Gene/Protein Disease Symptom Drug Enzyme Compound
Pivot Concepts:   Target Concepts:
Query: UMLS:C0043352 (xerostomia)
 4,250 document(s) hit in 31,850,051 MEDLINE articles (0.00 seconds)

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.
 ...
PMID:Suppression of seasonal allergic rhinitis symptoms with daily hydroxyzine. 36 20

Oral ebastine, 10 mg once daily for seven days, and placebo were compared as treatment for active perennial allergic rhinitis in 151 patients in a multicenter, randomized, double-blind trial. Ebastine treatment produced a significant reduction in the incidence and severity of most symptoms associated with perennial rhinitis. Tolerability was similar in the two treatment groups. The incidences of drowsiness and dry mouth were not more frequent in the patients treated with the active drug.
 ...
PMID:Ebastine in perennial allergic rhinitis. 168 73

In a double-blind, multicenter study, we compared the effects of SCH 434 (Claritin-D; Schering Corp., Kenilworth, N.J.), a new sustained-release, combination antihistamine/decongestant medication, with the effects of its individual components and placebo in 435 patients with seasonal allergic rhinitis. SCH 434 contains 5 mg of loratadine, a nonsedating antihistamine, and 120 mg of pseudoephedrine as the decongestant component. Administered twice daily in this study, SCH 434 effected a 50% decrease in total symptom scores at day 4 and was significantly (p less than or equal to 0.03) more effective than the components alone or the placebo. Loratadine or pseudoephedrine alone, with 43% and 33% decline in symptom scores, respectively, also was more effective than placebo (p less than 0.05). As expected, pseudoephedrine alone was more effective than loratadine (p less than 0.01) in relieving nasal stuffiness; SCH 434 was more effective (p less than or equal to 0.01) than placebo and loratadine in relieving nasal stuffiness. All treatments were safe and well tolerated, although insomnia and dry mouth were noted in a significant number of patients who received either SCH 434 or pseudoephedrine. No serious side effects were noted. The incidence of sedation did not differ significantly among the four treatment groups. We conclude that SCH 434 is a safe and effective treatment for symptoms of seasonal allergic rhinitis. The combination drug (SCH 434) was better than its components for some, but not all, symptoms.
 ...
PMID:SCH 434: a new antihistamine/decongestant for seasonal allergic rhinitis. 247 18

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.
 ...
PMID:Loratadine-pseudoephedrine combination versus placebo in patients with seasonal allergic rhinitis. 252 98

Loratadine, a new nonsedating antihistamine, was evaluated for efficacy and safety in 228 patients with perennial allergic rhinitis. Taken at a dose of 10 mg once daily, loratadine was significantly more effective than placebo and comparable to terfenadine, 60 mg taken twice daily, in reducing combined symptom scores in this patient population. Efficacy was maintained throughout the 28-day course of treatment. The overall incidence of side effects with loratadine was low (14%) with few occurrences of sedation (3%) and dry mouth (4%).
 ...
PMID:Evaluation of the efficacy and safety of loratadine in perennial allergic rhinitis. 256 43

The chemistry, pharmacology, pharmacokinetics, clinical efficacy, adverse effects, and dosages of the nonsedating histamine H1-receptor antagonists terfenadine, astemizole, loratadine, and acrivastine are reviewed. Terfenadine and astemizole are chemically unrelated to histamine H1-receptor antagonists such as diphenhydramine and chlorpheniramine. Loratadine is structurally related to the antihistamine azatadine, and acrivastine is a side-chain-reduced metabolite of the antihistamine triprolidine. Like other histamine H1-receptor antagonists, they competitively block histamine receptor sites rather than inhibiting histamine release. All four drugs have relatively long half-lives and are rapidly absorbed after oral administration. Terfenadine, astemizole, and loratadine are metabolized extensively in the liver; terfenadine and astemizole are both 97% protein bound. Terfenadine 60 mg twice daily has been shown to be as effective as conventional antihistamines for the treatment of seasonal allergic rhinitis. In clinical trials, astemizole 10 mg daily was comparable to or better than chlorpheniramine for treatment of chronic rhinitis. Both terfenadine and astemizole were effective for treatment of chronic urticaria. For treatment of seasonal allergic rhinitis, loratadine combined with pseudoephedrine may be preferable to triprolidine-pseudoephedrine and acrivastine-pseudoephedrine combinations that require more frequent dosing. Acrivastine must be administered more frequently than the other nonsedating antihistamines. None of these four agents impairs psychomotor activity. Infrequently reported adverse effects include dry mouth, skin reactions, and weight gain. The absence of substantial sedative effects and the less-frequent dosing schedules make these agents good alternatives to the classic antihistamines for treatment of seasonal and chronic rhinitis and chronic urticaria.
 ...
PMID:Nonsedating histamine H1-receptor antagonists. 256 12

Astemizole, a new histamine H1 receptor antagonist, was tested in a double-blind cross-over comparison study with chlorpheniramine maleate, a very effective conventional H1 antagonist, in patients with chronic allergic rhinitis. Astemizole was found to be equally effective, yet there was a significant decrease in the side effects of sleepiness (P less than .01) and dry mouth (P less than .05). Astemizole has a completely different structure and binding curves from terfenadine. It is approved for clinical use in the United Kingdom, Canada, and many European countries.
 ...
PMID:Efficacy of an H1 antagonist, astemizole, for chronic allergic rhinitis. 288 23

