Evidence map›Paper›PMID 10597870›Full record

ReviewDrug safety1999

Cardiac effects of ebastine and other antihistamines in humans.

A J Moss, J Morganroth

Erratum issuedAbstract readReview
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in Drug safety, 1999. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Cited by 9 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
9citing papers in PubMed
1.6field-weighted citation impact, top 17% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

9 citing papers in PubMed, 32 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Trial
  2. Trial
  3. Trial
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

  • Erratum issued
5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

2 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

A J MossUniversity of Rochester Medical Center, New York, USA.
J Morganroth
Premier Research Group · USUniversity of Rochester Medical Center · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The electrocardiographic effects of ebastine and its active metabolite, carebastine, have been studied alone and in relevant drug-interaction studies in various patient populations. The overall cardiac tolerability of ebastine is excellent. In ebastine dose-ranging studies in adults and children, there were no meaningful dose-related changes in the QTc interval. At high doses of ebastine (5 to 10 times the recommended dose), a modest 10.3 msec increase in QTc was observed. Recommended doses of ebastine had no meaningful effect on QTc in the elderly or in patients with renal or hepatic insufficiency. Interaction studies involving ebastine with ketoconazole revealed a significant increase in the serum ebastine concentration and in the elimination half-life of ebastine, with a modest 18.1 msec increase in QTc (approximately 10 msec above ketoconazole alone) and a plateau QTc-ebastine relationship at higher ebastine levels. Similar, though more minor, QTc findings were observed during coadministration of ebastine with erythromycin. No QTc effects were noted when ebastine was administered with theophylline, and the QTc was similar when ebastine was administered with or without food. These findings indicate that ebastine is well tolerated and, in contrast to terfenadine and astemizole, has no clinically meaningful effect on the QTc interval even at high serum concentrations. As with other 'safe' antihistamines, which have shown similar modest increases in QTc when coadministered with ketoconazole, caution should be exercised when administering ebastine to patients having the long QT syndrome or hypokalaemia, and in patients receiving azole antifungals or macrolide antibacterials.

Indexed as

AgedButyrophenonesChildDrug InteractionsElectrocardiographyHeart DiseasesHistamine H1 AntagonistsHumansPiperidinesButyrophenonesebastineHistamine H1 AntagonistsPiperidines

Identifiers

PMID10597870
OpenAlexW1976455294

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.