Allergen injection therapy with glutaraldehyde-modified--ragweed pollen-tyrosine adsorbate. A double-blind trial.

The effect of a preseasonal course of four injections of glutaraldehyde-modified—ragweed pollen-tyrosine adsorbate (MRTA), in a total dose of 7,000 Noon pollen units, was compared with a tyrosine base placebo in a double-blind trial in 43 matched patients with ragweed pollen-induced allergic rhinitis. During the pollen season, troublesome symptoms were treated with a standardized therapeutic regimen. The minimum medication requirement that adequately controlled symptoms was used as the main indicator of severity of the allergic rhinitis. Consequently, the symptom scores were similar in both treatment groups; however, the MRTA-treated group required approximately 50% less medication than the placebo group (p < 0.05). Subjective improvement was reported by 67% of the MRTA group and 38% of the placebo group (0.05 < p < 0.1). Serum concentrations of IgE and IgG antibodies to ragweed increased in response to MRTA (p < 0.02) but not in response to placebo. Side effects of MRTA included generalized urticaria in 2, mild asthma in 1, and large late swellings at the injection site which necessitated stopping the injections in 6 patients. MRTA was superior to placebo in reducing the severity of ragweed pollen-induced allergic rhinitis and was associated with a modest incidence of side effects.     

Effect of montelukast on symptoms and exhaled nitric oxide levels in 7- to 14-year-old children with seasonal allergic rhinitis.

BACKGROUND: Cysteinyl leukotrienes have been found to exert potent inflammatory effects in the upper airways and play a fundamental role in the pathogenesis of allergic rhinitis. Previous studies have reported increased levels of exhaled nitric oxide (eNO) in patients with allergic rhinitis without asthma symptoms. OBJECTIVE: To investigate the role of treatment with montelukast on symptoms, eNO levels, and peripheral eosinophil counts of children with seasonal allergic rhinitis during pollen season. METHODS: A randomized, double-blind, parallel-group study performed between April and June 2005 in 57 children aged 7 to 14 years with seasonal allergic rhinitis was performed. The study comprised a 1-week screening period, a 1-week run-in period, and a 2-week treatment period with once daily montelukast, 5 mg, or matching placebo. RESULTS: No significant difference at baseline was found in symptom scores, eNO levels, and blood eosinophil counts between the treatment and placebo groups. After 2 weeks of montelukast treatment, improvements from the baseline in the daytime nasal, composite, and daytime eye symptoms scores were significantly greater in the montelukast group compared with the placebo group (P < .001, P < .001, and P < .01, respectively). A significant decrease was also found in eosinophil counts (P < .001) in the montelukast group compared with the placebo group after treatment. Montelukast treatment did not produce a significant effect on eNO levels compared with placebo (P = .96). CONCLUSION: Montelukast treatment provided significant improvement in symptoms and peripheral eosinophil counts of school-age children with seasonal allergic rhinitis; however, it did not show a significant effect on eNO levels.     

Efficacy of azelastine nasal spray in seasonal allergic rhinitis patients who remain symptomatic after treatment with fexofenadine.

BACKGROUND: Currently available oral second-generation antihistamines do not provide adequate symptom relief for many allergy patients. OBJECTIVE: To determine the ability of azelastine nasal spray to improve rhinitis symptoms in patients with seasonal allergic rhinitis who remained symptomatic after treatment with fexofenadine. METHODS: This was a multicenter, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, 2-week study in patients with moderate-to-severe seasonal allergic rhinitis. The study began with a 1-week, open-label lead-in period, during which patients received fexofenadine, 60 mg twice daily. Patients who improved less than 25% to 33% with fexofenadine were randomized to treatment with (1) azelastine nasal spray, 2 sprays per nostril twice daily; (2) azelastine nasal spray, 2 sprays per nostril twice daily, plus fexofenadine, 60 mg twice daily; or (3) placebo (saline) nasal spray and placebo capsules twice daily. The primary efficacy variable was the change from baseline to day 14 in the total nasal symptom score (TNSS), consisting of runny nose, sneezing, itchy nose, and nasal congestion symptom scores. RESULTS: A total of 334 patients who remained symptomatic after treatment with fexofenadine were included in the efficacy analysis. After 2 weeks of treatment, azelastine nasal spray (P = .007) and azelastine nasal spray plus fexofenadine (P = .003) significantly improved the TNSS compared with placebo. Azelastine nasal spray monotherapy was as effective as the combination of azelastine nasal spray plus fexofenadine as measured by the TNSS and individual symptoms of the TNSS. CONCLUSIONS: Azelastine nasal spray is effective monotherapy for patients who remain symptomatic after treatment with fexofenadine and should be considered in the initial management of patients with seasonal allergic rhinitis.     

