Rare facial pain condition that affected Salman Khan also solved for 46-year-old patient, according to Apollo doctor’s diagnosis
A 46-year-old man’s persistent facial pain led to the discovery of a rare condition, trigeminal neuralgia, which was also famously battled by Bollywood superstar Salman Khan. The patient experienced severe, episodic pain on the right side of his face, specifically affecting the V2 dermatome region, for over a year. The pain was triggered by routine activities such as brushing teeth, chewing food, or shaving, and each episode lasted between 30 to 60 seconds. Despite initial treatment with carbamazepine, which provided only partial relief, further investigation was necessary.
Dr. Sudhir Kumar, a senior neurologist at Apollo Hospitals, Hyderabad, confirmed the condition as trigeminal neuralgia, a chronic neuropathic disorder that causes sudden, sharp, electric shock-like pain in the face. However, MRI scans revealed an underlying cause: a schwannoma in the right cerebellopontine angle, likely affecting the trigeminal or vestibular nerve. This identified the case as secondary trigeminal neuralgia, a less common form where another medical condition, such as a tumor or vascular malformation, compresses the trigeminal nerve.
Trigeminal neuralgia is a long-term condition that can make simple daily tasks extremely painful. Activities like eating, talking, shaving, or even exposure to a light breeze can trigger sudden, severe facial pain. While it is not life-threatening, it can significantly affect quality of life. Most cases occur in people over 50, and females are slightly more predisposed, though secondary TN can appear in younger individuals.
Bollywood star Salman Khan has openly discussed his own battle with trigeminal neuralgia, recalling excruciating pain that disrupted daily life and even basic activities like eating. He shared that the condition persisted for over seven years, with episodes occurring every few minutes. Initially mistaken for dental pain, Khan’s diagnosis highlighted the complexity of identifying TN. Dr. Kumar emphasized the importance of thorough diagnostic evaluation, including MRI imaging with contrast and trigeminal nerve protocol, particularly for younger patients or atypical presentations. This case highlights the need for accurate diagnosis and treatment to alleviate the symptoms of trigeminal neuralgia and improve the quality of life for those affected.
Delhi High Court bars Alchem International from utilizing the ‘ALCHEM’ trademark for pharmaceutical retail products.
Alkem Laboratories, one of India’s largest pharmaceutical companies, has been embroiled in a trademark dispute with Alchem International, a manufacturer of plant-derived active ingredients and Ayurvedic extracts. The controversy centers around the use of the marks “ALKEM” and “ALCHEM”, with Alkem claiming that Alchem’s increasing use of its mark is likely to cause confusion and amounts to trademark infringement and passing off. Alkem has been using its mark since its incorporation in 1973 and holds multiple trademark registrations, with the earliest dating back to October 1973.
Alchem, on the other hand, began using its mark in 1985, asserting that it was coined from the words “Alkaloids and Chemicals”. The company argues that Alkem’s suit is barred by delay and acquiescence, as Alkem was aware of its business for decades and took no action after sending a cease-and-desist notice in 2005. Alchem also contends that its operations, focused on nutraceuticals and herbal extracts, are distinct from Alkem’s prescription drug business.
Furthermore, Alchem relies on a 1990 Bombay High Court order that refused interim relief to Alkem in an earlier dispute involving another entity using the “Alchem” name. This, Alchem argues, demonstrates that Alkem’s mark lacked reputation at the time. Additionally, Alchem maintains that its use of the mark for exports and Active Pharmaceutical Ingredients (API) manufacture since 1985 constitutes honest and concurrent use.
The dispute highlights the complexities of trademark law, particularly in cases where similar marks are used by different companies operating in related but distinct fields. The outcome of the case will depend on the court’s assessment of the likelihood of confusion, the reputation of Alkem’s mark, and the validity of Alchem’s defenses. The case also raises questions about the implications of delay and acquiescence in trademark disputes, as well as the scope of honest and concurrent use. Ultimately, the court’s decision will have significant implications for the pharmaceutical industry in India and the protection of intellectual property rights.
