Gene/Protein Disease Symptom Drug Enzyme Compound
Pivot Concepts:   Target Concepts:
Query: UMLS:C0042109 (urticaria)
 6,569 document(s) hit in 31,850,051 MEDLINE articles (0.00 seconds)

Histamine H1 receptor antagonists are a mainstay in the management of chronic/chronic recurrent urticaria (c./c.r.U.). Since experimental studies have confirmed the presence of cutaneous H2 receptors partially conflicting results have been reported on the use of H2 antagonists in c./c.r.U. 20 patients with c./c.r.U. of idiopathic type were treated with cimetidine plus clemastine or placebo plus clemastine in a double-blind crossover study. Before this treatment traditional H1 antagonists alone failed to show any satisfying therapeutic effect. The results reveal that combined therapy is statistically more effective than corresponding H1 antagonists alone (P = 0.001). The addition of cimetidine is proposed in patients with c./c.r.U. if conventional therapy has been tried and proven ineffective.
 ...
PMID:[Effectiveness of combination treatment with H1-(Tavegyl) and H2-antagonists (Altramet) in chronic/chronically-recurrent urticaria]. 208 5

The introduction of relatively nonsedating H1-receptor antagonists ushered in a new era in the symptomatic treatment of allergic disorders. Unlike first-generation H1-receptor antagonists, the second-generation compounds (such as astemizole, cetirizine, loratadine, and terfenadine) do not cross the blood-brain barrier readily and are thus comparatively free of central nervous system effects. The pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic profiles vary considerably by agent, but most of the second-generation drugs are suitable for once-daily dosing. Efficacy of the H1 antagonists is maintained during chronic therapy. The second-generation H1-receptor antagonists are appropriate for use as first-line treatment of allergic rhinoconjunctivitis and urticaria. These agents also have a modest, direct beneficial effect in patients with chronic asthma. The role of the newer H1-receptor antagonists in the treatment of atopic dermatitis, upper respiratory tract infections, and otitis media remains undefined. Recently, the gene encoding the histamine H1 receptor was cloned from bovine adrenal medullae. Emerging evidence suggests that more than one subtype of H1 receptor may exist. It is hoped these advances will pave the way for further improvements in H1-antagonist therapy.
 ...
PMID:Evolution of H1-receptor antagonist treatment. 810 73

Ebastine is a long-acting nonsedating second generation histamine H1 receptor antagonist which binds preferentially to peripheral H1 receptors in vivo. It has shown antihistamine and antiallergic activity in healthy volunteers and patients with allergies, and protected against histamine-induced bronchoconstriction in patients with asthma. Significant symptom improvement is observed in patients with seasonal or perennial allergic rhinitis or chronic idiopathic urticaria following administration of ebastine 10 mg/day, or 20 mg/day in severe rhinitis. In clinical trials, the efficacy of ebastine 10 or 20 mg/day was generally similar to standard dosages of terfenadine, cetirizine, astemizole and loratadine in patients with seasonal allergic rhinitis, astemizole, terfenadine and ketotifen in patients with chronic idiopathic urticaria, and ketotifen, terfenadine, chlorpheniramine and mequitazine in patients with perennial allergic rhinitis. The most frequent adverse events reported during ebastine therapy are drowsiness, headache and dry mouth, the incidence being similar to that reported in placebo recipients. Serious adverse cardiac events, observed on rare occasions with some other histamine H1 receptor antagonists, have not been reported with ebastine, and there has been no evidence of QTc interval prolongation related to ebastine therapy. Thus, once-daily ebastine offers an effective and well-tolerated alternative to other second generation antihistamines in current use for the first-line treatment of seasonal and perennial allergic rhinitis and chronic idiopathic urticaria.
 ...
PMID:Ebastine. a review of its pharmacological properties and clinical efficacy in the treatment of allergic disorders. 880 67

