Similar rapid onset of action and magnitude of effect of fexofenadine and cetirizine as assessed by inhibition of histamine-induced wheal-and-flare reaction.

BACKGROUND: Histamine-induced wheal-and-flare studies are useful, objective tests for determining differences in the peripheral H1-receptor blockade activities of antihistamines. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the time of occurrence of 95% inhibition of histamine-induced wheal and flare after administration of fexofenadine hydrochloride, 180 mg, or cetirizine, 10 mg. METHODS: Forty-two volunteers (aged 18-60 years) were included in a randomized, double-blind, crossover study. Skin prick tests were undertaken using histamine (100 mg/mL) before treatment and 0.5, 1.0, 1.5, 2.0, 2.5, 3.0, 3.5, and 4.0 hours after treatment. Wheal and flare areas were evaluated, and the time to occurrence of 95% inhibition and the frequency of subjects exhibiting 95% inhibition before median time to 95% inhibition were calculated. RESULTS: Mean +/- SD time to 95% wheal inhibition was 2.46 +/- 0.71 hours with fexofenadine and 2.55 +/- 0.57 hours with cetirizine. The estimated mean difference between fexofenadine and cetirizine (-7 minutes in favor of fexofenadine; 2-sided 95% confidence interval, -21 to +7 minutes) was not statistically significant (P = .34). For wheal, 29% of subjects receiving fexofenadine and 24% receiving cetirizine achieved 95% inhibition before the median time of inhibition (2.5 hours). An exact permutation test yielded a P = .37. For flare, 26% of subjects receiving fexofenadine and 10% receiving cetirizine achieved 95% inhibition before the median time of inhibition (3 hours; P = .12 by exact permutation test). CONCLUSIONS: Fexofenadine and cetirizine have comparable onset of action times and similar frequencies of inhibition, as evaluated by the occurrence of 95% inhibition of histamine-induced wheal and flare.     

Twenty-four hours of activity of cetirizine and fexofenadine in the skin.

BACKGROUND: Cetirizine and fexofenadine, the active metabolite of terfenadine, are powerful and well-tolerated H1 receptor antagonists effective in the treatment of skin and nose atopic diseases. OBJECTIVE: We have compared the pharmacodynamic activity of the two antihistamines at therapeutic dosages, cetirizine at 10 mg and fexofenadine at 120 mg and 180 mg, on histamine-induced skin reactivity during a 24-hour period after single intake. METHODS: Twenty-six healthy volunteers participated in a randomized, double-blind, crossover, placebo-controlled study. The areas of wheal and flare induced by histamine (100 mg/mL) administered by prick test were measured at 0, 0.5, 1, 2, 4, 6, 8, 10, 12, and 24 hours postdose. Statistical analysis of the areas under the time-response curves was performed by a Friedman's ANOVA followed by a Wilcoxon test and Bonferroni's correction. RESULTS: The three active treatments clearly inhibited the wheal and flare areas throughout the 24-hour period compared with placebo. Maximal inhibition occurred at 4 hours postdose. Between 4 and 24 hours postdose, the time course of inhibition by cetirizine differed significantly (P < 0.001) from that by fexofenadine at either dose, which did not differ from each other. At 24 hours, fexofenadine inhibited <40% of the skin reaction, whereas cetirizine reduced 60% of the wheal. The duration of effect, considered as the time for wheal to be inhibited by at least 70%, also significantly favored cetirizine (19 hours) compared with fexofenadine (9.3 and 8.5 hours for 180 and 120 mg, respectively; P < 0.001). Consistency of activity was evaluated by the frequency of total inhibition of the wheal (> or =95%). Consistency was observed in 26 of 26 participants for cetirizine, 21 of 26 for fexofenadine, 180 mg, and 10 of 26 for fexofenadine, 120 mg (P < 0.001), suggesting better consistency for cetirizine. There was no serious adverse event. CONCLUSIONS: Our study clearly shows better duration of action and consistency of the antihistaminic activity of cetirizine compared with fexofenadine (120 and 180 mg) in the histamine-induced skin reaction during a 24-hour period.     

