Gene/Protein Disease Symptom Drug Enzyme Compound
Pivot Concepts:   Target Concepts:
Query: UMLS:C0033774 (pruritus)
 14,546 document(s) hit in 31,850,051 MEDLINE articles (0.00 seconds)

The athlete who suffers from atopic diseases such as seasonal allergic rhinitis has an arsenal of antihistamines from which to choose for relief of symptoms. The decision to select a particular medication involves consideration of its efficacy and its side effects. Many of the standard antihistamines have sedative side effects which render them undesirable for use by athletes during competition. For example, a survey of studies suggests that some of these medications may compromise the performance of psychomotor skills important to the athlete (e.g. reaction time and visual discrimination). The newer, nonsedating antihistamines are equal to the standard agents in efficacy and comparable with placebo in central nervous system effects. Thus, psychomotor performance is not adversely affected by the newer antihistamines. Despite their widespread use, the effects of treatment with antihistamines on exercise performance (e.g. metabolic responses and time to exhaustion) have scarcely been addressed. The few studies available indicate that single oral administrations of antihistamines neither compromise nor enhance exercise performance or tolerance in asymptomatic individuals. Yet the research conducted has not examined the effects of antihistamine ingestion on exercise performance in symptomatic individuals. Whether treatment with an antihistamine would improve exercise performance relative to nontreatment in symptomatic, atopic athletes remains to be determined. Whereas there is a dearth of information on the effects of antihistamine medications on exercise performance, there is growing evidence that pretreatment with antihistamines may prevent or attenuate some exercise-induced histamine-mediated disorders such as urticaria, pruritus, anaphylaxis and gastrointestinal bleeding. A survey of studies suggests that prophylactic treatment with antihistamines may increase tolerance to exercise in individuals susceptible to these disorders.
 ...
PMID:Effects of antihistamine medications on exercise performance. Implications for sportspeople. 768 Aug 15

A single blind, placebo-controlled, parallel-group study was performed during a pollen season in 41 patients suffering from seasonal allergic rhinitis. A group of 26 patients was treated with loratadine (10 mg daily in one dose) for 3 weeks. Placebo was given in the group of 15 patients (1 tablet daily) during 8-10 days. The following parameters were assessed: clinical symptoms (rhinorhea, sneezing, blockage, nasal itching, eye symptoms), rhinoscopy, at baseline and after 8 and 21 days of the treatment. Eosinophils in nasal secretion were countered before and after the medication. Patients recorded daily nasal and ocular symptoms and possible adverse events in diary cards. It was shown a statistical significant improvement of clinical symptoms in the group treated with loratadine in comparison with the placebo group (p < 0.01). Very good and good results were observed in 84.6% of the treated with loratadine patients. The reduction of eosinophilia in nasal secretion during medication period was noted. Loratadine did not induce more side effects than placebo.
 ...
PMID:[Loratadine in the treatment of seasonal allergic rhinitis]. 780 48

Allergic rhinitis commonly manifests for the first time in childhood or adolescence with seasonal or perennial sneezing, rhinorrhea, nasal congestion, and pruritus of the nose, eyes and throat. The nasal mucosa are pale blue and boggy, with a clear discharge. Patients should be instructed to avoid breathing tobacco smoke, to remove bedroom carpeting, to use foam pillows, to enclose mattresses and box springs in plastic covers, to keep house windows closed and to reduce indoor humidity by using air conditioning. If these avoidance procedures, together with oral and ocular antihistamines and/or decongestants, do not provide relief of symptoms, intranasal corticosteroids and cromolyn may be prescribed. Pharmacotherapy is more effective if it is used prophylactically. Second-generation antihistamines may reduce sedative and anticholinergic side effects. Intranasal decongestants should be used for only three to four days. Immunotherapy is appropriate for patients who remain unresponsive to therapy. Intranasal cromolyn should be the first drug considered in the treatment of pregnant women.
 ...
PMID:Allergic rhinitis. 788 60