Protective effect of loratadine on specific conjunctival provocation test.

The protective effect of loratadine (anti-H1 antagonist) on clinical and cellular processes following the early phase of specific conjunctival provocation test was assessed in 20 patients affected by seasonal allergic rhinoconjunctivitis, in a double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled, parallel-group study. Patients were randomly assigned to two treatment groups, each being given a single daily dose of loratadine 10 mg or placebo, for 7 days, out of pollen season. Pretreatment with Loratadine resulted in a significant higher allergen threshold dose than placebo (p less than 0.01). Patients treated with loratadine experienced a significant reduction (p less than 0.01) in conjunctival symptom severity as compared with placebo, following conjunctival challenge. Finally, the number of inflammatory cells was lower in the loratadine-treated patients compared to the placebo group (p less than 0.01). In conclusion, loratadine exerts a significant protective effect on the early phase cellular and clinical events of conjunctival reaction induced by allergen challenge in atopic patients.     

Local intranasal immunotherapy for ragweed allergic rhinitis I. Clinical response

Local nasal immunotherapy (LNIT) of ragweed allergic rhinitis was studied in a double-blind controlled trial. Sixty-seven subjects were divided into three groups. Twenty-one received unmodified ragweed extract (RW), 24 received a glutaraldehyde polymer of ragweed extract (PRW), and 22 received placebo. Mean symptom/medication scores during the season were 2.12, 2.76, and 3.93 for the RW, PRW, and placebo groups, respectively. Both the RW- and the PRW-treated group scores were significantly lower than those of the placebo group (p < 0.01, and p < 0.025, respectively). The results of the patients' self-evaluations indicated that therapy was effective in 71%, 59%, and 41 %for the RW-, PRW-, and placebo-treated groups, respectively. Adverse reactions to treatment were limited to the upper respiratory tract and were noted by all patients. They were significantly more severe in the RW-treated patients than those in the PRW- or placebo-treated groups. We conclude that LNIT is an effective therapy for ragweed allergic rhinitis. The use of a PRW decreased adverse reactions significantly while slightly decreasing the therapeutic benefit.     

A pilot study of pemirolast in patients with seasonal allergic rhinitis

Pemirolast is a potent, long-acting, orally effective antiallergic agent evaluated for clinical activity in prevention of symptoms of seasonal allergic rhinitis. It was evaluated in a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled parallel group in season trials to test its safety, tolerance, and prophylactic activity. Thirty-one patients with a history of fall seasonal allergic rhinitis were treated for 6 weeks with pemirolast, 50 mg bid, or placebo beginning approximately 2 weeks before the onset of the ragweed season in Atlanta. Daily evaluation of symptom scores disclosed statistically significantly less sneezing, rhinorrhea, and stuffy nose during treatment with pemirolast. There was, however, no difference for other evaluated symptoms or for the use of rescue medicines. There were no side effects during this short study. This preliminary study indicates that pemirolast may warrant further evaluation for the treatment of allergic rhinitis.     

Nasal beclomethasone prevents the seasonal increase in bronchial responsiveness in patients with allergic rhinitis and asthma.

