Effects of bilastine on T-wave morphology and the QTc interval: a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, thorough QTc study

Bilastine for the treatment of allergic rhinoconjunctivitis and urticaria: results from an international Delphi study

Background

Second-generation oral H1-antihistamines, including bilastine, represent the emerging treatments of allergic rhinitis (including rhinoconjunctivitis) and chronic urticaria in both adults and children. This study analyses available evidence supporting the use of bilastine amongst second-generation antihistamines for the symptomatic treatment of allergic rhinitis and urticaria in adults and children.

Methods

Consensus amongst experts from 17 countries on the ideal treatment of rhinitis and urticaria, and the specific role of bilastine was measured by means of a modified Delphi process. A total of 12 statements were voted on by the experts using a five-point Likert scale (1 = strongly disagree; 2 = disagree; 3 = undecided; 4 = agree; 5 = strongly agree). The definition of consensus was set at a minimum of 80% concordance for 4+5 scores (agree or strongly agree).

Results

All proposed statements reached consensus, with a concordance of ≥98% for five statements and ≥96% for seven.

Conclusions

The wide consensus obtained for the proposed statements suggests a prominent role for bilastine in the management of allergic rhinitis and urticaria.

An international Delphi study on the burden of allergic rhinoconjunctivitis and urticaria and the role of bilastine among current treatment options

BACKGROUND

allergic rhinoconjunctivitis and chronic urticaria are common histamine-driven diseases, exerting detrimental effects on cognitive functions, sleep, daily activities and quality of life. Non-sedating second-generation H₁-antihistamines are the first line treatment of choice. Aim of the study was to define the role of bilastine among second-generation H₁-antihistamines in the treatment of allergic rhinoconjunctivitis and urticaria in patients of different ages.

METHODS

an international Delphi study was carried out to assess consensus among experts from 17 European and extra-European countries on three main topics: 1) Burden of disease; 2) Current treatment options; 3) Specific characteristics of bilastine among second generation antihistamines.

RESULTS

here, we present the results obtained for a selection of 15 out of 27 consensus statements, focused on disease burden, role of second-generation antihistamines and bilastine profile. The rate of concordance was ≥ 98% for 4 statements, ≥ 96% for 6, ≥ 94% for 3, and ≥ 90% for 2.

CONCLUSIONS

the high degree of agreement obtained suggests a wide awareness of the burden of allergic rhinoconjunctivitis and chronic urticaria among experts from all over the world and reflect a broad consensus on the role of second generation antihistamines in general and of bilastine in particular for their management.

The Impact of Bilastine on Symptoms of Allergic Rhinitis and Chronic Urticaria: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials

BACKGROUND

Allergic diseases are immunological exaggerations with symptoms that may interfere with life quality. Bilastine, a novel oral second-generation H-1 antihistamine, is highly selective to H-1 receptors and has anti inflammatory properties. The present evidence regarding the drug efficacy is inconsistent.

OBJECTIVES

We aimed to evaluate the efficacy and safety of bilastine compared with the placebo and other active antihistamines in patients who complained either from AR or chronic urticaria.

METHODS

We systematically searched the Medline, Scopus, Web of Science, and Cochrane databases for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) evaluating bilastine effects on symptomatic hyper histaminic allergic conditions. We collected data on total symptoms scores (TSS), total nasal symptom scores (TNSS), discomfort associated with these allergic conditions measured by visual analog score (VAS), and quality of life (QOL) for AR and urticaria. Other outcomes such as clinical global impression and safety profiles were reported as well. We pooled the studies in a random effect model using RevMan 5.4 software.

RESULTS

We included 9 RCTs comprising 3801 participants. The meta-analysis revealed that bilastine was superior to placebo, improving TSS, TNSS, VAS, and QOL in AR or chronic urticaria participants. Moreover, the bilastine was comparable to active antihistamines such as cetirizine, fexofenadine, and loratadine regarding mentioned outcomes. In addition, the novel drug was safe and tolerable with no difference in the incidence of adverse events with a placebo.

