Analysis of disease-dependent sedative profiles of H(1)-antihistamines by large-scale surveillance using the visual analog scale

Sedation is the most frequent side effect of H(1)-antihistamines, and, sometimes, it may be life-threatening for patients. Evaluation of the sedative properties of H(1)-antihistamines is important to improve the patients' quality of life (QOL). Therefore, we carried out a large-scale surveillance quantified through a questionnaire using visual analog scale (VAS) from 1,742 patients. The results showed that the degree of sleepiness caused by some nonsedative second-generation antihistamines, including fexofenadine, olopatadine and cetirizine, was disease dependent. In atopic dermatitis, an unexpectedly low VAS score of sleepiness was obtained for the first-generation antihistamine d-chlorpheniramine, which is similar to those obtained for bepotastine and epinastine. d-Chlorpheniramine also showed a high VAS score in efficacy. Meanwhile, fexofenadine showed a higher VAS score of sleepiness in atopic dermatitis than those obtained in the other allergic diseases including allergic rhinitis, urticaria and asthma. In asthma, a higher VAS score of sleepiness was found for olopatadine, ebastine and cetirizine, when compared with d-chlorpheniramine. On the other hand, bepotastine showed the lowest VAS score for sleepiness. Our findings suggest the existence of unknown factors influencing the sedative properties of H(1)-antihistamines. Therefore, appropriate H(1)-antihistamines may need to be selected, depending on allergic diseases, to improve patients' QOL.     

Central effects of fexofenadine and cetirizine: measurement of psychomotor performance, subjective sleepiness, and brain histamine H1-receptor occupancy using 11C-doxepin positron emission tomography

Histamine H1-receptor (H1R) antagonists, or antihistamines, often induce sedative side effects when used for the treatment of allergic disorders. This study compared the sedative profiles of the second-generation antihistamines, fexofenadine and cetirizine, using 3 different criteria: subjective sleepiness evaluated by the Stanford Sleepiness Scale, objective psychomotor tests (simple and choice reaction time tests and visual discrimination tests at 4 different exposure durations), and measurement of histamine H1-receptor occupancy (H1RO) in the brain. Subjective sleepiness and psychomotor performance were measured in 20 healthy Japanese volunteers at baseline and 90 min after administration of fexofenadine 120 mg or cetirizine 20 mg in a double-blind, placebo-controlled crossover study. Hydroxyzine 30 mg was included as a positive control. H1RO was measured using positron emission tomography (PET) with (11)C-doxepin in 12 of the 20 subjects, and a further 11 volunteers were recruited to act as controls. In psychomotor tests, fexofenadine was not significantly different from placebo and significantly less impairing than cetirizine on some tasks, as well as significantly less impairing than hydroxyzine on all tasks. For subjective sleepiness, fexofenadine was not significantly different from placebo, whereas cetirizine showed a trend toward increased sleepiness compared with fexofenadine and placebo. H1RO was negligible with fexofenadine (-0.1%) but moderately high with cetirizine (26.0%). In conclusion, fexofenadine 120 mg is distinguishable from cetirizine 20 mg, as assessed by H1RO and psychomotor testing.     

The effects of a sedative antihistamine,d-chlorpheniramine,on visuomotor spatial discrimination and regional brain activity as measured by positron emission tomography (PET)

Although most people taking antihistamines have experienced sedation and impaired performance, the neural correlates of these sedative properties are not well understood in man. Brain imaging can be used to demonstrate how regional brain activities are altered during such sedative effects. The aim of this study was to visualize the brain mechanism of impaired visuomotor spatial cognition with orally administered d-chlorpheniramine, a first-generation sedative antihistamine, using H(2) (15)O and positron emission tomography (PET). Normal subjects were randomly assigned to two groups (chlorpheniramine and placebo) and performed a spatial discrimination task after the oral administration of 6 mg d-chlorpheniramine or a placebo. The administration of d-chlorpheniramine impaired visuomotor spatial discrimination and altered cortical and subcortical activity. Decreased and increased activities were observed in the right parietal cortex (BA 40) which is related to visuomotor spatial cognition and the posterior cingulate cortex which constitutes the attention system of the brain, respectively. In particular, the brain activities of BA 40 were negatively and positively correlated to those of bilateral caudate nuclei and the dorsolateral prefrontal cortex, respectively. These findings clearly suggest that the alteration in the cortical and subcortical activity contributes to impaired spatial cognition caused by treatment with d-chlorpheniramine.     

