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)

Tacrolimus ointment is a topical immunomodulator. Currently, there is available evidence regarding the potential use of topical tacrolimus in a range of dermatological disorders. The aim of this study was to evaluate the efficacy and safety of tacrolimus ointment 0.1% for the nickel sulfate-induced steroid-resistant allergic contact dermatitis (ACD). A randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, parallel-group study design was performed in a total of 28 patients affected by nickel sulfate-induced steroid-resistant ACD after a 14-day run-in period. Then, the enrolled patients were randomized into two subgroups. Group A was treated with tacrolimus for 14 days and finally observed for a 7-day follow-up period. Group B, instead, was treated with placebo (vehicle). Four major symptoms (erythema, oozing, scaling, and itching) were considered as outcomes during the different phases of the study. In group A, during the treatment period with tacrolimus, a significant improvement was observed in all four considered symptoms. On the other hand, no improvement in symptoms was observed in the placebo-treated group B. Local adverse events in the tacrolimus-treated group, such as burning/itching at the application site, were transient and well tolerated. No patients withdrew because of burning/itching. In our study, tacrolimus ointment 0.1% appeared to be both effective and safe in the treatment of nickel sulfate-induced steroid-resistant ACD.
Allergy Asthma Proc
PMID:Tacrolimus ointment in nickel sulphate-induced steroid-resistant allergic contact dermatitis. 1717 90

Although response to intranasal steroid therapy has been reported in patients with allergic rhinitis, efficacy of some nasal steroids is noteworthy.This study was undertaken to evaluate the efficacy of a two-week course of Fluticasone (Flixonase) nasal spray vs. Beclomethasone (beconase) nasal spray in patients with symptoms of allergic rhinitis referred to our clinic. This study reviewed sixty randomized studies with symptoms of allergic rhinitis which supported common aeroallergens with skin prick test. Patients received a total daily dose of nasal spray of Fluticasone (Flixonase) 100 mcg bid (N=30) compared with patients with allergic rhinitis who received a total daily dose of Beclomethasone (Beconase) 50mcg 2 puffs bid (N=30). Patients were visited before and after therapy, and efficacy of Flixonase and Beconase was evaluated by the change in nasal symptoms including: nasal discharge, nasal obstruction, nasal itching, and sneezing. After two weeks of treatment nasal symptoms of blockage, discharge, sneezing and itching were significantly better in the group treated with Fluticasone nasal spray (65%, 82%, 67%, 79% respectively (p<0.001) but after treatment with beconase nasal spray lower benefits in the nasal symptoms includes: 50%, 71%, 51%, 57% respectively. After two weeks of treatment no deleterious changes consequent to therapy were observed in nasal symptoms. 100 mcg bid Flixonase (Fluticasone) intranasal spray is more effective than 50 mcg 2 puffs bid Beconase (Beclomethasone) intranasal spray. Like asthma, allergic rhinitis is an inflammatory disease and should be managed with anti-inflammatory medication.
Iran J Allergy Asthma Immunol 2003 Dec
PMID:Evaluation of fluticasone (flixonase) nasal spray versus beclomethasone (beconase) nasal spray in the treatment of allergic rhinitis. 1730 80

Pruritus is synonymous with itching. Many medical conditions are complicated by chronic pruritus compromising the patient's quality of life. The majority of pruritic stimuli are transmitted through C fibers into the lateral spinothalamic tract and then into the somatic sensory cortex where the itching is detected. Histamine, substance P, and tumor necrosis factor a play significant roles in the perception of pruritus. Medical conditions in adults with significant pruritus will be defined in this review.
Allergy Asthma Proc
PMID:What lies beneath the surface of the itch in adults? 1747 98

Perennial allergic rhinitis (PAR) is a chronic inflammatory nasal condition in individuals exposed year-round to allergens. This was a double-blind study of 15- to 85-year-old patients randomly allocated to montelukast, 10 mg (n=630), placebo (n=613), or the positive control cetirizine, 10 mg (n=122) for 6 weeks. The primary efficacy end point was change from baseline in Daytime Nasal Symptoms Score (DNSS; mean of congestion, rhinorrhea, sneezing, and itching scores, rated daily by patients [scale: 0=none to 3=severe]) averaged during the initial 4 weeks (primary analysis) or entire 6 weeks of treatment. Also assessed were combined post hoc results of primary end point data from this study and another similarly designed study (Patel P, et al. Randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled study of montelukast for treating perennial allergic rhinitis, Ann Allergy Asthma Immunol 95:551, 2005). Over 4 weeks, montelukast showed numerical improvement over placebo in DNSS (least-squares mean difference of -0.04 [95% confidence interval (CI}, -0.09, 0.01]); the difference between cetirizine and placebo was significant: -0.10 (95% CI, -0.19, -0.01). However, when averaged over 6 weeks, neither active treatment was significantly different from placebo. The Rhinoconjunctivitis Quality-of-Life score was significantly improved by montelukast (p < 0.05), but not by cetirizine, during 4 and 6 weeks. The treatment effect of montelukast, but not cetirizine, generally remained consistent through the 6 weeks of treatment. In pooled data, montelukast consistently improved DNSS versus placebo during all 6 weeks of treatment (-0.07 [95% CI, -0.10, -0.041). In conclusion, montelukast produced numerical improvement in daytime nasal symptoms and significant improvement in quality of life. In a pooled post hoc analysis, montelukast provided consistent improvement in daytime nasal symptoms over 6 weeks, supportive of an overall benefit in PAR.
Allergy Asthma Proc
PMID:Efficacy of montelukast for treating perennial allergic rhinitis. 1761 58

