Nasal histamine release following hyperosmolar and allergen challenge

Allergic rhinitis is characterised by symptoms of sneezing, itching of the nose with watery secretions, and nasal obstruction. We have previously shown that patients can have the diagnosis of allergic rhinitis confirmed by nasal provocation tests and assessment of nasal inspiratory peak flow (NIPF) after specific allergen or hyperosmolar challenge. We now show that histamine is released into the nasal lavage fluid in response to such challenges. Saline lavage alone results in detectable histamine levels in the order of 5 ng/ml, but in the presence of allergen (HDM) there is a significant increase in histamine release in atopics but not in control subjects. With hyperosmolar challenge, atopics showed a biphasic response in that histamine release was increased with 1.8% and 3.6% saline but returned to baseline with 5.4% and 7.2% saline, then showing a further increase with 9.0% saline. This raises the possibility of two populations of responsive mast cells. Hyperosmolar challenge leads to symptoms of nasal itch and sneezing as well as histamine release in atopics but not in controls. This suggests that hyperosmolar challenge can be used as a simple diagnostic test for allergic rhinitis and may provide a model for nasal hyper-reactivity.     

Effect of terfenadine on nasal, eustachian tube, and pulmonary function after provocative intranasal histamine challenge.

Previous studies have documented that intranasal histamine challenge results in nasal and eustachian tube obstruction (ETO) in human volunteers. The purpose of the present study was to assess the effect of pretreatment with terfenadine, a nonsedating antihistamine on the pathophysiologic consequences of intranasal histamine challenge. Fifteen subjects with allergic rhinitis were challenged intranasally with saline and increasing histamine doses (0.01, 0.1, 0.5, 1.0, 5.0, and 10.0 mg) before pretreatment (baseline) and after 1 week of pretreatment with terfenadine, 60 mg b.i.d., terfenadine, 120 mg b.i.d., and placebo. Nasal conductance as measured by posterior rhinomanometry showed a dose-dependent, monotonic decrease following sequential administration of the histamine solutions, but there were no apparent differences in the average responses among the four challenge sessions. The frequency of ETO after histamine challenge was decreased by pretreatment with both doses of terfenadine, although this was not significant. Histamine-induced sneezing and rhinorrhea, but not congestion, were significantly reduced by terfenadine pretreatment. There was no evidence of extension of the histamine effects to the lower airway. The results of the present study suggest that terfenadine, a nonsedating antihistamine, had a favorable effect on sneezing and rhinorrhea after provocative intranasal histamine challenge, but did not significantly attenuate the subjective or objective nasal and ET obstructive responses.     

The effect of local hyperthermia on allergen-induced nasal congestion and mediator release

Background: Local hyperthermia reduces mast cell degranulation, the severity of acute lung injury, and exercise-induced asthma and decreases symptoms of rhinitis. We have investigated the effect of local hyperthermia on mast cell degranulation and symptom generation in allergic rhinitis to assess its effect and mechanism of action within the nose.Methods: In a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, crossover study, 10 subjects with rhinitis were treated for 30 minutes with local hyperthermia or placebo, which was followed 30 minutes later by nasal allergen challenge. During the first two visits nasal lavages were performed to assess vascular leakage and mediator release. During the last two visits nasal airway resistance, the number of sneezes, and mucus secretion were monitored.Results: Local hyperthermia significantly reduced both nasal airway resistance (p < 0.05) and vascular leakage (p < 0.02) but had no significant effect on the number of sneezes, on mucus secretion, or on tryptase release.Conclusion: Local hyperthermia reduces allergen provoked nasal blockage and vascular leakage but has no effect on sneezing, rhinorrhea, or tryptase release. Nasal blockage occurs predominantly via newly formed lipid mediators and kinins, whereas sneezing and rhinorrhea occur predominantly via preformed mediators. We propose that local hyperthermia inhibits newly formed mediator production or release or reduces the sensitivity of the vasculature to inflammatory mediators in general. Further investigation into the mechanisms and potential uses of local hyperthermia is warranted.     