Clinical pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics of desloratadine, fexofenadine and levocetirizine : a comparative review

Second-generation histamine H(1) receptor antagonists were developed to provide efficacious treatment of allergic rhinitis (AR) and chronic idiopathic urticaria (CIU) while decreasing adverse effects associated with first-generation agents. When comparing the efficacy and safety profiles of the newest second-generation antihistamines - desloratadine, fexofenadine and levocetirizine - many pharmacological and clinical criteria must be considered. Most importantly, these elements should not be evaluated separately but, rather, as parts of a puzzle that create a whole picture. As a class, second-generation antihistamines are highly selective for the H(1) receptor. Some bind to it with high affinity, although there is marked heterogeneity among the various compounds. They have a limited effect on the CNS, and clinical studies have noted almost no significant drug-drug interactions in the agents studied. No major cytochrome P450 inhibition has been reported with desloratadine, fexofenadine and levocetirizine, and the bioavailability of desloratadine is minimally affected by drugs interfering with transporter molecules. Of the second-generation antihistamines, desloratadine has the greatest binding affinity for the H(1) receptor. The use of desloratadine, fexofenadine and levocetirizine is not associated with clinically relevant antimuscarinic effects. Desloratadine and fexofenadine do not impair cognitive or psychomotor functioning and are comparable with placebo in terms of somnolence. Based on these pharmacological characteristics, as well as clinical endpoints such as symptom scores, quality-of-life surveys, inflammatory cell counts and investigators' global evaluations, we conclude that desloratadine, fexofenadine and levocetirizine are all efficacious treatments for AR and CIU. However, differences among the antihistamines in relation to a lack of significant interaction with drug transporter molecules and somnolence in excess of placebo may provide some advantages for the overall profile of desloratadine compared with fexofenadine and levocetirizine.     

Efficacy and tolerability of newer antihistamines in the treatment of allergic conjunctivitis

Treatment for allergic conjunctivitis has markedly expanded in recent years, providing opportunities for more focused therapy, but often leaving both physicians and patients confused over the variety of options. As monotherapy, oral antihistamines are an excellent choice when attempting to control multiple early-phase, and some late-phase, allergic symptoms in the eyes, nose and pharynx. Unfortunately, despite their efficacy in relief of allergic symptoms, systemic antihistamines may result in unwanted adverse effects, such as drowsiness and dry mouth. Newer second-generation antihistamines (cetirizine, fexofenadine, loratadine and desloratadine) are preferred over older first-generation antihistamines in order to avoid the sedative and anticholinergic effects that are associated with first-generation agents. When the allergic symptom or complaint, such as ocular pruritus, is isolated, focused therapy with topical (ophthalmic) antihistamines is often efficacious and clearly superior to systemic antihistamines, either as monotherapy or in conjunction with an oral or intranasal agent.Topical antihistaminic agents not only provide faster and superior relief than systemic antihistamines, but they may also possess a longer duration of action than other classes including vasoconstrictors, pure mast cell stabilisers, NSAIDs and corticosteroids. Many antihistamines have anti-inflammatory properties as well. Some of this anti-inflammatory effect seen with 'pure' antihistamines (levocabastine and emedastine) may be directly attributed to the blocking of the histamine receptor that has been shown to downregulate intercellular adhesion molecule-1 expression and, in turn, limit chemotaxis of inflammatory cells. Some topical multiple-action histamine H(1)-receptor antagonists (olopatadine, ketotifen, azelastine and epinastine) have been shown to prevent activation of neutrophils, eosinophils and macrophages, or inhibit release of leukotrienes, platelet-activating factors and other inflammatory mediators. Topical vasoconstrictor agents provide rapid relief, especially for redness; however, the relief is often short-lived, and overuse of vasoconstrictors may lead to rebound hyperaemia and irritation. Another class of topical agents, mast cell stabilisers (sodium cromoglicate [cromolyn sodium], nedocromil and lodoxamide), may be considered; however, they generally have a much slower onset of action. The efficacy of mast cell stabilisers may be attributed to anti-inflammatory properties in addition to mast cell stabilisation. In the class of topical NSAIDs, ketorolac has been promoted for ocular itching but has been found to be inferior for relief of allergic conjunctivitis when compared with olopatadine and emedastine. Lastly, topical corticosteroids may be considered for severe seasonal ocular allergy symptoms, although long-term use should be avoided because of risks of ocular adverse effects, including glaucoma and cataract formation.     

