olopatadine-hydrochloride and fexofenadine
olopatadine-hydrochloride has been researched along with fexofenadine* in 14 studies
Trials
8 trial(s) available for olopatadine-hydrochloride and fexofenadine
Article | Year |
---|---|
Comparison of the efficacy of olopatadine and fexofenadine in chronic idiopathic urticaria patients: a crossover study.
Olopatadine is one of the second-generation H1 antihistamines that were used for treating allergic disorders initially in Asia, and now also in Western countries. Whereas several trials compared the efficacy on chronic urticaria among second-generation H1 antihistamines, no study has directly compared the clinical efficacy between olopatadine and other H1 antihistamines in patients with chronic idiopathic urticaria (CIU). In this study, we address this issue for the first time and conclude that olopatadine is a good candidate for the treatment of CIU. Topics: Adult; Anti-Allergic Agents; Chronic Disease; Cross-Over Studies; Dibenzoxepins; Female; Histamine H1 Antagonists, Non-Sedating; Humans; Male; Middle Aged; Olopatadine Hydrochloride; Terfenadine; Treatment Outcome; Urticaria | 2015 |
Effects of single therapeutic doses of promethazine, fexofenadine and olopatadine on psychomotor function and histamine-induced wheal- and flare-responses: a randomized double-blind, placebo-controlled study in healthy volunteers.
Since most first-generation antihistamines have undesirable sedative effects on the central nervous systems (CNS), newer (second-generation) antihistamines have been developed to improve patients' quality of life. However, there are few reports that directly compare the antihistaminic efficacy and impairment of psychomotor functions. We designed a double-blind, placebo controlled, crossover study to concurrently compare the clinical effectiveness of promethazine, a first-generation antihistamine, and fexofenadine and olopatadine, second-generation antihistamines, by measuring their potency as peripheral inhibitors of histamine-induced wheal and flare. Further, we investigated their sedative effects on the CNS using a battery of psychomotor tests. When single therapeutic doses of fexofenadine (60 mg), olopatadine (5 mg) and promethazine (25 mg) were given in a double-blind manner to 24 healthy volunteers, all antihistamines produced a significant reduction in the wheal and flare responses induced by histamine. In the comparison among antihistamines, olopatadine showed a rapid inhibitory effect compared with fexofenadine and promethazine, and had a potent effect compared with promethazine. In a battery of psychomotor assessments using critical flicker fusion, choice reaction time, compensatory tracking, rapid visual information processing and a line analogue rating scale as a subjective assessment of sedation, promethazine significantly impaired psychomotor function. Fexofenadine and olopatadine had no significant effect in any of the psychomotor tests. Promethazine, fexofenadine and olopatadine did not affect behavioral activity, as measured by wrist actigraphy. These results suggest that olopatadine at a therapeutic dose has greater antihistaminergic activity than promethazine, and olopatadine and fexofenadine did not cause cognitive or psychomotor impairment. Topics: Adolescent; Dibenzoxepins; Double-Blind Method; Female; Histamine H1 Antagonists; Humans; Male; Olopatadine Hydrochloride; Promethazine; Pruritus; Psychomotor Performance; Rhinitis, Allergic, Seasonal; Terfenadine; Urticaria; Young Adult | 2012 |
Evaluation of the efficacy and safety of olopatadine and fexofenadine compared with placebo in Japanese cedar pollinosis using an environmental exposure unit.
