Application of capillary zone electrophoresis to determine second-generation H1 antihistaminic drugs, loratadine and rupatadine

Abstract The second generation of H1 antihistamines from the piperidine group are often used for treating allergic diseases due to their action on histaminic receptors, the primary mediator of allergy. Moreover, the antihistamines have anti-inflammatory action, mediated through platelet-activating factor blocking activity. A simple and rapid capillary zone electrophoresis method was developed and validated for the determination of loratadine (LOR) and rupatadine (RUP) in tablets. The analyses were carried out using a fused silica capillary of 50.2 cm (40 cm effective length), 75 µm i.d. The background electrolyte was composed of boric acid 35 mmol/L, pH 2.5. Voltage of 20 kV, hydrodynamic injection of 3447.3 Pa for 3s, temperature at 25 ºC, and UV detection at 205 nm were applied. Electrophoretic separation was achieved at 1.8 and 2.8 min for RUP and LOR, respectively. The method was linear for both drugs in a range of 50.0 to 400.0 µg/mL (r>0.99). The limits of detection and quantification were 46.37 and 140.52 µg/mL, for LOR and 29.60 and 89.69 µg/mL for RUP respectively. The precision was less than 5.0 % for both drugs. The average recovery was approximately 100 %. The proposed novel method can significantly contribute to the rapid detection of counterfeit products and in quality control of drug products containing antihistamines

Síndrome de intolerancia a múltiples medicamentos / Syndrome of intolerance to multiple medicines

El síndrome de intolerancia a múltiples medicamentos (MDIS, por sus siglas en inglés) se caracteriza por la intolerancia a dos o más medicamentos no relacionados. Tiene una prevalencia baja y es común en pacientes con polifarmacia. A pesar de que las reacciones adversas a los medicamentos son muy frecuentes, es raro que los pacientes debuten con este síndrome, el cual tiene implicaciones clínicas de leves a graves que afectan su vida; de acuerdo con esto varían el abordaje y su manejo. La sintomatología presentada varía desde síntomas gastrointestinales como reflujo gastroesofágico, dolores musculares y cefalea, hasta síntomas cutáneos; estos son los más frecuentes, tales como urticaria y erupciones maculopapulares o presentaciones menos comunes como el síndrome de Stevens-Johnson. El MDIS es causado por una amplia variedad de fármacos; por ello el conocimiento del síndrome, así como un adecuado interrogatorio de los antecedentes del paciente, es necesario para realizar un diagnóstico oportuno e instaurar un manejo adecuado y preventivo, evitando reacciones adversas que pongan en riesgo su vida. Con los hallazgos del cuadro clínico en la paciente, y basados en los antecedentes alérgicos presentados anteriormente a diferentes medicamentos no relacionados entre ellos, más la presentación de un rash maculopapular generalizado posterior a la administración de trimetoprim/sulfametoxazol se realiza el diagnóstico de MDIS. Se decide cambiar de medicamento por fosfomicina, con una consecuente evolución favorable. (AU)

Síndrome DRESS por paracetamol / DRESS syndrome due to acetaminophen

A síndrome DRESS é uma entidade rara e distinta, caracterizada por acometimento cutâneo e envolvimento de órgãos internos, com risco potencial de morte. O diagnóstico e o tratamento pre- coces são de vital importância. Relatos de DRESS por paraceta- mol são raros na literatura, razão pela qual apresentamos este caso. Paciente do sexo masculino, 56 anos, com surgimento de rash maculopapular, febre, linfadenopatia e hipereosinofilia 3 semanas após suspensão de paracetamol, associados ao ante- cedente familiar de reação a fármaco. Evoluiu bem após pulso- terapia com metilprednisolona.

DRESS syndrome is a rare and distinct entity characterized by cutaneous manifestations and internal organs involvement with a potential risk of death. Early diagnosis and treatment are vi- tally important. Reported cases of DRESS syndrome due to ace- taminophen are rare in the literature, and that is the reason for this case report. A 56-year-old male patient with maculopapular rash, fever, lymphadenopathy, and hypereosinophilia three we- eks after suspension of acetaminophen, associated with a family history of drug reaction. It progressed well after pulse therapy with methylprednisolone.

Individualized treatment for allergic rhinitis based on key nasal clinical manifestations combined with histamine and leukotriene D4 levels / Tratamento individualizado para a rinite alérgica baseado nas principais manifestações clínicas nasais e dos níveis de histamina e leucotrieno D4

Abstract Introduction The types of allergic rhinitis are roughly classified based on the causative antigens, disease types, predilection time, and symptom severity. Objective To examine the clinical typing and individualized treatment approach for allergic rhinitis and to determine the optimal treatment method for this disease using various drug combination therapies. Methods A total of 108 participants with allergic rhinitis were divided into three groups based on symptoms. Subsequently, each group was further categorized into four subgroups based on the medications received. The efficacy of the treatments was evaluated using the visual analog scale VAS scores of the total and individual nasal symptoms, decline index of the symptom score, histamine and leukotriene levels, and mRNA and protein expression levels of histamine 1 and cysteinyl leukotriene 1 receptors. Results Loratadine + mometasone furoate and loratadine + mometasone furoate + montelukast significantly improved the sneezing symptom and reduced the histamine levels compared with the other combination therapies (p < 0.05). Meanwhile, montelukast + mometasone furoate and montelukast + mometasone furoate + loratadine considerably improved the nasal obstruction symptom and decreased the leukotriene D4 levels compared with the other combination therapies (p < 0.05). Conclusion Clinical symptom evaluation combined with experimental detection of histamine and leukotriene levels can be an objective and accurate method to clinically classify the allergic rhinitis types. Furthermore, individualized treatment based on allergic rhinitis classification can result in a good treatment efficacy.

