How to prescribe antihistamines for chronic idiopathic urticaria: desloratadine daily vs PRN and quality of life

Exploring the management of recurrent angioedema caused by different mechanisms

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

We aim to explore the most recent insights into the pathogenesis of recurrent angioedema caused by different mechanisms and then focus on the management and treatment approaches available.

RECENT FINDINGS

The recently developed DANCE consensus classification identifies five types of angioedema: mast cell-mediated (AE-MC), bradykinin-mediated, because of intrinsic vascular endothelium dysfunction (AE-VE), drug-induced (AE-DI), and due to unknown mechanisms (AE-UNK). These subtypes require different management with treatment choices targeting the main pathogenetic pathways involved in each form. For AE-MC and AE-BK, the therapeutic landscape has been significantly widened in recent years. Conversely, there is a lack of consensus for the hereditary forms because of newly discovered mutations ( factor 12 , plasminogen, kininogen-1 , myoferlin, angiopoietin-1 , heparan sulfate 3-O-sulfotransferase 6 ) and AE-UNK.

SUMMARY

Recurrent angioedema can present with or without wheals. Angioedema without wheals may be driven by bradykinin and/or mast cell mediators. The different forms respond to specific drugs and require a different management. For its potentially life-threatening and disfiguring features, angioedema should be promptly recognized and effectively treated. For this reason, enhancing awareness about various angioedema subtypes and their management provide a useful tool for the clinical practice.

Urticaria

Urticaria (hives) is a common disorder that may be associated with angioedema (swelling that occurs beneath the skin). It is generally classified as acute or chronic, and chronic urticaria is further classified as spontaneous or inducible Second-generation, non-sedating histamine type 1 (H1)-receptor antihistamines represent the mainstay of therapy for both acute and chronic urticaria. Second-line treatment for uncontrolled chronic urticaria includes omalizumab (a monoclonal anti-immunoglobulin E [IgE] antibody). In this article, we review the causes, diagnosis and management of urticaria (with or without angioedema).

Quality of life measurement in assessing treatment effectiveness in urticaria: European experts position statement

In this study, the European Academy of Dermatology and Venereology (EADV) Task Forces on Quality of Life and Patient-Oriented Outcomes and Urticaria and Angioedema has examined the Health-Related Quality of Life (HRQoL) measurement in the treatment of urticaria. The Dermatology Life Quality Index was the most frequently used HRQoL instrument in clinical trials on urticaria. Many reports of clinical trials of urticaria gave no exact numeric results related to HRQoL changes, making clear conclusions and comparisons with other studies impossible. The interpretation of HRQoL impairment data is more difficult when assessed by instruments without severity stratification systems. The minimal clinically significant difference (MCID) is a more clinically oriented and relevant parameter than depending on statistically significant changes in HRQoL scores. Therefore, using HRQoL instruments with established MCID data in clinical trials and clinical practice is preferred.

Quality of life measurement in urticaria: Position statement of the European Academy of Dermatology and Venereology Task Forces on Quality of Life and Patient-Oriented Outcomes and Urticaria and Angioedema

The European Academy of Dermatology and Venereology (EADV) Task Forces on quality of life (QoL) and patient-oriented outcomes and on urticaria and angioedema recommendations for the assessment of Health-related (HR) QoL in all patients with urticaria in research and practice are as follows: to use the DLQI for adults and the CDLQI for children as dermatology-specific and the CU-Q2oL as a disease-specific HRQoL instruments in urticaria; to use generic instruments to provide comparison of data on urticaria with non-dermatologic diseases, or to compare with healthy volunteers or the general population; to select validated HRQoL instruments with appropriate age limits; to present exact numeric data for HRQoL results; correct title of any HRQoL instrument should be used, along with its correct abbreviation and the reference to its original publication, where possible. The EADV TFs discourage the use of non-validated HRQoL instruments and modified HRQoL instruments that have not undergone standard validation.

The Dermatology Life Quality Index as the primary outcome in randomized clinical trials: a systematic review

BACKGROUND

Primary endpoint measures in clinical trials are typically measures of disease severity, with patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) relegated as secondary endpoints. However, validation of some PROMs may be more rigorous than that of disease severity measures, which could provide support for a primary role for PROMs.

OBJECTIVES

This study reports on 24 peer reviewed journal articles that used the Dermatology Life Quality Index (DLQI) as primary outcome, derived from a systematic review of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) utlizing DLQI, covering all diseases and interventions.

METHODS

The study protocol was prospectively published on the PROSPERO database, and the study followed PRISMA guidelines. Searches were made using MEDLINE, The Cochrane Library, Embase, Web of Science, Scopus, CINAHL (EBSCO) and PsycINFO databases and records were combined into an Endnote database. Records were filtered for duplicates and selected based on study inclusion/exclusion criteria. Full-text articles were sourced and data were extracted by two reviewers into a bespoke REDCap database, with a third reviewer adjudicating disagreements. The Jadad scoring method was used to determine risk of bias.

RESULTS

Of the 3220 publications retrieved from online searching, 457 articles met the eligibility criteria and included 198 587 patients. DLQI scores were used as primary outcomes in 24 (5.3%) of these studies comprising 15 different diseases and 3436 patients. Most study interventions (17 of 24 studies, 68%) were systemic drugs, with biologics (liraglutide, alefacept, secukinumab, ustekinumab, adalimumab) accounting for 5 of 25 pharmacological interventions (20%). Topical treatments comprised 32% (8 studies), whereas nonpharmacological interventions (n = 8) were 24% of the total interventions (N = 33). Three studies used nontraditional medicines. Eight studies were multicentred (33.3%), with trials conducted in at least 14 different countries, and four studies (16.7%) were conducted in multiple countries. The Jadad risk of bias scale showed that bias was uncertain or low, as 87.5% of studies had Jadad scores of ≥ 3.

CONCLUSIONS

This study provides evidence for use of the DLQI as a primary outcome in clinical trials. Researchers and clinicians can use this data to inform decisions about further use of the DLQI as a primary outcome.

Urticaria

The relevance of the disease is due to its prevalence ― for acute urticaria up to 20% with predominance in the paediatric population, for chronic spontaneous urticaria up to 0.5–5% of the population. The course of the disease is characterised by unpredictability of prognosis of duration, effectiveness of standard therapy, serious impact on the quality of life of the patient, his relatives, the burden on health authorities. The lack of accurate understanding of the mechanisms of disease development, a wide range of pathogenetic treatment complicates the possibility of rapid achievement of drug remission. The clinical Recommendations contain up-to-date information on epidemiology, pathogenesis, clinical picture, differential diagnosis, possibilities of examination and stage treatment, including immunobiological therapy. The procedure of medical care, prophylaxis and dispensary observation, criteria for assessing the quality of patient management and supporting material, including questionnaires to assess the severity of the condition and the effectiveness of treatment are outlined. Clinical recommendations on urticaria are intended for practicing physicians of all specialities, students, teachers of medical schools, residents, postgraduates and researchers.