CONCLUSIONS

Bilastine safely improved TSS in hyper histaminic allergic conditions involving nasal symptoms in AR. It decreases the discomfort associated with the disease resulting in improving the QOL of the participants.

Electrocardiographic T-wave morphology and risk of mortality

BACKGROUND

Electrocardiographic T-wave morphology is used in drug safety studies as an adjunct to the QT_c interval, but few measurements of T-wave morphology can be interpreted in clinical practice. Morphology combination score (MCS) is a combination of T-wave flatness/peakedness, asymmetry, and notching, enabling easy visual assessment of T-wave morphology. We aimed to test the association between T-wave morphology, quantified by MCS, and mortality.

METHODS

We included electrocardiograms recorded in 2001-2011 from 342,294 primary care patients. Using Cox regression, we evaluated the association between MCS, cardiovascular death, and all-cause mortality, adjusting for heart rate, QT_c, QT-prolonging drugs, diabetes, ischemic heart disease, hypertension, and congestive heart failure.

RESULTS

270,039 individuals (44% men, median age 55 [inter-quartile range: 42-67 years]) were included and followed for a median of 9.3 years, during which time 13,489 (5.0%) died from cardiovascular causes and 50,481 (18.7%) from any cause. High values of MCS (i.e. asymmetric, flattened, and/or notched T waves) were associated with an adjusted mortality Hazard Ratio of 1.75 (95% CI 1.62-1.89) and 1.61 (1.43-1.92) for women and men, respectively. Low values of MCS (i.e. peaked and symmetric T waves) were associated with a Hazard Ratio of 1.18 (1.08-1.28) and 1.71 (1.48-1.98) for women and men, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

In a large primary care population, we found that T-wave asymmetry, flatness, and notching provided prognostic information on mortality independent of heart rate, QTc, and baseline comorbidities.

Bilastine: a lifetime companion for the treatment of allergies

Objective: Bilastine is a potent and highly selective H₁-antihistamine approved for the treatment of allergic rhinoconjunctivitis and urticaria. This article summarizes available data on the use of bilastine in the treatment of allergic disorders in different age groups, including younger and older adults, and school-age children and adolescents.Methods: A PubMed literature search ("bilastine") was conducted on 25 February 2019. Additional literature known to the authors and identified from the reference lists of cited publications was included.Results: Bilastine is administered orally at a dose of 20 mg once daily in adults and adolescents aged ≥12 years and 10 mg once daily in children aged 6 to <12 years. Clinical trials have demonstrated its efficacy at improving nasal and ocular symptoms in patients with allergic rhinitis, and wheals and itching in patients with urticaria. It has a rapid onset of action and long duration of action. Bilastine does not undergo significant metabolism and does not interact with the CYP450 system, which limits its potential for drug-drug interactions. No dosage adjustments are required in patients with renal or hepatic impairment, or in the elderly. Bilastine is generally well tolerated, even when administered at above-standard doses. It does not exhibit anticholinergic effects or cardiotoxic effects, shows no central nervous system penetration and has minimal sedative properties. It has been shown to improve health-related quality of life.Conclusions: Bilastine is a suitable option for the treatment of patients with allergic rhinoconjunctivitis or urticaria across age groups from school-age children to elderly patients.

Bilastine: a new H1 -antihistamine with an optimal profile for updosing in urticaria

This review set out to examine published papers detailing the efficacy of bilastine in skin models and urticaria to assess whether it meets the optimal profile for updosing in urticaria, that is, strong clinical efficacy and freedom from unwanted side effects, particularly sedation. Bilastine is a highly effective H₁ -antihistamine even when used at the basic dose of 20 mg daily. Its facilitated uptake after oral dosage gives it a rapid onset and long duration of action. In both wheal and flare studies and in urticaria updosing fourfold showed increased effectiveness. With respect to somnolence, bilastine is a substrate for P-glycoprotein, a membrane pump which prevents it crossing the blood-brain barrier. Consequently, bilastine is a practically 'non-sedating' H₁ -antihistamine. In conclusion, the excellent profile of bilastine in both efficacy and safety make it the ideal H₁ -antihistamine for updosing the daily dose fourfold in difficult-to-treat urticaria as recommended by the EAACI/GA² LEN/EDF/WAO guideline for the management of urticaria.