Effect of the second-generation antihistamine, fexofenadine, on cough reflex sensitivity and pulmonary function

AIMS: Current guidelines recommend the use of first-generation antihistamines for the treatment of cough due to rhinitis/postnasal drip syndrome. The antitussive activity of the second-generation antihistamine, fexofenadine, has not been investigated. Therefore, we evaluated the effect of fexofenadine on capsaicin-induced cough in healthy volunteers and in subjects with acute viral upper respiratory tract infection (URI). METHODS: Twelve healthy volunteers and 12 subjects with URI underwent pulmonary function testing and capsaicin cough challenge on two separate days, 2 h after ingesting 180 mg fexofenadine or matched placebo. Subjects inhaled single, vital-capacity breaths of capsaicin aerosol, administered in incremental doubling concentrations, until the concentration inducing five or more coughs (C5) was determined. RESULTS: In both subject groups, C5 was not significantly different after fexofenadine compared to placebo. In subjects with URI, pulmonary function studies were also similar. In healthy volunteers, however, FEV1 and FEF(25-75), pulmonary function parameters reflecting the degree of airway dilatation, were significantly increased after fexofenadine. Mean (95% CI) values for FEV1(L) after fexofenadine and placebo were 3.16 (2.77, 3.55) and 3.08 (2.69, 3.47), respectively (P = 0.017). Mean values for FEF(25-75)(L/s) were 3.49 (3.10, 3.88) and 3.26 (2.79, 3.72), respectively (P = 0.029). CONCLUSIONS: Fexofenadine demonstrated no antitussive activity against capsaicin-induced cough in healthy volunteers and subjects with URI. The ineffectiveness of fexofenadine in suppressing cough probably reflects the lack of anticholinergic activity and central nervous system penetrance that is characteristic of first-generation antihistamines. The mild bronchodilation induced by fexofenadine in healthy volunteers is of unclear clinical significance and requires further investigation.     

A combined neurophysiological and behavioural study into the stimulating effects of fexofenadine on performance

Antihistamines are known for their sedative effects. However, some studies suggested mild stimulant effects in the case of fexofenadine. The goals of this study are to examine whether fexofenadine possesses stimulating properties and to determine whether such stimulating effects are related to workload. Sixteen healthy volunteers received a single dose of 180 and 360 mg fexofenadine and placebo on separate test days. Drug effects were assessed using a divided attention task (DAT), continuous performance task (CPT) and motor choice reaction time test (MCRT). Sensitivity of the tasks was increased by manipulating the workload during task performance. Event Related brain Potentials (ERPs) were measured in the DAT and CPT to study the underlying neurophysiological processes. An interaction effect of Treatment and Workload was found on tracking performance in the DAT and on movement time in the MCRT. Performance on the DAT was less affected by increments in workload after fexofenadine as compared to placebo. P1 and P3 latency were affected by Treatment x Workload and Treatment respectively and indicated faster attentional and information processing latencies following fexofenadine treatment. Treatment did not influence performance in the CPT task or in the ERPs measured during this task. The MCRT demonstrated faster movement times following fexofenadine treatment. These results suggest that although the neurophysiological data indicate central nervous system (CNS) activation after fexofenadine treatment, the magnitude of the centrally activating effects is too small to produce relevant performance improvement at the behavioural level.     

