bluuebunny/crossref_metadata_2025_split huggingface dataset:
THE MISSING LINK BETWEEN INFLATION UNCERTAINTY AND INTEREST RATES
Authors: Berument Hakan , Kilinc Zubeyir , Ozlale Umit 
Published: June 2005

AbstractIn the literature, there is no consensus about the direction of the effects of inflation uncertainty on interest rates. This paper states that such a result may stem from differentiation in the sources of the uncertainties and analyzes the effects of different types of inflation uncertainties on a set of interest rates for the UK within an interest rate rule framework. Three types of inflation uncertainties – impulse uncertainty, structural uncertainty and steady‐state uncertainty – are derived by using a time‐varying parameter model with a Generalized Autoregressive Conditional Heteroskedasticity specification. It is shown that the impulse uncertainty is positively and the structural uncertainty is negatively correlated with the interest rates. Moreover, these two uncertainties are important to explain short‐term interest rates for the period of inflation targeting era. However, this time, the impulse uncertainty is negatively and the structural uncertainty is positively correlated with the overnight interbank interest rates, which is consistent with the general characteristic of the inflation targeting regimes. Lastly, the evidence concerning the effect of the steady‐state inflation uncertainty on interest rates is not conclusive.
SHOULD CENTRAL BANKS CARE ABOUT REGIONAL IMBALANCES?
Authors: Røisland Øistein 
Published: June 2005

AbstractRegional imbalances may arise both as a result of asymmetric shocks and of divergent responses to symmetric shocks, such as monetary policy shocks. This paper analyses flexible inflation targeting when regional imbalances are included in the loss function. By adding regional imbalances, the time‐inconsistency problem in monetary policy becomes more complex. The paper analyses alternative institutional arrangements designed to improve the discretionary equilibrium. Even in the absence of an over‐ambitious output target, it is shown that the outcome of monetary policy is improved if the central bank places less weight on regional imbalances than the political authorities.
ARMS EXPORT CONTROLS, SUBSIDIES AND THE WTO EXEMPTION
Authors: Del Carmen García‐Alonso María , Levine Paul 
Published: June 2005

AbstractOwing to the World Trade Organization (WTO) exemption that allows governments to subsidize arms exports, the arms trade is one of the few remaining areas of trade where we observe export subsidies. This paper examines the effect of arms controls, in the form of licensing delays, on the incentives to subsidize arms exports and conversely the effect of the WTO arms trade exemption on the incentives to break arms control agreements. Our main result is that arms controls and free trade commitments re‐enforce each other. Licensing delays reduce the incentive to subsidise and free trade without subsidies reduces the benefits of a unilateral abrogation of arms controls. Transparency actually worsens the Nash inefficiencies at play in that incomplete information leads to lower subsidies and lower arms exports.
Efficacy of famotidine and omeprazole in healing symptoms of non‐erosive gastro‐oesophageal reflux disease: randomized‐controlled study of gastro‐oesophageal reflux disease
Authors: Wada T. , Sasaki M. , Kataoka H. , Tanida S. , Itoh K. , Ogasawara N. , Oshima T. , Togawa S. , Kubota E. , Yamada T. , Mori Y. , Fujita F. , Ohara H. , Nakao H. , Sobue S. , Joh T. , Itoh M. 
Published: June 2005

SummaryBackground : The epidemiology and pathophysiology of non‐erosive gastro‐oesophageal reflux disease differs from erosive gastro‐oesophageal reflux disease. There is a possibility that non‐erosive gastro‐oesophageal reflux disease treatment requires a different regimen/approach but it is not yet acknowledged.Aim : To investigate the efficacy of famotidine and omeprazole in the treatment of gastro‐oesophageal reflux disease, especially non‐erosive gastro‐oesophageal reflux disease.Patients and methods : A randomized, open‐label trial was conducted. Fifty‐four gastro‐oesophageal reflux disease patients were assigned to treatment with famotidine at a dosage of 20 mg twice daily; or omeprazole, 20 mg once daily, for a period of 8 weeks. The Short Form‐36 Health Survey and Gastrointestinal Symptom Rating Scale administered at baseline and after 8 weeks of treatment as well as a symptom questionnaire were conducted daily.Results : Short Form‐36 revealed that gastro‐oesophageal reflux disease has severe impact on health‐related quality of life. Thirty‐nine subjects (77%) were endoscopically diagnosed as non‐erosive gastro‐oesophageal reflux disease. The mean Gastrointestinal Symptom Rating Scale abdominal pain, and indigestion score of non‐erosive gastro‐oesophageal reflux disease significantly improved in famotidine‐treated patients (P < 0.05), but not in the omeprazole. There was no significant change regarding improved heartburn symptoms of non‐erosive gastro‐oesophageal reflux disease between treatments in the daytime or night‐time.Conclusion : Famotidine and omeprazole were both effective in improving symptoms of gastro‐oesophageal reflux disease, particularly non‐erosive gastro‐oesophageal reflux disease.
Famotidine vs. omeprazole: a prospective randomized multicentre trial to determine efficacy in non‐erosive gastro‐oesophageal reflux disease
Authors: Fujiwara Y. , Higuchi K. , Nebiki H. , Chono S. , Uno H. , Kitada K. , Satoh H. , Nakagawa K. , Kobayashi K. , Tominaga K. , Watanabe T. , Oshitani N. , Arakawa T. 
Published: June 2005

