Talk:Tacrolimus

message: Reading this I become a little confused on some items (aka I think this article could be clarified a little more than what it is at the moment). Since I'm not a medical professional (nor am I in the pharmacy profession) I'm coming to this article with just the knowledge of a 3 yr post transplant patient on this drug. 
Anyway disregarding that I'll start at the introduction. I get the part where FK is introduced as both an immunosuppressent and then a topical cream but after the topical introduction "It has also been used after bone marrow transplants and for severe refractory uveitis." is somewhat thrown in there. Is the topical used after bone marrow transplants somehow, or is it used as an immunosuppressent in pill form? Same goes for the refractory uveitis. For the Contraindications and Precautions, is that for both the immunosuppressent or the topical or both? Additionally I notice it says "Black patients" (personal curiosity) under that heading, I'm curious as to why that is, it perhaps could be clarified in the article (I assume this has something to do with the topical cream and perhaps skin reactions?) Or does it even belong in there at all? I understand that a contraindication is a 'condition or factor that increases the risk involved in using a particular drug' but to include that with precautions just leaves me a bit confused, especially when seeing 'children' in there. Maybe I'm not reading that particular section right, but like I said I'm not in the medical field so.. 
Pretty much my last topic to hit in this section is the "Cancer risks" is this talking about the immunosuppressent or the topical or both (personally I've been warned that my skin cancer risks go up because I'm on this and a bunch of other immunosuppressents)? This doesn't really seem clear and the whole paragraph is vague at best until you get to the part about "UK dermatologists." So that's about it, I just thought I would throw that out there in case others come across this article and are as confused as I am. Although I must note that if I were to be looking for information on the medications that I take wikipedia would not be the first place I check, I just came across this article while bored and randomly typing in items to learn about. Anyway whoever clarifies this/answers these questions, thanks! --ImmortalGoddezz 23:52, 10 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Clarification

message: It would be very foolish to use this strong, possibly risky drug any more than absolutely necessary.  Certainly not every day, without a damn good reason. -69.87.204.151 01:28, 3 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: serious drug

message: I checked out the tacrolimus page recently since I personally have pretty severe eczema and had tried Protopic soon after it was approved for clinical use. I put a test amount on the inside of my elbows and immediately felt a hot, burning sensation. This was quickly followed by an intense, unusual headache that lasted for hours. I never used the stuff again. 
It was pretty disappointing, especially since the failure meant it was back to the old steroids. (Tried pimecrolimus too, and it had no effects good or bad.) Of course drug reactions depend on the individual, but I was surprised to find the industry trials had only found headaches in ~20% of patients and they wrote it off as being comparable to controls. I refuse to write the headache off as a psychological effect because I had no idea what to expect. Who'd expect to get a headache from a topical cream? Wonder why it only happens in some people? Anyway-- just did a PubMed search to back up my edits.
As I understand it the cancer risk isn't super-high, and may be specific to the species of lab animals they tested it on. Wouldn't be enough to stop me from using Protopic if it actually worked without giving me a headache. Eczema's no fun and I'd trade a few years of my life for relief.Scerevisiae 15:49, 13 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Yes, I had a hot sensation too the first few times I used it, but it was nothing I couldn't handle, and I didn't get any headaches either. At that time, I really had a bad eczema but three days after using it, the condition improvided significantly, not more than a week later it was gone. I can now stretch applying the ointment to one, maybe two times in two weeks and be comfortable with my skin. I can't even remember when I applied it in once critical areas - the crooks of my arms - the last time, because they've been fine for a long time. Maybe you should give it a try for two days in spite of the side effects. Maybe they will subside. I certainly didn't have the burning sensation for a long time. --Thilo 02:45, 10 September 2007 (UTC)
replies: text:  Sorry -- I know this is a page for discussing the article, not the subject -- but I've also had the burning sensation from Tacrolimus ointment: when I first used it and, bizarrely, after I've had a few sips of beer, but only if it's real ale! All I can think is that I'm having some kind of allergic reaction to the beer and that reaction is being modified by the Tacrolimus. Sam Dutton (talk) 22:17, 28 February 2008 (UTC)

text:  Alcohol sensitivity is listed as one of the clinically significant side-effects.  Also experienced headache and burning, similar to the feeling after too much sun.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.57.73.215 (talk) 20:47, 1 January 2014 (UTC)
thread_title: Personal experience + Literature search

message: From the first paragraph: "It is a 23-membered macrolide lactone discovered in 1984".  From the second paragraph: "Tacrolimus was discovered in 1987 by a Japanese team".  Neither of these assertions are sourced.  (I have undergone two liver transplants, and tacrolimus/Prograf is my primary immunosuppressant.) Emptyshell 04:52, 3 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: From the "answering my own question" department: 1984 is the correct date, according http://www.prograf.com/HCP/Prograf_History.htm. Emptyshell 04:55, 3 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Discovered in 1984 and 1987? 

message: I, for one (in the UK), don't have 'severe atopic dermatitis', but I'm being treated with Tacrolimus.
Maybe the first paragraph should be changed to 'moderate to severe atopic dermatitis'?
Sam Dutton (talk) 22:21, 28 February 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Severe atopic dermatitis 

message: I am currently taking Tacrolimus for liver transplant; I am in rejection and terminal; I am looking for the pharmaceutical company who makes this drug as I can no longer afford the co-pay for procuring this drug, can you help?  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.242.224.125 (talk) 16:27, 12 August 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Who makes it 

message: Wiki says now:
"It has similar immunosuppressive properties to cyclosporin, but is much more potent. Immunosuppression with tacrolimus was associated with a significantly lower rate of acute rejection compared with ciclosporin-based immunosuppression (30.7% vs 46.4%) in one study. Clinical outcome is better with tacrolimus than with ciclosporin during the first year of liver transplantation. LONG-term outcome has not been improved to the same extent". 
QUESTIONS:
*What if a person who has had heart transplant for 18 years and has used Cyclosporin for 18 years switches to Tacrolimus?
Is the outcome better then?
*A long time patient may need to switch because Cyslosporin damages kidneys.
Is Tacrolimus safer for kidneys?
ee1518 (talk) 16:52, 4 July 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Heart transplant patient: Switching from cyclosporin (after using 18 years) to Tacrolimus or to some other? 

message: What is the FK protein naming scheme? If you Google "FK505", "FK504", etc they exist, but what does "FK" stand for? 92.184.117.163 (talk) 14:33, 18 December 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  FK 

message: In my view, the name FK506 should be included in the lead (not solely in the infobox), because it is NOT an obsolete or former name. For example, it is used as the primary name in this 2023 paper. Robert.Allen (talk) 19:44, 21 January 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: User:Whywhenwhohow: WP:PHARMOS is a guideline, not a rule, and in this particular case should not apply. Adding the name FK506 does not clutter the lead. Moreover, FK506 is no longer just a "development name", since it is still frequently used in the research literature as the primary name of the compound and is also part of the name for FK506 binding proteins. For examples, see , , , , , , . It is easy to find many more examples in the recent literature where FK506 is used and tacrolimus is not. --Robert.Allen (talk) 22:43, 21 January 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  FK506 as alternative name