Resumo Introdução A rinite alérgica é basicamente classificada de acordo com os antígenos causadores, tipos de doença, peridiocidade e gravidade dos sintomas. Objetivo Avaliar os tipos clínicos e a abordagem terapêutica individualizada para cada tipo de rinite alérgica e determinar o método de tratamento ideal utilizando várias terapias de combinação de fármacos. Método Um total de 108 participantes com rinite alérgica foram divididos em três grupos com base nos sintomas. Posteriormente, cada grupo foi subsequentemente categorizado em quatro subgrupos com base nos medicamentos recebidos. A eficácia dos tratamentos foi avaliada utilizando os escores da escala visual analógica EVA dos sintomas nasais totais e individualmente, índice de declínio do escore de sintomas, níveis de histamina e leucotrienos e níveis de expressão de mRNA e proteína dos receptores de histamina 1 e cisteinil-leucotrieno 1. Resultados As associações entre loratadina + furoato de mometasona, assim como a de loratadina + furoato de mometasona + montelucaste melhoraram significativamente o sintoma de espirros e reduziram os níveis de histamina em comparação às outras terapias combinadas (p < 0,05). Por outro lado, a associação montelucaste + furoato de mometasona, assim como a associação montelucaste + furoato de mometasone + loratadina melhoraram consideravelmente o sintoma de obstrução nasal e diminuíram os níveis de leucotrieno D4 em comparação com as outras combinações (p < 0,05). Conclusão A avaliação clínica dos sintomas combinada com a detecção experimental dos níveis de histamina e leucotrieno pode ser um método objetivo e preciso para classificar clinicamente os tipos de rinite alérgica. Além disso, o tratamento individualizado baseado na classificação da rinite alérgica pode resultar no aumento da eficácia do tratamento.

Meta-analysis of efficacy and safety of Tripterygium Glycosides Tablets combined with desloratadine in treatment of chronic urticarial / 中国中药杂志

To analyze the efficacy and safety of Tripterygium Glycosides Tablets combined with desloratadine as well as desloratadine alone in the treatment of chronic urticaria by Meta-analysis,in order to provide evidence-based reference for clinical treatment.PubMed,CBM,Wan Fang,VIP database and CNKI database were retrieved to collect randomized controlled trials( RCT) about Tripterygium Glycosides Tablets combined with desloratadine( test group) as well as desloratadine alone( control group) in the treatment of chronic urticaria. Meta-analysis was performed by using Rev Man 5. 3 software after data extraction and quality evaluation( a total of 15 RCTs were included,involving 1 411 patients). Meta-analysis showed that the total effective rate( RR = 1. 28,95%CI[1. 22,1. 35],P<0. 000 01) and the quality of life improvement rate( RR = 1. 49,95% CI[1. 33,1. 66],P< 0. 000 01) of the test group were better than those of the control group,and the recurrence rate( RR = 0. 29,95%CI[0. 21,0. 40],P<0. 000 01) was significantly lower than that of the control group,with statistically significant differences; there was no statistically significant difference in the incidence of adverse reactions( RR = 1. 02,95%CI[0. 68,1. 53],P = 0. 92) compared with the control group. Based on the included RCTs,the efficacy of Tripterygium Glycosides Tablets combined with desloratadine in the treatment of chronic urticaria were superior to those of desloratadine alone,with similarity in safety. However,due to the low quality of RCTs and the lack of large-scale multi-center studies,the results shall not be further verified by clinical trials.

Association of CACNA1C gene genetic polymorphism with the susceptibility as well as prognosis for chronic spontaneous urticaria / 中南大学学报(医学版)

To investigate the relationship between single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) of CACNA1C (SNPs rs58619945, rs7316246 and rs216008) and susceptibility of chronic spontaneous urticaria (CSU) as well as the curative effect of non-sedating antihistamine drugs.
 Methods: Peripheral blood were extracted from 191 CSU patients to collect DNA. Urticaria Activity Score 7 (UAS7) and Dermatology Life Quality Index (DLQI) changes were collected from these patients with different non-sedating antihistamine drugs. PubMed retrieval system was used to select the 3 SNPs (rs58619945, rs7316246 and rs216008) of CACNA1C. Susceptibility of CSU and curative effect of non-sedating antihistamine drugs (desloratadine, mizolastine, fisofenadine) in 189 CSU patients and 105 controls with different SNPs were compared with Chi-squared test. Data of 105 southern Chinese controls were extracted from the 1 000 genome database.
 Results: Frequency of rs58619945 G allele in the CSU patients was significantly higher than that in the controls [OR(95%CI)=0.660(0.470-0.925), P=0.016]. However, there was no significant differences in rs7316246 and rs216008 between the CSU patients and the controls. Meanwhile there was no significant difference in general curative effect of the 3 drugs in the 3 SNPs (rs58619945: OR=0.843, P=0.454; rs7316246: OR=2.103, P=0.102; rs216008: OR=0.237, P=0.363). There was significant difference in different alleles of rs216008 in the patients administered by desloratadine [OR(95%CI)=0.480(0.247-0.933), P=0.029]. No difference was shown in the 3 SNPs in patients administered by mizolastine.
 Conclusion: The rs58619945 A/G might be related to susceptibility of CSU, and the rs216008 mutation might affect drug response of desloratadine.