Experimental studies have demonstrated that induction of a nasal allergic reaction can lead to an increase in bronchial responsiveness (BR). To assess the clinical relevance of these experimental changes to chronic asthma, we sought to determine the effect of nasal beclomethasone dipropionate (Bdp) on BR in patients with seasonal allergic rhinitis and asthma. Eighteen subjects with histories of seasonal allergic rhinitis and asthma during the fall pollen season with positive skin tests to short ragweed and bronchial hyperresponsiveness to inhaled methacholine were assigned to receive either nasal Bdp (336 micrograms/day) or placebo for the entire ragweed season. Patients recorded daily nasal and chest symptoms, nasal blockage index, oral peak expiratory flow rates, and supplemental medication use. BR to methacholine was measured during the baseline period and 6 weeks into the ragweed season. Although the Bdp group did have a significant improvement in nasal blockage index, there was no improvement in daily asthma symptom scores, oral peak expiratory flow, or asthma medication use. However, subjects treated with Bdp were protected from the increase in BR seen in the placebo group (geometric mean PC20 placebo group: baseline = 0.70, week 6 = 0.29; Bdp group: baseline = 0.80, week 6 = 0.93; intergroup difference, p = 0.022). We conclude that nasal corticosteroid therapy can prevent the increase in BR associated with seasonal pollen exposure in patients with allergic rhinitis and asthma.     

Basophilic cell progenitors, nasal metachromatic cells, and peripheral blood basophils in ragweed-allergic patients

Circulating hematopoietic progenitor cells giving rise to colonies containing basophilic cells (basophilic cell colony-forming units in culture [CFU-c]), nasal epithelial metachromatic cells (basophils and/or mast cells) (NMC), and blood basophils were enumerated before, during, and after a ragweed-pollen season in patients with ragweed hayfever and patients with perennial allergic rhinitis who were not ragweed allergic. In the patients with seasonal hay fever, the following was observed: basophilic cell CFU-c, measured as basophilic cell or histamine-containing colonies, were significantly reduced during the ragweed season compared to before (p less than 0.005) or after (p less than 0.025) the season in the ragweed-allergic group only. Conversely, peripheral blood basophils were higher during the ragweed season than before or after (p less than 0.001) in the ragweed-allergic group, whereas the number of NMC was higher during the season than before the season in this group (p less than 0.05). There were no such changes during the season in the group of patients with perennial allergic rhinitis. The observed seasonal changes in both NMC and circulating basophilic cell CFU-c are discussed in the context of lineage relationships among metachromatic cell types.     

Eosinophils, secretory responsiveness and glucocorticoid-induced effects on the nasal mucosa during a weak pollen season

This study examined the seasonal effects on eosinophils and secretory responsiveness of the nasal mucosa in 22 patients with allergic rhinitis due to birch pollen (11 patients received placebo and 11 budesonide, 200 micrograms once daily in each nostril). The pollen counts during the study season were too low to produce a significant symptomatology. Hence, our findings demonstrate threshold alterations of the airway mucosa in allergic rhinitis and their inhibition by anti-inflammatory drug intervention. The patients were monitored for 8 weeks with daily recordings of pollen counts and symptom scores. Once every week a series of laboratory tests was carried out: the local eosinophil influx was determined using a Rhinobrush technique; the levels of eosinophil cationic protein (ECP) were analysed in nasal lavage fluids; and the secretory response to intranasal methacholine was measured. Treatments started after a 2-week run-in period. The proportion of eosinophils increased markedly in the placebo group and was elevated also during the last two study weeks when the pollen counts were practically nil. The secretory responsiveness to methacholine increased during the pollen season and returned to baseline towards the end of the study period. The topical glucocorticoid treatment reduced the proportion of eosinophils, the ECP levels, and the secretory response to methacholine compared to placebo. We conclude that the increased traffic and activity of eosinophils and less conspicuously the increased secretory responsiveness are expressions of the mucosal inflammation that precede the development of symptoms in seasonal allergic rhinitis.     

A comparison of topical budesonide and oral montelukast in seasonal allergic rhinitis and asthma