Stronger nasal responsiveness to cold air in individuals with rhinitis and asthma, compared with rhinitis alone

BACKGROUND: We have previously proposed that, compared with rhinitis alone, the constellation of upper and lower airway allergic disease is a manifestation of a more severe form of a syndrome affecting the entire airway. If this is correct, not only the lower, but also the upper airways of patients with asthma and rhinitis should demonstrate more abnormalities compared with patients with rhinitis alone, including higher sensitivity to irritant factors. Objective To test the hypothesis that, a previously well-studied natural nasal stimulus, cold, dry air (CDA), produces a stronger response in subjects with allergic rhinitis (AR) and asthma compared with subjects with AR alone. METHODS: We performed nasal provocation with CDA on 24 individuals with asthma and rhinitis and 17 with rhinitis alone. Prior to and after the challenge, nasal symptoms were recorded using visual analogue scales and nasal lavages were performed to determine histamine and lysozyme levels. RESULTS: The two groups reacted differently to CDA: after the challenge, patients with rhinitis and asthma reported significantly higher scores for nasal congestion, rhinorrhea and lacrimation. Also in this group, significant increases in histamine and in lysozyme levels in nasal lavage fluids were induced by CDA. In subjects with rhinitis alone, CDA failed to increase histamine or lysozyme levels above baseline. The CDA-induced change from baseline in histamine was significantly higher in the patients with rhinitis and asthma, compared with the rhinitis-only group. CONCLUSION: Patients with AR and asthma have stronger nasal responsiveness to CDA compared with patients with rhinitis alone. This observation is consistent with the notion that compared with rhinitis alone, the presence of asthma and rhinitis signifies a higher degree of functional abnormality of the entire airway.     

Mediator release after allergic and physical nasal challenges

Intranasal challenge of allergic subjects with the allergen to which they are sensitive rapidly produces sneezing, rhinorrhea, and airway obstruction. Nasal washings during the response reveal increased amounts of histamine, leukotrienes, prostaglandin D2 (PgD2), kinins and TAME-esterase in secretions. Although appearance of these mediators ceases shortly after challenge, many patients have a recrudescence of symptoms 3-11 h later, with a reappearance of the same mediators with the notable exception of PgD2. Subjects who respond to exposure to cold with rhinorrhea and nasal stuffiness were subjected to a 15-min nasal challenge with cold (-3-10 degrees C) dry (10% relative humidity) air and also responded with typical symptoms and the appearance of histamine, PgD2, TAME-esterase and leukotrienes. Nasal challenge with ragweed pollen by patients on immunotherapy showed that the threshold for response was greater and the amount of mediator found was less after treatment.     

Mucosal blood flow in the human nose following local challenge with histamine

Nasal blood flow was measured using the 133Xe wash-out method in 10 non-allergic subjects and 13 asymptomatic hay fever patients. Determinations were made before and 15 min after challenge with diluent, 0.13 mg, 1.3 mg and 13 mg of histamine/nasal cavity. Nasal symptom scores were recorded. The nasal inspiratory peak flow was determined simultaneously in the hay fever patients. No differences in blood flow or symptom score recordings were found between the normal subjects and allergic patients under basal conditions or after histamine challenge. The nasal blood flow increased after challenge with the highest histamine dose. The increase was 34% (P less than 0.05) from baseline in normals and 47% (P less than 0.05) in allergics. There was a dose-dependent increase in nasal symptom scores following histamine challenge, again with no difference between normal and allergic subjects. The nasal peak flow decreased in a similar manner with a maximum decrease of 74% (P less than 0.001). The present study gives further support to the notion that histamine is not the only mediator involved in vascular reactions during allergic rhinitis.     