Repeated-dose effects of mequitazine, cetirizine and dexchlorpheniramine on driving and psychomotor performance

AIMS: Previous studies have demonstrated that the antihistamines mequitazine, cetirizine and dexchlorpheniramine produce mild sedation after single doses. It is unknown, however, whether acute sedation persists after repeated dosing. Therefore, this study assessed the effects of repeated dosing of these antihistamines on driving and psychomotor performance. METHODS: Sixteen healthy volunteers were treated with mequitazine 10 mg q.a.m., cetirizine 10 mg q.a.m., dexchlorpheniramine Repetab 6 mg b.i.d. and placebo for four separate 8-day periods. Drug effects were assessed on days 1 and 8 using on-the-road driving tests (highway driving and car following), psychomotor tests (tracking and divided attention) and subjective questionnaires. RESULTS: Dexchlorpheniramine and mequitazine significantly impaired driving performance on the highway driving test on the first day; dexchlorpheniramine increased Standard Deviation of Lateral Position by 2 cm [95% confidence interval (CI) 0.5, 3.8] and mequitazine by 2.5 cm (CI 1.0, 4.3). These effects on driving performance disappeared after 8 days of treatment. No effect of treatment was found on car following, tracking and divided attention. Although subjective ratings confirmed that subjects knew their driving had been impaired in the mequitazine and dexchlorpheniramine condition after completion of the highway driving test on day 1, they did not expect their driving to be affected before the start of the test. Cetirizine did not impair performance on any of the tests. CONCLUSIONS: Single doses of mequitazine 10 mg and dexchlorpheniramine Repetab 6 mg cause mild driving impairment. However, when taken over several days, the impairing effect wears off, possibly as a result of tolerance.     

Acute pharmacological effects of temazepam,diphenhydramine, and valerian in healthy elderly subjects

Elderly insomniacs are often treated pharmacologically with benzodiazepines, antihistamines, or natural products. A double-blind, randomized, crossover, placebo-controlled study was performed to assess the comparative pharmacodynamics of single doses of temazepam (15 and 30 mg), diphenhydramine (50 and 75 mg), and valerian (400 and 800 mg) in 14 healthy elderly volunteers (mean age, 71.6 years; range, 65-89). Assessments were made at 0, 0.5, 1, 2, 3, 4, 6, and 8 hours postdosing with use of validated measures of subjective sedation and mood (visual analogue scales, Tufts University Benzodiazepine scale) and psychomotor performance (manual tracking and digit symbol substitution tests). Temazepam had dose-dependent effects on sedation and psychomotor ability with a distinct time course. Temazepam 30 mg had the most detrimental effect on psychomotor ability (p < 0.001 compared with all other treatments). Temazepam 30 mg and both doses of diphenhydramine elicited significantly greater sedation than placebo (p < 0.05, all), and temazepam had the greatest effect. There was no difference in sedation scores between 50 and 75 mg diphenhydramine. Sedative effects were slightly lesser with 15 mg temazepam and were not significant in comparison with placebo. Psychomotor impairment was evident after administration of 75 mg diphenhydramine in comparison with placebo on the manual tracking test (p < 0.05); this was less than the impairment with 30 mg temazepam (p < 0.001) but similar to that with 15 mg temazepam (NS). No psychomotor impairment was detected with 50 mg diphenhydramine. Valerian was not different from placebo on any measure of psychomotor performance or sedation.     