The nonsedating histamine H1 receptor antagonist fexofenadine is the active metabolite of terfenadine. It reduced the allergic response in animal models of allergy and did not prolong the QT interval (QTc) in dogs or rabbits at plasma concentrations many times higher than those seen after administration of therapeutic dosages. Similarly, relative to placebo, fexofenadine did not affect mean QTc in patients given dosages of up to 480 mg/day for 2 weeks or in volunteers who received up to 800 mg/day for 6 days or 240 mg/day for 12 months. In a double-blind clinical trial, oral fexofenadine 120 or 180mg once daily controlled symptoms in patients with seasonal allergic rhinitis as effectively as cetirizine. Other double-blind clinical trials showed that fexofenadine 40 to 240mg twice daily was significantly more effective than placebo. Fexofenadine 180 or 240mg once daily was significantly more effective than placebo in patients with chronic idiopathic urticaria. The drug was well tolerated in these clinical trials, with an adverse event profile similar to that seen with placebo. The most common adverse events were headache, throat irritation, viral infection, nausea, dysmenorrhoea, drowsiness, dyspepsia and fatigue.
 ...
PMID:Fexofenadine. 950 46

Second-generation histamine H1 receptor antagonists (antihistamines) have been developed to reduce or eliminate the sedation and anticholinergic adverse effects that occur with older H1 receptor antagonists. This article evaluates second-generation antihistamines, including acrivastine, astemizole, azelastine, cetirizine, ebastine, fexofenadine, ketotifen, loratadine, mizolastine and terfenadine, for significant features that affect choice. In addition to their primary mechanism of antagonising histamine at the H1 receptor, these agents may act on other mediators of the allergic reaction. However, the clinical significance of activity beyond that mediated by histamine H1 receptor antagonism has yet to be demonstrated. Most of the agents reviewed are metabolised by the liver to active metabolites that play a significant role in their effect. Conditions that result in accumulation of astemizole, ebastine and terfenadine may prolong the QT interval and result in torsade de pointes. The remaining agents reviewed do not appear to have this risk. For allergic rhinitis, all agents are effective and the choice should be based on other factors. For urticaria, cetirizine and mizolastine demonstrate superior suppression of wheal and flare at the dosages recommended by the manufacturer. For atopic dermatitis, as adjunctive therapy to reduce pruritus, cetirizine, ketotifen and loratadine demonstrate efficacy. Although current evidence does not suggest a primary role for these agents in the management of asthma, it does support their use for asthmatic patients when there is coexisting allergic rhinitis, dermatitis or urticaria.
 ...
PMID:Second-generation antihistamines: a comparative review. 1040 Apr 11

Ebastine and its active metabolite carebastine show potent antagonism of histamine H1-mediated phenomena in a wide variety of in vitro and in vivo non-clinical experimental models. By contrast, activity is not seen against histamine H2- or H3-mediated, nor acetylcholine- or serotonin-mediated phenomena, and both compounds are virtually without effect in models measuring pharmacological effects on the central nervous system (CNS). Explanation of these observations is found in their high selectivity for the histamine H1 receptor and in their low in vivo potency in displacing [3H]-mepyramine from central histamine H1 receptors, indicating that they do not readily pass the blood-brain barrier. These findings have been mirrored in clinical experimental models where oral doses of ebastine (1-30 mg) showed clear dose-related inhibition of intradermal histamine-induced weal and flare responses, whereas doses of 90 mg were without anticholinergic effects on salivary flow, cardiovascular reflexes or pilocarpine-induced miosis. Furthermore, in an extensive series of controlled studies in specific clinical models for measuring objective effects on the CNS, ebastine in single doses of 10-90 mg and repeated doses of 10-30 mg once daily, had no clinically relevant effects on cognitive performance and visual co-ordination tests, nor on simulated car-tracking tests and real car-driving tests. Nor was their any interaction with ethanol or diazepam. On subjective test parameters (questionnaires and visual analogue scales) there were only a few isolated and random incidences of minor increases in some indices of sedation at the highest doses. Not surprisingly, therefore, the clear therapeutic benefit seen during the extensive and international use of ebastine (5-20 mg once daily) in the treatment of seasonal and perennial rhinitis and chronic idiopathic urticaria, has not been accompanied by signs of drug-induced anticholinergic effects (dry mouth, disturbances of visual accommodation) or sedation, making it an effective and well-tolerated first-line treatment alternative to other second-generation antihistamines.
 ...
PMID:The non-cardiac systemic side-effects of antihistamines: ebastine. 1044 30