Nasal obstruction is the main symptom in patients with allergic rhinitis and it may be measured by rhinomanometry. Moreover, a decongestion test evaluates its reversibility. Some new antihistamines have been shown capable of improving this symptom. The aim of this pilot study was to evaluate nasal symptoms, nasal airflow, and the response to decongestion tests in patients with persistent allergic rhinitis (PER), before and after treatment with ebastine. Twenty patients with PER were evaluated, 15 male and 5 female patients (mean age, 28.2 +/- 6.7 years). All of the patients received ebastine (20 mg/day) for 3 weeks. Total nasal symptom score (including rhinorrhea, itching, sneezing, and obstruction), rhinomanometry, and decongestion tests were evaluated in all subjects before and after treatment. Patients evaluated weekly nasal and ocular symptoms by diary card. Ebastine treatment induced significant symptom relief (p = 0.0013), including obstruction (p = 0.0025) and significant increase of nasal airflow (p = 0.0001). Moreover, the response to the decongestion test was significantly affected by ebastine treatment (p = 0.0003). This pilot study showed the effectiveness of ebastine treatment in (i) improving nasal airflow and (ii) exerting decongestant activity in patients with PER. However, this pilot study was not suitable in assessing the effectiveness of ebastine on nasal symptoms. Additional controlled studies need to be conducted to confirm these findings.
Allergy Asthma Proc
PMID:Ebastine improves nasal symptoms and airflow and affects response to decongestion test in patients with persistent allergic rhinitis: a pilot study. 1788 85

Even though there is no mortality associated with allergic rhinoconjunctivitis (AR), there is significant morbidity in sufferers of this condition. The exact number of patients with AR is difficult to ascertain, with studies showing ranges from 9 to 42% of the population. Recently, the Allergies in America survey found that 14.2% of the adult U.S. population has been diagnosed with AR. It is well established that AR has a profound influence on the patient's quality of life. Not only do people with AR complain of rhinorrhea, nasal congestion, sneezing, itching, and associated eye problems disturbing, but they also have impaired emotional wellbeing and social functioning. Costs are a major burden in AR studies showing at least $6 billion/year. Although most attention related to costs in AR have been evaluating direct costs due to physician consultation and medical treatment, it is now clear that indirect costs are a major aspect of total costs in AR, especially for American businesses. Indirect costs include absenteeism from work or school because of illness and decreased productivity when at work or presenteeism. AR should be treated seriously by the medical community. Proper treatment of AR patients should not only greatly improve their quality of life, but also bring down health care costs, especially indirect ones, associated with this condition.
Allergy Asthma Proc
PMID:Allergic rhinoconjunctivitis: burden of disease. 1788 5

Olopatadine hydrochloride ophthalmic solution 0.2% (Pataday, Alcon) is a new formulation of olopatadine hydrochloride ophthalmic solution, the first topical ocular antiallergic agent indicated for once-daily dosing. The aim of this study was to evaluate the safety, efficacy, onset, and duration of action of olopatadine 0.2% in the treatment of allergic conjunctivitis. Using the conjunctival allergen challenge, this double-masked, randomized by eye, parallel-group study included four visits over a 5-week period. Subjects were screened for eligibility (visit 1) and their ocular allergic responses were confirmed at visit 2. The efficacy of olopatadine in reducing the signs and symptoms of allergic conjunctivitis was evaluated at onset of action (visit 4) and 16 hours (visit 3) after masked medication instillation. The primary efficacy parameter was ocular itching. Safety parameters were also evaluated. Ninety subjects were evaluated. Olopatadine 0.2% was significantly (p < 0.001) more effective than placebo in the treatment of ocular itching at all time points at both the onset of action and the 16-hour allergen challenges. Olopatadine 0.2% was significantly (p < 0.03) more effective than placebo in the reduction of conjunctival redness, chemosis, and eyelid swelling at all time points (with the exception of conjunctival redness, which was significantly reduced at five of six time points). There were no serious adverse events and no treatment-related adverse events. Once-daily dosing with olopatadine 0.2% reduced the signs and symptoms of allergic conjunctivitis with a rapid and prolonged duration of action. Safety analyses indicated that olopatadine 0.2% was safe and well tolerated in subjects with a history of allergic conjunctivitis.
Allergy Asthma Proc
PMID:Efficacy of olopatadine ophthalmic solution 0.2% in reducing signs and symptoms of allergic conjunctivitis. 1788 10