Bilastine in Refractory Chronic Spontaneous Urticaria: Disease Control and Cytokine Modulation in an Open-label Prospective Study

Introduction

The treatment options for chronic spontaneous urticaria (CSU) primarily include second generation non-sedative antihistamine (SGAHs). Bilastine is a newer, nonsedating SGAH approved for urticaria in February 2019 by the Drugs Controller General of India. Its major advantages are in terms of superior efficacy, lack of drug interactions and adverse effects, including sedation, compared to conventional SGAHs. The role of cytokines in the pathogenesis of CSU is well known. However, there is a shortage of data regarding the change in serum levels of proinflammatory cytokines following H1 antihistamines. We conducted this trial to evaluate the role of bilastine in cytokine modulation and autoimmunity, thereby explaining its role in modifying the disease process in CSU.

Materials and Methods

This prospective study was conducted in a tertiary institute in Kolkata on patients aged 12 years and above with a CSU >6 months. These patients had an unsatisfactory response, as per the Urticaria Activity Score 7 (UAS7), to previous antihistamine therapies in standard doses. Treatment effectiveness was determined by comparing the UAS7 at baseline with that at weeks 4, 8 and 12. Also, baseline serum interleukin-6 (IL-6) and IL-17 were compared with those at the end of the study, that is, 12 weeks.

Results

Thirty patients who matched the inclusion criteria and signed informed consent were included in the study. At the end of 12 weeks, 10% of patients (n = 3) achieved a complete treatment response (UAS = 0), whereas 43.33% of patients (n = 13) were labelled as having well-controlled urticaria (UAS <6). At 12 weeks, the mean UAS7 score (6.47 ± 4.45) was statistically significant compared to the baseline score (25.47 ± 7.74). The mean values of serum IL-6 (pg/ml) and IL-17 (pg/ml) at baseline were 5.96 ± 5.24 pg/ml and 6.96 ± 5.97 pg/ml, respectively. At the end of treatment, that is, 3 months, the mean values were reduced to 4.61 ± 4.56 pg/ml and 5.08 ± 3.87 pg/ml. The reduction was statistically significant for both serum IL-6 (P < 0.001) and IL-17 (P < 0.0001).

Conclusion

We conclude that bilastine at a once-daily continuous dose of 40 mg for 3 months is safe and effective in CSU patients who are refractory to treatment at the standard doses of SGAHs. Improved symptomatic control with bilastine was also associated with better control over the inflammatory process, as suggested by the lowering of mean cytokine levels in our study.

A systematic review of 454 randomized controlled trials using the Dermatology Life Quality Index: experience in 69 diseases and 43 countries

BACKGROUND

Over 29 years of clinical application, the Dermatology Life Quality Index (DLQI) has remained the most used patient-reported outcome (PRO) in dermatology due to its robustness, simplicity and ease of use.

OBJECTIVES

To generate further evidence of the DLQI's utility in randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and to cover all diseases and interventions.

METHODS

The methodology followed PRISMA guidelines and included seven bibliographical databases, searching articles published from 1 January 1994 until 16 November 2021. Articles were reviewed independently by two assessors, and an adjudicator resolved any opinion differences.

RESULTS

Of 3220 screened publications, 454 articles meeting the eligibility criteria for inclusion, describing research on 198 190 patients, were analysed. DLQI scores were primary endpoints in 24 (5.3%) of studies. Most studies were of psoriasis (54.1%), although 69 different diseases were studied. Most study drugs were systemic (85.1%), with biologics comprising 55.9% of all pharmacological interventions. Topical treatments comprised 17.0% of total pharmacological interventions. Nonpharmacological interventions, mainly laser therapy and ultraviolet radiation treatment, comprised 12.2% of the total number of interventions. The majority of studies (63.7%) were multicentric, with trials conducted in at least 42 different countries; 40.2% were conducted in multiple countries. The minimal clinically importance difference (MCID) was reported in the analysis of 15.0% of studies, but only 1.3% considered full score meaning banding of the DLQI. Forty-seven (10.4%) of the studies investigated statistical correlation of the DLQI with clinical severity assessment or other PRO/quality of life tools; and 61-86% of studies had within-group scores differences greater than the MCID in 'active treatment arms'. The Jadad risk-of-bias scale showed that bias was generally low, as 91.8% of the studies had Jadad scores of ≥ 3; only 0.4% of studies showed a high risk of bias from randomization. Thirteen per cent had a high risk of bias from blinding and 10.1% had a high risk of bias from unknown outcomes of all participants in the studies. In 18.5% of the studies the authors declared that they followed an intention-to-treat protocol; imputation for missing DLQI data was used in 34.4% of studies.

CONCLUSIONS

This systematic review provides a wealth of evidence of the use of the DLQI in clinical trials to inform researchers' and -clinicians' decisions for its further use. Recommendations are also made for improving the reporting of data from future RCTs using the DLQI.

Efficacy and safety of on-demand versus daily rupatadine in chronic spontaneous urticaria: A randomized trial

BACKGROUND

Non-sedating H1 -antihistamines (nsAH) are the most commonly used treatment for chronic spontaneous urticaria (CSU). Many patients use them as on-demand (OD) therapy rather than a maintenance treatment. Here, we compared OD versus daily maintenance treatment with the nsAH rupatadine, assessed the efficacy of rupatadine updosing, and investigated potential long-term disease-modifying effects.

METHODS

This multicenter, randomized study consisted of 2 weeks of screening, 8 weeks of double-blind treatment, and 6 weeks of treatment-free follow-up (OD allowed). Adult patients were randomized to 10 mg rupatadine OD or 10 mg rupatadine daily. At Week 4, if patients did not have a complete response, they switched from 10 to 20 mg rupatadine daily or underwent sham updosing (patients on 10 mg rupatadine OD). The primary aim was to compare CSU disease activity at the end of follow-up between daily versus OD. Additionally, we assessed the efficacy of rupatadine updosing. Major outcomes were disease activity, CSU-related quality of life (QoL), and disease control.

RESULTS

At Week 4, disease activity and QoL significantly improved in daily versus OD-treated patients. Updosing of rupatadine did not improve the mean disease activity, but the number of complete responders increased during updosing from 5% to 22%. At the end of follow-up, the disease activity of patients treated OD versus daily was not significantly different.

CONCLUSIONS

Daily rupatadine treatment significantly improved CSU disease activity and QoL during treatment versus OD treatment but not after discontinuation of rupatadine, indicating the benefits of a daily maintenance nsAH schedule.