Measurement of interstitial cetirizine concentrations in human skin: correlation of drug levels with inhibition of histamine‐induced skin responses

BACKGROUND: The purpose of the present study was to measure the concentrations of cetirizine in the extracellular water compartment in intact human skin and assess simultaneously inhibition of histamine-induced wheal and flare reactions. METHODS: Skin cetirizine levels were collected by the microdialysis technique and analyzed by high-pressure liquid chromatography with mass spectrometry detection. Skin levels in 20 subjects were compared to plasma levels for 4 h after a single oral dose of 10 or 20 mg of cetirizine. Skin prick tests were performed with histamine 100 mg/ml. RESULTS: Plasma cetirizine levels increased within 30 min to reach peak values of 315+/-10 and 786+/-45 ng/ml 90-120 min after administration of 10 and 20 mg of cetirizine. This was followed by a slow decline. In the skin, dialysate cetirizine levels (non-protein-bound fraction only) peaked at 1.6+/-0.1 and 2.4+/-0.3 ng/ml at 120-180 min. In vivo recovery of cetirizine was 14.4+/-4.3%. It was estimated that the non-protein-bound concentration of cetirizine in the skin was 50-70% of corresponding plasma values. Both 10- and 20-mg doses of cetirizine inhibited wheal and flare reactions over 240 min. The time vs concentration profile of cetirizine in skin dialysate paralleled the inhibition of skin reactions, but no significant correlations were found between individual cetirizine levels in skin or plasma with wheal and flare reactions. CONCLUSIONS: Cetirizine concentrations in the skin could be monitored by the microdialysis technique. The results indicate no simple linear correlation between cetirizine skin levels and inhibition of skin reactions.     

Use of cetirizine to investigate non-H1 effects of second-generation antihistamines.

In addition to their increased potency as H1 blockers and their nonsedating effects, the second-generation antihistamines have other unusual and potentially beneficial properties. Evidence is accumulating from several laboratories that at least one of these agents under investigation, cetirizine, may be effective in inhibiting the late reaction. The Johns Hopkins group showed that during the cutaneous late phase response (LPR), histamine release was not altered by cetirizine, 20 mg, pretreatment. The most dramatic effect of cetirizine was attenuation of inflammatory cell migration into the chamber. Eosinophils, neutrophils, and basophils were reduced by about 75% during hours 6 to 8. It can be concluded that cetirizine influences the LPR by causing a reduction in the inflammatory cell infiltrate. Cetirizine, 10 mg, orally once a day also induced a significant decrease in the wheal and flare skin reactions caused by pollen, histamine, and compound 48/80. Cetirizine inhibited eosinophil recruitment and platelet-activating factor (PAF) in skin chambers 24 hours after pollen challenge. We and others have studied the mechanisms of this effect. The release of eosinophil peroxidase induced by PAF and formyl-methionyleucyl/phenylalanine was not attenuated by cetirizine. At therapeutic concentrations, however, cetirizine has a potent inhibitory action in vitro on eosinophil chemotaxis induced either by formyl-methionyleucyl/phenylalanine or PAF and also on IgE-dependent stimulation of platelets. In a separate study in patients with chronic urticaria, cetirizine markedly reduced both the immediate wheal and flare induced by PAF and the delayed reaction at six hours. These results suggest that cetirizine acts on eosinophil migration to inhibit the late reaction.     

Efficacy of ebastine, cetirizine, and loratadine in histamine cutaneous challenges.

BACKGROUND: Few studies have compared the antihistaminic effect of ebastine at 20 mg/day (maximal recommended daily dose) with the effect found for other antihistamines in human pharmacologic models. OBJECTIVE: To compare the inhibition of the histamine-induced skin reaction produced by ebastine (20 mg/day) with that produced by cetirizine (10 mg/day), loratadine (10 mg/day), or placebo in a double-blind, randomized, crossover, placebo-controlled clinical trial. METHODS: Twenty volunteers (10 men and 10 women) received the four treatments once daily for 7 days, with a mean 7-day washout period between treatments. Three intradermal histamine challenges (0.05 mL of a 100 microg/mL histamine solution at 4, 8, and 24 hours after drug administration) were performed at baseline, day 1 (single dose), and day 7 (multiple doses). Wheal and flare areas were measured after 15 minutes. RESULTS: All treatments yielded significant reductions of histamine-induced wheal in comparison to placebo (P < 0.001). Analysis of covariance revealed significant differences between treatments (P < 0.05). Ebastine had a significantly greater antihistaminic effect than did cetirizine or loratadine, except at 4 hours after a single dose versus cetirizine. Further, the effect of cetirizine was similar with single or multiple doses after both 4 and 24 hours, whereas the effect of ebastine showed significant increases in wheal reduction with multiple doses (P < 0.05). No serious adverse events or withdrawals occurred during the study. CONCLUSION: This study shows that ebastine in a 20-mg dose is an effective once-daily antihistamine. Superior efficacy was found in comparison to cetirizine (10 mg) or loratadine (10 mg) on the overall skin wheal response after single and multiple doses.     