Second-generation oral H1-antihistamines have become a mainstay of treatment for the symptoms of seasonal allergic rhinitis; however, the effect of olopatadine has not been widely reported to date.. To evaluate the efficacy of 2 oral H1-antihistamines, olopatadine and fexofenadine, in the treatment of the nasal symptoms of Japanese cedar pollinosis and their possible side effects.. This was a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, crossover study conducted in an environmental exposure unit (EEU). Twenty volunteers suffering from Japanese cedar pollinosis were randomly divided into 3 groups and exposed to cedar pollen in the EEU with oral administration of olopatadine hydrochloride (5 mg), fexofenadine hydrochloride (60 mg), or placebo 1 hour prior to pollen exposure. Nasal symptoms, activity impairment, and subjective sleepiness were self-assessed during the study period. Attention was measured using the digit cancellation test. The trial was repeated after 4 and 7 weeks.. Compared with placebo, olopatadine significantly improved nasal symptoms and activity impairment during pollen exposure (P < .05). There was no significant relief of nasal discharge or nasal congestion with fexofenadine throughout the 5-hour exposure to cedar pollen. Furthermore, olopatadine significantly reduced nasal congestion during the first 2 hours, as well as sneezing and nasal discharge 4 hours after admission to the EEU compared with fexofenadine (P < .05). There was no significant difference in the effect on subjective sleepiness among the 3 groups, and all 3 agents had little effect on attention.. These findings suggest that olopatadine is more effective than placebo and fexofenadine in improving nasal symptoms of Japanese cedar pollinosis. Topics: Adult; Allergens; Cryptomeria; Dibenzoxepins; Double-Blind Method; Female; Follow-Up Studies; Histamine H1 Antagonists, Non-Sedating; Humans; Male; Middle Aged; Motor Activity; Olopatadine Hydrochloride; Pollen; Rhinitis, Allergic, Seasonal; Sleep; Sneezing; Terfenadine; Treatment Outcome | 2009 |
Evaluation of the antihistamine effects of olopatadine, cetirizine and fexofenadine during a 24 h period: a double-blind, randomized, crossover, placebo-controlled comparison in skin responses induced by histamine iontophoresis.
Potency of the antihistamine effects of olopatadine, cetirizine and fexofenadine in standard-dose application were compared from 11.5 to 24 h after application. The test was designed in a double-blind, randomized, crossover, placebo-controlled study of ten healthy volunteers on histamine-induced flare and wheal response using an iontophoresis technique. The suppressive effect of olopatadine on the wheals induced by a 0.1-mA histamine iontophoresis lasted for 24 h after dosing. Fexofenadine administered using the same regimen was the least effective among three drugs tested. Suppression of the wheal response by cetirizine, taken once-daily, decreased with time. Olopatadine completely suppressed even the wheal response induced by a 0.2-mA histamine iontophoresis, although fexofenadine and cetirizine were less effective on the wheals induced by the same histamine challenge. There were no significant differences in subjective drowsiness and objective cognitive function between drug- and placebo-treated subjects. These results demonstrate that olopatadine is the most potent antihistamine among the three H(1)-blockers when administered in a standard dosage. Topics: Adult; Cetirizine; Cross-Over Studies; Dibenzoxepins; Dose-Response Relationship, Drug; Double-Blind Method; Drug Administration Schedule; Female; Histamine Antagonists; Humans; Iontophoresis; Male; Olopatadine Hydrochloride; Skin; Terfenadine; Urticaria | 2008 |
Effects of bepotastine, cetirizine, fexofenadine, and olopatadine on histamine-induced wheal-and flare-response, sedation, and psychomotor performance.
Although many antihistamines are now in clinical use, few studies directly compare their pharmacodynamic and sedative activities in humans in vivo. We designed a double-blind, placebo-controlled, crossover study to compare the inhibitory effects of bepotastine, cetirizine, fexofenadine, and olopatadine on histamine-induced flare-and-wheal response. Systemic sedative effects and impaired psychomotor activities by these drugs were also evaluated. Bepotastine (10 mg twice a day), cetirizine (10 mg once a day), fexofenadine (60 mg twice a day), and olopatadine (5 mg twice a day) or placebo was given in a double-blind manner to seven healthy volunteers before histamine challenge by iontophoresis. At 0, 1, 2, 4, 8, 12, and 24 h following the oral administration of these drugs, histamine iontophoresis-induced wheal-and-flare response was measured. Sedative effects by the drugs were also evaluated by a visual analogue scale for subjective sedation, and by word processor test for psychomotor activity. Each volunteer was tested with all of the drugs (including placebo), administered in a random order with a washout period of at least 1 week. Histamine iontophoresis induced marked wheal-and-flare response in all participants. Bepotastine, cetirizine, fexofenadine, and olopatadine yielded significant reduction of histamine-induced wheal-and-flare response compared to placebo (P < 0.01). Among the drugs, olopatadine and cetirizine suppressed most markedly and persistently histamine-induced wheal-and-flare response, while bepotastine and fexofenadine produced a significant, but less persistent suppression. Olopatadine, fexofenadine, and cetirizine showed a significant systemic sedative effect in this order with bepotastine showing the least sedative effect. Moreover, olopatadine affected psychomotor performance most markedly, which was followed by fexofenadine and cetirizine. These results indicate that bepotastine, cetirizine, fexofenadine, and olopatadine inhibit histamine-induced wheal-and-flare response of humans in vivo and induce a variable systemic sedative effect and impaired psychomotor activity. Although olopatadine and cetirizine showed the strongest and most persistent suppression of histamine-induced wheal-and-flare response, olopatadine showed a considerable sedative effect with impaired psychomotor performance. Topics: Adult; Cetirizine; Cross-Over Studies; Dermatitis, Atopic; Dibenzoxepins; Double-Blind Method; Female; Histamine; Histamine H1 Antagonists; Humans; Iontophoresis; Male; Olopatadine Hydrochloride; Piperidines; Psychomotor Performance; Pyridines; Sleep Stages; Terfenadine | 2004 |
Randomized, double-masked comparison of olopatadine ophthalmic solution, mometasone furoate monohydrate nasal spray, and fexofenadine hydrochloride tablets using the conjunctival and nasal allergen challenge models.
