Dataset Information

In Vivo Anti-Inflammatory Effect of H1 Antihistamines in Allergic Rhinitis: A Randomized Clinical Trial.

ABSTRACT: Allergic rhinitis is characterized by a chronic inflammation of nasal mucosa and represents a risk factor for asthma occurrence. H1 antihistamines reduce the symptoms of rhinitis, but some compounds may have anti-inflammatory properties.We evaluated the plasma level of some cytokines in patients with persistent allergic rhinitis (PAR) and their evolution after a 4-week treatment with H1 anti-histamines, as well as the risk of asthma after 1.5 years.Randomized clinical trial.Eighty-five patients with PAR and 30 healthy volunteers were included in the study. The patients with PAR were randomly divided into 2 groups: 41 patients treated with 5 mg/day desloratadine and 44 patients under 5 mg/day levocetirizine for 4 weeks. The clinical and biological evaluations were performed before and after treatment and included rhinitis symptoms and total symptoms score, type of sensitization, and plasmatic levels of total IgE, IL-1?, IL-6, IL-8 and TNF-?.IL-8 and TNF-? were significantly increased in patients with PAR compared to healthy volunteers (5.85 vs 3.12, p<0.001 and 2.32 vs 1.06, p<0.001, respectively). Both H1 antihistamines reduce all symptoms of allergic rhinitis, including nasal congestion and the plasmatic level of IL-1?, IL-6, IL-8 and TNF-?, after 4 weeks of treatment. The reduction of cytokine levels was not influenced by patients' age, sex, duration or severity of rhinitis, or type of sensitization. Levocetirizine has a superior effect compared to desloratadine in reducing the rhinitis symptoms and cytokines' level. Twenty eight (32.9%) of the patients presented asthma symptoms after 1.5 years. The occurrence of asthma was influenced by house dust sensitization (OR-14.6; CI 95% 1.8-116.3; p=0.01), but baseline values of cytokines were not predictive factors for its appearance.Levocetirizine and desloratadine as a prolonged therapy reduce plasmatic levels of some pro-inflammatory cytokines in patients with PAR. Levocetirizine has a better effect on decreasing the symptoms and plasmatic levels of IL-1? and IL-8. (ClinicalTrials. gov Identifier: NCT02507635).POSDRU and University of Medicine and Pharmacy, Iuliu Ha?ieganu, Cluj Napoca.

SUBMITTER: Bocsan CI

PROVIDER: S-EPMC4692333 | biostudies-literature | 2015 Oct

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

In Vivo Anti-Inflammatory Effect of H1 Antihistamines in Allergic Rhinitis: A Randomized Clinical Trial.

Bocşan Corina I CI Bujor Adriana I AI Miron Nicolae N Vesa Ştefan C ŞC Deleanu Diana D Buzoianu Anca D AD

Balkan medical journal 20151001 4

<h4>Background</h4>Allergic rhinitis is characterized by a chronic inflammation of nasal mucosa and represents a risk factor for asthma occurrence. H1 antihistamines reduce the symptoms of rhinitis, but some compounds may have anti-inflammatory properties.<h4>Aims</h4>We evaluated the plasma level of some cytokines in patients with persistent allergic rhinitis (PAR) and their evolution after a 4-week treatment with H1 anti-histamines, as well as the risk of asthma after 1.5 years.<h4>Study desig ...[more]