Association between desloratadine and prednisolone in the treatment of children with acute symptoms of allergic rhinitis: a double-blind, randomized and controlled clinical trial / Associação entre desloratadina e prednisolona no tratamento de crianças com sintomas agudos de rinite alérgica: ensaio clínico duplo-cego, randomizado e controlado

Abstract Introduction: A combination of antihistamines and oral corticosteroids is often used to treat acute symptoms of allergic rhinitis. Objective: To evaluate safety and efficacy of desloratadine plus prednisolone in the treatment of acute symptoms of children (2-12 years) with allergic rhinitis, and to compare it to dexchlorpheniramine plus betamethasone. Methods: Children with moderate/severe persistent allergic rhinitis and symptomatic (nasal symptoms score [0-12] ≥ 6) were allocated in a double-blind, randomized fashion to receive dexchlorpheniramine plus betamethasone (n = 105; three daily doses) or desloratadine plus prednisolone (n = 105; single dose followed by two of placebo) for 7 days. At the beginning and end of the evaluation, the following were obtained: nasal symptoms score, extra nasal symptoms score, peak nasal inspiratory flow, blood biochemistry, and electrocardiogram. Ninety-six children of the dexchlorpheniramine plus betamethasone group and 98 of the desloratadine plus prednisolone group completed the protocol. Results: The two groups were similar regarding initial and final nasal symptoms scores, extra nasal symptoms scores and peak nasal inspiratory flow. A drop of 76.4% and 79.1% for nasal symptoms score, 86.0% and 79.2% for extra nasal symptoms score, as well as an increase of 25.2% and 24.3% for peak nasal inspiratory flow occurred for those treated with desloratadine plus prednisolone and dexchlorpheniramine plus betamethasone, respectively. There were no significant changes in blood chemistry. Sinus tachycardia was the most frequent electrocardiogram change, but with no clinical significance. Drowsiness was reported significantly more often among those of dexchlorpheniramine plus betamethasone group (17.14% × 8.57%, respectively). Conclusion: The desloratadine plus prednisolone combination was able to effectively control acute symptoms of rhinitis in children, improving symptoms and nasal function. Compared to the dexchlorpheniramine plus betamethasone combination, it showed similar clinical action, but with a lower incidence of adverse events and higher dosing convenience.

Resumo Introdução: A associação entre anti-histamínicos e corticosteroides orais é frequentemente empregada no tratamento de sintomas agudos de rinite alérgica. Objetivo: Avaliar a segurança e eficácia da associação desloratadina + prednisolona no tratamento de sintomas agudos de crianças (2-12 anos) com rinite alérgica e compará-las com as da associação dexclorfeniramina + betametasona. Método: Crianças com rinite alérgica persistente moderada/grave e sintomáticas (escore de sintomas nasais [0-12] ≥ 6) foram alocadas de modo duplo-cego e randômico para receber dexclorfeniramina + betametasona (n = 105; três doses diárias) ou desloratadina + prednisolona (n = 105; dose única seguida por duas de placebo) por 7 dias. No início e no fim da avaliação foram obtidos: escore de sintomas nasais, escore de sintomas extranasais, pico de fluxo inspiratório nasal, bioquímica sanguínea e eletrocardiograma. Do total, 96 crianças do grupo dexclorfeniramina + betametasona e 98 do grupo desloratadina + prednisolona concluíram o protocolo. Resultados: Os dois grupos foram iguais com relação ao escore de sintomas nasais, escore de sintomas nasais extranasais e pico de fluxo inspiratório nasal iniciais e finais. Observou-se queda de 76,4% e 79,1% nos escores para escore de sintomas nasais, de 86,0% e 79,2% para escore de sintomas extranasais, assim como incremento de 25,2% e de 24,3% para o pico de fluxo inspiratório nasal para os grupos desloratadina + prednisolona e dexclorfeniramina + betametasona, respectivamente. Não houve alterações significativas da bioquímica sanguínea. Taquicardia sinusal foi a alteração do eletrocardiograma mais encontrada, mas sem significância clínica. Sonolência foi significantemente mais referida entre os tratados com dexclorfeniramina + betametasona do que entre os desloratadina + prednisolona (8,57% × 17,14%, respectivamente). Conclusão: A associação desloratadina + prednisolona foi capaz de controlar efetivamente os sintomas agudos de rinite em crianças, melhorou sintomas e a função nasal. Na comparação com a associação dexclorfeniramina + betametasona, demonstrou ação clínica semelhante, mas com menor incidência de eventos adversos e maior comodidade posológica.

