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 efficacy and safety of a new non-sedating antihistamine, loratadine (Clarityn, CAS 79794-75-5) 10 mg q.d., was compared to the classical antihistamine, hydroxyzine 25 mg t.i.d. and placebo in a 4-week (optional 12 week) randomized, double-blind, multi-center study in 203 patients with chronic idiopathic urticaria. Efficacy evaluations included weekly physician and patient assessments of pruritus, overall disease condition, and therapeutic response to treatment. Loratadine and hydroxyzine were significantly more effective than placebo and clinically comparable to each other as measured by all efficacy evaluations at each visit. Loratadine was safe and well tolerated with sedation and dry mouth similar to placebo and significantly less than hydroxyzine.
 ...
PMID:Relative efficacy and safety of loratadine, hydroxyzine, and placebo in chronic idiopathic urticaria. 144 78

Loratadine is a new selective peripheral histamine H1-receptor antagonist, that is orally effective, long-acting, and devoid of significant central and autonomic nervous system activity. Its safety and efficacy were evaluated in a 28-day study conducted in patients with chronic idiopathic urticaria. Patients were randomly assigned to one of three treatment groups (loratadine, 10 mg OD; terfenadine, 60 mg BID; or placebo). Evaluation of efficacy included weekly assessments of the individual disease signs and symptoms, the overall disease condition, and therapeutic response to treatment. Throughout the 28-day treatment period progressive improvement was observed in the loratadine and terfenadine treatment groups; however, at each evaluation, loratadine was significantly more effective than placebo (P less than .01) and clinically more effective than terfenadine in reducing disease signs and symptoms. Terfenadine was significantly more effective than placebo at day 7 and endpoint (last valid visit). The overall therapeutic response at the endpoint of treatment was rated as marked or complete relief of symptoms in 64%, 52%, and 25% of the patients in the loratadine, terfenadine, and placebo treatment groups, respectively. Loratadine was well tolerated and comparable to terfenadine and placebo in incidence of adverse experiences. Sedation was reported in one patient each in the terfenadine and placebo treatment groups and an anticholinergic side effect (dry mouth) in one terfenadine-treated patient. No sedative or anticholinergic side effects were observed in patients receiving loratadine. We concluded that loratadine, 10 mg, once daily is a safe and effective treatment for symptomatic relief of chronic idiopathic urticaria.
 ...
PMID:Comparative effects of loratadine and terfenadine in the treatment of chronic idiopathic urticaria. 196 19

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

Loratadine is a new, highly selective, non sedating, H 1-receptor antagonist, without central nervous system activity. In a randomized double-blind, crossover study, we evaluated the effects of loratadine and placebo administered once daily in 184 food intolerant patients affected by urticaria-angioedema. The difference between loratadine and placebo treatment was significant in relieving symptoms. Adverse reactions reported in the treatment were mild, in fact somnolence was reported by 3.4%, dry mouth by 2.2% of patients.
 ...
PMID:[Effectiveness of loratadine vs. placebo in the treatment of urticaria-angioedema syndrome in patients with food allergy]. 835 46

The aim of the study was to assess efficacy and safety of 5 mg loratadine/120 mg pseudoephedrine combination drug in patients with seasonal allergic rhinitis. 30 patients allergic to grass pollen were treated with the new drug (Clarinase) twice a day in 15-day study during grass pollen seasonal. Nasal an non-nasal symptoms were evaluated for efficacy. Loratadine/pseudoephedrine combination effected a significant decrease in total symptoms score as well as individual evaluated symptoms score: nasal stuffiness, itching and discharge, sneezing, eye itching, tearing and redness of the eyes. The treatments was well tolerated. No serious side effects were noticed. The incidence of mild sedation, dry mouth, insomnia and nervousness was only 3 to 7 percent. 5 mg loratadine plus 120 mg pseudoephedrine was safe and effective in relieving the symptoms of allergic rhinitis.
 ...
PMID:[Evaluation of the efficiency and safety of the loratadine with pseudoephedrine combination drug in treatment of seasonal allergic rhinitis]. 963 91