PMID: 26740893

Similar Datasets

Project description:Allergic diseases are on the rise in many parts of the world, including the Asia-Pacific (APAC) region. Second-generation antihistamines are the first-line treatment option in the management of allergic rhinitis and urticaria. International guidelines describe the management of these conditions; however, clinicians perceive the additional need to tailor treatment according to patient profiles. This study serves as a consensus of experts from several countries in APAC (Hong Kong, Malaysia, the Philippines, Singapore, Thailand, Vietnam), which aims to describe the unmet needs, practical considerations, challenges, and key decision factors when determining optimal second-generation antihistamines for patients with allergic rhinitis and/or urticaria.Specialists from allergology, dermatology, and otorhinolaryngology were surveyed on practical considerations and key decision points when treating patients with allergic rhinitis and/or urticaria.Clinicians felt the need for additional tools for diagnosis of these diseases and a single drug with all preferred features of an antihistamine. Challenges in treatment include lack of clinician and patient awareness and compliance, financial constraints, and treatment for special patient populations such as those with concomitant disease. Selection of optimal second-generation antihistamines depends on many factors, particularly drug safety and efficacy, impact on psychomotor abilities, and sedation. Country-specific considerations include drug availability and cost-effectiveness. Survey results reveal bilastine as a preferred choice due to its high efficacy and safety, suitability for special patient populations, and the lack of sedative effects.Compliance to the international guidelines is present among allergists, dermatologists and otorhinolaryngologists; however, this is lower amongst general practitioners (GPs). To increase awareness, allergy education programs targeted at GPs and patients may be beneficial. Updates to the existing international guidelines are suggested in APAC to reflect appropriate management for different patient profiles and varying symptoms of allergic rhinitis and urticaria.

Project description:BackgroundSchistosomiasis is a socioeconomically devastating parasitic infection afflicting hundreds of millions of people and animals worldwide. It is the most important helminth infection, and its treatment relies solely on the drug praziquantel. Oral H1-antihistamines are available worldwide, and these agents are among the most widely used of all medications in children and adults. Given the importance of the drug repositioning strategy, we evaluated the antischistosomal properties of the H1-antihistamine drugs commonly used in clinical practices.MethodsTwenty-one antihistamine drugs were initially screened against adult schistosomes ex vivo. Subsequently, we investigated the anthelmintic properties of these antihistamines in a murine model of schistosomiasis for both early and chronic S. mansoni infections at oral dosages of 400 mg/kg single dose or 100 mg/kg daily for five consecutive days. We also demonstrated and described the ability of three antihistamines to induce tegumental damage in schistosomes through the use of scanning electron microscopy.ResultsFrom phenotypic screening, we found that desloratadine, rupatadine, promethazine, and cinnarizine kill adult S. mansoni in vitro at low concentrations (5-15 µM). These results were further supported by scanning electron microscopy analysis. In an animal model, rupatadine and cinnarizine revealed moderate worm burden reductions in mice harboring either early or chronic S. mansoni infection. Egg production, a key mechanism for both transmission and pathogenesis, was also markedly inhibited by rupatadine and cinnarizine, and a significant reduction in hepatomegaly and splenomegaly was recorded. Although less effective, desloratadine also revealed significant activity against the adult and juvenile parasites.ConclusionsAlthough the worm burden reductions achieved are all only moderate, comparatively, treatment with any of the three antihistamines is more effective in early infection than praziquantel. On the other hand, the clinical use of H1-antihistamines for the treatment of schistosomiasis is highly unlikely.

Project description:Background:Artemisia annua is the most common outdoor aeroallergen throughout Northern China; however, no multicenter study has investigated sublingual immunotherapy (SLIT) as a treatment option for Artemisia annua-induced allergic rhinitis (AR). The aim of this study was to evaluate the efficacy and safety of an innovative SLIT for Artemisia annua-related AR. Methods:This was a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, multicenter, phase 3 clinical trial conducted in China (NCT XXX). A total of 702 Artemisia annua-sensitized eligible patients were randomized in a ratio of 2:1 to receive Artemisia annua-SLIT or placebo. The treatment lasted 32 weeks; including 5-weeks up-dosing phase and 27-weeks maintenance phase. The primary endpoint was the daily combined score of medication and rhinoconjunctivitis symptom (CSMRS), and secondary endpoints were daily total nasal symptom score (dTNSS) and daily rescue medication score (dRMS) during peak pollen period. Safety of treatment was evaluated according to adverse events (AEs) experienced. Results:Mean daily CSMRS was significantly improved during the peak pollen period in the SLIT group compared with the placebo group (1.46 ± 0.47 vs 1.88 ± 0.42, P < 0.0001 in full analysis set [FAS]; 1.49 ± 0.52 vs 1.95 ± 0.46, P < 0.0001 in per protocol set [PPS]); representing a 22.3% and 23.6% reduction, respectively, relative to placebo. In specifically Artemisia annua monosensitized patients, mean daily CSMRS reductions were demonstrated as 24.1% and 27.0% in the FAS and PPS populations, respectively, when comparing the active treatment to placebo treatment. Similarly, SLIT decreased dTNSS in peak pollen period by 19.0% in FAS and 22.3% in PPS, respectively, relative to placebo. In coincidence, dRMS in peak pollen period was reduced by 22.0% in FAS and 26.0% in PPS. 65.8% patients in SLIT group experienced treatment-related AEs, none of which was serious. Conclusion:This study indicates that SLIT with Artemisia annua drops is an effective and safe treatment option in Chinese patients with Artemisia Annua-induced AR.