Modern Approaches to the Management of Patients with Urticaria

The Union of Pediatricians of Russia together with the Russian Association of Allergologists and Clinical Immunologists and the Russian Society of Dermatovenerologists and Cosmetologists have developed new clinical guidelines for the urticaria in adults and children. Urticaria is a common disease; its various clinical variants are diagnosed in 15–25% of people in the global population, and a quarter of all cases belongs to chronic urticaria. The prevalence of acute urticaria is 20%, and 2.1–6.7% in child population, whereas acute urticaria is more common in children than in adults. The prevalence of chronic urticaria in adults in the general population is 0.7 and 1.4%, and 1.1% in children under 15 years of age, according to the systematic review and meta-analysis, respectively. This article covers features of epidemiology, etiology, and pathogenesis of the disease with particular focus on differential diagnostic search. Guidelines on treatment and step-by-step therapy scheme (both based on principles of evidencebased medicine) for pediatric patients were presented. Clarification on the analysis of the therapy efficacy and the degree of disease activity was given.

Unmet Needs of Patients With Chronic Urticaria: A Survey in Korea

Chronic urticaria (CU) is a common problem with a high disease burden that has a significant negative impact on quality of life. Many patients are undertreated, and awareness of management strategies is low among clinicians. The present study aimed to improve understanding of CU from the patients' perspective, including the disease burden and current healthcare system use. Adult patients who presented to our referral hospital for CU treatment completed self-report questionnaires about demographics, clinical characteristics of CU, the impact of CU on daily life, unmet needs, and the history of medical service usage. This self-report survey included 127 participants (females, 57.0%; mean age, 42.0 ± 13.6 years; mean CU duration, 1.8 ± 3.4 years); 51.6% reported frequent discomfort with CU in daily life, including 44.1% of those who reported a good response to medication. More than half of the respondents reported a depressed mood and anxiety. Although 46.4% of the respondents reported that urticaria completely disappeared while on medication, only 10% were satisfied with the CU management provided by primary care hospitals. The principal cause of dissatisfaction was that they did not know the cause of CU (68.4% of patients). In total, 55% of the patients visited 2 or more hospitals before presenting to our referral hospital and 6.3% had tried folk remedies. In conclusion, most patients report that CU is not adequately controlled. Therefore, in addition to appropriate medication, information on the cause of CU, long-term treatment plan, medication safety, and expected prognosis is required to meet patients' needs.

S3 Guideline Urticaria. Part 2: Treatment of urticaria - German-language adaptation of the international S3 guideline

This publication is the second part of the German-language S3 guideline on urticaria. It covers the management of urticaria and should be used together with Part 1 of the guideline on classification and diagnosis. This publication was prepared according to the criteria of the AWMF on the basis of the international English-language S3 guideline with special consideration of health system conditions in German-speaking countries. Chronic urticaria has a high impact on the quality of life and daily activities of patients. Therefore, if causal factors cannot be eliminated, effective symptomatic treatment is necessary. The recommended first-line treatment is to administer new generation, non-sedating H1 antihistamines. If the standard dose is not sufficiently effective, the dose should be increased up to fourfold. For patients who do not respond to this treatment, the second-line treatment in addition to antihistamines in the treatment algorithm is omalizumab and, if this treatment fails, ciclosporin. Other low-evidence therapeutic agents should only be used if all treatments in the treatment algorithm agreed upon by the guideline group fail. Both the benefit-risk profile and cost should be considered. Corticosteroids are not recommended for long-term treatment due to their inevitable severe side effects.

Taiwanese dermatological association consensus for the definition, classification, diagnosis, and management of urticaria: A 2021 update

Urticaria is a prevalent disease with substantial physical, psychological, and economic impacts. With the advent of understandings of the disease and the emerging evidence of treatments, the international guidelines for treating urticaria have been updated in recent years. In order to update the 2014 edition of the Taiwanese Dermatological Association (TDA) consensus of urticaria, a total of 17 dermatologists with extensive experience in urticaria management were invited to and attended the TDA consensus meetings. All the specific aspects of the content were approved by at least 75% of the experts in attendance. Comparing to the former edition, several substantial modifications were made. For diagnosis, D-dimer was added as the recommended routine test in patients with chronic spontaneous urticaria. For pharmacological management, treatment suggestions were simplified. The approved-dosed, the up-dosed second-generation antihistamines, omalizumab, and cyclosporine were listed as the first-line to the fourth-line treatment, respectively. In addition, the management for patients of special considerations, such as the elderly, children, and pregnant women, were all discussed and mentioned in the consensus. We hope the updated TDA consensus can serve as a reference for all physicians and can help the physicians providing up-to-dated managements for these patients.

The international EAACI/GA²LEN/EuroGuiDerm/APAAACI guideline for the definition, classification, diagnosis, and management of urticaria

This update and revision of the international guideline for urticaria was developed following the methods recommended by Cochrane and the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) working group. It is a joint initiative of the Dermatology Section of the European Academy of Allergology and Clinical Immunology (EAACI), the Global Allergy and Asthma European Network (GA²LEN) and its Urticaria and Angioedema Centers of Reference and Excellence (UCAREs and ACAREs), the European Dermatology Forum (EDF; EuroGuiDerm), and the Asia Pacific Association of Allergy, Asthma and Clinical Immunology with the participation of 64 delegates of 50 national and international societies and from 31 countries. The consensus conference was held on 3 December 2020. This guideline was acknowledged and accepted by the European Union of Medical Specialists (UEMS). Urticaria is a frequent, mast cell-driven disease that presents with wheals, angioedema, or both. The lifetime prevalence for acute urticaria is approximately 20%. Chronic spontaneous or inducible urticaria is disabling, impairs quality of life, and affects performance at work and school. This updated version of the international guideline for urticaria covers the definition and classification of urticaria and outlines expert-guided and evidence-based diagnostic and therapeutic approaches for the different subtypes of urticaria.

The KAAACI/KDA Evidence-Based Practice Guidelines for Chronic Spontaneous Urticaria in Korean Adults and Children: Part 1. Definition, Methodology and First-line Management

Chronic spontaneous urticaria (CSU) is defined as the occurrence of spontaneous wheals, angioedema, or both for >6 weeks in the absence of specific causes. It is a common condition associated with substantial disease burden both for affected individuals and societies in many countries, including Korea. CSU frequently persists for several years and requires high-intensity treatment; therefore, patients experience deteriorations in quality of life and medication-associated complications. During the last decade, there have been major advances in the pharmacological treatment of CSU and there is an outstanding need for evidence-based guidelines that reflect clinical practice in Korea. The guidelines reported here represent a joint initiative of the Korean Academy of Asthma, Allergy and Clinical Immunology and the Korean Dermatological Association, and aim to provide evidence-based guidance for the management of CSU in Korean adults and children. In Part 1, disease definition, guideline scope and development methodology as well as evidence-based recommendations on the use of antihistamines and corticosteroids are summarized.