It is presumed that exposure to allergens in the environment occurs through both the eyes and the nose. Allergic rhinoconjunctivitis is typically treated with a nasal spray or systemic antihistamine, neither of which may provide adequate relief of the ocular component of the disease.. This study was designed to gain a better understanding of the physiologic interaction between the conjunctival and nasal mucosa and thus help establish a profile for the most effective ocular treatment in patients whose allergies have both an ocular and a nasal component.. This was a single-center, randomized, double-masked clinical study using the conjunctival allergen challenge (CAC) and nasal allergen challenge (NAC) models. It compared the clinical signs and symptoms induced by CAC and NAC, the effects of drugs administered by 3 different routes, and the movement of fluorescein after instillation into the eye and nose (Jones test), and assessed levels of of inflammatory mediators in tears and nasal secretions. At visit l, subjects previously identified as CAC responders underwent NAC to determine the dose of allergen necessary to elicit a sufficient positive reaction. At visit 2, which took place 1 week later, subjects with a positive reaction at visit 1 were randomized to group A (CAC) or group B (NAC), and underwent challenge to confirm the allergen dose necessary to produce a positive reaction. Subjects who qualified were randomized to receive 1 of 3 treatments: olopatadine 0.1% ophthalmic solution, placebo nasal spray, and placebo tablets; mometasone furoate monohydrate 50-microg nasal spray, placebo topical solution, and placebo tablets; or fexofenadine hydrochloride 180-mg tablets, placebo topical solution, and placebo nasal spray. All study medications were administered according to their approved labeling: drops were administered twice daily in the eyes, and the nasal sprays and tablets were administered once daily. At visit 3, which took place 1 week after visit 2, subjects received study medication and 15 minutes later underwent CAC or NAC as before. The primary efficacy variables were ocular itching, ocular redness, and overall nasal symptoms (sneezing, rhino rrhea/postnasal drip, nasal pruritus, palatal pruritus, and nasal congestion) rated on standard scales. Peak nasal inspiratory flow (PNIF) was measured at each visit, and the Jones test was performed at visits 1 and 3. At baseline and after challenge at visits 2 and 3, tear and nasal lavage samples were collected from a subset of randomly selected subjects for analysis of eosinophil cationic protein and tryptase.. Seventy-three subjects (42 women, 31 men; mean age, 45.26 years [range, 21-73 years]) were screened, and all were randomized to treatment. Two subjects did not complete the study. CAC induced clinically significant (>1 unit difference) ocular and nasal signs and symptoms, whereas NAC induced clinically significant nasal signs and symptoms only. In group A, there was a greater reduction in ocular itching with olopatadine compared with mometasone and fexofenadine at 3 minutes (P = 0.003 and P = 0.008, respectively) and 5 minutes (P = 0.007 and P = 0.013) after challenge. Although the difference was not statistically significant, overall relief of conjunctival redness (average of 3 vessel beds) was greatest in the olopatadine group, followed by fexofenadine. In group B, prevention of total nasal symptoms was significantly greater with mometasone compared with fexofenadine at 20 minutes (P = 0.006) and 30 minutes (P = 0.014) after challenge. There were no statistically significant differences between treatment groups in nasal