>My drs said that it does not make that much of a difference
based on what?
>A Cochrane Library review states a 9% gain in the probability of surviving one year.
------ snip
While riluzole has been proven to slow down ALS, patients do not report any subjective improvement. Approximately 10% of patients experience side effects such as nausea and fatigue which lead them to discontinue treatment. Safety monitoring includes regular liver function tests and people with liver disease such as hepatitis should be monitored especially carefully.
In the UK riluzole has been available through the NHS since 1997 at a standard dosage of 50 mg twice daily. There has been some evidence to show that higher doses might produce more significant improvements in ALS patients but at £5 a tablet it is at risk of being prohibitively expensive given the modest benefit to patients. One study in the Netherlands found that riluzole is metabolised differently by males and females, and its levels in plasma are decreased in patients who smoke cigarettes or take omeprazole.[8] [9]
A Cochrane Library review states a 9% gain in the probability of surviving one year. In secondary analyses of survival at separate time points, there was a significant survival advantage with riluzole 100 mg at six, nine, 12 and 15 months, but not at three or 18 months.[10] There was a small beneficial effect on both bulbar and limb function, but not on muscle strength. There were no data on quality of life, but patients treated with riluzole remained in a more moderately affected health state significantly longer than placebo-treated patients.
------ end snip