Cetirizine inhibits bradykinin-induced cutaneous wheal and flare in atopic and healthy subjects

BACKGROUND: Kinins are vasoactive mediators involved in allergic reactions. When applied on the skin or in the nose, bradykinin (BK) elicits inflammation that is poorly affected by previous H1-blockade. The aim of this study was to compare the possible effect of cetirizine (an H1-antagonist) on wheal and flare responses to BK, histamine, and compound 48/80 in atopic and healthy subjects. METHODS: In a randomized, double-blind, crossover study, eight atopic and eight healthy subjects received cetirizine (10 mg/day) or placebo for 3 days before cutaneous tests. Intradermal tests (IDT) and prick tests (PT) were performed with BK (20 nmol/ml for IDT and 20 micromol/ml for PT), histamine (100 microg/ml IDT and 100 mg/ml PT), and compound 48/80 (100 microg/ml IDT and 100 mg/ml PT) as positive controls and saline as negative control. The skin responses were monitored by measurement of wheal and flare areas. RESULTS: BK, histamine, and 48/80 induced wheal and flare reactions in all placebo-treated subjects. Histamine elicited larger wheal and flare reactions than BK and 48/80. IDT with BK induced four- to sixfold larger wheal and flare reaction than PT. No differences in BK-induced wheal and flare were observed between atopic and healthy subjects. In atopic subjects, cetirizine induced a significant reduction of flare reactions after the BK test (80% for IDT, and 94% for PT [P < 0.01]). Moreover, cetirizine reduced significantly BK-induced wheals by 70% for IDT (P < 0.01) and 65% for PT (P < 0.01). A similar inhibiting effect of cetirizine was also observed in healthy subjects. CONCLUSIONS: These findings showed that the wheal and flare reactions induced by BK challenge were markedly inhibited by previous intake of cetirizine. The mechanism by which this effect is mediated cannot be established at present.     

A comparison of levocetirizine and desloratadine in the histamine-induced wheal and flare response in human skin in vivo

Background The histamine-induced wheal and flare response was used to compare quantitatively the antihistaminic potency of levocetirizine and desloratadine. Methods In this double-blind, placebo-controlled crossover study, 24 healthy male non-atopic volunteers received weekly single doses of 1.25, 2.5 or 5 mg levocetirizine, 2.5, 5 or 10 mg desloratadine, or placebo. Four hours after dosing, histamine (100 mg/ml) skin prick tests were performed on the volar surface of both forearms. The diameters of the wheals and flares were measured 10 minutes later. Sedation was evaluated using a visual analogue scale and a motricity test. The effects of individual drug doses were compared using Student’s t-test for paired data and the overall effects of the two drugs by ANOVA. Results All doses of levocetirizine significantly (P < 0.0001) inhibited both wheals and flares in a dose-related manner. Only the 10 mg dose of desloratadine achieved significant inhibition of response. ANOVA showed levocetirizine to be significantly (P < 0.0001) more active than desloratadine. Neither drug caused significant sedation or loss of motricity. Conclusion Levocetirizine is significantly more effective than desloratadine in inhibiting wheal and flare responses to histamine in human skin in vivo, with 1.25 mg levocetirizine being more effective than 10 mg desloratadine. Received 3 July 2005; returned for revision 9 August 2005; returned for final revision 6 February 2006; accepted by M. Parnham 8 February 2006     

Cetirizine inhibits bradykinin-induced cutaneous wheal and flare in atopic and healthy subjects