Fluticasone Propionate Aqueous Nasal Spray (FPANS) contains a topically active glucocorticoid fluticasone propionate which has been used successfully for the treatment of seasonal allergic rhinitis. This multicentre, randomized, double-blind, double-dummy, placebo-controlled, parallel group study was designed to compare the efficacy and tolerability of FPANS with terfenadine tablets or placebo in controlling the symptoms of allergic rhinitis to grass pollen. Two hundred and fourteen patients were treated for 6 weeks during the grass pollen season with either FPANS 200 micrograms once daily, terfenadine tablets (60 mg) twice daily or placebo. Efficacy was evaluated by the analysis of symptom-free days and median symptom scores. Patients receiving FPANS had significantly more days free of nasal blockage on waking (P = 0.012) and during the day (P = 0.01) and of rhinorrhoea (P = 0.027) than those receiving terfenadine. Additionally, in terms of absolute efficacy, patients receiving FPANS demonstrated significantly more days free of the above symptoms (P = 0.017, P = 0.028, P = 0.004, respectively) and of sneezing (P < 0.001) than those receiving placebo. There were no significant differences in symptoms of nasal itching, eye symptoms, of symptoms of drowsiness between the three treatment groups. Patients in the FPANS group had significantly lower median symptom scores for nasal blockage on waking (P < 0.001) and during the day (P < 0.018) than those in the terfenadine group and significantly lower scores for nasal blockage on waking (P < 0.001), sneezing (P < 0.013) and rhinorrhoea (P = 0.005) than those in the placebo group.(ABSTRACT TRUNCATED AT 250 WORDS)
 ...
PMID:A double-blind comparison of fluticasone propionate aqueous nasal spray, terfenadine tablets and placebo in the treatment of patients with seasonal allergic rhinitis to grass pollen. 788 28

The aim of the study was to investigate the effect of short-term treatment with fluticasone propionate on the response to nasal allergen challenge in patients with allergic rhinitis. Responses to nasal allergen challenge were assessed subjectively by recording symptom scores on visual analogue scales, and objectively by measuring histamine, PGD2 and LTC4 in nasal lavage and by measuring nasal inspiratory peak flow following challenge. Nasal allergen challenge resulted in an increase in all symptom scores (P < 0.05); an increase in histamine and PGD2 (P < 0.05), and a decrease in nasal inspiratory peak flow at 1 h, 5 h and 7 h following challenge (P < 0.05). The allergen-induced changes in symptom scores, mediator levels and nasal inspiratory peak flow were attenuated by treatment with fluticasone propionate (P < 0.05 for all parameters measured). Post-challenge nasal obstruction was decreased by 45%; sneezing, itching and rhinorrhoea by 73, 78 and 80% respectively in the group as a whole comparing scores whilst on fluticasone propionate with those on no therapy. Fluticasone propionate, 200 micrograms twice daily for 2 weeks is effective in reducing significantly the early and late response to nasal allergen challenge.
 ...
PMID:Effect of short-term treatment with fluticasone propionate nasal spray on the response to nasal allergen challenge. 789 87

A total of 30 patients suffering from seasonal allergic rhinitis were treated in a 6-week randomized, double-blind, double-dummy parallel-group study, comparing azelastine nasal spray (0.14 mg/nostril administered twice daily) and loratidine tablets (10 mg once daily). Symptoms evaluated were sneezing, nose and/or eye itching, lacrimation, rhinorrhoea, photophobia, nasal occlusion, throat irritation, smell loss, nasal mucosa swelling, conjunctivitis, and pharyngeal mucosa reddening. Each symptom was assessed according to severity and given a score on a four-point rating scale. Compared with baseline, total symptom scores for both the azelastine and loratidine treatment groups were reduced at each of the assessments during treatment. No significant differences were observed between the two treatment groups. The investigator concluded that azelastine, formulated as a nasal spray, is as effective as loratidine tablets in the relief of the symptoms of seasonal rhinitis and that it has a rapid onset of action.
 ...
PMID:A comparison of the efficacy of azelastine nasal spray and loratidine tablets in the treatment of seasonal allergic rhinitis. 790 59

A prospective, comparative, random study was conducted with 40 patients treated with ebastine vs. terfenadine. The purpose of the study was to evaluate the efficacy of both as second generation antihistamines used in the treatment of allergic rhinitis. Ten milligrams of ebastine was administered once a day before breakfast (fasting), in 5 and 10 year old children and 20 mg in 11 to 15 year olds. Ebastine was more efficient in the control of symptoms (rhinorrhea, nasal obstruction, sneezing, eye and nose itching) than terfenadine from the seventh day on, (p 0.05). Tolerance to ebastine was good, although a small number of patients (1.5%) suffered collateral symptoms: sleepiness, headaches and nausea. The two doses of ebastine (10 or 20 mg depending on the patients age) had overall efficacy rates better than terfenadine (p 0.05%).
 ...
PMID:[Ebastine vs terfenadine in allergic rhinitis]. 790 44