Real allergy to local anesthetic (LA) is very rare. This study was performed to report a case of anaphylaxis to multiple "caine." A 25-years-old atopic nurse developed a very severe anaphylactic reaction on her third infiltration for low back pain with bupivacaine, lidocaine, and methylprednisolone: she developed a vagal reaction, followed during the next 30 minutes by a pruriginous skin rash, followed by a tongue edema and a severe bronchospasm. Adrenalin was injected with a poor response. She was intubated and transferred to the intensive care unit for a few days and, finally, she recuperated completely. Skin-prick tests were done on two occasions. In the first session, no reactions were observed with triamcinolone and methylprednisolone at 1 mg/cc, but a rapid extending maculopapular erythema developed with a final diameter of 50 mm with lidocaine 0.1% (group 2) and 25 mm with procaine 2% (group 1): control 0 mm, histamine, 3 mm. She also complained of itchiness in the neck and shoulder, which resolved in the next 90 minutes. In the second session, a test with bupivacaine 0.0005% (group 2) gave a papule with a diameter of >5 mm, and a test with mepivacaine 0.001% (group 2) was negative: control, histamine, 3 mm; no subsequent tests with mepivacaine were done because she developed a cough and throat pruritus, voice modification, and a sensation of throat narrowing, that resolved with treatment. We reported a case of anaphylaxis to multiple LA (groups 1 and 2), possibly via an IgE-mediated mechanism.
Allergy Asthma Proc
PMID:Allergy to multiple local anesthetics. 1803 81

H(1)-receptor antagonists are known to suppress reactions in skin-prick tests (SPTs); however, the effect of H(2)-receptor antagonists, which are widely used in our everyday practice, remains unclear. The aim of this study was to determine the influence of ranitidine on wheal, flare, and itching sensation in SPTs. Twenty-one atopic patients (5 women and 16 men) with an average age of 28.04 years (SD, +/-8.24) were tested with histamine, codeine, negative control solution, and standard allergen extracts. Ranitidine (150 mg daily), loratadine (10 mg daily), or placebo were given to the volunteers for 5 days in a double-blind manner with 14 days of washout period. SPTs were applied to the volar surface of a forearm. There was no difference in wheal, flare, and itching between SPTs performed after placebo and washout period. The analysis revealed a statistically significant suppression of wheal and flare by ranitidine and loratadine (p = 0.013 and <0.00001, respectively, for wheals after allergens solutions tests, Wilcoxon rank-sum test). We found a significant suppression of itching induced by ranitidine (reduction of 26.85%; p = 0.005) and loratadine (29.6%; p = 0.005) as compared with placebo (p = 0.068 versus washout). Our data show a suppressive effect of ranitidine on the wheal, flare, and itching sensation in SPT. Because the sensitivity and specificity of skin testing requires withholding medication that could change the skin reactivity, it seems important to take into account the possible influence of H(2)-receptor antagonists on allergy diagnosis and therapy.
Allergy Asthma Proc
PMID:Ranitidine (150 mg daily) inhibits wheal, flare, and itching reactions in skin-prick tests. 1820 37

Allergic rhinitis (AR) is a chronic inflammatory disease characterized by nasal itching, sneezing, rhinorrhea, and nasal obstruction. Although the incidence of AR has been increasing, the reported prevalence of AR differs among surveys. Allergies in America was a comprehensive national survey that included 2500 adults diagnosed with AR and 400 healthcare practitioners who treat AR. Participants were interviewed about the burden of AR and comorbid conditions and the effect of AR on productivity and quality of life. Approximately 43% of nasal allergy sufferers reported that their nasal allergies were seasonal, and 56% indicated that their allergies were persistent throughout the year. Seasonal allergies were worse during the spring and fall, as reported by 56 and 45% of sufferers, respectively. Nasal congestion was ranked as the most common symptom experienced by patients daily or on most days during the worst month for nasal allergies. Patients and healthcare providers indicated that nasal congestion was the most bothersome symptom of AR. Asthma was diagnosed in 20% of patients with AR. Nasal allergy sufferers and healthcare providers indicated that nasal allergies affected productivity, led to missed workdays, and had a negative effect on patient quality of life. Patients and healthcare professionals report that symptoms of AR are bothersome. Effective treatment options for nasal symptoms of AR may decrease the burden of illness and improve patient productivity and quality of life.
Allergy Asthma Proc
PMID:Patient and healthcare-provider perspectives on the burden of allergic rhinitis. 1830 38


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