Epithelial shedding is associated with nasal reactions to cold, dry air

BACKGROUND: Cold, dry air (CDA) can cause symptoms of rhinitis and obstructive airway responses. The pathophysiology of these reactions is not understood. One hypothesis is that the respiratory mucosa of individuals with CDA sensitivity cannot compensate for the loss of water that occurs on exposure to the stimulus, leading to epithelial damage. OBJECTIVE: To test for an association between nasal reactions to CDA and the number of epithelial cells recovered in nasal fluids. METHODS: Ten CDA-sensitive subjects received nasal provocations with CDA and warm, moist air; 10 CDA-insensitive subjects received CDA; and 10 subjects with allergic rhinitis received allergen and diluent challenges. Nasal lavage cytology was performed at baseline and after the challenge. Symptoms were recorded and histamine, [3H]-N-alpha-tosyl-L-arginine methyl ester-esterase activity, tryptase, and albumin were assayed in nasal lavages. RESULTS: A 6-fold increase in nasal lavage epithelial cells was found in the CDA-sensitive group after CDA (P < .01), but not after warm, moist air. No changes were observed in the CDA-insensitive group, or after allergen or diluent in allergic rhinitis. CONCLUSION: Epithelial cell shedding accompanies clinical responses to CDA in the human nose. This supports the hypothesis that the airway mucosa of CDA-sensitive individuals cannot compensate for the water loss that occurs under extreme conditions leading to epithelial damage. CLINICAL IMPLICATIONS: A defect in mucosal water homeostasis may need to be considered in individuals who get excessive nasal symptoms when exposed to cold and dry, windy environment.     

Effect of leukotriene D4 on nasal mucosal blood flow, nasal airway resistance and nasal secretion in humans

The possible role of leukotriene D₄(LTD₄)in nasal allergy was investigated in healthy volunteers. Nasal blood flow, nasal airway resistance, nasal discharge and nasal itching and sneezing were examined. LTD₄ was found to induce a dose-response related increase in nasal mucosal blood flow as measured by laser-Doppler flowmetry. Histamine exhibited similar effects on blood flow in the same concentration range. Nasal airway resistance as recorded by rhinomanometry, increased in a dose-related manner after topical LTD₄. Nasal secretion was obtained by nasal lavage and estimated from a dilution principle. Topical LTD₄ did not increase the amount of nasal secretion, whereas a dose-related increase was found after topical histamine. LTD₄ did not cause itching, sneezing or other irritative symptoms. In conclusion, LTD₄ may play a role in nasal allergy by increasing blood flow and nasal airway resistance. Itching, sneezing and discharge, however, are apparently not caused by LTD₄ but can be accounted for by the release of histamine or other mediators.     

Nasal histamine challenge in nonallergic and allergic subjects evaluated by acoustic rhinometry

Nasal patency shows spontaneous variations but is influenced by a number of factors like exercise and allergic conditions. Nasal histamine challenge has been used to define nasal hypersensitivity. We have applied acoustic rhinometry as a new objective method to study the spontaneous variations of the nasal mucosa and its response to histamine challenge in 12 nonallergic subjects and 12 subjects with nasal allergy to pollen, but out of the pollen season. Measurements of the minimum cross-sectional area and the volume of the nasal cavities were done every 15 min for 6 h. More pronounced spontaneous variations, defined by the coefficient of variation of the measurements, were encountered in the allergic than in the nonallergic subjects, especially with regard to the minimum cross-sectional areas in the nasal cavities (P < 0.02). Allergic subjects showed increased sensitivity to histamine, as compared with nonallergic subjects, during low-concentration (0.1%) challenge (P < 0.05) and a prolonged effect of histamine challenge (P = 0.01). Antihistamine (cetirizine) had a significant effect on the histamine-induced symptoms and decrease of nasal dimensions during histamine challenge, but no significant effect on pollen-induced changes. In the allergic group, the decrease in minimum area during allergen provocation correlated with the level of specific IgE (r = 0.81; P = 0.0015).     