SummaryBackground : Several studies in Western countries showed that proton‐pump inhibitors are superior to histamine2‐receptor antagonists or placebo in the treatment of non‐erosive gastro‐oesophageal reflux disease. The efficacy of acid‐suppressive drugs for non‐erosive gastro‐oesophageal reflux disease in Japan, in which the prevalence of Helicobacter pylori infection is higher compared with Western countries, is unknown.Aim : To compare the efficacy of famotidine and omeprazole in Japanese patients with non‐erosive gastro‐oesophageal reflux disease by a prospective randomized multicentre trial.Methods : A total of 98 patients received either famotidine 20 mg b.d. (n = 48) or omeprazole once daily (n = 50). Frequency of gastro‐oesophageal reflux disease symptoms and health‐related quality of life were evaluated at baseline and after 4 weeks of treatment. Complete relief was defined as no gastro‐oesophageal reflux disease symptoms during the 7‐day interval in week 4.Results : Complete relief was achieved in 23 (48%) of patients receiving famotidine and 28 (56%) of patients treated with omeprazole. In the famotidine group, complete relief rate in H. pylori‐negative patients was significantly lower than H. pylori‐positive patients (35% vs. 64%). Both famotidine and omeprazole improved most scales of health‐related quality of life. Omeprazole significantly improved reflux score irrespective of H. pylori infection while famotidine significantly improved reflux score in H. pylori‐positive patients but not in H. pylori‐negative patients.Conclusions : Omeprazole is more effective than famotidine for the control of gastro‐oesophageal reflux disease symptoms in H. pylori‐negative patients, while similar efficacy is observed in H. pylori‐positive patients with non‐erosive gastro‐oesophageal reflux disease.
Minimal change oesophagitis: a disease with characteristic differences to erosive oesophagitis
Authors: Nakamura T. , Shirakawa K. , Masuyama H. , Sugaya H. , Hiraishi H. , Terano A. 
Published: June 2005

SummaryBackground : The majority of gastro‐oesophageal reflux disease (GERD) seems to be non‐erosive reflux disease. Nonerosive reflux disease includes minimal change oesophagitis (whitish or reddish, oedematous change and erosion that is not regarded as mucosal break) and no endoscopic abnormalities.Aim : To investigate the accurate proportion of those with minimal change oesophagitis and to clarify its characteristics. In addition, we evaluated the effect of famotidine (40 mg/ day) in those with minimal change.Methods : Prospective endoscopic assessment was performed for consecutive 606 out‐patients. Of the 582 patients suitable for analysis, 347 were non‐treated. The latter were divided into those with erosive GERD or minimal change, and their endoscopic findings and characteristics were compared.Results : Among 347 non‐treated patients, 88 (25%) had erosive GERD and 249 (72%) had minimal change. Compared with patients who have erosive GERD and those with minimal change, the latter were less likely to have hiatal hernia or bile reflux, but more likely to have gastric atrophy. Symptomatic patients (n = 55) with minimal change oesophagitis were more likely to have hiatal hernia than those who were asymptomatic (n= 194). Most patients preferred taking famotidine on‐demand, during a 4‐week follow‐up period.Conclusions : Most non‐erosive reflux disease can be classified as minimal change oesophagitis, and that have different characteristics from erosive GERD. On‐demand famotidine may be a suitable alternative treatment for patients with minimal change disease.
Randomized, double‐blind, placebo‐controlled crossover trial of famotidine in patients with functional dyspepsia
Authors: Kato M. , Watanabe M. , Konishi S. , Kudo M. , Konno J. , Meguro T. , Kitamori S. , Nakagawa S. , Shimizu Y. , Takeda H. , Asaka M. 
Published: June 2005