BACKGROUND: Allergic rhinitis and asthma commonly coexist and are both mediated by similar inflammatory mechanisms. Leukotriene antagonists may therefore be an alternative to corticosteroid therapy. OBJECTIVE: To compare oral montelukast with inhaled plus intranasal budesonide in patients with seasonal allergic rhinitis and asthma. PATIENTS AND METHODS: A single-blind double-dummy placebo-controlled crossover study was performed comparing once daily 10 mg oral montelukast with 400 microg inhaled plus 200 microg intranasal budesonide in 12 patients with allergic rhinitis and asthma: mean (S.E.) age 34.0 years (2.7), forced expiratory volume in 1 s (FEV1) 91.2 (3.8)% predicted. Each treatment was for 2 weeks with a 1-week placebo run-in and washout. Measurements were made after each active treatment and placebo for: adenosine monophosphate bronchial challenge, exhaled and nasal nitric oxide. Patients also recorded their domiciliary peak expiratory flow, nasal peak inspiratory flow, asthma and seasonal allergic rhinitis symptoms. RESULTS: There were no significant differences between the placebos for any measurement. For adenosine monophosphate PC20, geometric mean fold differences (95% confidence interval (CI) for difference) were 6.4 (2.2-18.6) for placebo vs. budesonide, 2.9 (1.0-8.4) for placebo vs. montelukast, and 2.1 (1.1-4.5) for budesonide vs. montelukast. For exhaled nitric oxide (p.p.b.) there was significant (P < 0.05) suppression with both montelukast (10.9) and budesonide (10.1) compared with placebo (18.8). For nasal nitric oxide and nasal peak flow there were only significant differences with budesonide compared with placebo. Both treatments reduced total seasonal allergic rhinitis symptoms but only budesonide had a significant effect on nasal symptoms. CONCLUSION: Once-daily inhaled plus intranasal budesonide and once daily montelukast showed comparable efficacy on lower airway, but only the budesonide had significant efficacy on upper airway inflammatory markers. Both treatments significantly reduced allergic rhinitis symptoms.     

Double-blind placebo-controlled study of loratadine, mequitazine, and placebo in the symptomatic treatment of seasonal allergic rhinitis

Loratadine is a long-acting H1 antagonist devoid of anticholinergic and sedative effects. A double-blind, placebo-controlled, parallel-group study was performed in 69 patients to compare efficacy and safety of loratadine and mequitazine. Patients allergic to grass pollens were randomly assigned to one of the three treatment groups and followed up to 2 weeks during the peak of the pollen season. Symptoms of allergic rhinitis were evaluated at baseline and after 3, 7, and 14 days of treatment by the physician with patients rating their response daily on diary cards. Both loratadine and mequitazine induced a significant relief of nasal symptoms when these were compared to placebo. Loratadine was found to be significantly superior to placebo after 3 days of treatment, whereas a significant improvement was only observed after 7 days in patients treated with mequitazine. For nonnasal symptoms, none of the two anti-H1 antagonist induced a significant improvement, and this lack of effect may be related to low symptoms at baseline. Loratadine did not induce more side effects than placebo. Loratadine can be considered to be an effective and safe anti H1 histamine with a rapid onset of action.     

Montelukast for treating seasonal allergic rhinitis: a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial performed in the spring

BACKGROUND: Cysteinyl leukotrienes are important proinflammatory mediators believed to have a role in allergic rhinitis. OBJECTIVE: This multicentre, randomized, double-blind, placebo- and active-controlled trial evaluated the effectiveness and tolerability of montelukast, a cysteinyl leukotriene receptor antagonist, for treating patients with seasonal allergic rhinitis. METHODS: After a 3- to 5-day, single-blind placebo run-in period, 1302 male and female patients (aged 15-81 years) with active allergic rhinitis symptoms were randomly assigned to receive montelukast 10 mg (n = 348), loratadine 10 mg (n = 602), or placebo (n = 352) administered once daily at bedtime for 2 weeks during the spring allergy season. RESULTS: Mean patient characteristics and symptom scores at baseline were similar for the three treatment groups. The primary end-point, daytime nasal symptoms score (mean of nasal congestion, rhinorrhea, nasal pruritus, and sneezing scores; 0-3 scale), improved from baseline during treatment by (least squares mean, 95% confidence interval) - 0.37 (- 0.43, - 0.31), - 0.47 (- 0.52, - 0.43), and - 0.24 (- 0.29, - 0.18) in the montelukast, loratadine, and placebo groups, respectively (P < or = 0.001 comparing each active treatment with placebo). Mean changes from baseline in all other diary-based scores, including night-time and eye symptom scores, were significantly greater for each active treatment than for placebo. The rhinoconjunctivitis quality of life overall score improved significantly with montelukast and with loratadine as compared with placebo. Montelukast and loratadine showed a safety profile comparable to that of placebo. CONCLUSION: Montelukast is well tolerated and provides improvements in daytime and night-time symptoms, as well as quality of life parameters, for patients with seasonal allergic rhinitis.     