The safety and tolerability profile of bilastine for chronic urticaria in children

Background

Urticaria is a condition defined by the development of wheals, angioedema or both. It is classified based on its duration as acute (≤ 6 weeks) or chronic (> 6 weeks). Chronic urticaria is less frequent than acute one in children, but it represents a debilitating condition, always needing treatment. Symptoms affect child's daily activities and disturb sleeping patterns, causing emotional distress and negatively influencing learning and cognition. Therefore, the management of chronic urticaria must point to a complete control of symptoms, taking into account tolerability and the patient quality of life.

Review of literature

The recently revised version of EAACI/GA²LEN/EDF/WAO guideline on the management of urticaria, in addition to recommending the use of second-generation H₁ antihistamines as the treatment of choice, gives particular attention to their use in the paediatric population. Bilastine has been studied in children; at the dose of 10 mg/once daily, it is licenced for the symptomatic relief of urticaria in children ≥ 6 to 11 years, in the European Union, in appropriate formulation, as oral solution or orodispersible tablet.

Conclusions

In line with the recent guideline recommendation for the use of second generation H₁ antihistamines in children we have reviewed the safety and tolerability profile of bilastine in children with chronic urticaria.

The Efficacy of a Two-Fold Increase of H1-Antihistamine in the Treatment of Chronic Urticaria - the Vietnamese Experience

BACKGROUND

Chronic urticaria, a mast cell-driven condition, is common, debilitating and hard to treat. H1-antihistamines are the first line treatment of chronic urticaria, but often patients do not get satisfactory relief with the recommended dose. European guidelines recommend increased antihistamine doses up to four-fold.

AIM

We conducted this study to evaluate the efficacy of increased H1-antihistamine doses up to two-fold in Vietnamese chronic urticaria patients.

METHODS

One hundred and two patients with chronic urticaria were recruited for treatment with levocetirizine (n = 52) or fexofenadine (n = 50). Treatment started at the conventional daily dose of 5 mg levocetirizine or 180 mg fexofenadine for 2 weeks and then increased to 10 mg levocetirizine or 360 mg fexofenadine for 2 weeks if patients did not have an improvement in symptoms. At week 0, week 2 and week 4 wheal, pruritus, size of the wheal, total symptom scores, and associated side-effects were assessed.

RESULTS

With the conventional dose, the total symptom scores after week 2 decreased significantly in both groups compared to baseline figures, i.e. 7.4 vs 2.3 for levocetirizine group and 8.0 vs 2.6 for fexofenadine group (p < 0.05). However, there were still 26 patients in each group who did not have improvements. Of these 26 patients, after having a two-fold increase of the conventional dose, 11.5% and 38.5% became symptom-free at week 4 in levocetirizine group and fexofenadine group, respectively. At week 4 in both groups, the total symptom scores had significantly decreased when compared with those at week 2 (2.8 ± 1.5 versus 4.7 ± 1.6 in levocetirizine group; 2.1 ± 1.9 versus 5.1 ± 1.4 in fexofenadine group). In both groups, there was no difference in the rate of negative side effects between the conventional dose and the double dose.

CONCLUSION

This study showed that increasing the dosages of levocetirizine and fexofenadine by two-fold improved chronic urticaria symptoms without increasing the rate of negative side effects.

Urticaria: A comprehensive review: Treatment of chronic urticaria, special populations, and disease outcomes

Second-generation antihistamines are considered first-line agents in the treatment of chronic urticaria because of their safety and efficacy profile. Some patients require higher doses of H₁ antihistamines alone or in combination with other classes of medications, including H₂ antihistamines, leukotriene receptor antagonists, or first-generation H₁ antihistamines. One major therapeutic advance has been omalizumab, a humanized monoclonal anti-immunoglobulin E that was recently approved by the US Food and Drug Administration for the treatment of chronic urticaria that is unresponsive to H₁ antagonists. In addition, the second article in this continuing medical education series outlines several evidence-based alternative treatments for urticaria and the differences in recommendations between 2 major consensus groups (the European Academy of Allergy and Clinical Immunology/World Allergy Organization and the American Academy of Allergy, Asthma and Immunology/American College of Allergy, Asthma and Immunology Joint Task Force).

Emerging Therapies in Chronic Spontaneous Urticaria

Chronic spontaneous urticaria (CSU) is characterized by typically short-lived and fleeting wheals, angioedema or both, which occur spontaneously and persist for longer than 6 weeks. This term is applied to the most common subtype of chronic urticaria. The underlying pathophysiology for CSU involves mast cell and basophil degranulation with release of histamine, leukotrienes, prostaglandins and other inflammatory mediators. Although a variety of treatments exist, many patients do not tolerate or benefit from the existing therapies and even require more effective treatments. Omalizumab is currently the only licensed biologic for antihistamine-refractory CSU, and novel drugs are under development. This article reviews its current status regarding pathogenesis and approach to treatment as well as therapeutic agents that are under development for the treatment of CSU.

Urticaria and angioedema

Urticaria (hives) is a common disorder that often presents with angioedema (swelling that occurs beneath the skin). It is generally classified as acute or chronic. Second-generation, non-sedating, non-impairing histamine type 1 (H1)-receptor antihistamines represent the mainstay of therapy for both acute and chronic urticaria. Angioedema can occur in the absence of urticaria and can be broadly divided into histamine-mediated and non-histamine-mediated angioedema. Histamine-mediated angioedema can be allergic, pseudoallergic or idiopathic. Non-histamine mediated angioedema is largely driven by bradykinin and can be hereditary, acquired or drug-induced, such as with angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors. Although bradykinin-mediated angioedema is often self-limited, laryngeal involvement can lead to fatal asphyxiation. The mainstay of management for angioedema is to avoid specific triggers, if possible. For hereditary angioedema, there are specifically licensed treatments that can be used for the management of acute attacks, or for prophylaxis in order to prevent attacks. In this article, the authors will review the causes, diagnosis and management of urticaria (with or without angioedema) and isolated angioedema. The diagnostic and therapeutic approaches to these two conditions are considerably different, and this review is designed to highlight these differences to the reader.

The EAACI/GA²LEN/EDF/WAO guideline for the definition, classification, diagnosis and management of urticaria

This evidence- and consensus-based guideline was developed following the methods recommended by Cochrane and the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) working group. The conference was held on 1 December 2016. It is a joint initiative of the Dermatology Section of the European Academy of Allergology and Clinical Immunology (EAACI), the EU-founded network of excellence, the Global Allergy and Asthma European Network (GA²LEN), the European Dermatology Forum (EDF) and the World Allergy Organization (WAO) with the participation of 48 delegates of 42 national and international societies. This guideline was acknowledged and accepted by the European Union of Medical Specialists (UEMS). Urticaria is a frequent, mast cell-driven disease, presenting with wheals, angioedema, or both. The lifetime prevalence for acute urticaria is approximately 20%. Chronic spontaneous urticaria and other chronic forms of urticaria are disabling, impair quality of life and affect performance at work and school. This guideline covers the definition and classification of urticaria, taking into account the recent progress in identifying its causes, eliciting factors and pathomechanisms. In addition, it outlines evidence-based diagnostic and therapeutic approaches for the different subtypes of urticaria.