BACKGROUND: Kinins are vasoactive mediators involved in allergic reactions. When applied on the skin or in the nose, bradykinin (BK) elicits inflammation that is poorly affected by previous H1-blockade. The aim of this study was to compare the possible effect of cetirizine (an H1-antagonist) on wheal and flare responses to BK, histamine, and compound 48/80 in atopic and healthy subjects. METHODS: In a randomized, double-blind, crossover study, eight atopic and eight healthy subjects received cetirizine (10 mg/day) or placebo for 3 days before cutaneous tests. Intradermal tests (IDT) and prick tests (PT) were performed with BK (20 nmol/ml for IDT and 20 micromol/ml for PT), histamine (100 microg/ml IDT and 100 mg/ml PT), and compound 48/80 (100 microg/ml IDT and 100 mg/ml PT) as positive controls and saline as negative control. The skin responses were monitored by measurement of wheal and flare areas. RESULTS: BK, histamine, and 48/80 induced wheal and flare reactions in all placebo-treated subjects. Histamine elicited larger wheal and flare reactions than BK and 48/80. IDT with BK induced four- to six-fold larger wheal and flare reaction than PT. No differences in BK-induced wheal and flare were observed between atopic and healthy subjects. In atopic subjects, cetirizine induced a significant reduction of flare reactions after the BK test (80% for IDT, and 94% for PT [P<0.01]). Moreover, cetirizine reduced significantly BK-induced wheals by 70% for IDT (P<0.01) and 65% for PT (P<0.01). A similar inhibiting effect of cetirizine was also observed in healthy subjects. CONCLUSIONS: These findings showed that the wheal and flare reactions induced by BK challenge were markedly inhibited by previous intake of cetirizine. The mechanism by which this effect is mediated cannot be established at present.     

A double-blind, randomized, single-dose, crossover comparison of levocetirizine with ebastine, fexofenadine, loratadine, mizolastine, and placebo: suppression of histamine-induced wheal-and-flare response during 24 hours in healthy male subjects.

BACKGROUND: Levocetirizine is the active enantiomer of cetirizine, a potent drug with little metabolism widely used for allergic rhinitis and urticaria. OBJECTIVE: This study compares the potency, consistency, onset, and duration of action of levocetirizine with other popular antihistamines. METHODS: Levocetirizine 5 mg, ebastine 10 mg, fexofenadine 180 mg, loratadine 10 mg, mizolastine 10 mg, or placebo in single doses were given to 18 healthy male volunteers in a double-blind, crossover, randomized fashion. Wheal-and-flare responses to epicutaneous histamine dihydrochloride (100 mg/mL) challenge were measured at 0, 0.5, 1, 2, 4, 6, 8, 10, 12, and 24 hours after each dose. RESULTS: The overall effect of each drug was evaluated by the area under the curve (0 to 24 hours). Levocetirizine was the most potent and consistently effective drug for inhibiting the histamine-induced wheal-and-flare surface areas. Ebastine, fexofenadine, and mizolastine ranked next and had almost identical effects for inhibiting the wheal. Loratadine was the least potent drug. Levocetirizine, fexofenadine, and mizolastine inhibited the wheal-and-flare response after 1 hour and reached their peak for inhibition after 4 hours. Ebastine and loratadine could be distinguished from placebo only after 4 hours. After treatment with levocetirizine, all 18 subjects had >95% inhibition of the wheal response at one timepoint. Fexofenadine, mizolastine, and ebastine were inhibitory in declining order. All treatments were considered safe and well tolerated. CONCLUSIONS: Levocetirizine, the active enantiomer of cetirizine, is more potent and consistent than other popular H1 antihistamines for blocking the cutaneous response to histamine. These findings may predict the efficacy of this drug in treating allergic disorders.     