There is increasing evidence that histamine may have wider proinflammatory and immunomodulatory activities than previously reported. It may influence several functions of lymphocytes, monocytes, basophils and macrophages, modulating the release of inflammatory mediators and cytokines. These observations have aroused interest in the pharmacology and clinical applications of histamine H1 receptor antagonists and have led to the identification of novel antiinflammatory properties for this class of drugs. Oxatomide, initially characterized as an H1 antagonist, inhibits the secretion of several mediators of inflammation from human basophils and mast cells. In vitro oxatomide inhibits the release of both preformed (histamine and tryptase) and de novo synthesized mediators (leukotriene C4 and prostaglandin D2). The inhibitory effect is not restricted to basophils and mast cells but is also evident on other inflammatory cells such as the neutrophils. In this cell, oxatomide inhibits arachidonic acid mobilization, and leukotriene B4 and platelet-activating factor synthesis, presumably by reducing the activity of cytosolic phospholipase A2. These observations extend the pharmacological activities of oxatomide beyond H1 receptor antagonism and suggest that this drug influences a variety of biochemical events in human inflammatory cells. These antiinflammatory activities help to explain its beneficial effect in various allergic and inflammatory disorders, including urticaria, allergic rhinitis and bronchial asthma.
 ...
PMID:Antiinflammatory effects of oxatomide. 1051 46

Angioedema without urticaria is a clinical syndrome characterised by self-limiting local swellings involving the deeper cutaneous and mucosa tissue layers. Most occurrences of angioedema respond to treatment with a histamine H1 receptor blocker (antihistamine) because they are an allergic or parallergic reaction. A small number of cases do not respond to antihistamine treatment. Such cases tend to occur in patients with deficiency or dysfunction of the inhibitor of the first component of the complement (C1-INH), but more rarely can occur in patients with other conditions and as an adverse drug reaction. Angioedema is well documented in patients taking ACE inhibitors. Considering that 35 to 40 million patients are treated worldwide with ACE inhibitors, this drug class could account for several hundred deaths per year from laryngeal oedema. ACE inhibitors certainly do not mediate angioedema through an allergic or idiosyncratic reaction. For this reason the relationship with this drug is often missed and consequently quite underestimated. Rare instances of angioedema have also been reported with angiotensin II receptor antagonists. This adverse effect seems to occur less frequently with angiotensin II receptor antagonists than with ACE inhibitors. However, we do not know whether this adverse effect has the same mechanism with the 2 classes of medications. Some cases of severe angioedema have been recently reported after treatment with fibrinolytic agents. Scattered reports suggest the possibility of angioedema associated with the use of estrogens, antihypertensive drugs other than ACE inhibitors, and psychotropic drugs. Angioedema can also occur with nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs. Prevention of angioedema relies first on the patient history. Estrogen and ACE inhibitors should be avoided in a patient with congenital or acquired C1-INH deficiency. In the case of ACE inhibitors, the appearance of angioedema following long term treatment does not lessen the probability that such an agent could be the cause. The most important action to take in a patient with suspected drug-induced angioedema is to discontinue the pharmacological agent. Epinephrine (adrenaline), diphenydramine and intravenous methylprednisolone have been proposed for the medical management of airway obstruction, but so far no controlled studies have demonstrated their efficacy. If the acute airway obstruction leads to life-threatening respiratory compromise an emergency cricothyroidotomy must be performed.
 ...
PMID:Drug-induced angioedema without urticaria. 1148 Apr 92