Individualized Treatment of Allergic Rhinitis According to Nasal Cytology

PURPOSE: Nasal cytology is important in the diagnosis and treatment of nasal inflammatory diseases. Treatment of allergic rhinitis (AR) according to nasal cytology has not been fully studied. We plan to explore the individualized treatment of AR according to nasal cytology. METHODS: Nasal cytology from 468 AR patients was examined for inflammatory cell quantity (grade 0–5) and the percentage of neutrophils and eosinophils. Results were subdivided into the following categories: AR(Eos), eosinophil ≥50% of the whole inflammatory cells; AR(Neu), neutrophils ≥90%; AR(Eos/Neu), 10%≤ eosinophil <50%; AR(Low), grade 0/1 inflammatory cell quantity. Nasal cytology-guided treatment was implemented: all AR(Eos) patients (n=22) and half of the AR(Neu) patients (AR[Neu1], n=22) were treated with mometasone furoate spray and oral loratadine. Another half of the AR(Neu) patients (AR[Neu2], n=22) were treated with oral clarithromycin. Visual analog scale (VAS), symptom scores, and nasal cytology were evaluated 2 weeks before and after treatment. RESULTS: There were 224/468 (47.86%) AR(Eos), 67/468 (14.32%) AR(Neu), 112/468 (23.93%) AR(Eos/Neu), and 65/468 (13.89%) AR(Low) of the AR patients studied. There were no significant differences in clinical characteristics among these subgroups, except that the nasal blockage score was higher in AR(Eos) patients than in AR(Neu) patients (1.99 vs. 1.50, P=0.02). Comparing AR(Eos) patients with AR(Neu1) patients 2 weeks after treatment, nasal symptoms and VAS were significantly lower in AR(Eos) patients, except for nasal blockage symptoms (P<0.05 of nasal itching and sneezing; P<0.01 for nasal secretion, total scores, and VAS). Comparing AR(Neu1) with AR(Neu2) patients, nasal symptoms, and VAS were significantly lower in AR(Neu2), except for nasal blockage and nasal itching symptoms (P<0.05 for nasal secretions, sneezing, total score, and VAS). CONCLUSIONS: Nasal cytology may have important value in subtyping AR and optimizing AR treatment. Treating neutrophils is very important in AR patients with locally predominant neutrophils.

Ehretia microphylla (Tsaang gubat) versus loratadine as treatment for allergic rhinitis: A randomized controlled trial

@#<p style="text-align: justify;"><strong>OBJECTIVE:</strong> To determine if Ehretia microphylla (Tsaang Gubat) decoction tea and placebo can improve the symptoms of mild intermittent allergic rhinitis in comparison to loratadine and control tea.<br /><strong>METHODS:</strong><br /><strong>Design:</strong> Double-Blind, Randomized Controlled<br /><strong>Trial Setting:</strong> Tertiary-Government Training Hospital<br /><strong>Participants:</strong> Twenty-four patients diagnosed with mild intermittent allergic rhinitis from October 2015 to July 2016 were randomly divided into a treatment group given Ehretia microphylla (Tsaang Gubat) decoction tea and placebo, and a control group given control tea and loratadine, both taken for 7 days. Patients underwent pre- and post-intervention evaluation by anterior rhinoscopy, Sino-nasal Outcome Test 22 (SNOT 22) Questionnaire and 10-point Visual Analog Scale (VAS). Data were encoded and subjected to statistical analysis using Mann Whitney U test and Wilcoxon Signed Rank test.<br /><strong>RESULTS:</strong> Age and gender of the treatment and control group participants were comparable. Prior to intervention, no differences in symptoms were noted between both groups on SNOT 22 and VAS scores. After intervention, no differences in symptoms were noted between the 2 groups on SNOT 22 and VAS scores either. Comparison of pre- (30.4 ± 17.3) and post- (7.2 ± 6.5) intervention mean SNOT 22 scores of the loratadine control group with pre- (32.5 ± 23.7) and post- (7.8 ± 10.4) intervention mean SNOT 22 scores of the Ehretia Microphylla treatment group showed significant improvement of symptoms in both groups. Likewise, comparison of pre- and post-intervention mean VAS scores of the loratadine control group and pre- and post-intervention mean VAS scores of the Ehretia Microphylla treatment group based on symptoms of sneezing, rhinorrhea, nasal congestion and pruritus showed significant improvement of symptoms in both groups (p-values of < .001).<br /><strong>CONCLUSION:</strong> Ehretia microphylla (Tsaang Gubat) decoction tea may improve symptoms of allergic rhinitis (sneezing, rhinorrhea, pruritus and nasal congestion) and be taken as an alternative to loratadine in patients with mild intermittent allergic rhinitis. Further clinical trials with more participants may provide stronger evidence for this conclusion.</p>

Ehretia microphylla (Tsaang gubat) versus loratadine as treatment for allergic rhinitis: A randomized controlled trial