Suppression of seasonal allergic rhinitis symptoms with daily hydroxyzine.

The effectiveness of hydroxyzine in the suppression of allergic rhinitis symptoms was evaluated using a double-blind, parallel study design during the 1977 ragweed season. Forty-three subjects with positive ragweed skin tests and a history of an exacerbation of symptoms during August and September of the previous two years were randomly assigned to receive either hydroxyzine or placebo. Subjects scored the severity and duration of symptoms in a daily diary and adverse effects were evaluated from a structured interview at two-week intervals. Although drowsiness and dry mouth were frequent initially among the hydroxyzine-treated patients, these minor side effects rapidly disappeared as the dose was slowly increased, and all but one subject tolerated 150 mg/day. Subsequently, during the period of the highest ragweek pollen counts, the hydroxyzine-treated group spent significantly more days free of symptoms or with only mild sneezing, rhinorrhea, and eye symptoms than subjects who took placebo (p less than 0.05). Thus, hydroxyzine appeared to be well tolerated on a continuous daily basis and was effective in suppressing most of the symptoms of seasonal allergic rhinitis. Comparison of hydroxyzine with antihistamines more traditionally used for allergic rhinitis appears warranted.     

The effect of anti-IgE treatment on in vitro leukotriene release in children with seasonal allergic rhinitis

BACKGROUND: Binding of allergens with IgE to the IgE receptors on mast cells and basophils results in the release of inflammatory mediators as sulfidoleukotrienes (SLTs), triggering allergic cascades that result in allergic symptoms, such as asthma and rhinitis. OBJECTIVE: We sought to investigate whether anti-IgE (Oma-lizumab), a humanized monoclonal anti-IgE antibody, in addition to specific immunotherapy (SIT) affects the leukotriene pathway. METHODS: Ninety-two children (age range, 6-17 years) with sensitization to birch and grass pollens and with seasonal allergic rhinitis were included in a phase III, placebo- controlled, multicenter clinical study. All subjects were randomized to one of 4 treatment groups. Two groups subcutaneously received birch SIT and 2 groups received grass SIT for at least 14 weeks before the start of the birch pollen season. After 12 weeks of SIT titration, placebo or anti-IgE was added for 24 weeks. The primary clinical efficacy variable was symptom load (ie, the sum of daily symptom severity score and rescue medication score during pollen season). Blood samples taken at baseline and at the end of study treatment after the grass pollen season were used for separation of leukocytes in this substudy. After in vitro stimulation of the blood cells with grass and birch pollen allergens, SLT release (LTC4, LTD4, and LTE4) was quantified by using the ELISA technique. RESULTS: Before the study treatment, SLT release to birch and grass pollen exposure did not differ significantly among the 4 groups. Under treatment with anti-IgE + SIT-grass (n = 23), a lower symptom load occurred during the pollen season compared to placebo + SIT-grass (n = 24, P =.012). The same applied to both groups receiving birch SIT (n = 23 and n = 22, respectively; P =.03). At the end of treatment, the combination of anti-IgE plus grass SIT, as well as anti-IgE plus birch SIT, resulted in significantly lower SLT release after stimulation with the corresponding allergen (416 ng/L [5th-95th percentile, 1-1168] and 207 ng/L [1-860 ng/L], respectively) compared with placebo plus SIT (2490 ng/L [384-6587 ng/L], P =.001; 2489 ng/L [1-5670 ng/L], P =.001). In addition, treatment with anti-IgE was also followed by significantly lower SLT releases to the allergens unrelated to SIT (grass SIT: 300 ng/L [1-2432 ng/L] in response to birch allergen; birch SIT: 1478 ng/L [1-4593 ng/L] in response to grass pollen) in comparison with placebo (grass SIT: 1850 ng/L [1-5499 ng/L], P =.001; birch SIT: 2792 ng/L [154-5839 ng/L], P =.04]. CONCLUSION: Anti-IgE therapy reduces leukotriene release of peripheral leukocytes stimulated with allergen in children with allergic rhinitis undergoing allergen immunotherapy independent of the type of SIT allergen used.     

