Talk:Temozolomide

message: Added Temodal, which is the brand name in at least Canada and the UK.
Whoa, go easy on the jargon, Doc... a couple of links would help already, and perhaps more introduction/explanation. --IByte 13:52, 10 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled

message: this article is fine from a clinical perspective, I suppose, but further explanation of the mechanism of action is in order. It's briefly mentioned in the introduction but a whole section should be dedicated to it. i.e. temozolomide -> monomethyl triazine -> 5-aminoimidazole-4-carboxamide -> methyldiazonium ions (dna methylation species)-> dna methylation.
Only explained better 70.128.95.244 (talk) 08:21, 1 March 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: Could someone possibly explain, or link to an explanation of, why/how it targets tumor cells over other non-tumor dividing or non-dividing cells ? Rod57 (talk) 23:43, 23 March 2011 (UTC)
thread_title: mechanism of action

message: I recently tagged this (see WP:PROD as a Proposed deletion because of copyright concerns. My rationale was as follows:
'This appears to have been cut and pasted from a larger document that is found in multiple places on the web such as http://www.boinc.org/temozolomide/ It is likely that it originated on a drug company website that no longer has the page up'
joe deckertalk to me removed the PROD (which I welcome - that's why it was WP:PROD and not WP:AFD).  His rationale was as follows:
'I'm pretty certain that the page you thought we were copyvio'ing from is instead a page that's mirroring WP content. The search I made on a few sentences of content from the middle of the article brought up, as near as I can tell, sites I know to be wikimirrors.  I do still understand your concern, and would suggest, unless you're now sure there's not a problem, you grab the attention of one of our copyright experts by using either Template:Cv-unsure or Template:Copyvio, which are probably better routes for dealing with possible CVs.)'
So now it's time to seek consensus as to whether it is a blatant copyright violation. Needless to say we all want to do what is best for this article and for Wikipedia.
Looking back at the link I provided, it is clearly a copy of Wikipedia. Joe Decker was right, and I had made an error.  Good catch, and much appreciated.  It looks like I made the error while opening up tabs and comparing different versions. The "smaller document" was actually an old version and the "extra text" was actually text that is in the latest version.  Embarrassing, but I am glad Joe caught my error.
Note to self: next time, smoke crack after editing Wikipedia... Guy Macon (talk) 13:07, 20 March 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Copyright Violation? 

message: Hi, Henry from Cancer Research UK here. I've added a link to the seminal paper in which temozolomide is discovered, plus a link to an interview we recently did with Professor Stevens. I was also wondering where/how was the best place/way to link to our patient-focused info page about the drug? See here: Temozolomide info for patients 
HenryScow (talk) 13:01, 4 May 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Extra citations and an interview with its inventor 

message: Hello. Sorry if this is bad protocol, I don't normally do wiki edits. I wanted to say that the chemical structure that you have displayed is wrong. I'm not a chemist but I am a cancer patient so my interest is personal. I was talking with a chemistry professor friend of my and he told me that what you have displayed is an adenine mimic which works very differently from alkylating agents. Temodar is an alkylating agent. I found a different structure here http://www.rxlist.com/temodar-drug.htm perhaps this one is right, although I won't swear to it. I just wanted to point out that there's something wrong with the one that's there. Thanks.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 128.180.47.88 (talk) 13:06, 2 April 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: I checked the rxlist.com structural formula.  It is actually the same as the formula in the Wikipedia article, but rotated by 180 degrees. 2A01:E0A:149:BEB0:4DE5:8DB7:4385:F45D (talk) 11:26, 26 August 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  chemical structure is not right  

message: The first link is dead 92.228.252.127 (talk) 00:42, 5 August 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  links 

message: This article said that they gave the patient temozolomide because it had fewer adverse effects than the traditional procarbazine, lomustine and vincristine treatment. That's significant, and it's more significant than just listing the adverse effects from the package insert. (With no WP:RS BTW.) 
http://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJMcpc1610101
Case Records of the Massachusetts General Hospital
Case 38-2016 — A 52-Year-Old Woman with Recurrent Oligodendroglioma
Andrew S. Chi, Daniel P. Cahill, Mykol Larvie, and David N. Louis
N Engl J Med 2016; 375:2381-2389
December 15, 2016
DOI: 10.1056/NEJMcpc1610101
--Nbauman (talk) 00:48, 18 December 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:   Less toxic?