ArticleClinical drug investigation2008
Non-interventional study comparing treatment satisfaction in patients treated with antihistamines.
Article in Clinical drug investigation, 2008. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
10 citing papers in PubMed, 34 citations in OpenAlex.
- High-risks drug adverse events associated with Cetirizine and Loratadine for the treatment of allergic diseases: A retrospective pharmacovigilance study based on the FDA adverse event reporting system database.Clinical and translational allergy · 2024Article
- Impact of increasing treatment rates on cost-effectiveness of subcutaneous immunotherapy (SCIT) in respiratory allergy: a decision analytic modelling approach.The European journal of health economics : HEPAC : health economics in prevention and care · 2018Article
- Intranasal exposure to monoclonal antibody Fab fragments to Japanese cedar pollen Cry j1 suppresses Japanese cedar pollen-induced allergic rhinitis.British journal of pharmacology · 2016Article
- A survey of clinical features of allergic rhinitis in adults.Medical science monitor : international medical journal of experimental and clinical research · 2014Article
- Comparison of levocetirizine pharmacokinetics after single doses of levocetirizine oral solution and cetirizine dry syrup in healthy Japanese male subjects.Journal of drug assessment · 2014Article
- Pharmacology of antihistamines.Indian journal of dermatology · 2013Article
- Examining the utilization and tolerability of the non-sedating antihistamine levocetirizine in England using prescription-event monitoring data.Drug safety · 2011Article
- Pharmacology of antihistamines.The World Allergy Organization journal · 2011Article
- Evaluation of treatment satisfaction in children with allergic disease treated with an antihistamine: an international, non-interventional, retrospective study.Clinical drug investigation · 2010Article
- Hydro-alcoholic extract of Raphanus sativus L. var niger attenuates bleomycin-induced pulmonary fibrosis via decreasing transforming growth factor β1 level.Research in pharmaceutical sciencesArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND
objectiveAllergic rhinitis and urticaria are common allergic disorders that may affect approximately 15% of people at some time in their lives. Antihistamines are the most widely used therapeutic interventions for these disorders but the newer generation agents have differing pharmacokinetic characteristics that may result in different patient satisfaction and preferences. The objective of this study was to investigate patients' and physicians' satisfaction with their current antihistamine treatment for allergic disease.
methodsIn an observational study, physicians in nine European countries completed questionnaires evaluating 7,274 patients treated with an oral antihistamine. The satisfaction of patients and physicians with the efficacy and tolerability of treatment was rated on a visual analogue scale. In addition, the proportion of patients satisfied with treatment (overall satisfaction) and willing to continue treatment with the same antihistamine were assessed. Safety and tolerability data were also gathered.
resultsThe results of this study indicate that modern antihistamines are generally considered effective and well tolerated by patients. In general, levocetirizine scored significantly higher in terms of perception of efficacy, tolerability and overall satisfaction. In terms of tolerability, three-quarters of patients were 'very satisfied' and a further fifth were moderately satisfied with levocetirizine and almost all (95%) were happy to continue treatment. Overall, the most commonly reported adverse event in this study was somnolence, a well known effect of antihistamines. The rate of somnolence in the levocetirizine group (3.8%) was similar to that for fexofenadine (both doses) and desloratadine, two products which are considered to be nonsedating antihistamines, and significantly less than half the rate for cetirizine.
conclusionLevocetirizine is considered an effective and well tolerated option for treating allergic disease by patients and physicians alike, particularly when the best available effectiveness and tolerability are required.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.