Mizolastine is a new histamine H1 receptor antagonist. Mizolastine 10 mg/day is effective in allergic rhinitis and chronic idiopathic urticaria. In young healthy volunteers, absorption of mizolastine is rapid with time (tmax) to peak concentration (Cmax) of about 1 hour. The absolute bioavailability of mizolastine 10mg tablets is about 65%. Distribution is rapid with a mean distribution half-life of 1.5 to 1.9 hours. Mizolastine is >98% bound to serum albumin and the apparent volume of distribution is between I and 1.4 L/kg. Mizolastine is extensively metabolised by hepatic glucuronidation and sulphation, with no major active metabolite, and excreted in faeces. The terminal elimination half-life (t1/2beta) is 7.3 to 17.1 hours. The apparent oral clearance after a repeated oral dose of 10mg is 6.02 L/h, with steady state reached from day 3 and no accumulation between days 1 and 7. Cmax and area under the concentration-time curve (AUC) are linearly related to dose. Mizolastine appears in vivo to be a relatively weak inhibitor of cytochrome P450 2E1, 2C9, 2D6 and 3A4. In vivo, no interactions were observed between mizolastine and lorazepam or ethanol. A significant increase in Cmax and trough plasma concentration (Cmin) of digoxin occurred after coadministration with mizolastine, without change in AUC, tmax or clinical parameters. Significant increases in theophylline Cmin and AUC were observed after coadministration with mizolastine. Mizolastine Cmax and AUC were increased when coadministered with erythromycin, with no change in t1/2beta. Concomitant administration of mizolastine and ketoconazole increased mizolastine AUC values with no change in t1/2beta. In a population analysis of the pharmacokinetics of mizolastine in patients with allergies, parameter values were close to those in healthy volunteers, except for duration of absorption, which was almost doubled in the patients. Bodyweight and creatinine clearance were found to have little influence on oral clearance, and no influence of liver transaminases was found on clearance and distribution. Pharmacokinetic parameters of mizolastine in elderly individuals were similar to those observed in healthy young volunteers. In patients with chronic renal insufficiency, t1/2beta was prolonged by 47% compared with young healthy volunteers. In patients with cirrhosis, tmax was longer, Cmax was lower, distribution half-life was prolonged and AUC was 50% higher than in healthy volunteers. In pharmacodynamic-pharmacokinetic trials, the percentage of wheal and flare inhibition was found to correlate with mizolastine Cmin values. No direct relationship was found between drug concentrations in skin blister fluid and antihistamine activity.
 ...
PMID:Clinical pharmacokinetics of mizolastine. 1151 Jun 27

Urticaria is a cutaneous syndrome characterized by dermal edema (wheal) and erythema (flare) that blanches with pressure. The lesions typically last less than 24 hours and are usually pruritic. In 1983, Christensen and Maibach summarized the theory behind the use of histamine H1 receptor antagonists (antihistamines) in clinical dermatology. These agents remain the mainstay of treatment for urticaria. This article reviews the medical literature on the effectiveness of antihistamines in urticarial syndromes, including acute, chronic idiopathic and the physical urticarias. Older antihistamines, such as chlorpheniramine and hydroxyzine, are effective in the treatment of urticarias, but they also have marked sedative and anticholinergic effects. Newer nonsedating antihistamines (second-generation antihistamines) have been developed that have reduced adverse effects because they do not cross the blood-brain barrier; these agents (acrivastine, cetirizine, loratadine, mizolastine, fexofenadine, ebastine, azelastine and epinastine) cause significantly less sedation and psychomotor impairment than their older counterparts. A review of the literature reveals that there are few studies which document the efficacy of second-generation antihistamines in the treatment of acute urticaria, a biologic entity that usually resolves within 3 weeks. We did not identify controlled studies that suggested superiority of any antihistamine in the treatment of acute urticaria. Loratadine or cetirizine, and possibly mizolastine, appear to be treatments of choice for chronic idiopathic urticaria. For symptomatic dermatographism, the combination of an antihistamine and an H2 antagonist, e.g. chlorpheniramine and cimetidine, appears to be effective. Very few studies have been conducted on the use of antihistamines in the treatment of cold, cholinergic, and pressure urticaria. Antihistamines are the mainstay of urticarial therapy. This evidence-based review suggests that there are efficacy differences between newer, nonsedating antihistamines and older agents in some forms of the disorder. Clearly, further well-controlled clinical trials in larger numbers of patients are needed to clarify the role of these agents in the treatment of urticaria.
 ...
PMID:Treatment of urticaria. An evidence-based evaluation of antihistamines. 1170 18


1 2 Next >>