OBJECTIVE: To determine if Ehretia microphylla (Tsaang Gubat) decoction tea and placebo can improve the symptoms of mild intermittent allergic rhinitis in comparison to loratadine and control tea.METHODS:Design: Double-Blind, Randomized ControlledTrial Setting: Tertiary-Government Training HospitalParticipants: Twenty-four patients diagnosed with mild intermittent allergic rhinitis from October 2015 to July 2016 were randomly divided into a treatment group given Ehretia microphylla (Tsaang Gubat) decoction tea and placebo, and a control group given control tea and loratadine, both taken for 7 days. Patients underwent pre- and post-intervention evaluation by anterior rhinoscopy, Sino-nasal Outcome Test 22 (SNOT 22) Questionnaire and 10-point Visual Analog Scale (VAS). Data were encoded and subjected to statistical analysis using Mann Whitney U test and Wilcoxon Signed Rank test.RESULTS: Age and gender of the treatment and control group participants were comparable. Prior to intervention, no differences in symptoms were noted between both groups on SNOT 22 and VAS scores. After intervention, no differences in symptoms were noted between the 2 groups on SNOT 22 and VAS scores either. Comparison of pre- (30.4 ± 17.3) and post- (7.2 ± 6.5) intervention mean SNOT 22 scores of the loratadine control group with pre- (32.5 ± 23.7) and post- (7.8 ± 10.4) intervention mean SNOT 22 scores of the Ehretia Microphylla treatment group showed significant improvement of symptoms in both groups. Likewise, comparison of pre- and post-intervention mean VAS scores of the loratadine control group and pre- and post-intervention mean VAS scores of the Ehretia Microphylla treatment group based on symptoms of sneezing, rhinorrhea, nasal congestion and pruritus showed significant improvement of symptoms in both groups (p-values of CONCLUSION: Ehretia microphylla (Tsaang Gubat) decoction tea may improve symptoms of allergic rhinitis (sneezing, rhinorrhea, pruritus and nasal congestion) and be taken as an alternative to loratadine in patients with mild intermittent allergic rhinitis. Further clinical trials with more participants may provide stronger evidence for this conclusion.

Do pediatric medicines induce topographic changes in dental enamel?

Abstract The purpose of the present study was to evaluate the effect of common pediatric liquid medicines on surface roughness and tooth structure loss and to evaluate the pH values of these medicines at room and cold temperatures in vitro. Eighty-four bovine enamel blocks were divided into seven groups (n = 12): G1-Alivium®, G2-Novalgina®, G3-Betamox®, G4-Clavulin®, G5-Claritin®, G6-Polaramine® and G7-Milli-Q water (negative control). The pH was determined and the samples were immersed in each treatment 3x/day for 5 min. 3D non-contact profilometry was used to determine surface roughness (linear Ra, volumetric Sa) and the Gap formed between treated and control areas in each block. Scanning electron microscopy (SEM) and energy dispersive spectrometry (EDS) were also performed. The majority of liquid medicines had pH ≤ 5.50. G1, G4, and G5 showed alterations in Ra when compared with G7 (p < 0.05). According to Sa and Gap results, only G5 was different from G7 (p < 0.05). Alteration in surface was more evident in G5 SEM images. EDS revealed high concentrations of carbon, oxygen, phosphorus, and calcium in all tested groups. Despite the low pH values of all evaluated medicines, only Alivium®, Clavulin®, and Claritin® increased linear surface roughness, and only Claritin® demonstrated the in vitro capacity to produce significant tooth structure loss.

Effect of Modified Danggui Yinzi on Delayed Allergy in Model Mice with Qi-Blood Deficiency Syndrome / 中国中西医结合杂志

<p><b>OBJECTIVE</b>To explore the effect of Danggui Yinzi (DY) on delayed allergy in model mice with qi-blood deficiency syndrome (QBDS).</p><p><b>METHODS</b>QBDS model was established in 48 Kuming mice of SPF grade by using reserpine and acetophenone hydrazine. Forty of them were then randomly divided into the model group, the loratadine group, the high dose DY group, the middle dose DY group, and the low dose DY group, 8 in each group. Another 8 in line with the same standard were recruited as a blank group. Mice in high, middle, and low dose DY groups were administered with DY concentrated solution at 60, 30, 15 g/kg by gastrogavage. Mice in the loratadine group were administered with loratadine solution at 1.66 mg/kg by gastrogavage. Equal volume of normal saline was administered to mice in the model group and the blank group by gastrogavage. All medication was given once per day for 1 successive week. Except those in the blank group, the rest mice were evenly smeared with 1% DNCB solution on the abdomen. Five days after skin allergy, 1% DNCB solution was smeared to right ear of all mice to stimulate allergic reaction. Mice in the blank group were smeared in the same way without allergenic reaction. The auricle swelling and the inhibition ratio were determined at 24 h after attack. Blood was collected from orbit and serum IgE level detected using double-antibody sandwich ELISA.</p><p><b>RESULTS</b>Compared with the blank group, auricle swelling obviously increased and serum IgE level was obviously elevated in the model group (P < 0.01). Compared with the model group, auricle swelling obviously decreased and serum IgE level was obviously reduced in the 3 dose DY groups (P < 0.05, P < 0.01). Meanwhile, the auricle swelling degree was superior in high and middle dose DY groups to that in the loratadine group (P < 0.05). The inhibition ratio of auricle swelling was sequenced from high to low as 67.3% in the high dose DY group, 56.0% in the middle dose DY group, 48.1% in the low dose DY group, 47.3% in the loratadine group.</p><p><b>CONCLUSIONS</b>DY could inhibit auricle swelling and lower serum IgE level. It also could inhibit delayed allergic reaction in model mice with QBDS to some extent.</p>