symptom scores at any time point after CAC. There were also no significant differences in PNIF between treatment groups. Fluorescein was present in nasal secretions within 5 minutes of being instilled into the eye; no fluorescein was detected in the eye after instillation into the nose.. In this study, exposure of the nasal mucosa to allergen resulted in allergic rhinitis, and exposure of the ocular the ocular surface to allergen resulted in conjunctivitis with a secondary effect in the nose. These results suggest movement of allergens, their mediators, and antiallergy drugs from the ocular surfaces into the nasal cavity, with no meaningful movement from the nasal cavity to the ocular surface. In this controlled model, both the systemic agent and the nasal spray failed to control ocular symptoms. The topical ophthalmic solution provided the most effective management of allergic ocular signs and symptoms, and the nasal spray was most effective for nasal symptoms. Combined use of a nasal spray and topical ophthalmic solution may provide maximal relief in patients whose allergies have both ocular and nasal components. Topics: Administration, Intranasal; Administration, Oral; Administration, Topical; Adult; Aged; Allergens; Anti-Allergic Agents; Conjunctiva; Conjunctivitis, Allergic; Dibenzoxepins; Double-Blind Method; Female; Humans; Male; Middle Aged; Mometasone Furoate; Nasal Mucosa; Olopatadine Hydrochloride; Ophthalmic Solutions; Pregnadienediols; Rhinitis, Allergic, Perennial; Tablets; Terfenadine; Time Factors | 2003 |
Comparative study of acute effects of single doses of fexofenadine, olopatadine, d-chlorpheniramine and placebo on psychomotor function in healthy volunteers.
Since most classical (first-generation) antihistamines have undesirable sedative effects on the central nervous system (CNS), newer (second-generation) antihistamines have been developed to relieve the sedative effects and to improve the patient's quality of life. However, the psychomotor profiles of second-generation antihistamines are not fully elucidated. In this randomized, double-blind, crossover study, the acute effects of single doses of second-generation antihistamines, fexofenadine (120 mg) and olopatadine (10 mg), on cognitive and psychomotor performance were investigated in comparison with those of placebo and d-chlorpheniramine (4 mg), a first-generation antihistamine, using objective and subjective assessments, in 11 healthy Japanese volunteers. In a battery of psychomotor tests, d-chlorpheniramine impaired tracking ability in the compensatory tracking task and caused a reduction in behavioural activity as continuously measured by wrist actigraphy. Olopatadine, like d-chlorpheniramine, reduced the behavioural activity, while fexofenadine had no effect in any of the tests. No significant changes in the subjects' self-ratings of drowsiness were found with the three antihistamines. These results suggest that d-chlorpheniramine and olopatadine, but not fexofenadine, produce sedative effects on psychomotor performance, and that the CNS profile of fexofenadine is different from that of olopatadine. Topics: Adult; Chlorpheniramine; Choice Behavior; Cognition; Cross-Over Studies; Dibenzoxepins; Double-Blind Method; Female; Flicker Fusion; Histamine H1 Antagonists; Humans; Male; Olopatadine Hydrochloride; Psychomotor Performance; Reaction Time; Terfenadine; Time Factors | 2003 |
Comparison of the efficacy of combined fluticasone propionate and olopatadine versus combined fluticasone propionate and fexofenadine for the treatment of allergic rhinoconjunctivitis induced by conjunctival allergen challenge.