The clinical pharmacology of non-sedating antihistamines

We previously reported on brain H₁ receptor occupancy measurements of antihistamines in human brain using [¹¹C]doxepin and positron emission tomography (PET). We proposed the use of brain H₁ receptor occupancy to classify antihistamines objectively into three categories of sedating, less-sedating, and non-sedating antihistamines according to their sedative effects. Non-sedating antihistamines are recommended for the treatment of allergies such as pollinosis and atopic dermatitis because of their low penetration into the central nervous system. Physicians and pharmacists are responsible for fully educating patients about the risks of sedating antihistamines from pharmacological points of view. If a sedating antihistamine must be prescribed, its sedative effects should be thoroughly considered before choosing the drug. Non-sedating antihistamines should be preferentially used whenever possible as most antihistamines are equally efficacious, while adverse effects of sedating antihistamines can be serious. This review summarizes the pharmacological properties of clinically useful non-sedating antihistamines from the perspective of histamine function in the CNS.

Taiwanese Dermatological Association consensus for the definition, classification, diagnosis, and management of urticaria

BACKGROUND/PURPOSE

This report describes the 2014 consensus of the Taiwanese Dermatological Association regarding the definition, classification, diagnosis, and management of urticaria. This consensus is distributed to practices throughout Taiwan to provide recommendations for diagnostic and therapeutic approaches for common subtypes of urticaria, in order to improve the quality of life of urticaria patients. The consensus, thus, serves as an important reference for dermatologists throughout Taiwan.

METHODS

All the consensus contents were voted on by the participating dermatologists, with approval by no less than 75% being required for inclusion. The consensus provides a comprehensive overview of urticaria, including recent advances in identifying its causes and the processes by which it develops.

RESULTS

All the consensus meeting attendees agreed to a definition of urticaria, which states that it is characterized by the sudden appearance of wheals (also known as hives), angioedema, or both. Most of the experts (16 out of 19, or 84.2%) agreed that chronic urticaria is defined as the sudden occurrence of wheals and/or angioedema for a period of ≥ 6 weeks. In addition, the consensus attendees also approved the Urticaria Activity Score system or the Urticaria Activity Score for 7 days system as the recommended method for assessing disease activity in spontaneous urticaria.

CONCLUSION

It was also determined that the treatment goal for patients with any form of urticaria should be complete cessation of suffering from all urticaria symptoms. The recommended treatment algorithms for chronic spontaneous urticaria and acute urticaria were finally proposed and approved by 100% (19/19) and 84.2% (16/19) of the consensus attendees, respectively.

BSACI guideline for the management of chronic urticaria and angioedema

This guidance for the management of patients with chronic urticaria and angioedema has been prepared by the Standards of Care Committee of the British Society for Allergy and Clinical Immunology (BSACI). The guideline is based on evidence as well as on expert opinion and is aimed at both adult physicians and paediatricians practising in allergy. The recommendations are evidence graded. During the development of these guidelines, all BSACI members were included in the consultation process using a Web-based system. Their comments and suggestions were carefully considered by the Standards of Care Committee. Where evidence was lacking, a consensus was reached by the experts on the committee. Included in this management guideline are clinical classification, aetiology, diagnosis, investigations, treatment guidance with special sections on children with urticaria and the use of antihistamines in women who are pregnant or breastfeeding. Finally, we have made recommendations for potential areas of future research.

H1-antihistamines for chronic spontaneous urticaria

Background Chronic spontaneous urticaria (CSU) is characterised by the development of crops of red, itchy, raised weals or hives with no identifiable external cause.Objectives To assess the effects of H1-antihistamines for CSU.Search methods We searched the following databases up to June 2014: Cochrane Skin Group Specialised Register, CENTRAL (2014, Issue 5), MEDLINE(from 1946), EMBASE (from 1974) and PsycINFO (from 1806). We searched five trials registers and checked articles for references to relevant randomised controlled trials.Selection criteria We included randomised controlled trials of H1-antihistamines for CSU. Interventions included single therapy or a combination of H1-antihistamines compared with no treatment (placebo) or another active pharmacological compound at any dose.Data collection and analysis We used standard methodological procedures as expected by The Cochrane Collaboration.Our primary outcome measures were proportion of participants with complete suppression of urticaria: 'good or excellent' response,50% or greater improvement in quality of life measures, and adverse events.We present risk ratios (RR) with 95% confidence intervals(CIs). Main results We identified 73 studies (9759 participants); 34 studies provided data for 23 comparisons. The duration of the intervention was up to two weeks (short-term) or longer than two weeks and up to three months (intermediate-term).Cetirizine 10mg once daily in the short term and in the intermediate term led to complete suppression of urticaria by more participants than was seen with placebo (RR 2.72, 95% CI 1.51 to 4.91). For this same outcome, comparison of desloratadine versus placebo in the intermediate term (5 mg) (RR 37.00, 95% CI 2.31 to 593.70) and in the short term (20 mg) (RR 15.97, 95% CI 1.04 to 245.04)favoured desloratadine, but no differences were seen between 5 mg and 10 mg for short-term treatment.Levocetirizine 20 mg per day (short-term) was more effective for complete suppression of urticaria compared with placebo (RR 20.87,95% CI 1.37 to 317.60), and at 5 mg was effective in the intermediate term (RR 52.88, 95% CI 3.31 to 843.81) but not in the shortterm, nor was 10 mg effective in the short term.Rupatadine at 10 mg and 20 mg in the intermediate term achieved a 'good or excellent response' compared with placebo (RR 1.35,95% CI 1.03 to 1.77).Loratadine (10 mg) versus placebo (RR 1.86, 95% CI 0.91 to 3.79) and loratadine (10 mg) versus cetirizine (10 mg) (RR 1.05, 95%CI 0.76 to 1.43) over short-term and intermediate-term treatment showed no significant difference for 'good or excellent response' or for complete suppression of urticaria, respectively.Loratadine (10 mg) versus desloratadine (5 mg) (intermediate-term) showed no statistically significant difference for complete suppression of urticaria (RR 0.91, 95% CI 0.78 to 1.06) or for 'good or excellent response' (RR 1.04, 95% CI 0.64 to 1.71). For loratadine(10 mg) versus mizolastine (10 mg) (intermediate-term), no statistically significant difference was seen for complete suppression of urticaria (RR 0.86, 95% CI 0.64 to 1.16) or for 'good or excellent response' (RR 0.88, 95% CI 0.55 to 1.42).Loratadine (10mg) versus emedastine (2mg) (intermediate-term) showed no statistically significant difference for complete suppression(RR 1.04, 95% CI 0.78 to 1.39) or for 'good or excellent response' (RR 1.09, 95% CI 0.96 to 1.24); the quality of the evidence was moderate for this comparison.No difference in short-term treatment was noted between loratadine (10mg) and hydroxyzine (25mg) in terms of complete suppression(RR 1.00, 95% CI 0.32 to 3.10).When desloratadine (5 to 20 mg) was compared with levocetirizine (5 to 20 mg), levocetirizine appeared to be the more effective (P value < 0.02).In a comparison of fexofenadine versus cetirizine, more participants in the cetirizine group showed complete suppression of urticaria(P value < 0.001).Adverse events leading to withdrawals were not significantly different in the following comparisons: cetirizine versus placebo at 10 mg and 20 mg (RR 3.00, 95% CI 0.68 to 13.22); desloratadine 5 mg versus placebo (RR 1.46, 95% CI 0.42 to 5.10); loratadine 10 mg versus mizolastine 10 mg (RR 0.38, 95% CI 0.04 to 3.60); loratadine 10mg versus emedastine 2mg (RR 1.09, 95%CI 0.07 to 17.14);cetirizine 10 mg versus hydroxyzine 25 mg (RR 0.78, 95% CI 0.25 to 2.45); and hydroxyzine 25 mg versus placebo (RR 3.64, 95%CI 0.77 to 17.23), all intermediate term.No difference was seen between loratadine 10 mg versus mizolastine 10 mg in the proportion of participants with at least 50%improvement in quality of life (RR 3.21, 95% CI 0.32 to 32.33).Authors' conclusions Although the results of our review indicate that at standard doses of treatment, several antihistamines are effective when compared with placebo, all results were gathered from a few studies or, in some cases, from single-study estimates. The quality of the evidence was affected by the small number of studies in each comparison and the small sample size for many of the outcomes, prompting us to downgrade the quality of evidence for imprecision (unless stated for each comparison, the quality of the evidence was low).No single H1-antihistamine stands out as most effective. Cetirizine at 10 mg once daily in the short term and in the intermediate term was found to be effective in completely suppressing urticaria. Evidence is limited for desloratadine given at 5 mg once daily in the intermediate term and at 20 mg in the short term. Levocetirizine at 5 mg in the intermediate but not short term was effective for complete suppression. Levocetirizine 20 mg was effective in the short term, but 10 mg was not. No difference in rates of withdrawal due to adverse events was noted between active and placebo groups. Evidence for improvement in quality of life was insufficient.