Delhi High Court grants interim relief to Sun Pharma in trademark dispute, restraining Alenvision from selling its NEXADOM medication amidst allegations of infringing on Sun Pharma’s NAXDOM trademark.
The Delhi High Court has granted interim relief to Sun Pharma in a trademark dispute over the name “NAXDOM”. The court has barred Alenvision from manufacturing and selling a drug called “NEXADOM”, which Sun Pharma claims is deceptively similar to their trademarked name.
The dispute began when Alenvision launched their drug “NEXADOM”, which Sun Pharma alleged was an attempt to capitalize on the reputation and goodwill of their own drug. Sun Pharma argued that the similarity in names would cause confusion among consumers and potentially harm their business.
The Delhi High Court agreed with Sun Pharma’s argument, stating that the name “NEXADOM” was indeed similar to “NAXDOM” and could cause confusion. The court granted an interim injunction, barring Alenvision from manufacturing, selling, or advertising their drug until the dispute is resolved.
This decision is a significant win for Sun Pharma, as it protects their trademark and prevents potential damage to their reputation. The company had argued that the similarity in names would not only cause confusion but also potentially harm their business. The court’s decision acknowledges the importance of protecting intellectual property rights, particularly in the pharmaceutical industry where consumer safety is a top priority.
The case highlights the importance of conducting thorough trademark searches before launching a new product. Alenvision’s failure to do so has resulted in a costly and time-consuming legal battle. The company will now have to rebrand their product, which could result in significant financial losses.
The decision also reinforces the need for companies to prioritize intellectual property protection. In today’s competitive market, a strong brand identity is crucial for success. Companies must take proactive steps to protect their trademarks, patents, and copyrights to prevent infringement and maintain their competitive edge.
In conclusion, the Delhi High Court’s decision to grant interim relief to Sun Pharma is a significant development in the trademark dispute over the name “NAXDOM”. The decision protects Sun Pharma’s intellectual property rights and prevents potential damage to their reputation. It also serves as a reminder to companies of the importance of prioritizing intellectual property protection and conducting thorough trademark searches before launching new products.
Indian authorities conduct searches at seven locations in Chennai tied to Sresan Pharma amidst investigations into deaths associated with Coldrif cough syrup.
The Enforcement Directorate (ED) has launched searches at seven locations in Chennai in connection with the Coldrif cough syrup case, which has resulted in the deaths of at least 22 children, primarily under the age of five. The searches are being conducted under the Prevention of Money Laundering Act (PMLA) and are linked to Sresan Pharma, the manufacturer of the banned syrup. The company’s owner, G Ranganathan, was taken into custody by Madhya Pradesh Police on October 9.
Investigations have revealed serious lapses by the Tamil Nadu Food and Drug Administration (TNFDA) in enforcing regulatory norms. Despite being licensed in 2011, Sresan Pharma continued to operate unchecked for over a decade, with poor infrastructure and multiple violations of national drug safety regulations. A recent inspection by the Central Drugs Standard Control Organisation (CDSCO) found gross non-compliance with Good Manufacturing Practices (GMP) and deplorable working conditions at the facility.
The TNFDA failed to inform the CDSCO about Sresan Pharma, leaving it absent from central regulatory databases. The company also failed to register its approved products on the national ‘Sugam’ portal, a mandatory requirement for monitoring pharmaceutical manufacturing in India. Even when the TNFDA audited Sresan Pharma in early October, the information was not shared with the CDSCO.
The CDSCO has recommended cancelling Sresan Pharma’s manufacturing license and initiating criminal proceedings. However, no action was taken by the TNFDA, and the arrest of the company’s owner was carried out by Madhya Pradesh Police. The ED’s searches are aimed at uncovering the financial trail and possible money laundering activities related to the case.
The incident has raised concerns about the regulatory framework and the lack of coordination between state and central agencies. The TNFDA’s failure to enforce regulatory norms and its delayed action have been criticized, and the case has highlighted the need for stricter oversight and monitoring of pharmaceutical manufacturing in India. As a reliable and trusted news source, it is essential to provide accurate and timely information about such incidents to ensure public awareness and accountability.
No Results Found
The page you requested could not be found. Try refining your search, or use the navigation above to locate the post.