One approach to treating allergic rhinoconjunctivitis is the concomitant use of an intranasal spray such as fluticasone propionate to alleviate nasal symptoms and a topical or systemic agent to relieve ocular symptoms. It has not yet been determined whether a topical or systemic agent is more effective for the latter purpose.. This study compared the efficacy of combined use of fluticasone and olopatadine with combined use of fluticasone and fexofenadine in the treatment of the signs and symptoms of allergic rhinoconjunctivitis.. This 2-site, randomized, double-masked, placebo-controlled, parallel-group study employed the conjunctival allergen challenge (CAC) model, a standardized method of inducing ocular and nasal signs and symptoms of allergic rhinoconjunctivitis. At visit 1, subjects underwent CAC to determine the dose of allergen required to elicit a positive reaction. The allergen dose was confirmed at visit 2, and, according to a randomization schedule, subjects were dispensed fluticasone, olopatadine, and placebo pill; fluticasone, fexofenadine, and tear substitute; or placebo nasal spray, placebo pill, and tear substitute. CAC took place at visit 3, after patients had used the assigned medications for 2 weeks. Study medication was instilled 2 hours before CAC, after which allergic signs and symptoms were graded on standardized scales. The primary efficacy variables were ocular itching, ocular redness, and overall nasal symptoms.. Eighty subjects completed the study: 30 received fluticasone and olopatadine, 30 fluticasone and fexofenadine, and 20 placebo. Women constituted 63.8% of the study population and men 36.3%; 91.3% were white, 3.8% black, 2.5% Hispanic, 1.3% Asian, and 1.3% other. Concomitant use of fluticasone and olopatadine produced significantly greater improvements in ocular itching at 3 and 7 minutes after CAC compared with fluticasone and fexofenadine (P < 0.05). There were no significant differences in redness scores between groups; however, concomitant use of fluticasone and olopatadine produced significantly greater improvements in redness at 2 time points in each of the 3 vessel beds (ciliary, conjunctival, and episcleral) compared with placebo, and fluticasone and fexofenadine produced significantly greater improvement in redness at 1 time point in I vessel bed compared with placebo (both comparisons, P < 0.05). The 2 treatments had similar effects on total nasal symptom efficacy scores.. In this study, concomitant use of the topical agents fluticasone and olopatadine was more effective than concomitant use of fluticasone plus fexofenadine for overall treatment of the signs and symptoms of induced allergic rhinoconjunctivitis. Topics: Administration, Intranasal; Administration, Topical; Adult; Allergens; Androstadienes; Anti-Allergic Agents; Anti-Inflammatory Agents; Conjunctivitis, Allergic; Dibenzoxepins; Double-Blind Method; Drug Therapy, Combination; Female; Fluticasone; Histamine H1 Antagonists; Humans; Male; Olopatadine Hydrochloride; Ophthalmic Solutions; Rhinitis, Allergic, Perennial; Terfenadine; Treatment Outcome | 2002 |
Other Studies
6 other study(ies) available for olopatadine-hydrochloride and fexofenadine
Article | Year |
---|---|
Application of the BCS biowaiver approach to assessing bioequivalence of orally disintegrating tablets with immediate release formulations.
The aim of this study was to compare the dissolution profiles of oral disintegrating tablets (ODTs) and immediate release (IR) formulations in order to experimentally validate the regulatory biowaiver scheme (BWS) for biopharmaceutical classification system (BCS) class III drugs. We examined six drugs that show clinical bioequivalence between the ODTs and IR formulations: taltirelin, olopatadine, droxidopa, famotidine, fexofenadine, and hydrochlorothiazide. The dissolution profiles of these drugs were evaluated using the compendium paddle apparatus at pH 1.2 and 6.8. Taltirelin and olopatadine showed very rapid dissolution and met the dissolution criteria in the BWS, whereas droxidopa, famotidine, fexofenadine, and hydrochlorothiazide did not. Furthermore, in the case of famotidine, fexofenadine, and hydrochlorothiazide, the ODTs and IR formulations showed dissimilar dissolution profiles. The dose-to-solubility ratio (D:S) of these drugs was larger than that of the other drugs. The results of this study suggest that extension of the BCS-BWS to ODTs and IR formulations of BCS class III drugs is appropriate. Furthermore, for BCS class III drugs with relatively high D:S, clinical bioequivalence would be achievable even when two formulations showed different dissolution profiles in vitro. Topics: Administration, Oral; Animals; Biopharmaceutics; Chemistry, Pharmaceutical; Dibenzoxepins; Droxidopa; Famotidine; Humans; Hydrochlorothiazide; Olopatadine Hydrochloride; Pharmaceutical Vehicles; Tablets; Terfenadine; Therapeutic Equivalency | 2014 |
The effect of antihistamines on seizures induced by increasing-current electroshocks: ketotifen, but not olopatadine, promotes the seizures in infant rats.