Effect of methyleugenol on expression of MUC5AC in nasal mucosa of rats with allergic rhinitis / 浙江大学学报·医学版

To investigate the effect of methyleugenol on expression of MUC5AC in nasal mucosa of rats with allergic rhinitis (AR).Seventy-two Wistar rats were randomly divided into 6 groups:normal control group, AR group, loratadine group, low-dose methyleugenol group, middle-dose methyleugenol group and high-dose methyleugenol group with 12 rats in each group. AR was induced by intraperitoneal injection of ovalbumin in latter 5 groups. 10 mg loratadine q.d was given to rats in loratadine group by gavage; and 10 mg/kg, 20 mg/kg and 40 mg/kg methyleugenol were given by gavege q.d to rats in low-, middle-and high-dose methyleugenol groups, respectively. Nasal mucosa samples were obtained from rats at 1, 2, 4 and 6 weeks after drug intervention. The expression of MUC5AC protein and mRNA in nasal mucosa was detected by immunohistochemistry and real-time fluorescence quota PCR (RT-PCR), respectively.Compared with AR, the percentage of cells staining positively for MUC5AC protein and the relative quantity of MUC5AC mRNA in middle-and high-dose methyleugenol groups were significantly decreased after 2 and 4 weeks of drug intervention (<0.05), but no such decrease was observed in low-dose methyleugenol group at all time points (>0.05). The percentage of cells with positive expression of MUC5AC protein and mRNA in loratadine group were significantly decreased after 1 week of administration (<0.05). The percentage of cells with positive MUC5AC protein in middle-dose methyleugenol group was higher than that in loratadine group (<0.05) after 6 week of drug intervention, but the difference was not seen in high-dose group (>0.05). There was no significant difference in relative quantities of MUC5AC mRNA after 4 weeks of administration between high-and middle-dose methyeugenol groups and loratadine group (>0.05).Methyleugenol can attenuate AR through inhibiting the expression of MUC5AC mRNA and protein in nasal mucosa of AR rats.

Clinical evaluation of Montelukast plus Budesonide nasal spray and Desloratadine citrate disodium in treating moderate and severe persistent allergic rhinitis / 临床耳鼻咽喉头颈外科杂志

OBJECTIVE@#To investigate the clinical efficacy of montelukast plus budesonide nasal spray and desloratadine citrate disodium tablets on moderate and severe persistent allergic rhinitis.@*METHOD@#Senenty patients with moderate and severe persistent allergic rhinitis were devided randomly study group (n = 35) and control group (n = 35). The study group were treated with montelukast sodium tablets combined with budesonide nasal spray and desloratadine citrate disodium tablets for 4 weeks, the control group received budesonide nasal spray and desloratadine citrate disodium tablets for 4 weeks. Comparing visual analogue scale (VAS) scores of nasal symptoms, rhino conjunctivitis quality of life questionnaire (RQLQ) scores and total effective rate in two groups at baseline and after treatment.@*RESULT@#(1) VAS scores of nasal symptoms: the difference of total nasal symptoms VAS scores or single nasal symptom VAS scores from both groups at 2 weeks and 4 weeks after treatment were statistically significant (P < 0.05); (2) RQLQ scores: the difference of RQLQ scores of 2 group's at baseline and 4 weeks after treatment were statistically significant, the difference of RQLQ scores about nasal symptoms in two groups at 4 weeks after treatment were statistically significant (P < 0.05); (3) The total effective rate was 94.29% in study group but 80.00% in control group, the differences were statistically significant (P < 0.05).@*CONCLUSION@#Montelukast plus budesonide nasal spray and desloratadine citrate disodium tablets can work together better on relieving clinical syptoms quickly and promoting the life quality of patients with moderate and severe persistent allergic rhinitis.

Histamine H1-receptor antagonists against leishmania (L. ) infantum: an in vitro and in vivo evaluation using phosphatidylserine-liposomes

