does it make sense to display those fields when the links don't work? Here is a link to an archived discussion of the EU/EMA license /info/en/?search=Template_talk:Infobox_drug/Archive_17#EMA_licence_link
Whywhenwhohow ( talk) 19:23, 24 March 2020 (UTC)
This
edit request to
Template:Infobox drug has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
Some drugs, like vaccines, have more than two entries in external databases but the template does not support more than two entries other than for ATC and CAS by using supplemental. The Dengue vaccine contains four serotypes and there are four separate DrugBank entries and four separate UNII entries for each serotype. There are similar issues with other parameters in the template for other vaccines. Any thoughts on extending the multiple parameter limit past two or using supplemental for more parameters? Whywhenwhohow ( talk) 23:47, 6 December 2019 (UTC)
|DrugBank=
and |UNII=
to support more than two entries. Then, I will make edit template request.
Ckfasdf (
talk)
09:40, 17 February 2020 (UTC)
|DrugBank=
, |UNII=
, |CASNo=
, |ChEBI=
, |ChEMBL=
, |ChemSpiderID
, |DrugBank=
, |InChI=
, |KEGG=
, |PubChem=
, and |SMILES=
to support more than two entries as per discussion above.
Ckfasdf (
talk)
10:06, 17 February 2020 (UTC)
Let's see what we have. The requested list is (see right):
CASnumber DrugBank UNII ChEBI ChEMBL ChemSpiderID DrugBank InChI KEGG PubChem SMILES
CAS_number2
, for eighteen (18) identifiers/parameters. See
documentation.- CASNo
- CASNo1
- CASNo2
- CASNo3
- CASNo4
- CASNo5
- CASNoOther
- CASNo_Comment
<blank> 1 2 3 4 5
, plus Other
(used unedited, unformatted) and a generic _Comment
ATC, ...
|type=combo
,
Category:Drugs that are a combination of chemicals (497).| component1 =<!-- name, will be wikilinked --> | class1 =<!-- class of agent, needs manual wikilinking --> | (1 ... 4)
- DePiep ( talk) 01:34, 2 April 2020 (UTC)
Continued: I personally feel it's necessarily as it tells us not only the volume of distribution but also if the drug crosses the brain-blood barrier at a glance. Regards. -- Reciprocater (Talk) 11:55, 12 April 2020 (UTC)
This
edit request to
Template:Infobox drug/legal status has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
The Australian entries in this template have two problems, one easily fixable, one requing specialist knowledge. Firstly, the article they link to has been renamed - it is now Standard for the Uniform Scheduling of Medicines and Poisons. Secondly, all of the section links are invalid. Mostly this is simply because of differing capitalisation (e.g. #Pharmacy Medicine vs. #Pharmacy medicine) but in some cases the terminology is different (e.g. Dangerous poison vs Dangerous drug). this may reflect a change of legal approach or it may not be significant - only a subject matter expert would know. And to make matters worse, the capitalisation of the target article's sections is inconsistent - e.g. #Schedule 7: Dangerous Drug vs. #Schedule 8: Controlled drug vs. #Schedule 9: prohibited substance. I therefore request that at least the first problem should be fixed. I don't have the knowledge to request appropriate fixes for the second problem. Colonies Chris ( talk) 11:15, 15 May 2020 (UTC)
|answered=yes
edit here. -
DePiep (
talk)
18:52, 15 May 2020 (UTC)
|answered=yes
talkpage edit
above. This is not changing to preventing bugs etc., this is content change. Meanhile, by skipping the /sandbox and /testcase check (the proposed edit had done), you also introduced a bug; this is not
#Wise template editing.As of right now we have fields for the legal status of drugs in Australia, Brazil, Canada, Germany, New Zealand, the United Kingdom, the United States, and the United Nations conventions. Only two of these places aren't first-world countries, Brazil and the United Nations. This is in my view a problem as readers of Wikipedia come from all around the world and while it's not necessary to include every country's drug classification there are definitely some anglophone countries that should be added. India is a prime example. There are many Indians who read the English Wikipedia, in fact there are more Indian English speakers than there are people in every country listed above except Brazil and America, see
List of countries by English-speaking population. Adding a legal_IN
field to the infobox would be helpful to the many Indian English speakers that read Wikipedia. Likewise for Nigeria and Pakistan, both countries that have English as an official language and have more English speakers than there are people in many other countries represented in the infobox.
Chess
(talk) (please use {{
ping|Chess}}
on reply)
20:18, 19 May 2020 (UTC)
This
edit request to
Template:Infobox drug/legal status has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
I propose to update {{ Infobox drug}} with these edits:
|autoheaders=yes
,|below=
),|data_page=
logic: input overrules default page.