The effect of ranitidine, alone and in combination with clemastine, on allergen-induced cutaneous wheal-and-flare reactions in human skin

The effect of intradermal ranitidine (administered alone and in combination with clemastine) on allergen-mediated wheal-and-flare reactions has been evaluated in a double-blind study on 10 healthy atopic volunteers. Ranitidine alone, administered in doses over a 10(4)-fold concentration range, had no effect on the size either of allergen-induced wheal or flare reactions. Clemastine alone evoked a dose-related inhibition of both wheal and flare. Compared to the inhibition achieved by clemastine alone, the combination of ranitidine with clemastine produced a small but significant increase in inhibition of allergen-induced flare at ranitidine concentrations of 10(-5) mol/L (p less than 0.001) and 10(-6) mol/L (p less than 0.01), and of allergen-induced wheal at ranitidine concentration 10(-5) mol/L (p less than 0.01). Our results provide further evidence for the presence of cutaneous histamine H2 receptors and their participation in the formation of allergen-mediated skin reactions but indicate that the contribution of cutaneous histamine H2-receptor stimulation to the production of immediate wheal-and-flare reactions evoked by allergen is only modest.     

Reliability of allergy skin testing

Background

Percutaneous allergen skin testing remains an established benchmark for diagnosing atopic disease. The reliability of skin testing depends greatly on the performance of allergen extracts used, methods used, and the presence of antihistamine medications.

A double‐blind, single‐dose, crossover comparison of cetirizine, ebastine, epinastine, fexofenadine, terfenadine, and loratadine versus placebo: suppression of histamine‐induced wheal and flare response for 24 h in healthy male subjects

BACKGROUND: New H1-antagonists have become available, but there has been no comparison of their potency for inhibiting histamine in the skin. METHODS: Cetirizine 10 mg, ebastine 10 mg, epinastine 20 mg, fexofenadine 60 mg, terfenadine 60 mg, loratadine 10 mg, or placebo was given to 14 healthy male volunteers in a double-blind, crossover randomized manner. Inhibition of the wheal and flare response to epicutaneous histamine phosphate (100 mg/ml) challenge was measured at 0, 0.5, 1, 2, 4, 6, 8, 10, 12, and 24 h after doses. RESULTS: Epinastine inhibited the wheal and flare after 30 min. Cetirizine commenced acting at 1 h and was superior to other treatments. Ebastine was no better than placebo until 4 h, but was efficacious thereafter until 24 h. Terfenadine induced potent inhibition after 1 h and was superior to its metabolite fexofenadine. Loratadine was the least potent inhibitor. Inhibition of the flare response paralleled the patterns seen for wheals. The rank order for area under the curve (0-24 h) was cetirizine, epinastine, terfenadine, ebastine, fexofenadine, loratadine, and placebo. CONCLUSIONS: The inhibition of histamine effects in the skin may be useful in predicting the clinical utility of newly introduced antihistamines in treating allergic disorders.     

A randomized, double-blind, crossover comparison among cetirizine, levocetirizine, and ucb 28557 on histamine-induced cutaneous responses in healthy adult volunteers

BACKGROUND: Cetirizine is a highly efficacious and long-acting second-generation H1-receptor antagonist for the treatment of allergic diseases, such as allergic rhinitis and chronic idiopathic urticaria, in adults and children. Pharmacologic studies have demonstrated that cetirizine, a racemate mixture composed of equal amounts of two enantiomers, does not undergo hepatic metabolism to any significant level. The enantiomers are excreted mainly unchanged, predominantly in the urine and to a lesser extent in the faeces. METHODS: The pharmacologic activity and potency of the two enantiomers of cetirizine in the management of allergic skin conditions were investigated by studying the effect of treatment with 5.0 mg cetirizine; 2.5 mg levocetirizine, the (R)-enantiomer; and 2.5 mg ucb 28557, the (S)-enantiomer, on histamine-induced wheal and flare response in 18 healthy volunteers. Each treatment was administered as a single oral dose in randomized, double-blind, and crossover manner, and the efficacy of treatment was assessed over a period of 32 h, as per cent inhibition of the histamine-induced wheal and flare areas before treatment. Blood and urine samples were collected in a time-dependent manner and analyzed for the total amounts of each study drug, to elucidate their pharmacokinetic profiles. RESULTS: Both cetirizine and levocetirizine caused a marked inhibition of histamine-induced wheal and flare, whereas ucb 28557 was inactive in this model. Inhibition of the wheal response observed for cetirizine and levocetirizine was apparent by 1 h after dosage and lasted for mean durations of 24.4 and 28.4 h, respectively. In addition, the response for cetirizine and levocetirizine became maximal by 6 h after treatment, rising to 79.5% and 83.8%. Similarly, cetirizine and levocetirizine also markedly inhibited the histamine-induced flare response. This effect was evident for both drugs by 1 h after dosage and lasted over a mean period of 28.4 and 26.0 h, respectively, for cetirizine and levocetirizine. The inhibitory effect of these compounds on histamine-induced flare response was also maximal by approximately 6 h after dosage, peaking at 88.5%) and 83.6%, respectively. Statistical evaluation showed that cetirizine and levocetirizine were equivalent for maximum inhibition of histamine-induced wheal and flare. However, levocetirizine was found to be superior to cetirizine when area under the curve was compared. In contrast, ucb 28557 was not found to inhibit histamine-induced wheal and flare responses at any time during the study period. Plasma concentrations of levocetirizine were found to be approximately double those of ucb 28557 at 4 and 8 h after dosing, and 50-60% of the drugs were excreted unchanged in urine over a period of 32 h. CONCLUSIONS: The finding that, in this model, levocetirizine 2.5 mg has comparable antihistaminic activity to cetirizine 5 mg, whereas its other enantiomer ucb 28557 has no pharmacodynamic effect, suggests that the antihistaminic properties of cetirizine observed in the management of allergic skin conditions are likely to be attributable to levocetirizine.     