Onset of action in the nasal antihistaminic effect of cetirizine and loratadine in patients with allergic rhinitis

Several studies have compared the cutaneous efficacy of cetirizine and loratadine and their onset of action. We assessed the nasal effect of these two antihistamines in a randomized, double-blind, crossover, placebo-controlled trial in order to compare objectively their efficacy and onset of action in the noses of patients with allergic rhinitis. Nasal challenge was performed by nebulization of increasing doubling doses of histamine (0, 0.04-1.28 mg/nostril) in 12 patients (eight men, four women, aged 22-39 years). Nasal airway resistance (NAR) was measured by posterior rhinomanometry either 1.5 h or 4 h after intake of cetirizine (10 mg), loratadine (10 mg), or placebo. Baseline NAR was identical between all study days (2.60-2.88 cmH₂O·1⁻¹·s). One and a half hours after intake, the increase in NAR induced by histamine was significantly reduced by both cetirizine and loratadine in contrast to placebo. However, with cetirizine the nasal obstruction was significantly lower than with loratadine ( P <0.05). Four hours after intake, a similar inhibition of the nasal obstruction caused by histamine was observed with both cetirizine and loratadine ( P <0.05). In conclusion, this study found cetirizine and loratadine to have similar nasal efficacy at therapeutic dosage 4 h after intake, whereas cetirizine was more effective than loratadine 1.5 h after intake. In agreement with the results observed in the skin, our study suggests a more rapid onset of action of cetirizine in the nose in allergic rhinitis.     

Effects of topical treatment with H1 and H2 antagonists on clinical symptoms and nasal vascular reactions in patients with allergic rhinitis

Fifteen asymptomatic subjects with allergic rhinitis participated in a double-blind, randomized, crossover, placebo-controlled study. The subjects were pretreated intranasally with a single dose of a selective H1 receptor antagonist, levocabastine, and/or selective H2 receptor antagonist, ranitidine, prior to a nasal allergen challenge. The nasal symptoms obtained at the challenge were assessed using a scoring technique 15 min after the allergen exposure. The nasal airway resistance was determined twice prior to and once after the allergen challenge using anterior rhinomanometry. The nasal mucosal blood flow was determined before and 15 min after allergen challenge using the 133Xe wash-out technique. After pretreatment with the H1 antagonist there was a statistically significant reduction in the number of sneezes and rhinorrhea compared to pretreatment with placebo. Pretreatment with the H2 receptor significantly decreased the rhinorrhea but not the sneeze. The nasal blockage was unaffected by both the H1 and the H2 antagonists. Pretreatment with the H1 and/or the H2 antagonists inhibited the reduction in the nasal mucosal blood flow induced by the allergen challenge to a significant degree. The present findings suggest that topical treatment with the highly selective histamine antagonist, levocabastine, inhibits allergen-induced reflex-mediated symptoms. H1 and H2 receptors do not appear to be involved in the regulation of the tone of the capacitance vessels. This indicates that a more complex mechanism participates in the induction of nasal blockage than the direct effect of histamine on H1 and H2 receptors on the capacitance vessels of the nasal mucosa alone. Both H1 and H2 receptors are of importance for the regulation of nasal mucosal blood flow during the allergic reaction.     

Efficacy and safety of desloratadine in the treatment of perennial allergic rhinitis

BACKGROUND: The evidence base for the use of H1-antihistamines in the treatment of perennial allergic rhinitis is considerably smaller than it is in the treatment of seasonal allergic rhinitis. OBJECTIVE: We hypothesized that desloratadine, a new, nonsedating selective H1-antihistamine, would be efficacious and safe in the treatment of perennial allergic rhinitis. METHODS: In a multicenter, randomized, placebo-controlled, double-blind, parallel-group study, 676 patients with symptomatic perennial allergic rhinitis were randomly assigned to 4 weeks of treatment with either 5 mg of desloratadine once daily or placebo. Efficacy was assessed by using a morning-evening instantaneous total symptom score (TSS), which was composed of scores for 4 individual nasal symptoms (rhinorrhea, itching, sneezing, and postnasal drip) and 3 individual nonnasal symptoms (itching eyes, watering eyes, and itching of the ears or palate). Secondary outcome measures included a morning-evening reflective TSS, total nasal and nonnasal symptoms scores, and individual symptom scores. Safety evaluations, including 12-lead electrocardiograms, were performed. RESULTS: Six hundred thirty-four patients completed the study. Desloratadine consistently diminished perennial allergic rhinitis symptoms, reducing the morning-evening instantaneous TSS (P =.005), the morning-evening reflective TSS (P =.007), the morning-evening reflective total nonnasal score (P =.023), and the individual nasal symptom scores for rhinorrhea, nasal itching, sneezing, and postnasal drip/drainage (P =.05 to P =.013) during weeks 1 through 4. Improvement in symptoms was observed after the first dose. Dropouts, and the type and frequency of adverse events (headache, viral infection, pharyngitis, and upper respiratory tract infection), were similar in both treatment groups. No clinically significant changes in QTc intervals were observed. CONCLUSIONS: Desloratadine rapidly and safely reduced the symptoms of perennial allergic rhinitis, and its efficacy did not diminish during 4 weeks of treatment.     