1. When set |autoheaders=yes
in the meta-infobox {{Infobox drug}}, all empty, idle headers are suppressed (headers with no data rows do not show). This replaces the more elaborate code like:
OLD: | header50 = {{#if:{{{sources|}}}{{{targets|}}}{{{receptors|}}}{{{agonists|}}}{{{antagonists|}}}{{{precursor|}}}{{{biosynthesis|}}} |[[Physiological]] data}}
NEW: | autoheaders = yes | header50 = [[Physiological]] data
2. In two cases, |headerN=some data
was semantically misused: data "Data page" and "Verification" was shown as a sole header (and would subsequentially be hidden for having no data rows ;-) ). I have changed the code to show these data rows either as datafield or as 'below'. See
/testcases11.
3.: |data_page=
allows adding a data page; otherwise an existing datapage is linked to (example:
Caffeine has
Caffeine (data page)). I changed the logic: when there is input, that page is linked to; otherwise the default pagename is used -- when existing. BTW, {{Infobox drug}} has
* seven such data pages; none set by |data_page=
i.e., all by default name.
These changes are mainly technical/logical; no content changes should appear. We need to be extra careful though for information disappearing (without warning apparently). One can check any article by previewing that article with edit {{Infobox drug/sandbox|name=abc|...}}
Comments or ideas? -
DePiep (
talk)
12:30, 27 June 2020 (UTC)
|header70 =
interacts with other sections=headers, via |metabolism=
(|header50
). Intentionally. Will take a better look at this shortly. -
DePiep (
talk)
23:58, 27 June 2020 (UTC)|metabolism=
. Works as expected. -
DePiep (
talk)
17:10, 29 June 2020 (UTC)This
edit request to
Template:Infobox drug has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
Please replace all live code with all sandbox code ({{ Infobox drug}} ← {{ Infobox drug/sandbox}}; diff).
Many drug leads contain two United States statistics drawn from ClinCalc Top 300 Drugs and each ClinCalc drug page. The first is the linear rank of the drug in terms of outpatient prescriptions. The second the number of prescriptions in millions. Both are not in fact hard facts but are extrapolated estimates made by a yearly poll.
At a recent discussion at WT:MED, it was noted that the linear figure is too precise vs reality: outside of the top 50, the drugs may move up and down the list by quite large amounts each year. Further the drop in sales after the top 3 drugs is more like exponential than linear, meaning that the top 3 is far more important than the top 10 which is far more important than the top 50 and so on. The top 300 is a fairly arbitrary cut-off on the source website, and many drugs in the bottom of the top 300 won't be in the list the following year, due to random fluctuations.
Could we find a way to indicate these prescription figures but without giving a linear figure like "is 207th most commonly prescribed", which is just too precise and hard relate to. Perhaps a linear number is stable enough and meaningful enough in e.g. the top 20? Could we use bigger chunks for others and just say "Top 50" or "Top 100" and maybe it isn't even worth noting after the top 100 or top 200?
Is there also some way we could document the meaning of these numbers, to indicate to a reader who wants to know, that these are extrapolations from a poll? -- Colin° Talk 18:17, 16 August 2020 (UTC)
This
edit request to
Template:Infobox drug#gene therapy has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
gt_gene_target
to gt_target_gene
(as in the example that follows). —
kashmīrī
TALK
04:54, 9 August 2020 (UTC)
In a recent discussion at WT:MED, it has been suggested that the WHO Essential Medicine status of a drug is better handled by an infobox element and a mention in body text, than warranting a long sentence in hundreds of article leads. Including that sentence is giving too much WP:WEIGHT to a characteristic of the drug which, while notable, is not nearly as important as, for example, its regulatory status or availability, neither of which are routinely documented in the lead.
The inclusion on the WHO EM list does not, sadly, convey any magical properties upon the drug: no manufacturer is compelled to make it widely and cheaply available to developing nations, and in fact many drugs on this list are widely unavailable outside of rich nations, and largely unaffordable. Nor is the inclusion of the drug an indication that it is among the safest and most effective of its class. For example, Amitriptyline is one of the few medicines on the list for depression, but, while effective, it is no longer a first-line choice in developed nations due to the high toxicity in overdose and low tolerability. In the UK, it is "not recommended" for depression, and mainly used for neuropathic pain in lower doses.
A further aspect of the EM list, which is not currently reflected in most mentions in articles, is that the list has "core" and "complementary" sub-lists. The former is the key one whereas the latter may include drugs that are more expensive or typically only prescribed by specialists.
Would it be possible to add an entry for WHO EMs, with values "Core", "Complementary" and some value perhaps to indicate if it is not on the list? Can we find an easy way to reference such entries (see here). -- Colin° Talk 18:05, 16 August 2020 (UTC)