Lack of subsensitivity to terfenadine during long-term terfenadine treatment

Eleven healthy male volunteers ingested terfenadine, 60 mg, every 12 hours for 56 days. Compliance was monitored strictly throughout the study. Before the first terfenadine dose on day 0, and 12 hours after the evening terfenadine dose every seventh day and on randomly selected "unscheduled" days, wheal-and-flare areas were measured after intradermal injections of 0.01 ml of histamine phosphate (1.0 mg/ml and 0.1 mg/ml). On days 0, 28, and 56, six volunteers had skin tests hourly for 12 hours after the morning terfenadine dose. On all study days, serum terfenadine metabolite I concentrations were measured each time histamine skin tests were performed. On days 7, 14, 21, 28, 35, 42, 49, and 56, the mean areas of the histamine-induced wheals did not differ significantly from each other but were significantly decreased compared to the mean wheal area on day 0 (p less than 0.01). On these days, the mean areas of the histamine-induced flares also did not differ significantly from each other but remained significantly suppressed compared to the mean flare areas on day 0 (p less than 0.01). Wheal-and-flare suppression was noted in all unscheduled histamine skin tests performed 12 hours after the evening terfenadine dose. In the subgroup of volunteers who had hourly tests, on day 0, the mean wheal-and-flare areas were significantly suppressed from 2 to 12 hours after the dose, with maximal wheal suppression occurring at 5 hours (p less than 0.05) and maximal flare suppression occurring from 3 to 9 hours (p less than 0.01).(ABSTRACT TRUNCATED AT 250 WORDS)     

Comparison of the effects of desloratadine and levocetirizine on histamine-induced wheal,flare and itch in human skin

Objective: A previous study showed the inhibitory effects of loratadine on histamine-induced wheal, flare and itch in human skin to be very variable between individuals. It was hypothesised that this variability may have been due to differences in the rates of metabolism of loratadine to its active form, desloratadine. This double blind, crossover study examined the effects of desloratadine in 12 healthy volunteers. Levocetirizine was used as a comparator. Methods: Desloratadine (5 mg), levocetirizine (5 mg) or placebo was taken orally 4 h before an intradermal injection of histamine (20 l, 100 M) or vehicle control into the forearm skin. Flare areas were assessed by scanning laser Doppler imaging before and at 30 s intervals for a period of 9 min. Wheal areas were measured by planimetry at 10 min. Itch was scored every 30 s for 5 min using a visual analogue scale. Results: Following placebo administration, the mean (± SEM) wheal area at 10 min was 79.3 ± 6.9 mm², mean flare area for the first 5 min following challenge 26.6 ± 2.7 cm², and itch score for the same period 48.5 ± 7.6%. The effects of desloratadine were variable between individuals, mean reductions in the wheal and flare areas being 17% (P = 0.033) and 12% (P = 0.036). Desloratadine did not reduce itch significantly. Levocetirizine was more consistent in its effects, mean reductions in wheal, flare and itch being 51%, 67% 78% respectively (all P < 0.001). Conclusions: A single dose of 5 mg levocetirizine produced more consistent and greater inhibitory effects on histamine-induced wheal, flare and itch than did 5 mg desloratadine. The difference is suggested to reflect the basic pharmacokinetics of the two drugs.Received 21 May 2003; returned for revision 29 May 2003; accepted by M. Parnham 5 June 2003     

Relative potency of fexofenadine HCl 180 mg, loratadine 10 mg, and placebo using a skin test model of wheal-and-flare suppression.