Considering the limited and toxic therapeutic arsenal available for visceral leishmaniasis (VL), the drug repositioning approach could represent a promising tool to the introduction of alternative therapies. Histamine H1-receptor antagonists are drugs belonging to different therapeutic classes, including antiallergics and anxyolitics. In this work, we described for the first time the activity of H1-antagonists against L. (L.) infantum and their potential effectiveness in an experimental hamster model. The evaluation against promastigotes demonstrated that chlorpheniramine, cinnarizine, hydroxyzine, ketotifen, loratadine, quetiapine and risperidone exerted a leishmanicidal effect against promastigotes, with IC50 values in the range of 13-84µM. The antihistaminic drug cinnarizine demonstrated effectiveness against the intracellular amastigotes, with an IC50 value of 21µM. The mammalian cytotoxicity was investigated in NCTC cells, resulting in IC50 values in the range of 57-229µM. Cinnarizine was in vivo studied as a free formulation and entrapped into phosphatidylserine-liposomes. The free drug was administered for eight consecutive days at 50mg/kg by intraperitoneal route (i.p.) and at 100mg/kg by oral route to L. infantum-infected hamsters, but showed lack of effectiveness in both regimens, as detected by real time PCR. The liposomal formulation was administered by i.p. route at 3mg/kg for eight days and reduced the parasite burden to 54% in liver when compared to untreated group; no improvement was observed in the spleen of infected hamsters. Cinnarizine is the first antihistaminic drug with antileishmanial activity and could be used as scaffold for drug design studies for VL.

Meta-analysis of leukotriene receptor antagonist montelukast in the treatment of allergic rhinitis / 中华耳鼻咽喉头颈外科杂志

<p><b>OBJECTIVE</b>To evaluate the treatment outcomes of leukotriene receptor antagonists (LTRA) as monotherapy or combined with the second-generation oral H1-histamines in the treatment of allergic rhinitis (AR), and to provide a basis for optimizing clinical therapeutic strategies.</p><p><b>METHODS</b>PubMed,EMBASE, CBMdisc and CJFD databases, retrieving randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of AR therapy literatures were searched. Based on the literature inclusion and exclusion criteria, the related literatures were selected and the quality was evaluated by using the Jadad scale. Meta-analysis was performed by Stata 12.1 software.For continuous outcomes, the weighted mean difference (WMD) and its 95% confidence intervals (CI) were calculated. The forest plots were drawn. The treatment outcomes included daytime nasal symptom scores (DNSS), nighttime symptom scores (NSS), composite symptom scores (CSS), daytime eye symptom scores (DESS), and the rhinoconjunctivitis quality of life questionnaire (RQLQ) were used to evaluate the therapeutic effects of LTRA on seasonal and perennial AR.</p><p><b>RESULTS</b>Eleven of clinical RCTs including 14 809 cases of AR patients, aged 15 to 85 years old, were available for Meta-analysis. Montelukast, a drug of LTRA, was primarily evaluated in the study. The results of Meta-analysis showed: (1) Compared with the placebo, montelukast statistically significantly reduced the DNSS,NSS, CSS, and RQLQ scores in patients with seasonal and perennial AR, as well as the DESS in patients with seasonal AR.(2) There were no statistical differences in the improvement of the CSS,DESS, and RQLQ scores in patients with seasonal AR after the treatment by montelukast compared with loratadine, a second-generation oral H1-histamine.(3) Montelukast statistically significantly reduced the NSS, but not DNSS, in patients with seasonal AR compared with loratadine.(4) The combination therapy of montelukast and loratadine statistically significantly improved the CSS compared with either montelukast or loratadine monotherapy.</p><p><b>CONCLUSIONS</b>Montelukast, a representative drug of LTRA, can be used as first-line therapy for AR, with comprehensive improvement of the nasal and ocular symptoms and the quality of life in AR patients. Montelukast combined with loratadine can significantly improve the diurnal and nocturnal symptoms for patients with seasonal AR, and the curative effect is better than the single use of montelukast or loratadine.</p>

Eficacia y seguridad clínica de ebastina contra loratadina en monoterapia o en combinación con fluticasona en pacientes con rinitis alérgica persistente / Efficacy and clinical safety of ebastine versus loratadine in monotherapy or in combination with fluticasone in patients with persistent allergic rhinitis

Fundamento y objetivo. Comparar la eficacia y seguridad de ebastina 20 mg, ebastina 10 mg y loratadina 10 mg en monoterapia o en terapia combinada con fluticasona en el tratamiento de la rinitis persistente. Pacientes y método. Estudio prospectivo, comparativo, al azar, abierto, con grupos paralelos, en 36 pacientes con diagnóstico de rinitis alérgica persistente que fueron asignados primero a tres grupos: ebastina 20 mg (n=12), ebastina 10 mg + pseudoefedrina 120 mg (n=12), y loratadina 10 mg + pseudoefedrina 120 mg; posteriormente se reasignaron a 6 grupos en los que se trataron con ebastina 20 mg, ebastina 10 mg o loratadina 10 mg en monoterapia o terapia combinada con fluticasona nasal. Al término de cada fase se calificaron los síntomas de rinitis, y para evaluar la seguridad se practicaron biometría hemática, pruebas de funcionamiento hepático y ELISA para IL-4, IL-5 e IL-13. Resultados. No se observaron diferencias significativas entre los diferentes grupos de estudio en las pruebas realizadas para evaluar la eficacia y la seguridad de los tratamientos. Se observó al final del estudio una disminución significativa (p=0,003) en los niveles de IL-5 en el lavado nasal de los pacientes de todos los grupos de estudio. Conclusiones. Duplicar la dosis de ebastina a 20 mg fue tan seguro y eficaz como la combinación de la mitad de la dosis de esta (10 mg, con descongestionante nasal). La co-administración con fluticasona no mejoró la eficacia del tratamiento de la rinitis alérgica con antihistamínicos y se sugiere valorar como segunda opción en pacientes con pobre respuesta. Los tratamientos con ebastina 20 mg, ebastina 10 mg y loratadina 10 mg mostraron similar perfil de seguridad y eficacia.(AU)