Effects of second-generation histamine H1 receptor antagonists on the sleep-wakefulness cycle in rats

The present study was performed to examine the sedative effects of second-generation histamine H(1) receptor antagonist using power spectrum analysis in the rat. Similar to ketotifen, olopatadine caused a decrease in sleep latency at a dose of 50 mg/kg, while epinastine and cetirizine showed no significant effect even at a dose of 50 mg/kg. On the other hand, no significant difference was observed in the total times of wakefulness, non-rapid eye movement sleep and rapid eye movement sleep by any drugs used in the experiments. The number of sleep phases and interval between sleep phases were also unchanged by these drugs. Ketotifen and olopatadine inhibited [(3)H]mepyramine binding to rat brain homogenates in parallel with a decrease in sleep latency. No significant effect was observed with epinastine and cetirizine on [(3)H]mepyramine binding. These findings suggest that the differences in the central nervous system (CNS) depressant effect observed in second generation H(1) receptor antagonists may be due to their liability to penetrate into the CNS.     

Some pharmacokinetic aspects of the lipophilic terfenadine and zwitterionic fexofenadine in humans

Fexofenadine, an active metabolite of the second-generation histamine H1 receptor antagonist (antihistamine) terfenadine, does not have the disadvantage of QT prolongation. In addition, unlike first-generation antihistamines, it is associated with few CNS adverse effects. Chemically, fexofenadine has a zwitterionic structure that makes it an interesting molecule for use as an oral drug. Fexo-fenadine has negligible hepatic metabolism in humans, and is recovered mainly in the faeces in an unchanged form after oral administration. The absolute oral bioavailability of fexofenadine in humans is not known because of a lack of studies of intravenous administration of this agent. Its apparent elimination half-life (t1/2) ranges from 3 to 17 hours and is highly dependent on study design, i.e. the length of blood sampling. This large discrepancy might be associated with a 'flip-flop' phenomenon caused by slow absorption of the zwitterionic molecule. This review summarises the available literature related to the absorption, elimination and excretion of fexofenadine and terfenadine. Based on these data, the volume of distribution, t1/2 and oral bioavailability of fexofenadine in humans are estimated. Understanding these pharmacokinetic aspects of this drug might be very useful for medicinal chemists utilising fexofenadine/terfenadine as an example for designing zwitterionic compounds to combat cardiotoxicity and other issues related to basic and lipophilic molecules.     

A double-blind, placebo-controlled investigation of the effects of fexofenadine, loratadine and promethazine on cognitive and psychomotor function

AIMS: To assess whether fexofenadine in a range of doses from 80 to 180 mg has any disruptive effects on aspects of psychomotor and cognitive function in comparison with placebo, loratadine and promethazine, an antihistamine known to produce psychomotor and cognitive impairment. METHODS: Twenty-four healthy volunteers received fexofenadine 80 mg, 120 mg and 180 mg, loratadine 10 mg, promethazine 30 mg (as a positive internal control) and placebo in a six-way crossover, double-blind study. Following each dose, subjects were required to perform a series of tests of cognitive function and psychomotor performance at 1.5, 3, 6, 9, 12 and 24 h post dose. The test battery included critical flicker fusion (CFF), choice reaction time (CRT) and assessment of subjective sedation (LARS). Overall levels of activity were monitored by means of wrist mounted actigraphs throughout each of the 24 h experimental periods. RESULTS: Fexofenadine at all doses tested was not statistically different from placebo in any of the tests used and loratadine did not cause any significant impairment of cognitive function. Significant impairments were found following promethazine. Promethazine caused a significant reduction in CFF threshold and this effect was evident up to 12 h post dose (P<0.05). There was a significant increase in recognition reaction time at 3 and 6 h post promethazine administration, and the drug caused a significant (P<0. 002) increase in the percentage of 'sleep-like' activity from actigraph records during the daytime. CONCLUSIONS: Fexofenadine at doses up to 180 mg appears free from disruptive effects on aspects of psychomotor and cognitive function in a study where the psychometric assessments have been shown to be sensitive to impairment, as evidenced by the effects of the verum control promethazine 30 mg.     

Safety and tolerability of treatments for allergic rhinitis in children.