Project description:BackgroundAcupuncture has shown beneficial effects for seasonal allergic rhinitis (SAR); however, it is time and cost intensive. We investigated feasibility and effects of self-administered body acupressure as a self-care technique that stimulates acupuncture points with manual pressure in SAR patients.MethodsWe conducted a two-armed randomized controlled exploratory trial to compare effects of self-administered acupressure over 4 weeks at five acupuncture points plus rescue medication (RM) with cetirizine compared to RM alone in SAR patients. Among other outcome parameters, we assessed disease-related quality of life (Rhinitis Quality of Life Questionnaire [RQLQ]), overall SAR symptoms by a visual analogue scale (VAS) and a rescue medication score (RMS) after 4 and 8 weeks.ResultsForty-one SAR patients (mean age 38.5 ± 10.0 years, n = 21, 51.2% women) were randomized. Compared to RM alone (n = 21), acupressure plus RM (n = 20) was associated with relevant improvements after 4 weeks, shown by the difference between groups in adjusted means of RQLQ: - 0.9 points (95% CI - 1.6 to - 0.2; p = 0.011) and VAS overall SAR symptoms: - 21.6 mm (95% CI - 36.3 to - 6.8; p = 0.005). The RMS was lower in the acupressure group than in the control group: 1.9 points (95% CI - 3.8 to - 0.1; p = 0.120). Group differences decreased slightly until week 8. The acupressure was feasible and safe.ConclusionResults of this exploratory study indicate that self-applied acupressure is feasible, may improve disease-specific quality of life and reduce disease-related symptoms as well as anti-allergic medication intake in SAR patients. High-quality confirmatory studies including a sham-control group are needed in the future. Trial registration DRKS-ID: DRKS00014310. Date of registration in DRKS: 2018/04/24. Investigator sponsored/initiated trial (IST/IIT): yes. Ethics approval/approval of the ethics committee: Approved (leading) Ethics Committee No. EA1/033/18, Ethik-Kommission der Charité -Universitätsmedizin Berlin. URL: https://www.drks.de/drks_web/navigate.do?navigationId=trial.HTML&TRIAL_ID=DRKS00014310.

Project description:BackgroundPlacebos can reduce physical symptoms even when provided with full honesty and disclosure. Yet, the precise mechanisms underlying the effects of "open-label placebos" (OLPs) have remained subject of debate. Furthermore, it is unclear whether OLPs are similarly effective when provided remotely, as is sometimes required e.g. in the current COVID-19 pandemic.MethodsIn a randomized-controlled trial, we examined the effects of OLP plus treatment as usual (TAU) compared to TAU alone on symptom reduction in people with allergic rhinitis (N = 54) over the course of two weeks. Due to the COVID-19 pandemic, OLP was provided remotely (i.e. sent via postal service). To investigate the potential influence of the clinical encounter on the effects of OLP, we manipulated the perception of the virtual clinical encounter, both with respect to verbal and nonverbal factors (augmented vs. limited encounter).ResultsThe results of the manipulation check confirmed that the augmented clinical encounter was evaluated more positively than the limited encounter, in terms of perceived warmth of the provider. Participants from all treatment groups showed significant symptom reduction from baseline to two weeks later, but OLP had no incremental effect over TAU. Participants benefitted more from OLP when they did not take any other medication against allergic symptoms than when taking medication on demand. When controlling for baseline symptoms, a significant treatment by encounter interaction was found, pointing to greater symptom improvement in the OLP group when the encounter was augmented, whereas the control group improved more when the encounter was limited.DiscussionThe study demonstrates that providing OLP and enhancing the encounter remotely is possible, but their effectiveness might be lower in comparison to previous studies relying on physical patient-provider interaction. The study raises questions for future research about the potential and challenges of remote placebo studies and virtual clinical encounters. The study has been registered as a clinical trial at ISRCTN (record number: 39018).