Nasal histamine challenges in symptomatic allergic rhinitis

Twenty subjects (seven with perennial allergic rhinitis, seven with symptomatic seasonal allergic rhinitis, and six normal control subjects) underwent assessment of nasal sensitivity to histamine. Nasal resistance was measured by posterior rhinometry under control conditions and after log incremental doses of histamine solution pipetted into the nose (0.5 to 5000 micrograms). Allergic subjects exhibited a twofold rise of nasal resistance with doses of 0.5, 5, or 50 micrograms of histamine, whereas the nasal resistance in normal subjects remained unchanged until 500 or 5000 micrograms of histamine had been administered. Nasal reactivity to histamine was not correlated with symptoms on the day of testing but was correlated with the number of positive wheals to skin prick testing. It was concluded that nasal resistance is more sensitive to histamine in subjects with allergic rhinitis than in normal control subjects and that this difference may be used as the basis of a diagnostic test.     

Disodium cromoglycate: laboratory studies and clinical trial in allergic rhinitis

The ability of disodium cromoglycate (DSCG) to block allergic responses in the nasal airways was investigated in two ways. The effect of DSCG on antigen-induced airways resistance changes in sensitive subjects was investigated in the laboratory. DSCG in a dose of 10 mg applied to each nostril was shown to block the expected reaction in 71 % of subjects and a 1 mg dose in 47%. Protection was conferred against antigen challenge for a period of about 6 hr by the 10 mg dose. A clinical trial of DSCG (10 mg) in seasonal allergic rhinitis was carried out using a double-blind cross-over design. Analysis of the results showed significant DSCG protective effects against lower respiratory tract symptoms and a significant antihistamine sparing effect. Analysis of part of the trial period when antigen challenge was uniformly high showed significant DSCG protective effects against sneezing, nasal discharge and nasal obstruction. Nasal application of DSCG is considered to be a promising alternative therapeutic approach in allergic rhinitis.     

Changes in airway inflammation following nasal allergic challenge in patients with seasonal rhinitis

BACKGROUND: Seasonal allergic rhinitis could predispose to the development of chronic bronchial inflammation as observed in asthma. However, direct links between nasal inflammation, bronchial inflammation and airway responsiveness in patients with seasonal allergic rhinitis and without asthma are not fully understood. The aim of this study was to analyse the changes induced by allergic nasal challenge outside the pollen season in airway responsiveness and bronchial inflammation of patients with seasonal allergic rhinitis. METHODS: Nine patients were evaluated after either grass pollens or placebo nasal challenge in a randomized cross-over double-blinded trial. Nasal parameters were recorded hourly and airway responsiveness was assessed by methacholine challenge. Cytological examinations and cytokine measurements were performed in nasal lavage and induced sputum. Eosinophil activation was investigated by eosinophil-cationic protein expression and secretion. RESULTS: Airway responsiveness was increased after allergic nasal challenge. Total eosinophils and eosinophils expressing eosinophil-cationic protein were increased in induced sputum after allergic nasal challenge. Both eosinophil number and eosinophil-cationic protein concentration in induced sputum were correlated to methacholine responsiveness. CONCLUSIONS: These results suggest that eosinophils participate to the bronchial inflammation in patients with seasonal allergic rhinitis following allergic nasal challenge outside the pollen season and might explain changes in airway responsiveness.     

