Implementation of the Methamphetamine Anti-Proliferation Act; thresholds for retailers and for distributors required to submit mail order reports; changes to mail order reporting requirements. Final rule.

This regulation implements the new threshold requirements and mail order reporting requirements of the Methamphetamine Anti-Proliferation Act of 2000 (MAPA), which was enacted on October 17, 2000. DEA is amending its regulations to reduce the thresholds for pseudoephedrine and phenylpropanolamine for retail distributors and for distributors required to submit mail order reports. Also, DEA is amending its regulations to require mail order reports for certain export transactions. DEA is codifying exemptions from the mail order reporting requirements for certain distributions to nonregulated persons and certain export transactions. This rule is consistent with the intent of MAPA to prevent the diversion of drug products to the clandestine manufacture of methamphetamine and amphetamine, and simultaneously reduce the industry reporting burden.

Safety and efficacy of terfenadine/pseudoephedrine versus clemastine/phenylpropanolamine in the treatment of seasonal allergic rhinitis.

A double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled, parallel trial was conducted to compare the efficacy and safety of terfenadine, 60 mg (immediate-release)/pseudoephedrine hydrochloride, 120 mg (controlled-release) (T/Ps) and clemastine fumarate, 1.34 mg (immediate-release)/phenylpropanolamine, 75 mg (sustained-release) (C/Ph) in a combination tablet b.i.d. in 178 patients (12-59 years of age) with symptoms of seasonal allergic rhinitis. After seven days of treatment, the total symptom scores recorded in the diaries of 175 patients showed that both therapies had a highly significant overall treatment effect when compared with placebo (P < or = .02). The overall level of improvement, as well as improvement of individual symptoms, was similar with the two therapies. Total symptom scores assigned by physicians to 170 patients showed significant and similar levels of improvement with both therapies when compared with placebo (P < .01). The two therapies were also similar on physicians' evaluations of overall effectiveness. Both therapies relieved most histamine-mediated symptoms as well as nasal congestion, although only T/Ps showed improvement of the latter symptom in both the patients' diaries and physicians' evaluations. Among 178 patients, drowsiness and fatigue occurred more often in the C/Ph group (25% and 11.7% for the two adverse events, respectively) than in the T/Ps group (10.2% and 1.7%, respectively). The incidence of insomnia and dry mouth/nose/throat was higher with T/Ps (23.7% and 11.9%, respectively) than with C/Ph (6.7% and 3.3%, respectively). No serious or unexpected adverse events were reported. These results indicate that T/Ps and C/Ph are both superior to placebo and equally effective in the treatment of symptoms of seasonal allergic rhinitis.(ABSTRACT TRUNCATED AT 250 WORDS)