Update and insights into treatment options for chronic spontaneous urticaria

Chronic spontaneous urticaria (CSU) is defined as itchy weals, angio-oedema, or both, arising spontaneously without external physical stimuli. Symptoms of the disease continue to develop for more than 6 weeks. It carries a high socioeconomic burden with considerable health care costs. Second generation H1-antihistamines are the mainstay of urticaria treatment and are the only licensed option. However, many patients are resistant to H1-antihistamine therapy. Omalizumab has proven to be an effective therapeutic option in patients with recalcitrant chronic urticaria. Ciclosporin appears to be more beneficial in patients with functional histamine releasing autoantibodies as a cause of their disease. This review article will highlight the major therapeutic options available today for the management of CSU knowing that good quality evidence for efficacy of many agents is scarce except for H1-antihistamines and omalizumab.

Methods report on the development of the 2013 revision and update of the EAACI/GA2 LEN/EDF/WAO guideline for the definition, classification, diagnosis, and management of urticaria

This methods report describes the process of guideline development in detail. It is the result of a systematic literature review using the 'Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation' (GRADE) methodology and a structured consensus conference held on 28 and 29 November 2012, in Berlin. It is a joint initiative of the Dermatology Section of the European Academy of Allergy and Clinical Immunology (EAACI), the EU-funded network of excellence, the Global Allergy and Asthma European Network (GA(2) LEN), the European Dermatology Forum (EDF), and the World Allergy Organization (WAO) with the participation of delegates of 21 national and international societies. This guideline covers the definition and classification of urticaria, taking into account the recent progress in identifying its causes, eliciting factors and pathomechanisms. In addition, it outlines evidence-based diagnostic and therapeutic approaches for the different subtypes of urticaria. This guideline was acknowledged and accepted by the European Union of Medical Specialists (UEMS) and is published in Allergy 2014; 69:868-887.

The EAACI/GA(2) LEN/EDF/WAO Guideline for the definition, classification, diagnosis, and management of urticaria: the 2013 revision and update

This guideline is the result of a systematic literature review using the 'Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation' (GRADE) methodology and a structured consensus conference held on 28 and 29 November 2012, in Berlin. It is a joint initiative of the Dermatology Section of the European Academy of Allergy and Clinical Immunology (EAACI), the EU-funded network of excellence, the Global Allergy and Asthma European Network (GA(2) LEN), the European Dermatology Forum (EDF), and the World Allergy Organization (WAO) with the participation of delegates of 21 national and international societies. Urticaria is a frequent, mast cell-driven disease, presenting with wheals, angioedema, or both. The life-time prevalence for acute urticaria is approximately 20%. Chronic spontaneous urticaria and other chronic forms of urticaria do not only cause a decrease in quality of life, but also affect performance at work and school and, as such, are members of the group of severe allergic diseases. This guideline covers the definition and classification of urticaria, taking into account the recent progress in identifying its causes, eliciting factors and pathomechanisms. In addition, it outlines evidence-based diagnostic and therapeutic approaches for the different subtypes of urticaria. This guideline was acknowledged and accepted by the European Union of Medical Specialists (UEMS).

Prognosis of chronic spontaneous urticaria in 117 patients not controlled by a standard dose of antihistamine

BACKGROUND

Chronic spontaneous urticaria (CSU) is a common skin disorder, but its clinical course reported so far is largely variable, probably due to the heterogeneity of the clinical background of patients and pathogenesis of this disease.

METHODS

To reveal the prognosis of refractory CSU, we retrospectively studied the patients who suffered from spontaneous urticaria for six weeks or longer at their first visit to our outpatient clinic, who were insufficiently controlled by a standard dose of antihistamine, and revisited from 2003 to 2009.

RESULTS

Among 223 patients with CSU, 117 patients fulfilled the criteria mentioned above. Mean disease duration at first visit and mean duration of follow-up at our hospital were 27.4 ± 4.2 months and 18.7 ± 1.9 months, respectively. By using Kaplan-Meier methods, the estimated improved rates at 12 months, 24 months, and 60 months were 36.6%, 51.2%, and 66.1%, respectively. The overall improvement rate of childhood cases (<19 years) was significantly higher than that of adult cases (P = 0.007, log-rank test). Moreover, the improvement rate of patients with short disease durations (<1 year at the first visit) was significantly (P = 0.003, log-rank test) higher than that of patients with long disease durations (one year or more).