BACKGROUND: H1-receptor antagonists differ in their ability to produce peripheral H1-blockade. Suppression of histamine-induced flares and wheals is a useful objective test for measuring these differences. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the relative potency of fexofenadine HCI 180 mg, loratadine 10 mg, and placebo (PBO) in suppressing histamine-induced flares and wheals and compare the onset, duration, and maximum suppression of histamine achieved with each agent. METHODS: Thirty healthy volunteers were enrolled in this randomized, double-blind, single-dose, crossover study. Flares and wheals induced by skin-prick testing with histamine 1.8 mg/mL were measured before treatment, every 20 minutes during the first hour after dosing, and thereafter hourly between 2 and 12 hours and between 23 and 25 hours postdose. RESULTS: Fexofenadine was significantly more effective than loratadine in suppressing the histamine-induced flare response at hours 2 through 7 and 10 through 12 and produced greater flare suppression than did PBO at hours 2 through 25. Onset of flare suppression occurred 2 hours after dosing with fexofenadine and 4 hours after dosing with loratadine. Likewise, fexofenadine was superior to loratadine in suppressing the wheal response from hours 1 through 12 and was more effective than PBO at hours 1 through 12, 24, and 25. Throughout the 25-hour measurement interval, the magnitude of difference in both wheal and flare suppression consistently favored fexofenadine over loratadine. CONCLUSIONS: In a skin test model of wheal-and-flare suppression, fexofenadine showed rapid distribution into the skin compartment with faster onset of action and greater potency vs loratadine.     

Cetirizine inhibits skin reactions but not mediator release in immediate and developing late-phase allergic cutaneous reactions. A double-blind, placebo-controlled study

BACKGROUND: Recent reports have indicated cetirizine, a potent H(1)-receptor antagonist, to possess a number of anti-inflammatory effects, e.g. inhibition of mast cell degranulation and inhibition of leucocyte migration and activation. OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to compare the effects of cetirizine on skin responses and mediator release in intact skin in immediate and developing late-phase allergic reactions by microdialysis technique. METHODS: Cetirizine 10 mg once daily or matching placebo were administered to 10 atopic subjects for 6 days followed by a 2-week washout in a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, cross-over trial. Immediate skin test responses to allergen, codeine, and histamine and late-phase reactions to allergen were assessed. The time course of extracellular levels of inflammatory mediators in intact skin were monitored by microdialysis techniques using 2 kDa and 3 MDa cut-off fibers, respectively. RESULTS: Cetirizine significantly reduced immediate weal and flare reactions to allergen, codeine, and histamine. Injection of allergen, but not buffer controls, induced a significant release of histamine, tryptase, prostaglandin D(2), total protein, and eosinophilic cationic protein. No significant increase of leukotriene B(4) and myeloperoxidase was observed. Cetirizine inhibited early total protein extravasation by 40%, but this did not reach a significant level. None of the inflammatory mediators were significantly inhibited by cetirizine. Cetirizine significantly reduced the late-phase skin induration to allergen by approximately 30%. CONCLUSION: Cetirizine potently reduced skin responses in immediate allergic reactions without inhibition of early mediators. These data indicate cetirizine to be a potent H1-receptor antagonist with no effect on mast cell activation. It did not inhibit any of the late-phase mediators, but it reduced the late skin reaction. These data suggest that mediators other than those actually measured may play a significant role in the clinical late-phase reaction.     

Tissue Repair and Fibrosis

Background

Because antileukotrienes may inhibit inflammation, it is plausible that montelukast administered for a long time could suppress skin wheal and flare reaction, and thus, it should be discarded prior to the tests. This study assessed the effect of long-lasting treatment with montelukast alone or in combination with antihistamines on wheal and flare in skin pricks tests (SPT) in patients sensitized to perennial allergens.