SummaryBackground : Histamine 2‐receptor antagonists were used as a first therapy against functional dyspepsia. However, few clinical studies with famotidine for functional dyspepsia have been reported.Aim : To evaluate the effectiveness of famotidine for functional dyspepsia patients.Methods : A multicentre, randomized, double‐blind, placebo‐controlled crossover trail was conducted. Patients diagnosed with functional dyspepsia by the Roma II criteria were included. Subjects were randomized into two groups, and received either famotidine or placebo as the first 4 weeks medication. After a 1‐week washout period, they were switched to the other regimen for another 4 weeks. Evaluation was made prior to the start of study, upon completion of the first drug cycle, and the second drug cycle, by Gastrointestinal Symptoms Rating Scale for the seriousness of abdominal symptoms, and by Short Form‐36 for the level of quality of life.Results : Nineteen of 21 enrolled patients successfully completed this study. Significant improvement in Gastrointestinal Symptoms Rating Scale scores was observed in abdominal pain (P = 0.007), indigestion and reflux syndrome after famotidine treatment. Also quality of life scores showed significant improvement in body pain, vitality and general health perceptions after famotidine treatment. There was no improvement of symptoms and quality of life scores after administration of placebo.Conclusions : Famotidine was effective for improving symptoms and quality of life in functional dyspepsia patients.
Usefulness of famotidine in functional dyspepsia patient treatment: comparison among prokinetic, acid suppression and antianxiety therapies
Authors: Seno H. , Nakase H. , Chiba T. 
Published: June 2005

SummaryBackground : The treatment of functional dyspepsia is controversial.Aim : The purpose of this paper is to clarify the initial effect of prokinetic, acid suppression and antianxiety treatment for functional dyspepsia patients.Patients and methods : Sixty‐four functional dyspepsia patients without Helicobacter pylori infection were randomly assigned to 15 mg/day of mosapride, 40 mg/day of famotidine, or 30 mg/day of tandospirone during an 8‐week treatment. Individual functional dyspepsia symptoms were evaluated with 4 cm visual analogue scale before and at 2, 4 and 8 weeks after treatment.Results : Among 64 enrolled patients, 62 completed the study. Within 2 weeks, visual analogue scale score in the mosapride‐treated group decreased from 2.29 ±0.14 to 1.57 ± 0.20; in the famotidine from 2.04 ± 0.16 to 1.09 ± 0.12 (mean ± S.E.). Therefore, there were significant improvements of functional dyspepsia symptoms in mosapride‐ and famotidine‐treated patients (P <0.01). Furthermore, famotidine was significantly more effective than mosapride (P < 0.05). On the contrary, visual analogue scale score in the tandospirone therapy was 2.23 ± 0.20 and 2.13 ± 0.22 before and at 2 weeks, respectively, without any significant improvement.Conclusions : A treatment regimen of famotidine at 40 mg/day had a significant favourable effect on the clinical outcome in functional dyspepsia patients.
Effects of famotidine, mosapride and tandospirone for treatment of functional dyspepsia
Authors: Kinoshita Y. , Hashimoto T. , Kawamura A. , Yuki M. , Amano K. , Sato H. , Adachi K. , Sato S. , Oshima N. , Takashima T. , Kitajima N. , Abe K. , Suetsugu H. 
Published: June 2005

SummaryBackground : An effective therapeutic strategy for functional dyspepsia (FD) has not been well‐established.Aim : We investigated and compared the therapeutic effects of famotidine, mosapride and tandospirone for the control of dyspeptic symptoms.Methods : Fully examined FD patients of outpatient clinics at seven different medical centres were enrolled in the study. They were randomly assigned to three groups based on the type of drug administered: famotidine, mosapride and tandospirone. The effects of treatment over 4 weeks were assessed by visual analogue scales.Results : All of the drugs showed beneficial effects, although famotidine was the most effective for symptom relief, which was significantly greater than tandospirone, while the effect of mosapride was similar to that of famotidine. No subtype of FD showed a better response to a particular type of drug.Conclusions : For the treatment of FD, famotidine demonstrated the best therapeutic effect, followed by mosapride, while that of tandospirone was significantly lower.
New strategy of therapy for functional dyspepsia using famotidine, mosapride and amitriptyline
Authors: Otaka M. , Jin M. , Odashima M. , Matsuhashi T. , Wada I. , Horikawa Y. , Komatsu K. , Ohba R. , Oyake J. , Hatakeyama N. , Watanabe S. 
Published: June 2005