CONCLUSION

Our data indicate that the condition of patients with CSU can be gradually improved even in intractable cases. Information about the clinical course and prognostic factors of CSU in this study could help physicians predict the prognosis of patients and ensure medication adherence of patients with CSU.

Diagnosis and treatment of urticaria and angioedema: a worldwide perspective

: Urticaria and angioedema are common clinical conditions representing a major concern for physicians and patients alike. The World Allergy Organization (WAO), recognizing the importance of these diseases, has contributed to previous guidelines for the diagnosis and management of urticaria. The Scientific and Clinical Issues Council of WAO proposed the development of this global Position Paper to further enhance the clinical management of these disorders through the participation of renowned experts from all WAO regions of the world. Sections on definition and classification, prevalence, etiology and pathogenesis, diagnosis, treatment, and prognosis are based on the best scientific evidence presently available. Additional sections devoted to urticaria and angioedema in children and pregnant women, quality of life and patient-reported outcomes, and physical urticarias have been incorporated into this document. It is expected that this article will supplement recent international guidelines with the contribution of an expert panel designated by the WAO, increasing awareness of the importance of urticaria and angioedema in medical practice and will become a useful source of information for optimum patient management worldwide.

Urticaria and its subtypes: the role of second-generation antihistamines

Urticaria is a heterogeneous group of debilitating skin disorders characterized by wheals, pruritus, and frequently angioedema. The various forms of urticaria are often chronic and can exact a toll on quality of life. New diagnostic criteria and management guidelines are available to assist primary care physicians in the identification and proper treatment of different subtypes of urticaria. Second-generation antihistamines are recommended as first-line therapy because of their high degree of efficacy and safety. It is important to note, however, that European indications for most agents in this class are limited to specific forms of urticaria. The exception is desloratadine, the only second-generation antihistamine approved for the treatment of all urticaria subtypes in the European Union. Guidelines and best practice suggest that doses of antihistamines up to 4 times higher than those normally recommended for urticaria may benefit patients who do not respond to standard doses of antihistamines. Adjunctive therapy with leukotriene receptor antagonists may be advantageous in certain subgroups of patients who have suboptimal responses to antihistamine monotherapy. In all cases, physicians should work closely with patients to ensure proper adherence to prescribed regimens-a component that is often lacking but holds the key to successful outcomes.

Chronic urticaria: a comparison of management guidelines

INTRODUCTION

Chronic urticaria is characterized by recurring episodes of spontaneous transient dermal wheals and pruritus, with or without angioedema, which can persist for ≥ 6 weeks. Chronic urticaria impairs quality of life, emphasizing the need for effective treatments. Professional societies and clinical experts have issued evidence-based recommendations for the management of chronic urticaria, including recommending the use of second-generation antihistamines as a first-line therapy.

AREAS COVERED

A Medline search was conducted from 2000 to 2011 using the following terms, alone or in combination: 'chronic urticaria', 'management guidelines', 'consensus guidelines' and 'expert opinions'. Ten management guidelines/expert opinions met the inclusion criteria.

EXPERT OPINION

There was a universal agreement among the articles reviewed, that low-sedating, second-generation antihistamines should be prescribed as a first-line treatment of chronic urticaria. For refractory urticaria, however, recommendations varied and included dose escalation of second-generation antihistamines and adjunctive treatments with other agents of the same class, such as sedating antihistamines or leukotriene receptor antagonists. More research into effective second-line treatments and consistent implementation of current guidelines is needed, to ensure that treatment is based on clinical evidence.

Estudo da qualidade de vida nos pacientes com urticária crônica

FUNDAMENTOS: A urticária crônica compromete o doente por interferir nas atividades diárias, prejudicar a autoestima e as relações interpessoais. Os profissionais de saúde subestimam seu impacto na qualidade de vida dos doentes. OBJETIVOS: Avaliar a qualidade de vida com questionário específico e genérico. Compará-la entre os tipos clínicos de urticária crônica e avaliar se o angioedema piora a qualidade de vida. MÉTODOS: Participaram 62 doentes com urticária crônica, com sinais e sintomas da doença até 7 dias da consulta, que foram divididos em urticária crônica comum, urticária crônica física e urticária crônica mista. RESULTADOS: Observou-se predominância de mulheres (72,6%), idade média de 39,8 anos, angioedema associado em 75,8% dos doentes. Apresentaram mais angioedema doentes com urticária crônica comum (p=0,011) e mulheres (p=0,024). Quanto aos tipos clínicos, 32,3% apresentaram urticária crônica comum, 27,4% urticária crônica física e 40,3% urticária crônica mista. O escore médio total do questionário específico foi 10,4. No questionário específico, os domínios mais comprometidos foram "Sintomas e sentimentos" e "Atividades diárias", e, no SF-36, "Aspectos físicos" e "Vitalidade". Houve comprometimento da qualidade de vida nas mulheres, nos doentes com até 30 anos, em primeira consulta, nos mais escolarizados, naqueles com até 1 ano de doença e naqueles com angioedema. CONCLUSÃO: A urticária crônica compromete a qualidade de vida medida pelos questionários específico e genérico. Não houve diferença estatisticamente significante na qualidade de vida entre os tipos clínicos. A presença do angioedema conferiu pior qualidade de vida aos doentes. Houve correlação estatisticamente significante entre os escores do questionário específico e do questionário genérico.

Recommendations for assessing patient-reported outcomes and health-related quality of life in patients with urticaria: a GA(2) LEN taskforce position paper

The aim of this Global Allergy and Asthma European Network (GA(2)LEN) consensus report is to provide recommendations and suggestions for assessing patient-reported outcomes (PROs) including health-related quality of life in patients with urticaria. We recommend that PROs should be used both in clinical trials and routine practice for the evaluation of urticaria patients. We suggest that PROs should be considered as the primary outcome of future clinical trials. Two validated and disease-specific instruments for assessing PROs are available, the urticaria activity score (for symptoms) and the chronic urticaria questionnaire on quality of life CU-Q(2)oL. This latter tool, CU-Q(2)oL, is available in many languages and should be preferred, where available, over more generic instruments for assessing urticaria-specific effects on quality of life. CU-Q(2)oL is only suited for the investigation of patients with chronic spontaneous urticaria. Similar instruments for other forms of urticaria have yet to be developed and validated. Also, tools for assessing other chronic spontaneous urticaria PROs besides quality of life and symptoms are needed.

Efficacy of Tripterygium hypoglaucum Hutch in adults with chronic urticaria

OBJECTIVES

The study objectives were to evaluate the efficacy and safety of Tripterygium hypoglaucum Hutch (THH) in adult with severe chronic urticaria (CU) by performing a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled clinical trial.