Loratadine-pseudoephedrine combination versus placebo in patients with seasonal allergic rhinitis

Two hundred sixty-four patients with moderate to severe seasonal allergic rhinitis were treated with loratadine 5 mg plus pseudoephedrine 120 mg twice a day or placebo in a 28-day multicenter study. Four nasal and four non-nasal symptoms were evaluated for efficacy. At the last evaluable visit, the active treatment group had significantly lower (P = .05) mean combined nasal and non-nasal symptom scores than the placebo group. Also, the physician's rating of overall therapeutic response was significantly better in the active-treatment group (P = .03). Dry mouth, insomnia, and nervousness were reported by a significantly greater proportion (P less than or equal to .04) in the active-treatment group. Sedation occurred in 7% of patients in each treatment group and 6% of patients in each group discontinued the study because of adverse experiences. Loratadine plus pseudoephedrine was safe and significantly more effective than placebo in relieving the symptoms of allergic rhinitis.     

The effect of nedocromil sodium on nasal provocation with allergen

We have investigated the effect of nedocromil sodium in preventing the symptoms of rhinitis occurring immediately after allergen provocation in 10 patients with allergic rhinitis. The study had a double-blind, placebo-controlled, crossover design. Nedocromil sodium (1% w/v) and placebo were administered intranasally from identical metered-dose inhalers 20 minutes before allergen provocation. Three variables were measured: nasal airway resistance, the production of secretion, and the number of sneezes. Nedocromil sodium was significantly more effective than placebo in preventing nasal obstruction (p less than 0.01), rhinorrhea (p less than 0.01), and sneezing (p less than 0.05), suggesting that this drug may be useful in the treatment of allergic rhinitis.     

Effects of H1-antihistamine drug regimen on histamine release by nonlesional skin mast cells of patients with chronic urticaria.

Profiles of compound 48/80-induced histamine release (HR) from mast cells of uninvolved skin from patients with chronic urticaria (CU) and from a normal control (NC) group were compared, and the effects of anti-H1 medications were assessed versus placebo. Then, patients with CU (15) and NC subjects (10) were randomly assigned to take either hydroxyzine (100 mg/day), terfenadine (120 mg/day), or placebo for 28 days. The effects of such treatment on the clinical response and on the profile of compound 48/80-induced HR during a 4-hour period were analyzed. Treatment with hydroxyzine in patients with CU improved the clinical symptoms and modified the profile of HR; more histamine was recovered at 1 hour (p less than 0.05) and 2 hours (p less than 0.05), as compared with baseline. Terfenadine and placebo had no effect on the clinical response or on the profiles of HR. In the NC group, the amounts of histamine recovered at 1 hour after challenge with compound 48/80 were lower than amounts of the pretherapy values (p less than 0.01). It could be concluded that (1) the profile of HR in patients with CU is reproducible during a period of 28 days, (2) only hydroxyzine modifies both the clinical response and the profile of HR, and (3) anti-H1 compounds decrease the HR in the NC group.     

Efficacy and safety of specific immunotherapy with SQ allergen extract in treatment-resistant seasonal allergic rhinoconjunctivitis

BACKGROUND: Specific immunotherapy is widely used to treat allergic rhinitis, but few large-scale clinical trials have been performed. OBJECTIVE: We sought to assess the efficacy and safety of specific immunotherapy with 2 doses of Alutard grass pollen in patients with moderately severe seasonal allergic rhinitis inadequately controlled with standard drug therapy. METHODS: We performed a double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled study of 410 subjects (203 randomized to 100,000 standardized quality units [SQ-U] maintenance, 104 to 10,000 SQ-U, and 103 to placebo). Three hundred forty-seven (85%) completed treatment. Groups were well matched for demographics and symptoms. RESULTS: Across the whole pollen season, mean symptom and medication scores were 29% and 32% lower, respectively, in the 100,000-SQ-U group compared with those in the placebo group (both P < .001). Over the peak pollen season, mean symptom and medication scores were 32% and 41% lower, respectively, than those in the placebo group. The 10,000-SQ-U group had 22% less symptoms than the placebo group over the whole season (P < .01), but medication scores reduced by only 16% (P = .16). Quality-of-life measures confirmed the superiority of both doses to placebo. Local and delayed side effects were common but generally mild. Clinically significant early and delayed systemic side effects were confined to the 100,000-SQ-U group, but no life-threatening reactions occurred. CONCLUSIONS: One season of immunotherapy with Alutard grass pollen reduced symptoms and medication use and improved the quality of life of subjects with moderately severe hay fever. The 100,000-SQ-U regimen was more effective, but the 10,000-SQ-U regimen caused fewer side effects.     