SummaryBackground : In functional gastrointestinal (GI) disorders including functional dyspepsia (FD) and irritable bowel syndrome (IBS), there might be no small extent of contributions of psychosomatic factors. As a therapy for IBS patients, the effectiveness of antidepressants has been reported.Aim : In this study, we evaluated the efficacy of H2‐receptor antagonist (famotidine) and 5‐HT4 receptor agonist (mosapride citrate). In addition, the effect of antidepressants was assessed as the second‐step therapy.Methods : Patients complaining upper GI symptoms were diagnosed as FD excluding organic diseases. Randomized patients received 20 mg/day of famotidine or 15 mg/day of mosapride citrate for 4 weeks and the efficacy was compared between the two groups based on a 10‐point visual analogue scale. When symptoms were not relieved (score improvement 0–2 points), patients received amitriptyline (30 mg/day) or no medication for 4 weeks randomly. Patients who had depression in psychological test (SDS) were omitted.Results : As the first‐step therapy, both famotidine and mosapride showed beneficial effects regardless of FD subtypes, age and gender. The efficacy of these two drugs in relieving FD symptoms was not significantly different. In patients who failed in the first‐step therapy, amitriptyline showed beneficial effects.Conclusions : These findings might be clinically important in view of the efficient relief of symptoms in FD patients.
Famotidine prevents canine gastric blood flow reduction by NSAIDs
Authors: Hata J. , Kamada T. , Manabe N. , Kusunoki H. , Kamino D. , Nakao M. , Fukumoto A. , Yamaguchi T. , Sato M. , Haruma K. 
Published: June 2005

SummaryAim : To investigate the effect of famotidine on gastric blood flow reduction induced by diclofenac sodium, a common non‐steroidal anti‐inflammatory drug in Japan, using laser Doppler flowmetry in the canine stomach.Methods : The gastric mucosal blood flow was measured by laser Doppler flowmetry in 15 healthy male beagles before and 60 min after the administration of diclofenac suppository (1.0 mg/kg) into the rectum. The examination was done in a crossover, single‐blinded fashion. All dogs underwent both famotidine (0.5 mg/kg) and placebo (saline) injection simultaneously with the administration of diclofenac. In addition, the tissue concentration of prostaglandin E2 was measured.Results : The blood flow decreased by 18.3 ± 9.1% in the gastric body, by 26.3 ± 8.1% in the antrum in the placebo group after the administration of diclofenac sodium, while the decreases seen were significantly smaller in the famotidine group: 3.2 ± 12.6% in the gastric body and 7.9 ± 16.5% in the antrum (P = 0.001 for the gastric body, P = 0.0034 for the antrum). Conversely, the percentage of mucosal prostaglandin E2 concentration decrease in each group did not show a significant difference.Conclusion : Famotidine alleviates the reduction of gastric blood flow induced by diclofenac sodium. Further, not only mucosal prostaglandins but also gastric acid may play an important role in non‐steroidal anti‐inflammatory drugs‐induced gastric microcirculatory disturbance.
A clinical study of Japanese patients with ulcer induced by low‐dose aspirin and other non‐steroidal anti‐inflammatory drugs
Authors: Nakashima S. , Arai S. , Mizuno Y. , Yoshino K. , Ando S. , Nakamura Y. , Sugawara K. , Koike M. , Saito E. , Naito M. , Nakao M. , Ito H. , Hamaoka K. , Rai F. , Asakura Y. , Akamatu M. , Fujimori K. , Inao M. , Imai Y. , Ota S. , Fujiwara K. , Shiibashi M. 
Published: June 2005