A case of levocetirizine-induced fixed drug eruption and cross-reaction with piperazine derivatives

Fixed drug eruption is an uncommon adverse drug reaction caused by delayed cell-mediated hypersensitivity. Levocetirizine is an active (R)-enatiomer of cetirizine and there have been a few reports of fixed drug eruption related to these antihistamines. We experienced a case of levocetirizine-induced fixed drug eruption and cross-reaction with other piperazine derivatives confirmed by patch test. A 73-year-old female patient presented with recurrent generalized itching, cutaneous bullae formation, rash and multiple pigmentation at fixed sites after taking drugs for common cold. She took bepotastine besilate (Talion®) and levocetirizine (Xyzal®) as antihistamine. She took acetaminophen, pseudoephedrine 60 mg / triprolidine 2.5 mg (Actifed®), dihydrocodeinebitartrate 5 mg / di-methylephedrine hydrochloride 17.5 mg / chlorpheniramine maleate 1.5 mg / guaifenesin 50 mg (Codening®) and aluminium hydroxide 200 mg / magnesium carbonate 120 mg (Antad®) at the same time. Patch test was done with suspected drugs and the result was positive with levocetirizine. We additionally performed patch test for other antihistamines such as cetirizine, hydroxyzine, fexofenadine and loratadine. Piperazine derivatives (cetirizine and hydroxyzine) were positive, but piperidine derivatives (fexofenadine and loratadine) were negative to patch test. There was no adverse drug reaction when she was challenged with fexofenadine. We report a case of levocetirizine-induced fixed drug eruption confirmed by patch test. Cross-reactions were only observed in the piperazine derivatives and piperidine antihistamine was tolerant to the patient.

Uremic pruritus in hemodialysis patients: treatment with desloratidine versus gabapentin / Prurido urêmico em pacientes em hemodiálise: tratamento com desloratidina versus gabapentina

INTRODUCTION: Uremic pruritus is common among dialysis patients. Effective treatments are not readily available. Early evidence with antihistamines and gabapentin indicate variable effects. OBJECTIVE: To compare the efficacy and side effects of gabapentin and desloratadine in patients with dialysis pruritus. METHODS: Prospective, open-label, cross-over clinical trial in 22 patients on chronic hemodialysis with sustained pruritus over a period of at least 60 days. After a one-week run-in period, we assigned patients to three weeks of either gabapentin 300 mg thrice weekly or desloratadine 5 mg thrice weekly. After a one-week washout period, each patient crossed-over to the alternate regimen for three more weeks. The primary endpoint of the study was the change in the visual analogue pruritus score (VAS). RESULTS: Nineteen subjects completed the two treatment blocks and were available for analysis. VAS scores decreased with both treatments (5.95 to 4.6 with gabapentin, p = 0.07; 5.89 to 3.4 with desloratadine, p = 0.004), but only desloratadine reached statistical significance. There were no differences when comparing the final pruritus score with gabapentin and desloratadine (4.6 versus 3.4, p = 0.16) Excessive sedation was common with gabapentin. Desloratadine was well tolerated. CONCLUSION: Desloratadine provides significant relief of uremic pruritus compared with no therapy. gabapentin has marginal efficacy. Desloratadine is better tolerated than gabapentin.

INTRODUÇÃO: Prurido urêmico é comum entre pacientes em diálise. Tratamentos eficazes não estão disponíveis até o momento. Provas recentes com anti-histamínicos e gabapentina indicam vários efeitos. OBJETIVO: Comparar a eficiência e os efeitos colaterais da gabapentina e da desloratadina em pacientes com prurido na diálise. MÉTODOS: Estudo prospectivo, aberto e comparativo com 22 pacientes em hemodiálise crônica com prurido constante durante um período de pelo menos 60 dias. Após uma semana, submetemos os pacientes a três semanas de gabapentina 300 mg, três vezes por semana, ou desloratadina 5 mg três vezes por semana. Após um período de eliminação de uma semana, os pacientes trocaram de regime por mais três semanas. O objetivo primário do estudo foi a mudança na escala visual analógica (EVA) de prurido. RESULTADOS: Dezenove indivíduos completaram os dois tratamentos e foram submetidos à análise. Os escores da EVA caíram com ambos os tratamentos (5,95 para 4,6 com gabapentina, p = 0,07; 5,89 para 3,4 com desloratadina, p = 0,004), mas somente a desloratadina teve significância estatística. Nenhuma diferença foi observada ao comparar o escore final do prurido com gabapentina e desloratadina (4,6 versus 3,4, p = 0,16). Excesso de sedação foi comum com gabapentina. A desloratadina teve alto nível de tolerância. CONCLUSÃO: A desloratadina dá alívio significante do prurido urêmico quando comparada a nenhum tratamento. A gabapentina tem eficiência marginal. A desloratadina tem maior nível de tolerância em relação à gabapentina.