Allergic rhinitis is a common condition in adults and children and can have a large impact on patients' health and quality of life. The aim of current allergic rhinitis therapies is to treat the subjective symptoms and to improve objective measures of the disease. Of the available treatment options for paediatric allergic rhinitis, the newer oral antihistamines and intranasal corticosteroids are first-line treatments.First-generation antihistamines are associated with unwanted adverse effects such as cardiotoxicity, sedation and impairment of psychomotor function. Despite results from studies using first-generation antihistamines demonstrating impairment of cognitive and academic function in children, many of these agents are still commonly given to patients. The newer antihistamines, developed with the aim of being more specific for the histamine H(1) receptor and of overcoming these adverse effects, are the medication of choice in patients with mild intermittent allergic rhinitis. For children <12 years of age, three newer oral antihistamines are currently available: cetirizine, loratadine and fexofenadine. A lack of adverse effects with these antihistamines has been demonstrated in children using EEG and psychomotor performance tests, and in clinical studies. However, issues of receptor selectivity and the potential for CNS adverse effects still remain, and further studies are warranted.Intranasal corticosteroids are the most effective anti-inflammatory agents used for the treatment of paediatric allergic rhinitis; however, the safety of these compounds remains controversial. The safety implications associated with corticosteroids are long-term, dose-related systemic effects, such as suppression of adrenocortical function, growth and bone metabolism, and the extent of these effects is influenced by a number of factors including corticosteroid type, pharmacokinetic profile, mode of delivery and delivery device. Topical corticosteroids were introduced to reduce the systemic effects seen with the long-term use of oral agents. The intranasal corticosteroids currently available for the treatment of paediatric allergic rhinitis - beclometasone, budesonide, flunisolide, fluticasone propionate, mometasone and triamcinolone - have short half-lives and rapid first-pass hepatic metabolism; however, their pharmacokinetics vary in terms of systemic absorption, potency, binding affinity, lipophilicity, volume of distribution, and half-life. A number of studies - utilising hypothalamic-pituitary-adrenal axis function tests such as plasma cortisol levels, 24-hour urinary-free cortisol tests; stimulation tests with corticotropin (adrenocorticotropic hormone), lypressin, and corticotropin-releasing hormone; and growth assessment studies using knemometry and stadiometry - have indicated that these intranasal corticosteroids are well-tolerated in paediatric patients and do not significantly affect growth.The wealth of clinical data and the recommendations from evidence-based guidelines suggest that both antihistamines and intranasal corticosteroids have good safety profiles in children. Nevertheless, growth should be regularly monitored in children receiving intranasal corticosteroids. Other treatments such as immunotherapy, local chromones and decongestants can also be beneficial in managing paediatric allergic rhinitis, and therapies should be considered on an individual basis.     

The psychopharmacological effects of premazepam, diazepam and placebo in healthy human subjects.

Pharmacological studies of premazepam in animals predicted antianxiety activity without sedation and, in combination with diazepam, a reduction in the sedative effects of the latter. The effects of single doses of premazepam (25 and 50 mg), diazepam (10 mg), premazepam (25 mg) plus diazepam (10 mg), and a placebo on subjective feelings, psychological tests and the EEG were studied in a double-blind cross-over study in 10 healthy subjects. In a repeated dose study in eight subjects, the effects on subjective feelings, psychological tests and the EEG of premazepam (5 and 10 mg twice-daily), diazepam (5mg twice-daily) and a placebo were compared. Premazepam had a different EEG profile from diazepam, producing more slow and less fast wave activity. In the single dose study its effects were similar to diazepam for sedative action and most of the psychological tests, with a tendency towards greater psychomotor impairment. In the repeated dose study, however, premazepam caused less sedation and also tended to produce less psychomotor impairment. The combination dose of premazepam (25 mg) plus diazepam (10 mg) in the single dose study indicated an additive effect rather than an antagonistic one.     

Zopiclone produces effects on human performance similar to flurazepam, lormetazepam and triazolam.