Clinical reports have shown that some antihistamines, such as ketotifen, occasionally produced seizures, especially in pre-school age children or young patients with epilepsy. The purpose of this study was to investigate whether olopatadine, one of the most efficacious antihistamines, promotes seizures induced by electroshocks in young rats. We investigated the seizures induced by electroshock using increasing-current delivery in 3- or 4-week-old rats, and found that the threshold-current of tonic extensor seizures was elevated with age in weeks in the vehicle-treatment groups. While caffeine decreased the threshold-current in every age group of rats, pentylenetetrazole, a γ-aminobutyric acid (GABA)(A) receptor antagonist, significantly decreased them only in 4-week-old rats. On the other hand, ketotifen decreased them only in 3-weeks-old rats. In the 3-week-old rats, neither olopatadine nor fexofenadine had any effect on the threshold-currents of tonic extensor seizures. These results showed that histaminergic neuro-transmission in the brain plays a crucial role in inhibiting seizures in rats soon after weaning, but is no longer effective in rats as they approach sexual maturation. In addition, unlike ketotifen, olopatadine, as well as fexofenadine, do not promote the occurrence of seizures in infant rats. Topics: Age Factors; Animals; Anti-Allergic Agents; Brain; Caffeine; Central Nervous System Stimulants; Dibenzoxepins; Electroshock; Epilepsy; GABA Antagonists; Histamine H1 Antagonists; Ketotifen; Male; Olopatadine Hydrochloride; Pentylenetetrazole; Rats; Rats, Wistar; Seizures; Terfenadine | 2012 |
Efficacy of repeated pretreatment with olopatadine hydrochloride on rhinitis induced by intranasal instillation of toluene-2,4-diisocyanate in rats.
It is well known that starting treatment for cedar pollinosis therapy with second-generation antihistamines before the initial day of pollen scattering can relieve nasal symptom severity during the pollen season. Olopatadine hydrochloride (olopatadine) is an antiallergic agent with histamine H(1) receptor antagonistic action. We have evaluated the effects of repeated preadministration of olopatadine on the toluene-2,4-diisocyanate-induced rhinitis in rats. A single administration of olopatadine suppressed sneezing and the increases in histamine, nerve growth factor (NGF) and vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) production in nasal lavage fluid. When olopatadine was administered repeatedly once a day for 7 days before provocation, its inhibitory effects were enhanced compared to the effect of a single administration. Although the repeated administration of fexofenadine enhanced the inhibitory effects on sneezing, it did not inhibit the increases in NGF and VEGF production. These results show that the suppression of the increase in NGF and VEGF might partially be involved in the improvement of nasal allergy signs by the treatment with olopatadine. It is expected that the early treatment with olopatadine may achieve stable therapeutic effects. Topics: Administration, Intranasal; Animals; Anti-Allergic Agents; Dibenzoxepins; Disease Models, Animal; Drug Administration Schedule; Histamine H1 Antagonists, Non-Sedating; Male; Nerve Growth Factor; Olopatadine Hydrochloride; Rats; Rats, Inbred BN; Rhinitis, Allergic, Seasonal; Terfenadine; Toluene 2,4-Diisocyanate; Vascular Endothelial Growth Factor A | 2009 |
Analysis of disease-dependent sedative profiles of H(1)-antihistamines by large-scale surveillance using the visual analog scale.