METHODS

Seventy-eight (78) adult patients with severe CU, 21-58 years of age, responding poorly to antihistamines alone, were randomly divided into two groups: the therapeutic group with THH 3 tablets 3 times daily (n = 40) and the control group with placebo 3 tablets 3 times daily (n = 38). Meanwhile, all patients jointly received cetirizine hydrochloride (HCl) 10 mg once daily throughout the study period. The efficacy of THH was assessed by the scoring system of 4-point scale and the subject's global assessment of relief.

RESULTS

Sixty-nine (69) of 78 patients (37 in the therapeutic group, 32 in the control group) completed the study. By the end of the fourth week, there was a 67% improvement of total effective rate (TER) with THH compared with a 28% improvement with placebo by per-protocol analysis (χ(2) = 10.68, p = 0.0011), while by intention-to-treat analysis, 63% and 24% improvements of TER were respectively observed in the therapeutic group and the control group (χ(2) = 11.36, p = 0.001). THH with cetirizine showed statistical superiority to placebo with cetirizine during each study week for changes in total severity scores (p ≤ 0.001). In weekly analyses, THH was also statistically superior to placebo in reducing the mean pruritus scores during each study week (p ≤ 0.005).

CONCLUSIONS

This study shows that the therapeutic effect of THH with cetirizine is predominant over that of cetirizine alone in adult CU. THH with cetirizine may play an important role in the therapy of CU and be a useful treatment for CU.

Unmet clinical needs in chronic spontaneous urticaria. A GA²LEN task force report

Chronic spontaneous urticaria, formerly also known as chronic idiopathic urticaria and chronic urticaria (CU), is more common than previously thought. At any time, 0.5-1% of the population suffers from the disease (point prevalence). Although all age groups can be affected, the peak incidence is seen between 20 and 40 years of age. The duration of the disease is generally 1-5 years but is likely to be longer in more severe cases, cases with concurrent angioedema, in combination with physical urticaria or with a positive autologous serum skin test (autoreactivity). Chronic spontaneous urticaria has major detrimental effects on quality of life, with sleep deprivation and psychiatric comorbidity being frequent. It also has a large impact on society in terms of direct and indirect health care costs as well as reduced performance at work and in private life. In the majority of patients, an underlying cause cannot be identified making a causal and/or curative treatment difficult. Nonsedating H₁-antihistamines are the mainstay of symptomatic therapy, but treatment with licensed doses relieves symptoms effectively in < 50% of patients. Although guideline-recommended updosing up to fourfold increases symptom control in many patients, a substantial number of patients have only little benefit from H₁ -antihistamines. Consequently, there is a great need for new therapeutic strategies.

[Therapeutic alternatives for antihistamine-refractory urticaria]

Patients with chronic spontaneous urticaria, the most frequent non-acute form of urticaria, generally exhibit a clinical picture of persistent disease, a high degree of disease activity, considerable impairment of quality of life, and poor response to treatment. More than half of the patients continue to develop symptoms despite standard therapy with non-sedating antihistamines. In these cases, the antihistamine dose should be increased (up to four times the daily dose). If this approach also does not result in symptom control, the high-dose antihistamine should be combined with a leukotriene antagonist and if necessary an H2 blocker. If the patient does not respond to this combination therapy, cyclosporin A, dapsone, or omalizumab should be administered.

Safety and efficacy of desloratadine in subjects with seasonal allergic rhinitis or chronic urticaria: results of four postmarketing surveillance studies

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE

Allergic rhinitis (AR) and chronic urticaria (CU) are common diseases with symptoms that impair quality of life. Second-generation antihistamines (e.g. cetirizine, desloratadine, fexofenadine, loratadine and mizolastine) are recommended first-line treatment for both conditions; however, studies of clinically relevant differences among these agents are lacking. The aim of this investigation was to evaluate the safety, tolerability and efficacy of desloratadine 5 mg once daily in four postmarketing surveillance studies in subjects with seasonal AR (SAR) or chronic idiopathic urticaria (CIU) in real-world clinical practice settings.

METHODS

This programme of prospective surveillance studies was conducted in Germany between February 2001 and March 2002 in allergy; dermatology; ear, nose and throat; or general practice settings. Subjects (total number 77 880) were aged > or =12 years and met the requirements for treatment of SAR or CIU with desloratadine as outlined in the package insert. All subjects received oral desloratadine 5 mg once daily for a mean duration of up to 40.4 days. Adverse events (AEs) were reported throughout the studies; serious AEs were recorded for up to 30 days after treatment. Investigators and subjects both rated tolerability at the end of treatment. Symptom severity and sleep and daily activity impairment were evaluated at baseline and after treatment using 4-point scales (0 = none; 1 = mild; 2 = moderate; 3 = severe). A post hoc subanalysis assessed desloratadine efficacy and onset of symptom relief in subjects who had received monotherapy with another second-generation antihistamine.

RESULTS

A total of 386 AEs were reported by 287 subjects (0.37%) in the four studies. The most commonly reported treatment-related AEs were fatigue (0.07%), headache (0.07%), dry mouth (0.04%) and nausea (0.03%). Tolerability was rated as excellent/good by 99.1% of investigators and 98.5% of subjects. Desloratadine therapy significantly reduced nasal and ocular symptom severity, itching and wheals, and sleep and activity disruption (p < 0.0001), as indicated by a reduction in mean total and individual symptom scores, and reported impairment of sleep and daily activities. The efficacy of desloratadine was rated as significantly greater by 59.4-88.0% of subjects who had previously received monotherapy with cetirizine, fexofenadine, loratadine or mizolastine (p < 0.01 for all). The percentage of subjects who rated onset of symptom relief with desloratadine as faster than previous treatment ranged from 51.6% to 82.4%.

CONCLUSION

Desloratadine was safe, well tolerated and efficacious in this series of surveillance studies. A post hoc analysis of subjects who had received previous monotherapy with a second-generation antihistamine found that most subjects rated efficacy as higher than their previous treatment, with a faster onset of symptom relief.

Clinical evaluation and treatment of chronic urticaria

Chronic urticaria is a common disease characterized by recurrent pruritic wheals with surrounding erythema for >6 weeks. It is associated with a significant health care burden and affects patient quality of life. The etiology of chronic urticaria is often difficult to elucidate; however, known etiologies include autoimmune urticaria, physical urticarias (eg, cold, cholinergic, and delayed pressure urticaria), and idiopathic urticaria. The etiology is unknown in many patients, leading to a diagnosis of chronic idiopathic urticaria. The diagnosis of chronic idiopathic urticaria can be challenging for the primary care physician because of the disease's chronic symptoms. Diagnosis requires a detailed patient history and comprehensive physical examination, with additional testing tailored to the patient's history. Effective treatments include antihistamines, leukotriene receptor antagonists in combination with antihistamines, and oral immunomodulatory drugs, including corticosteroids, cyclosporine, dapsone, hydroxychloroquine, and sulfasalazine. Newer experimental therapies include intravenous immunoglobulin and omalizumab. This article reviews the pathophysiology, diagnosis, and treatment of chronic urticaria.