The cognitive function and psychomotor performance of 10 healthy male volunteers were measured following single oral doses of: zopiclone (7.5 mg), flurazepam (15 mg), lormetazepam (1 mg), triazolam (0.25 mg) and placebo. The performance tests selected (stroop task, five choice serial reaction time, memory span, logical reasoning, mood and saccadic eye movement analysis) were thought to reflect aspects of normal daily activity. The tests demonstrated a clear reduction of performance for all active treatments. No drug emerged as the most potent sedative overall, as each of the tests was affected to a different degree by each drug. Drug effects were not qualitatively different between active treatments so that zopiclone was indistinguishable from the three benzodiazepines with which it was compared.     

Functional neuroimaging of cognition impaired by a classical antihistamine, d-chlorpheniramine

Antihistamine induced cognitive decline was evaluated using positron emission tomography (PET) measurement of histamine H1 receptor (H1R) occupancy and regional cerebral blood flow (rCBF). Cognitive performance in attention-demanding task deteriorated dose-dependently and the effects were statistically significant after the treatment of 2 mg of d-chlorpheniramine. There was no significant change in subjective sleepiness in the same dose. The regional blockade of H1R was observed mainly in the frontal, temporal and anterior cingulate cortices, and the intravenous administration of d-chlorpheniramine as a therapeutic dose (2 mg) blocked over 60% of H1R in the frontal cortices. The results from activation study using visual discrimination tasks demonstrated that enhanced activity in the right prefrontal and anterior cingulate cortices as well as a decreased activity in the left temporal and frontal cortices and midbrain after the treatment of d-chlorpheniramine. There were no changes in global CBF for the subjects treated with 2 mg d-chlorpheniramine (pre; 44.8+/-3.3 ml dl(-1) min(-1) vs post; 44.4+/-4.7 ml dl(-1) min(-1)). The results indicated that the attention system of human brain could be altered by therapeutic doses of H1R antagonists. These findings provide the information as to the potential risk of antihistamines in our daily activities. British Journal of Pharmacology (2000) 129, 115 - 123     

Treating Allergic Rhinitis with Second-Generation Antihistamines

Allergic rhinitis afflicts close to 40% of the nation's population and costs more than $1.8 billion a year. The toll exacted by this disorder has been greatly alleviated by nonsedating second-generation antihistamines loratadine, terfenadine, and astemizole. The three agents effectively reduce symptoms without the sometimes intolerable adverse effects of older drugs, but they are not completely equivalent. For example, terfenadine requires twice/day dosing, whereas the others can be given once/day. Astemizole has a slow onset and extremely prolonged duration of action. Both terfenadine and astemizole may have cardiotoxic effects (e.g., torsades de pointes) when serum concentrations rise due to overdosing or drug interactions. Cetirizine, a recently approved second-generation antihistamine, has sedative and anticholinergic effects, although to a lesser degree than the first-generation antihistamines.     

Short-term effects of morning versus evening dose of hydroxyzine 50 mg on cognition in healthy volunteers

It is well known that the sedative properties of antihistamines can differ considerably between individual drugs. Several factors have been suggested to determine the presence, absence, and/or magnitude of sedation by antihistamines. Research has suggested that the sedative effects caused by central H1 blockade partly depend on the availability of histamine competing for the same receptor and that this competition is affected by a mechanism related to sleep. Consequently, the present study was designed to compare the effects of evening and morning doses of the first-generation antihistamine hydroxyzine on cognition. It was expected that the sedative effect of hydroxyzine would be apparent in the evening after an evening dose but would be smaller in the morning after a morning dose owing to the greater release of histamine shortly after awakening. Eighteen participants (9 females) participated in a placebo-controlled, randomized, double-blind 3-way crossover design. Performance was assessed using several psychomotor tests: that is, divided attention task, critical tracking task, stop signal task, the attention network test, and the experimental attention switch task. Results demonstrated that evening doses of hydroxyzine impaired performance on the divided attention and the attention network test. Impairment after morning doses was generally larger in magnitude and affected performance measures in all tasks. It is concluded that hydroxyzine-induced impairment at tmax is more prominent after morning doses compared with evening doses and that the present study could not present direct evidence to substantiate the hypothesis that histamine availability inversely affects the magnitude of antihistamine impairment.