Sedation is the most frequent side effect of H(1)-antihistamines, and, sometimes, it may be life-threatening for patients. Evaluation of the sedative properties of H(1)-antihistamines is important to improve the patients' quality of life (QOL). Therefore, we carried out a large-scale surveillance quantified through a questionnaire using visual analog scale (VAS) from 1,742 patients. The results showed that the degree of sleepiness caused by some nonsedative second-generation antihistamines, including fexofenadine, olopatadine and cetirizine, was disease dependent. In atopic dermatitis, an unexpectedly low VAS score of sleepiness was obtained for the first-generation antihistamine d-chlorpheniramine, which is similar to those obtained for bepotastine and epinastine. d-Chlorpheniramine also showed a high VAS score in efficacy. Meanwhile, fexofenadine showed a higher VAS score of sleepiness in atopic dermatitis than those obtained in the other allergic diseases including allergic rhinitis, urticaria and asthma. In asthma, a higher VAS score of sleepiness was found for olopatadine, ebastine and cetirizine, when compared with d-chlorpheniramine. On the other hand, bepotastine showed the lowest VAS score for sleepiness. Our findings suggest the existence of unknown factors influencing the sedative properties of H(1)-antihistamines. Therefore, appropriate H(1)-antihistamines may need to be selected, depending on allergic diseases, to improve patients' QOL. Topics: Adolescent; Adult; Aged; Aged, 80 and over; Asthma; Butyrophenones; Cetirizine; Child; Chlorpheniramine; Dermatitis, Atopic; Dibenzazepines; Dibenzoxepins; Female; Histamine H1 Antagonists; Histamine H1 Antagonists, Non-Sedating; Humans; Imidazoles; Japan; Male; Middle Aged; Olopatadine Hydrochloride; Pain Measurement; Piperidines; Population Surveillance; Psychomotor Performance; Pyridines; Quality of Life; Rhinitis, Allergic, Perennial; Rhinitis, Allergic, Seasonal; Sleep Stages; Surveys and Questionnaires; Terfenadine; Urticaria | 2008 |
Inhibition of cytokine-induced expression of T-cell cytokines by antihistamines.
To investigate immunomodulatory properties of 4 antihistamines available in Japan.. Isolated peripheral blood T cells from healthy volunteers were preincubated with cetirizine, loratadine, olopatadine, or fexofenadine for 30 minutes and then stimulated with interleukin (IL)-1 2 or IL-4 to skew immune response towards type 1 or type 2 helper T cells. RNA was extracted 6 hours later and semiquantitative reverse transcription polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) was performed using primers for IL-5 and interferon (IFN) gamma. Supernatants were collected 24 hours after stimulation, and cytokine production was quantified by enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA).. RT-PCR revealed that IL-12-induced expression of IFN-gamma was partially suppressed by loratadine and fexofenadine and that all 4 agents tested inhibited IL-4-induced expression of IL-5. ELISA demonstrated that IL-12-induced IFN-gamma production was significantly suppressed by cetirizine and fexofenadine and IL-4-induced IL-5 production was downregulated by three agents with the exception of cetirizine. This study demonstrates that antihistamines have varying immunomodulatory properties, suggesting treatment choice for atopic dermatitis can be directed by disease signs and symptoms. Topics: Cells, Cultured; Cetirizine; Dibenzoxepins; Histamine H1 Antagonists, Non-Sedating; Humans; Immunosuppressive Agents; Interferon-gamma; Interleukin-12; Interleukin-4; Interleukin-5; Loratadine; Olopatadine Hydrochloride; RNA, Messenger; T-Lymphocytes; Terfenadine | 2007 |
The various effects of four H1-antagonists on serum substance P levels in patients with atopic dermatitis.
Antiallergic drugs have various actions against allergy-associated cells and molecules as well as antihistamic properties. We studied the effects of antiallergics on the serum levels of substance P. Patients with atopic dermatitis were treated with one of four oral H1-antagonists for 14 days, and the serum level of substance P was measured before and after treatment in parallel with several atopic severity markers. Olopatadine significantly decreased the substance P level. This is in accordance with its known downmodulatory effect on tachykinin release. In contrast, cetiridine and fexofenadine unexpectedly increased the substance P level. In patients administered cetiridine, the blood severity markers for atopic dermatitis, including lactate dehydrogenase, eosinophil number, and the soluble forms of IL-2R, E-selectin, VCAM-1 and ICAM-1 were reduced after the treatment. Therefore, the elevation of SP was unrelated to the deterioration of atopic dermatitis but rather associated with improvement. Our study suggests that antiallergics can be divided into substance P-increasing and -decreasing types and raises the possibility that the increment of substance P by the former type is caused by the competitive occupation of substance P receptors. Topics: Adult; Anti-Allergic Agents; Cetirizine; Dermatitis, Atopic; Dibenzazepines; Dibenzoxepins; E-Selectin; Female; Histamine H1 Antagonists; Humans; Imidazoles; Intercellular Adhesion Molecule-1; Male; Olopatadine Hydrochloride; Substance P; Terfenadine; Vascular Cell Adhesion Molecule-1 | 2005 |