Allergic conjunctivitis is the most common ocular allergic disease. Although very symptomatic it does not endanger vision, and topical antihistamines or chromones are the first choice treatment in clinical practice. Recently, equivalent nanomolar affinities for histamine H and muscarinic M 1 and M3 cloned human receptors have been reported for desloratadine, the active metabolite of loratadine, a widely prescribed antihistamine. This property might enhance its utility in the treatment of asthma, but could induce adverse anticholinergic effects after topical administration. In the present study, we compare the anticholinergic activity of desloratadine with other known muscarinic antagonists and antihistamines on rabbit and guinea-pig iris smooth muscle. Desloratadine was found to be a competitive antagonist (pA2 = 6.67+/-0.09) of carbachol-induced contractions in isolated rabbit iris smooth muscle. Atropine (pA2 = 9.44+/-0.02) and NPC-14695 (pA2 = 9.18+/-0.03) also behaved as competitive antagonists, whereas tiotropium bromide (pD'2 = 9.06+/-0.02) exhibited a non-competitive behaviour in this tissue. Carebastine (pA2 = 5.64+/-0.04) and fexofenadine (pA2 < 4.0) were also studied. After topical administration on the guinea-pig eye conjunctiva, desloratadine produced a potent (ED50 = 2.3 mg/ml) and long lasting mydriasis (> 120 min at the ED50) in conscious animals. Fexofenadine and carebastine were inactive even at the highest concentration tested (10 mg/ml). Atropine (ED50 = 30 microg/ml) and tiotropium bromide (ED50 = 10 microg/ml) were much more potent than desloratadine or pirenzepine (ED50 = 3 mg/ml) in this model. The competitive muscarinic antagonism of desloratadine in vitro, and its potency and duration of action in vivo, suggest that topical treatment of allergic conjunctivitis and rhinitis with desloratadine could produce undesirable peripheral anticholinergic side effects such as mydriasis and xerostomia.
 ...
PMID:Anticholinergic effects of desloratadine, the major metabolite of loratadine, in rabbit and guinea-pig iris smooth muscle. 1042 66

Although antihistamines are highly effective in alleviating many symptoms associated with seasonal allergic rhinitis (SAR), relief from nasal congestion is variable. The efficacy of desloratadine, an effective antihistamine, in combination with pseudoephedrine, a potent nasal decongestant, was evaluated to determine whether combination therapy was more effective than individual component therapy in reducing nasal congestion, as well as other SAR symptoms. This multicenter, randomized, double-blind, three-arm study included 650 patients with SAR. For 2 weeks, patients were administered a combination tablet of desloratadine plus pseudoephedrine (desloratadine/pseudoephedrine, 2.5/120 mg) twice per day (b.i.d.), desloratadine (5 mg) once per day, or pseudoephedrine (120 mg) b.i.d. Patients assessed the severity of their SAR symptoms twice daily on symptom diary cards. The primary variable-change from baseline in the reflective A.M./P.M. total symptom score, excluding nasal congestion-was significantly superior (-6.7) compared with desloratadine (-5.4) or pseudoephedrine (-5.3) alone (p < or = 0.001 versus either group). Secondary efficacy variables including total symptom scores (plus congestion), total nasal symptom scores, and total nonnasal symptom scores were significantly reduced after desloratadine/pseudoephedrine therapy compared with the individual components. The most frequently reported adverse events were insomnia, headache, and dry mouth. Desloratadine/pseudoephedrine, 2.5/120 mg b.i.d., therapy was more effective in reducing total symptom scores of SAR, including nasal congestion, than were the individual components. These results support the use of this combination therapy over desloratadine or pseudoephedrine alone.
 ...
PMID:Efficacy and safety of desloratadine/pseudoephedrine tablet, 2.5/120 mg two times a day, versus individual components in the treatment of patients with seasonal allergic rhinitis. 1645 May 74


1