Talk:Atazanavir

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified  on Atazanavir. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20070306221456/http://today.reuters.co.uk:80/news/articlenews.aspx?type=healthNews to http://today.reuters.co.uk/news/articlenews.aspx?type=healthNews&storyID=2006-10-20T184537Z_01_WEN7494_RTRIDST_0_HEALTH-BRISTOLMYERS-DC.XML&WTmodLoc=SciHealth-C4-Health-5
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at ).
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 13:35, 20 October 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: We would like to add:
-a Drug-Drug-Interactions section
-Pregnancy and Lactation section
-Mechanism of action section
-expanding the Adverse Effects section to make it easier to understand for the general public
-Is there a better way to convey the "Chemistry" section to the general public?
-possibly add to the right-hand summary: Trade name, pregnancy category and legal status in other countries 
Contraindications section needs to be updated. Additional C/I’s and cautions can be added as well. Adverse events section needs to be updated as well, but this will require some effort in deciding which AE’s to share with the public.
— Preceding unsigned comment added by Christineyu247 (talk • contribs) 12:29, 3 November 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  UCSF CP133 Proposed Edits 

message: Have added a general mechanism of action section, but do not know whether resistance mechanisms should be included under this section, or warrant their own. JMargiott (talk) 03:27, 9 November 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  Added a mechanism of action section   

message: Removed 2009 FDA warning; FDA safety information for atazanavir has been updated since then, and no longer reflects a contraindication for co-administration with PPI's. Added contraindications found on PI. Kevinhng (talk) 11:51, 10 November 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  Updated contraindications section   

message: -"Atazanavir and lopinavir profile in pregnant women with HIV: tolerability, activity and pregnancy outcomes in an observational national study" appears to be an observational study, which is a primary resource. "Prolonged QT interval and torsades de pointes associated with atazanavir therapy Question: Have patients developed Liver stones as a side-effect of this medication?" is likewise a case report, and "Active human immunodeficiency virus protease is required for viral infectivity. appears to be an isolated primary laboratory experiment.
While these papers seem of very high quality, they may represent isolated cases and are not ideal for Wikipedia. What I might offer as a suggestion is to go to these resources and see which other papers cited it. If a more comprehensive review article is available which further confirms the observations made in these studies, that would be more ideal. 
Also,  "Bristol wins U.S. approval for single anti-HIV pill" did not seem to be accessible to me for some reason. 
Otherwise, I think the article was great overall and the choice of references was expansive and inclusive. The only other suggestion I could think to give is to remember wikipedia's audience might be more lay. For example, if a patient diagnosed with HIV wants to know more about the protease inhibitor her physician prescribed for her, I think it would be helpful to explain the action of protease inhibitors more broadly first, then get into the chemical specifics later in the section. Pharmatranst (talk) 01:18, 13 November 2016 (UTC)
thread_title: Review of Article for UCSF Project

message: In terms of punctuation and grammar, this group fulfilled all the requirements of Wikipedia's manual of style. The 3-paragraph lead incorporated all the necessary components of the article succinctly. The section division and titles were appropriate. However, it seems that the Chemistry section is currently a citation. I'm not sure if the group decided to edit this section. However, the edit would be more appropriately placed in a sandbox or Talk page until it was ready for public view. Overall, the recent changes have certainly improved the quality of this article.
Angelpan55 (talk) 08:14, 13 November 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  Review of Atazanavir Article