Both first-generation and second-generation antihistamines effectively reduce symptoms of sneezing, rhinorrhea, and nasal pruritus in individuals with allergic disease. These agents act as competitive inhibitors of histamine (a principal mediator of the allergic response) at various target-organ sites. Although the classic, first-generation antihistamines are unable to halt the allergic reaction once it has begun, emerging evidence has suggested that newer, second-generation agents may interfere with the release of inflammatory mediators from mast cells or may inhibit eosinophil chemotaxis. These effects may confer additional clinical benefit. Also, the second-generation agents produce fewer adverse reactions, including a marked reduction in sedation. Contrary to previous recommendations, recent findings have suggested that antihistamines may not necessarily be contraindicated in patients who have both asthma and allergic rhinitis. A greater understanding of the mechanisms of action and clinical effects of both older-generation and newer-generation antihistamines should help define optimal therapeutic strategies in the future.
 ...
PMID:Role of antihistamines in allergic disease. 790 79

The efficacy and tolerability of intranasal azelastine (0.14 mg/nostril twice daily) and oral terfenadine (60 mg twice daily) were compared under double-blind conditions in two 6-week, multicenter, parallel-group studies, including 167 patients suffering from seasonal and 52 patients suffering from perennial allergic rhinitis. In both studies, patients were symptomatic on entry and showed significant improvement on both treatments within the first 8 d of therapy, showing little further improvement with continued treatment. Symptoms most pronounced on entry--nasal itching, rhinorrhea, sneezing, and nasal obstruction--responded best to treatment (response rates 80-90%). Objective signs such as mucosal swelling and conjunctivitis improved in a manner parallel to symptoms. In perennial rhinitis, azelastine showed a trend to a superior relief of rhinorrhea and nasal obstruction, whereas terfenadine showed a trend toward better control of sneezing and nasal itchiness. No clinically relevant or statistically significant differences between treatments could be identified. The incidence of adverse effects of possible causal relationship to therapy was low. The most frequent effects in azelastine-treated patients were related to application site disorders, e.g., nasal irritation. Results indicate that with the dose used azelastine nasal spray is an effective treatment for both seasonal and perennial allergic rhinitis.
 ...
PMID:Comparative efficacy of azelastine nasal spray and terfenadine in seasonal and perennial rhinitis. 791 Oct 10

A gel formulation of the antiallergic compound N-acetyl-aspartyl glutamic acid (NAAGA) (Rhinaaxia (R)) has been evaluated in a multicenter, randomized, double-blind, three-arm, parallel-group comparison with placebo gel (P) and disodium cromoglycate (DSCG) in outpatients suffering from seasonal allergic rhinitis (pollinosis). Nose and eye symptoms were assessed daily by the patients on visual analog scales (VAS), and medical examinations were held after 1 week and at the end of the 4-week treatment. The use of rescue medications (H1-antagonist (terfenadine) and soothing eye-drops (Spersallerg) was recorded as a main assessment indicator of efficacy. For the efficacy analysis, only the periods with relevant pollen concentrations (> or = 50 grains/m3) were considered. The study extended over the two pollen seasons 1989 and 1990. Of 230 included patients, 190 were suitable for efficacy analysis (R = 63, P = 64, DSCG = 63). The VAS data did not reveal a difference between the treatment groups for nasal symptoms, whereas the use of terfenadine tablets was significantly lower in the Rhinaaxia group than in either the placebo (P = 0.0001) or DSCG group (P = 0.03). The eye symptoms were significantly less severe in the Rhinaaxia group than in both placebo (P = 0.0001) and DSCG (P < 0.01) groups. In addition, the use of rescue medication was significantly higher in the placebo than in the Rhinaaxia treatment group (P = 0.0001). The incidence of local untoward effects (itching/burning sensation in the nose) was slightly higher in the Rhinaaxia group, while the overall tolerability assessment was similarly good in all three treatment groups.(ABSTRACT TRUNCATED AT 250 WORDS)
 ...
PMID:Nasal application of a gel formulation of N-acetyl-aspartyl glutamic acid (NAAGA) compared with placebo and disodium cromoglycate in the symptomatic treatment of pollinosis. 791 Oct 11


<< Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Next >>