Project description:Allergic rhinitis (AR) is one of the most common allergic diseases. The conventional treatments of allergic rhinitis are oral anti-histamines, the use of intranasal corticosteroids, and immunotherapy. Dissatisfied with the ineffectiveness and side effects of these treatments, substantial numbers of patients are turning to alternative treatments like Chinese herbal medicine, particularly Tian Jiu (TJ). TJ is a form of moxibustion in which herbal patches are applied to specific acupoints on the skin. This study aims to investigate the efficacy and safety of TJ in the treatment of allergic rhinitis.This will be a prospective, randomized, single-blinded, controlled trial in patients with AR. After a 1-week run-in period, eligible subjects will be randomly assigned to the TJ group, placebo-control group or waitlist-control group. The TJ and placebo-control groups will undergo a 4-week treatment with one session per week and one 4-week post-treatment follow-up. Participants in the waitlist-control group will not receive any treatment during the first 4 weeks but will be required to be assessed. The primary outcome will be the change in the weekly average of the Total Nasal Symptom Score recorded from baseline to the end of treatment. The secondary outcomes will be change in symptoms and change in need for medication between baseline and the end of treatment by using the Rhinitis Quality of Life Questionnaire. Rescue medication (RM) needs will be measured using an RM score, comprising the weekly sum of daily assessments and any form of systemic steroids for allergic rhinitis.This study will be the first study to compare TJ treatment for allergic rhinitis with a placebo-control group, and a waitlist-control group. The investigation of TJ for allergic rhinitis will also suggest recommendations for clinical practice. The results of this study are expected to provide consolidated evidence for the effectiveness and safety of TJ for the treatment of patients with allergic rhinitis.NCT02470845 (17 May 2015).

Project description:BACKGROUND:Allergic rhinitis (AR) is a non-infectious immune disease and incidents of the disease has continuously increased in Thailand. Ginger, a Thai herb, is used in food and Thai traditional medicine. This study was designed to assess efficacy and safety of ginger extract in comparison with loratadine for AR treatment. METHODS:AR patients were treated with ginger extract 500?mg (n?=?40) against those treated with loratadine 10?mg (n?=?40) in a randomized, double-blind, controlled trial for 3 and 6?weeks. The efficacy was evaluated from clinical examinations i.e. total nasal symptom scores (TNSS), cross-sectional area of the nasal cavity with acoustic rhinometry (ARM) and rhinoconjunctivitis quality of life questionnaire (RQLQ). The safety of treatment was measured by blood pressure, blood analysis and history-taking for side effects. RESULTS:The results showed both ginger extract and loratadine treated groups significantly decreased TNSS scores but there was no significant difference between the two groups. In acoustic rhinometry measurement, the ginger treated group significantly gradually increased the estimated volume of the nasal cavity and decreased distances from the nostril, but the loratadine treated group did not cause a change. Both groups gave significantly improvement in every aspect of the RQLQ at third weeks. The treatment with ginger extract was as safe as loratadine as shown by renal and liver function results obtained from blood analysis. Both treatments had no effect on blood pressure of the patients. CONCLUSIONS:The ginger extract is as good as loratadine in improving nasal symptoms and quality of life in AR patients. However, ginger extract caused less side effects especially, drowsiness, fatigue, dizziness and constipation. Therefore, the ginger extract could be used as alternative treatment for patients with AR. TRIAL REGISTRATION:Registered with ClinicalTrials.gov (Registration number: NCT02576808) on 15 October 2015.

Dataset Information

In Vivo Anti-Inflammatory Effect of H1 Antihistamines in Allergic Rhinitis: A Randomized Clinical Trial.

Publications

In Vivo Anti-Inflammatory Effect of H1 Antihistamines in Allergic Rhinitis: A Randomized Clinical Trial.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure