Evidence map›Paper›PMID 19943707›Full record

ArticleDrugs2009

Treatment of allergic rhinitis in infants and children: efficacy and safety of second-generation antihistamines and the leukotriene receptor antagonist montelukast.

Hanna Phan, Matthew L Moeller, Milap C Nahata

Registry-linked trialAbstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Drugs, 2009. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT04957927 (Effectiveness of Montelukast Versus Intranasal Fluticasone Propionate in the Management of Allergic Rhinitis Among Children 02 to 05 Years of Age), which is not on this map. Cited by 10 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
10citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
1.6field-weighted citation impact, top 19% 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.

NCT04957927 phase4unknown statusnot on this mapstarted 2020, after this paper: background citation

Effectiveness of Montelukast Versus Intranasal Fluticasone Propionate in the Management of Allergic Rhinitis Among Children 02 to 05 Years of Age

TypeinterventionalSponsorUsama AzharRan2020 to 2021Enrolled60ConditionsAllergic RhinitisArmsEffectiveness of Montelukast Versus Intranasal Fluticasone Propionate in the Management of Allergic Rhinitis Among Children 02 to 05 Years of Age
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

10 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 35 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Add-on histamine receptor-3 antagonist for allergic rhinitis: a double blind randomized crossover trial using the environmental exposure unit.Allergy, asthma, and clinical immunology : official journal of the Canadian Society of Allergy and Clinical Immunology · 2014
    Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.

Hanna PhanThe University of Arizona, Tucson, USA.
Matthew L Moeller
Milap C Nahata
American Association of Colleges of Pharmacy · USUniversity of Arizona · USUniversity of Cincinnati Medical Center · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Allergic rhinitis (AR) affects a large percentage of paediatric patients. With the wide array of available agents, it has become a challenge to choose the most appropriate treatment for patients. Second-generation antihistamines have become increasingly popular because of their comparable efficacy and lower incidence of adverse effects relative to their first-generation counterparts, and the safety and efficacy of this drug class are established in the adult population. Data on the use of the second-generation antihistamines oral cetirizine, levocetirizine, loratadine, desloratadine and fexofenadine, and the leukotriene receptor antagonist montelukast as well as azelastine nasal spray in infants and children are evaluated in this review. These agents have been found to be relatively safe and effective in reducing symptoms associated with AR in children. Alternative dosage forms such as liquids or oral disintegrating tablets are available for most agents, allowing ease of administration to most young children and infants; however, limited data are available regarding use in infants for most agents, except desloratadine, cetirizine and montelukast. Unlike their predecessors, such as astemizole and terfenadine, the newer second-generation antihistamines and montelukast appear to be well tolerated, with absence of cardiotoxicities. Comparative studies are limited to cetirizine versus ketotifen, oxatomide and/or montelukast. Although second-generation antihistamines and montelukast are deemed relatively safe for use in paediatric patients, there are some noteworthy drug interactions to consider when selecting an agent. Given the wide variety of available agents for treatment of AR in paediatric patients, the safety and efficacy data available for specific age groups, type of AR, dosage form availability and cost should be considered when selecting treatment for AR in infants and children.

Indexed as

Drug Administration ScheduleAcetatesAdministration, OralAdultAnti-Allergic AgentsAnti-Asthmatic AgentsAstemizoleCetirizineChildCyclopropanesDrug InteractionsHistamine H1 Antagonists, Non-SedatingHumansKetotifenLeukotriene AntagonistsLoratadineAcetatesAnti-Allergic AgentsAnti-Asthmatic AgentsAstemizoleCetirizineCyclopropanesdesloratadinefexofenadineHistamine H1 Antagonists, Non-SedatingKetotifenLeukotriene AntagonistslevocetirizineLoratadinemontelukastoxatomidePiperazinesQuinolinesSulfidesTabletsTerfenadine

Identifiers

PMID19943707
OpenAlexW200466910

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

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.