SummaryBackground : The incidence and severity of non‐steroidal anti‐inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs)‐induced gastro‐duodenal ulcer have not been extensively studied in Japan.Aim : We performed a prospective study to clarify NSAIDs‐induced gastro‐duodenal injury, focusing especially on low‐dose aspirin (L‐A).Methods : Two hundred and thirty‐eight patients with bleeding peptic ulcers admitted to our hospital. History of taking NSAIDs and anti‐ulcer drugs was obtained from all patients who underwent endoscopic examinations. The lesion scores of patients taking L‐A were classified numerically from zero (no lesion) to five (ulcer).Results : The NSAIDs were associated with 28.2% of hemorrhagic ulcers. The rates of patients using L‐A, loxoprofen, diclofenac, and combination of two of these drugs were 27, 16, 10 and 9%, respectively. Co‐administered anti‐ulcer drugs were cytoprotective anti‐ulcer drugs (27%), H2 receptor antagonists (16%), PPI (4%), and none (53%). In patients taking L‐A, H2 receptor antagonists were used most frequently. The HP was positive in 63% of L‐A‐induced ulcer cases and in 69% of NSAIDs other than low‐dose aspirin‐induced ulcer cases. The lesion scores of patients taking L‐A with H2 receptor antagonists or PPI were significantly lower than those of patients who were taking only L‐A (P < 0.05).Conclusions : Approximately one‐third of hospitalized patients with NSAIDs‐induced hemorrhagic ulcer showed an association with L‐A. Prospective randomized controlled trials including H2 receptor antagonists are required to establish preventive efforts aimed at L‐A‐induced gastro‐duodenal injury.
Preventive therapy for non‐steroidal anti‐inflammatory drug‐induced ulcers in Japanese patients with rheumatoid arthritis: the current situation and a prospective controlled‐study of the preventive effects of lansoprazole or famotidine
Authors: Miyake K. , Ueki N. , Suzuki K. , Shinji Y. , Kusunoki M. , Hiratsuka T. , Nishigaki H. , Tatsuguchi A. , Futagami S. , Wada K. , Tsukui T. , Nakajima A. , Yoshino S. , Sakamoto C. 
Published: June 2005

SummaryBackground : There is a lack of evidence for the efficacy of preventive medications for peptic ulcers (PUs) among long‐term users of non‐steroidal anti‐inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) in Japan.Aim : To estimate the preventive effect by normal dose, not high‐dose histamine‐H2 receptor antagonists (H2RA) for NSAID‐induced ulcers.Methods : We designed two different studies to assess the efficacy of anti‐ulcer agents in rheumatoid arthritis (RA) in patients treated over a long term with NSAIDs. An investigative survey divided patients into those not taking anti‐ulcer agents (non‐medication group); those taking mucosal protective agents (mucosal protectant group), H2RA (H2RA group), proton pump inhibitors (PPI group), or a prostaglandin E1 analog (PG) (PG group). The second study compared prospectively the preventive effects of either famotidine 20 mg bd (famotidine group) or lansoprazole 15 mg daily (lansoprazole group) in patients with PU scars.Results : The prevalence of PU in the H2RA group was significantly lower compared to the mucosal protectant group (P < 0.05), and the mucosal protectant group was not significantly different to the non‐medication group. The prospective study revealed that the PU onset rate of the famotidine group was 8% (1/13), and lansoprazole group was 15% (2/13), indicating no significant differences between the two.Conclusions : In Japan, normal‐dose H2RA is expected to be a new PU preventive treatment strategy in patients requiring long‐term NSAID therapy.
Effect of famotidine on recurrent bleeding after successful endoscopic treatment of bleeding peptic ulcer
Authors: Kamada T. , Hata J. , Kusunoki H. , Kido S. , Hamada H. , Aoki R. , Nishida T. , Komoto K. , Todo H. , Sumioka M. , Tanimoto T. , Sanuki E. , Sumii K. , Ogoshi H. , Hidaka T. , Dongmei Q. , Chayama K. , Haruma K. 
Published: June 2005

SummaryAim:  We investigated the effect of acid suppression therapy on recurrent bleeding after successful endoscopic treatment of bleeding peptic ulcer.Methods:  A total of 400 patients with bleeding peptic ulcer received either intravenous infusion of famotidine (40 mg/day) (n = 207, 163 males, 44 females, mean age 61.5 years) or drip infusion of omeprazole (40 mg/day; n = 193, 134 males, 59 females, mean age 59.8 years) after successful endoscopic treatment. The fasting duration, hospital stay, volume of transfused blood, incidence of rebleeding and mortality were compared between the two groups.Results:  The incidence of rebleeding did not differ significantly between the famotidine group (9%) and the omeprazole group (8%). The mean hospital stay was significantly shorter in the omeprazole group (18.4 days) than in the famotidine group (21.5 days, P = 0.009). However, there was no statistically significant difference in fasting duration, volume of transfused blood or mortality.Conclusion:  Our findings indicate that intravenous infusion of famotidine after successful endoscopic treatment is equivalent to drip infusion of omeprazole for prevention of recurrent bleeding.