Involvement of thromboxane A2 and peptide leukotrienes in early and late phase nasal blockage in a guinea pig model of allergic rhinitis

OBJECTIVE AND DESIGN: We investigated the effects of the thromboxane (TX) A2 antagonist seratrodast, the peptide leukotriene (p-LT) antagonist pranlukast, the antihistaminic drug terfenadine and the glucocorticoid dexamethasone on antigen-induced sneezing, biphasic nasal blockage and nasal hyperresponsiveness to histamine using a guinea pig model of allergic rhinitis. SUBJECTS: Male Hartley guinea pigs were used. TREATMENT: Intranasally sensitized guinea pigs were challenged once every week for 13 weeks by inhalation of Japanese cedar pollen as the antigen. Dexamethasone and other agents were administered orally 3 and 1 h, respectively, before the 4th, 6th and 13th challenge. METHODS: Sneezing frequency and the change in specific airway resistance (sRaw) were measured at these challenges. Two days after the 13th challenge, nasal responsiveness to histamine was evaluated by measuring sRaw after intranasal instillation of increasing doses of histamine. Moreover, the levels of TXB2, p-LTs and histamine were estimated in nasal cavity lavage fluid (NCLF) collected at the 13th challenge. RESULTS: Only terfenadine (10 mg/kg) significantly inhibited sneezing at any challenge time. Seratrodast (3 and 10 mg/ kg), pranlukast (30 mg/kg) and dexamethasone (10 mg/kg), but not terfenadine, suppressed both the early and late phase elevation of sRaw (biphasic nasal blockage), although the degree of inhibition on the early phase response varied with the challenge time. In contrast, the development of nasal hyperresponsiveness to histamine was inhibited by only dexamethasone. Furthermore, biphasic increases in TXB2, p-LTs and histamine in NCLF were observed after the challenge in sensitized animals. CONCLUSIONS: These results suggest that TXA2 and p-LTs, but not histamine, play important roles in both the early and the late phase nasal blockage in this model of allergic rhinitis.     

Activity of substance P on human skin and nasal airways

Nasal challenge and intradermal injection with substance P (SP) were performed in five normal subjects and in five patients suffering from allergic rhinitis. No clinical symptoms, local histamine release, or modifications of nasal airway resistance were observed when SP was insufflated in the nose. Conversely, intradermal injection with SP caused a wheal and flare reaction in all the studied subjects. The different response to SP is likely to be due to the heterogeneity of human skin and nasal mucosa mast cells as far as sensitivity to histamine-releasing agents is concerned. Our findings indicate that SP has no relevant effect on human nasal mucosa, even if a synergetic action of SP with other allergic mediators cannot be excluded. The role of SP in the pathogenesis of allergic diseases in humans remains to be defined and deserves further study.     

Histamine concentrations in nasal secretion and secretory activity in allergic rhinitis

The prerequisites for using the assayed histamine concentration in nasal secretion as an objective measure of disease activity in allergic rhinitis were investigated. It was demonstrated that in histamine determination procedures the presence of quenching substances in the nasal secretion could lead to underestimation of the histamine concentration. This bias was eliminated in a modified spectrofluorometric assay. Only an insignificant fraction of the histamine in samples collected by nasal spray washing was bound to unfiltrable particles or cells. The mean histamine concentration in nasal secretions from 15 healthy subjects was 11.2 micrograms/ml and in a group of nine patients with allergic rhinitis out of season 3.36 micrograms/ml. The histamine concentration in the latter group decreased during the pollen season and after positive allergen challenge. It is suggested that this decrease is caused by the increase in volume of the secretion during the allergic response. The use of lithium as an exogenous marker permitted quantitation of the increase in the relative amount of nasal secretion recovered by washing in the symptomatic subjects.     