The efficacy and safety of an extended-release combination of loratadine plus pseudoephedrine sulfate (SCH 434) was compared with that of a tablet containing chlorpheniramine maleate plus pseudoephedrine sulfate (CTM-D) in 131 patients with symptomatic seasonal allergic rhinitis. Patients were randomly assigned to receive either SCH 434 (loratadine 5 mg and pseudoephedrine sulfate 120 mg) or CTM-D (chlorpheniramine maleate 12 mg and pseudoephedrine sulfate 120 mg) twice daily for 2 weeks. Evaluations were made after 3, 7, and 14 days of treatment. Demographics (age, race, sex, and duration of seasonal allergic rhinitis) and baseline total symptom scores were comparable between groups. Both combination products were effective in relieving the symptoms of allergic rhinitis. Improvement in total symptom scores was 54% on day 3 and 65% on day 14 in the SCH 434 group versus 57% on day 3 and 64% on day 14 in the CTM-D group. Individual symptom scores (nasal discharge, stuffiness, nasal itching, sneezing, and ocular symptoms) responded similarly. A smaller proportion of patients in the SCH 434 group reported side effects, especially dry mouth (7% vs 19%, P = 0.07), fatigue (6% vs 25%, P < 0.01), and sedation (7% vs 22%, P < 0.03). In conclusion, the combination of loratadine plus pseudoephedrine sulfate was equally as effective as a classic antihistamine (chlorpheniramine maleate) plus pseudoephedrine sulfate but had a lower incidence of side effects.
 ...
PMID:Comparative study of SCH 434 and CTM-D in the treatment of seasonal allergic rhinitis. 791 2

The efficacy and safety of loratadine and terfenadine in the treatment of 3- to 6-year-old children with seasonal allergic rhinitis were compared in a third-party-blind, randomized, parallel-group study. A total of 96 children were included in the efficacy analysis: 49 children received 5 or 10 mg of loratadine once daily, and 47 received 15 mg of terfenadine twice daily, for 14 days. The mean total score for both nasal and non-nasal symptoms was decreased significantly from baseline at days 3, 7, and 14 in both treatment groups. At endpoint, these scores had improved 73% in each group. There were no statistically significant differences between the two groups in the total symptom scores at any point during the study. Both treatments were effective in relieving individual nasal and nonnasal symptoms. Therapeutic response to treatment was good or excellent in 82% of loratadine-treated children and in 60% of terfenadine-treated children. Few adverse events were reported during the study; all were mild or moderate and were not significantly different between the two treatment groups. There were no reports of sedation or dry mouth in either group. Once-daily treatment with 5 or 10 mg of loratadine was as effective as twice-daily treatment with 15 mg of terfenadine in improving the symptoms of seasonal allergic rhinitis in children 3 to 6 years old. Both treatments were well tolerated.
 ...
PMID:A comparative study of the efficacy and safety of loratadine syrup and terfenadine suspension in the treatment of 3- to 6-year-old children with seasonal allergic rhinitis. 826 52

A double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled, parallel trial was conducted to compare the efficacy and safety of terfenadine, 60 mg (immediate-release)/pseudoephedrine hydrochloride, 120 mg (controlled-release) (T/Ps) and clemastine fumarate, 1.34 mg (immediate-release)/phenylpropanolamine, 75 mg (sustained-release) (C/Ph) in a combination tablet b.i.d. in 178 patients (12-59 years of age) with symptoms of seasonal allergic rhinitis. After seven days of treatment, the total symptom scores recorded in the diaries of 175 patients showed that both therapies had a highly significant overall treatment effect when compared with placebo (P < or = .02). The overall level of improvement, as well as improvement of individual symptoms, was similar with the two therapies. Total symptom scores assigned by physicians to 170 patients showed significant and similar levels of improvement with both therapies when compared with placebo (P < .01). The two therapies were also similar on physicians' evaluations of overall effectiveness. Both therapies relieved most histamine-mediated symptoms as well as nasal congestion, although only T/Ps showed improvement of the latter symptom in both the patients' diaries and physicians' evaluations. Among 178 patients, drowsiness and fatigue occurred more often in the C/Ph group (25% and 11.7% for the two adverse events, respectively) than in the T/Ps group (10.2% and 1.7%, respectively). The incidence of insomnia and dry mouth/nose/throat was higher with T/Ps (23.7% and 11.9%, respectively) than with C/Ph (6.7% and 3.3%, respectively). No serious or unexpected adverse events were reported. These results indicate that T/Ps and C/Ph are both superior to placebo and equally effective in the treatment of symptoms of seasonal allergic rhinitis.(ABSTRACT TRUNCATED AT 250 WORDS)
 ...
PMID:Safety and efficacy of terfenadine/pseudoephedrine versus clemastine/phenylpropanolamine in the treatment of seasonal allergic rhinitis. 849 30


1 2 3 Next >>