Efficacy and safety of loratadine plus pseudoephedrine in patients with seasonal allergic rhinitis and mild asthma

Background: Antihistamines have been shown to have a variety of therapeutic effects in asthma. Although nasal obstruction may play an important role in modulating lower airway function, no prior trial has used a decongestant in combination with an antihistamine in patients with allergic rhinitis and concomitant asthma.Objective: We sought to determine the efficacy and safety of loratadine (5 mg) plus pseudoephedrine (120 mg) (L/P) twice daily in patients with seasonal allergic rhinitis and mild asthma.Methods: We conducted a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial of L/P in 193 subjects during the fall allergy season. Nasal and chest symptoms, albuterol use, and peak expiratory flow rates were recorded daily for 6 weeks. Spirometry was measured at baseline and after 1, 2, 4, and 6 weeks of therapy, and health-related quality of life was rated at the beginning and end of the study.Results: Total rhinitis and asthma symptom severity scores were significantly reduced in patients receiving active therapy compared with those receiving placebo throughout the 6-week study. Peak expiratory flow rates improved significantly in patients treated with L/P during weeks 2 through 6 (peak effect [mean ± SEM]: L/P, 26.23 ± 4.64 L/min vs placebo, 8.52 ± 3.53 L/min, p = 0.002) as did FEV₁ (peak effect [mean ± SEM]: L/P, 170 ± 53 ml vs placebo, 20 ± 40 ml, p = 0.01) at all clinic visits. In addition, select measures of asthma-specific quality of life improved significantly relative to placebo.Conclusions: L/P significantly improved nasal and asthma symptoms, pulmonary function, and quality of life in patients with seasonal allergic rhinitis and concomitant mild asthma. (J Allergy Clin Immunol 1997;100:781-8)     

Montelukast plus cetirizine in the prophylactic treatment of seasonal allergic rhinitis: influence on clinical symptoms and nasal allergic inflammation

BACKGROUND: The aim of our study was to investigate effects of 6-week pretreatment of seasonal allergic rhinitis (AR) with cetirizine, and montelukast, alone and in combination. Antihistamine/antileukotriene treatment is effective in AR. Antihistamines may prevent AR symptoms while prophylactic activity of antileukotrienes remains unclear. METHODS: Sixty AR patients, aged 18-35 years, were randomized to receive placebo, montelukast only, cetirizine only, or montelukast plus cetirizine, 6 weeks prior and 6 weeks after the beginning of grass pollen season. Mean self-recorded in-season symptom scores and mean weekly all-symptom scores were analyzed. In 31 patients, nasal lavages were performed before treatment, and at the end of the study, i.e. 12 weeks after the treatment initiation. Eosinophil and basophil counts, eosinophil cationic protein (ECP), and mast cell tryptase (MCT) levels were evaluated in lavage samples. RESULTS: Combined montelukast/cetirizine pretreatment significantly reduced in-season symptom score for sneezing, eye itching, nasal itching, rhinorrhea, and congestion. Montelukast plus cetirizine were more effective than cetirizine alone in preventing eye itching, rhinorrhea, and nasal itching. Moreover, combined pretreatment with montelukast and cetirizine delayed appearance of AR symptoms. Eosinophil nasal lavage fluid counts were significantly increased during pollen season in placebo and montelukast-only groups. No differences were observed in basophil counts. The in-season ECP level was significantly increased in all groups except montelukast-plus-cetirizine group. In-season MCT levels were not increased. CONCLUSION: Combined antihistamine and antileukotriene treatment started 6 weeks before the pollen season is effective in preventing AR symptoms and reduces allergic inflammation in nasal mucosa during natural allergen exposure.