Nasal response to a single antigen challenge in patients with allergic rhinitis — inflammatory cell recruitment persists up to 48 hours

BACKGROUND: Allergen challenge in some patients with respiratory allergy is followed by an early and a late reaction. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the duration of mediator release and inflammatory cell recruitment during the late antigen-induced nasal response. METHODS: Eight patients with seasonal allergic rhinitis due to grass pollen underwent local challenge with the relevant allergen, a non-relevant allergen (Parietaria judaica), and nebulized saline solution. Nasal lavages were performed at baseline and 6, 24, 48, 72 h after challenge. Eosinophil cationic protein (ECP), leukotriene C4 (LTC4), leukotriene B4 (LTB4) myeloperoxidase (MPO) and prostaglandin D2 (PGD2) levels were radioimmunoassayed and histamine concentration was measured by an automated fluorometric method. RESULTS: Nasal challenge with the relevant antigen induced a response 6 h after stimulation, which subsided within 24 h. Eosinophilia, observed in the nasal lavages collected from 6 to 24 h after this challenge, was accompanied by ECP release. Neutrophilia were found in the nasal lavages collected from 6 to 24 h after challenge. The increase in neutrophil number correlated with MPO levels and LTB4 concentrations, but not with the intensity of nasal obstruction. Antigen challenge also induced significant recruitment of mononuclear cells 48 h after provocation. The challenge significantly raised histamine, but not PGD2, levels in the nasal lavages collected 6 h after provocation. A trend towards an increase in LTC4 levels in the nasal lavages collected 6 h after specific antigen challenge was also found. Nasal challenge with a non-relevant allergen or with saline solution did not cause either inflammatory cell recruitment or mediator release. CONCLUSION: Nasal challenge with the relevant antigen can induce a late response characterized by local accumulation of eosinophils, neutrophils and mononuclear cells persisting for 48 h and accompanied by release of ECP, MPO, LTB4 and histamine. These results indicate that a single antigen challenge in patients with allergic rhinitis causes prolonged inflammatory alterations which may contribute to the development of airway hyperreactivity.     

A randomized controlled trial of cetirizine plus pseudoephedrine versus loratadine plus pseudoephedrine for perennial allergic rhinitis

The purpose of this study was to compare the safety and efficacy of cetirizine plus pseudoephedrine (C+P) with loratadine plus pseudoephedrine (L+P) in the treatment of perennial allergic rhinitis. This was a double blind, randomized, parallel trial with an active control. Subjects aged 12 to 70 years with perennial allergic rhinitis for at least 2 years were enrolled and randomized to receive either of the active study medications plus a placebo resembling the other, twice daily for 4 weeks. Nasal total symptom scale (NTSS) including sneezing, rhinorrhea, nasal itching and nasal stuffiness is evaluated by subjects daily and at baseline, 2 weeks, and 4 weeks by the investigator as efficacy measurement. A total of 51 eligible patients were enrolled and 45 patients completed the treatment course. Both groups had significant reductions in NTSS after 4 weeks of treatment as assessed by the subjects, but there was no significant difference between the two groups (mean +/- SD) reduction of 4.25 +/- 2.45 with C+P vs. 3.52 +/- 2.41 with L+P, p = 0.215. As assessed by the investigator, sneezing was significantly better at 2 weeks (-1.13 vs. -0.52, p = 0.028) and nasal congestion at 4 weeks (-1.71 vs. -1.19, p = 0.031) in subjects treated with C+P compared to those treated with L+P. There were 37 treatment-related adverse events (5 in 4 subjects in the C+P group and 32 in 16 subjects in the L+P group). It was concluded that both cetirizine plus pseudoephedrine and loratadine plus pseudoephedrine are efficacious for perennial allergic rhinitis in Taiwanese subjects. Relief of sneezing and nasal congestion may be marginally better with the cetirizine preparation, which also seemed to be slightly better tolerated, although the incidence of side effects did not differ significantly.