Methods

We conducted a 32-week, double-blind, placebo-controlled, cross-over and randomized trial that implicated two arms: arm A, 20 patients received levocetirizine, montelukast with or without levocetirizine or placebo; arm B, 20 patients received desloratadine, montelukast with or without desloratadine or placebo. All treatment periods lasted 6 weeks and were separated by 2-week washouts. At baseline and on the last day of each treatment period, SPT were performed in all participants.

Results

Both levocetirizine and desloratadine in monotherapy, or in combination with montelukast, were effective in reducing wheal and flare in SPT. Monotherapy with montelukast did not change the size of the wheal for either histamine or for house dust mites, in either arm of the study, but significantly reduced the size of flare for histamine in arm A. Addition of montelukast to antihistamine did not exceed efficacy of monotherapy with antihistamine in both arms of the study.

Conclusions

Since the size of wheal determines the results of SPT, montelukast, even taken for a long time, does not have to be discarded prior to the tests.     

Histamine skin test reactivity following single and multiple doses of azelastine nasal spray in patients with seasonal allergic rhinitis.

OBJECTIVE: To determine whether azelastine nasal spray suppresses the dermal response to epicutaneous histamine in allergic patients and the duration of suppression after azelastine use is discontinued. METHODS: Seventy-eight patients with seasonal allergic rhinitis were entered into this randomized, double-blind, parallel-group, placebo-controlled study. Patients received either azelastine nasal spray (2 sprays per nostril twice daily) or placebo nasal spray for 14 days. Skin tests were performed 5 hours after the first dose of study drugs to determine the effect of a single dose of azelastine nasal spray on the wheal-and-flare response to histamine. At the end of the 14-day treatment period, skin tests were performed 5 hours after the last dose of study drugs and at 24-hour intervals thereafter, until each patient's wheal-and-flare response to histamine (1.0 and 5.0 mg/mL) returned to within 20% of baseline values. RESULTS: A single dose of azelastine nasal spray did not significantly alter the wheal-and-flare response to histamine. The wheal response was within 20% of the baseline value in 82% and 88% (1.0 and 5.0 mg/mL of histamine, respectively) of the patients 5 hours after discontinuing 14 days of treatment with azelastine nasal spray. Wheal responses were within 20% of baseline values 48 hours after treatment was discontinued, whereas flare responses returned to within 20% of baseline within 48 hours in 92% of the patients. CONCLUSIONS: Azelastine nasal spray should be discontinued for at least 48 hours before beginning allergy skin test procedures.     

Comparison of the effects in the nose and skin of a single dose of desloratadine and levocetirizine over 24 hours

BACKGROUND: Desloratadine (DL) and levocetirizine (LCZ) are the newest commercialized antihistamines. Pharmacokinetics, pharmacodynamics and clinical data are available for both drugs, but there is to date no direct comparison involving the nose and skin at the same time. We compared the effects of a single dose of the two drugs in the nose and skin over 24 h. METHODS: Twenty-three patients with symptomatic allergic rhinitis were enrolled in a randomized double-blind crossover administration of DL and LCZ. The histamine-induced wheal and flare was measured at baseline and 2 and 24 h after dosing. A reflective total symptom score (rTSS) for the previous 24 h was assessed before and after each dose. An instant symptom score was also measured at various time points after each drug. RESULTS: LCZ provided greater inhibition of the flare at 2 h (p = 0.05) and at 24 h (p = 0.007) and greater inhibition of the wheal only at 2 h (p = 0.02). The decrease in wheal and flare was significant versus baseline (p = 0.007) with both drugs. The rTSS of the previous 24 h decreased significantly with both LCZ (11.53 vs. 8.0; p < 0.05) and DL (11.3 vs. 7.9; p < 0.05). The instant TSS progressively decreased in parallel with both drugs, but a difference in favor of LCZ was seen 2 h after dosing. CONCLUSIONS: Single doses of DL and LCZ had a comparable effect on nasal symptoms, but LCZ was faster and displayed a greater effect on histamine wheal.