A direct comparison of the efficacy of antihistamines in SAR and PAR: randomised, placebo-controlled studies with levocetirizine and loratadine using an environmental exposure unit – the Vienna Challenge Chamber (VCC)

Stübner, Petra; Zieglmayer, René; Horak, Friedrich

doi:10.1185/030079904125003700

Cited by 56 publications

(28 citation statements)

References 16 publications

(14 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…15 The findings were consistent across the literature, suggesting Levocetirizine improved outcomes, leading to incremental cost savings and cost-effectiveness. 16 Anthi Rogkakou et al, concluded that Levocetirizine was welltolerated, safe, and suitable for continuous and longlasting treatment.…”

Section: Noncompeting Choicesupporting

confidence: 78%

Pharmacoeconomic assessment and comparing efficacy between cetirizine, levocetirizine, loratadine and fexofenadine in allergic rhinitis patients

Pentewar

Wagh

Chincholkar

2017

Int J Basic Clin Pharmacol

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background: A successful treatment of allergic rhinitis is considered not only as relief from sneezing, itching, rhinorrhoea, congestion but also as the functional impact on the patient’s daily life. The cost of treating allergic rhinitis and indirect costs related to loss of workplace productivity are substantial.Methods: The present study was single centered, open label, randomized, four Arm, parallel-group, comparative clinical study between orally administered Cetirizine, Levocetirizine, Loratadine and Fexofenatidine in patients with allergic rhinitis conducted at MIMER Medical college and Dr. Bhausaheb Sardesai hospital in rural Maval Taluka in Pune district of Maharashtra State.Results: Total Nasal Symptom Score differs significantly for all the treatment groups. Subsequent pairwise contrasts using a Bonferroni adjustment reveals maximum reduction of symptoms in Levocetirizine group. Cost effectiveness ratio was effective for Levocetirizine followed by Cetirizine, Loratadine, and Fexofenadine.Conclusions: From the analysis of results, the study shows that both Levocetirizine and Cetirizine control the symptoms of allergic rhinitis better as compared to Loratadine and Fexofenadine but Levocetirizine was a better choice in comparison to others due to its cost effectiveness.

show abstract

Section: Noncompeting Choicesupporting

confidence: 78%

Pharmacoeconomic assessment and comparing efficacy between cetirizine, levocetirizine, loratadine and fexofenadine in allergic rhinitis patients

Pentewar

Wagh

Chincholkar

2017

Int J Basic Clin Pharmacol

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…In each study period, over 2 consecutive days, the subjects were exposed to a controlled concentration of grass pollen in the VCC as described elsewhere [16,18]. The study was performed in accordance with the Declaration of Helsinki (as amended in 1964) and in compliance with the ICH E6 Note for Guidance on Good Clinical Practices (CPMP/ICH/135/ 95).…”

Section: Protocols and Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

The effects of bilastine compared with cetirizine, fexofenadine, and placebo on allergen-induced nasal and ocular symptoms in patients exposed to aeroallergen in the Vienna Challenge Chamber

Horak

Zieglmayer

et al. 2009

Inflamm. Res.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Of these, two studies were conducted in the Vienna Challenge Chamber (VCC) in a cross-over design and compared the efficacy of levocetirizine, loratadine/fexofenadine, and placebo28,29. Two other comparative studies were conducted in an environmental exposure unit (EEU) by Day et al 30,31.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Efficacy of fluticasone furoate nasal spray and levocetirizine in patients with Japanese cedar pollinosis subjected to an artificial exposure chamber

Hashiguchi

Kanzaki

Wakabayashi

et al. 2013

Journal of Drug Assessment

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

ObjectiveThis study investigated the clinical efficacy of a combination therapy of levocetirizine (LCTZ) and fluticasone furoate nasal spray (FFNS), compared with LCTZ monotherapy, for the suppression of seasonal allergic rhinitis (SAR) symptoms induced in an artificial exposure chamber.MethodsThis study was a single-center, placebo-controlled, randomized, 3-way cross-over comparative study performed in 42 Japanese cedar pollinosis patients. These subjects received (1) LCTZ plus FFNS (combination group), (2) LCTZ plus FFNS placebo (monotherapy group), or (3) LCTZ placebo plus FFNS placebo (placebo group) once on the night prior to exposure, with a 1-week washout period between exposures. Nasal (sneezing, rhinorrhea, nasal congestion, and itchy nose) and ocular (eye itching and tearing) symptoms were recorded every 15 min, and the number of sneezes, nose blowing events, and the amount of nasal secretions were measured during exposure. The primary end-point was the cumulative incidence of SAR symptoms during exposure and the ‘ime to occurrence of symptoms’. The secondary end-points were the total nasal symptom score, the ocular symptom score, the amount of nasal discharge, and the number of sneezes and nose blowing events.ResultsAt all the measurement points, the lowest cumulative incidences for the nasal symptoms were observed in the combination group, followed by the monotherapy and placebo groups. All the subjects in the placebo group developed nasal symptoms within 2 h after pollen exposure, while three and eight subjects in the monotherapy and combination groups, respectively, did not develop any nasal symptoms during exposure. In addition, combination therapy delayed the onset of symptoms.ConclusionsThe results demonstrated that combination therapy with FFNS and LCTZ significantly suppressed the induced SAR symptoms and delayed the onset of symptoms compared with LCTZ monotherapy and placebo. Although the conditions of the allergen challenge study using an exposure chamber are different from those in real life, combination therapy with FF and LCTZ was confirmed to be an effective treatment for SAR.

show abstract

A direct comparison of the efficacy of antihistamines in SAR and PAR: randomised, placebo-controlled studies with levocetirizine and loratadine using an environmental exposure unit – the Vienna Challenge Chamber (VCC)

Abstract: This study demonstrated that levocetirizine is superior to loratadine in improving symptoms in SAR and that there is a similar trend in PAR.

Cited by 56 publications

References 16 publications

Pharmacoeconomic assessment and comparing efficacy between cetirizine, levocetirizine, loratadine and fexofenadine in allergic rhinitis patients

Pharmacoeconomic assessment and comparing efficacy between cetirizine, levocetirizine, loratadine and fexofenadine in allergic rhinitis patients

The effects of bilastine compared with cetirizine, fexofenadine, and placebo on allergen-induced nasal and ocular symptoms in patients exposed to aeroallergen in the Vienna Challenge Chamber

Efficacy of fluticasone furoate nasal spray and levocetirizine in patients with Japanese cedar pollinosis subjected to an artificial exposure chamber

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About