Glucose ingestion causes cardiac repolarization disturbances in type 1 long QT syndrome patients and healthy subjects

BACKGROUND

Both hypoglycemia and severe hyperglycemia constitute known risk factors for cardiac repolarization changes potentially leading to malignant arrhythmias. Patients with loss of function mutations in KCNQ1 are characterized by long QT syndrome (LQTS) and may be at increased risk for glucose-induced repolarization disturbances.

OBJECTIVE

The purpose of this study was to test the hypothesis that KCNQ1 LQTS patients are at particular risk for cardiac repolarization changes during the relative hyperglycemia that occurs after an oral glucose load.

METHODS

Fourteen KCNQ1 LQTS patients and 28 control participants matched for gender, body mass index, and age underwent a 3-hour oral 75-g glucose tolerance test with ECGs obtained at 7 time points. Fridericia corrected QT interval (QTcF), Bazett corrected QT interval (QTcB), and the Morphology Combination Score (MCS) were calculated.

RESULTS

QTc and MCS increased in both groups. MCS remained elevated until 150 minutes after glucose ingestion, and the maximal change from baseline was larger among KCNQ1 LQTS patients compared with control subjects (0.28 ± 0.27 vs 0.15 ± 0.13; P <.05).

CONCLUSION

Relative hyperglycemia induced by ingestion of 75-g glucose caused cardiac repolarization disturbances that were more severe in KCNQ1 LQTS patients compared with control subjects.

The role and choice criteria of antihistamines in allergy management - expert opinion

Allergic diseases are the most common chronic conditions lasting throughout the patient’s life. They not only cause significant deterioration in the quality of life of patients but also lead to significant absenteeism and reduced productivity, resulting in very high costs for society. Effective and safe treatment of allergic diseases is therefore one of the main challenges for public health and should be carried out by all the specialists in family medicine, internists and paediatricians in collaboration with allergists, otorhinolaryngologists and dermatologists. Antihistamines are most commonly used in the treatment of allergies. Several dozen drugs are available on the pharmaceutical market, and their generic forms are advertised widely as very effective drugs for the treatment of allergic diseases. What is the truth? What are the data from clinical trials and observational studies? Are all drugs equally effective and safe for the patient? According to a panel of experts representing various fields of medicine, inappropriate treatment of allergies can be very risky for patients, and seemingly equally acting medications may differ greatly. Therefore, a panel of experts gathered the latest data from the entire scientific literature and analysed the latest standards and recommendations prepared by scientific societies. This paper provides a summary of these studies and highlights the importance for the patient of the proper choice of drug to treat his allergies.

Safety and tolerability of bilastine 10 mg administered for 12 weeks in children with allergic diseases

BACKGROUND

Regulations on medicinal products for paediatric use require that pharmacokinetics and safety be characterized specifically in the paediatric population. A previous study established that a 10-mg dose of bilastine in children aged 2 to <12 years provided an equivalent systemic exposure as 20 mg in adults. The current study assessed the safety and tolerability of bilastine 10 mg in children with allergic rhinoconjunctivitis and chronic urticaria.

METHODS

In this phase III, multicentre, double-blind study, children were randomized to once-daily treatment with bilastine 10-mg oral dispersible table (n = 260) or placebo (n = 249) for 12 weeks. Safety evaluations included treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs), laboratory tests, cardiac safety (ECG recordings) and somnolence/sedation using the Pediatric Sleep Questionnaire (PSQ).

RESULTS

The primary hypothesis of non-inferiority between bilastine 10 mg and placebo was demonstrated on the basis of a near-equivalent proportion of children in each treatment arm without TEAEs during 12 weeks' treatment (31.5 vs. 32.5%). No clinically relevant differences between bilastine 10 mg and placebo were observed from baseline to study end for TEAEs or related TEAEs, ECG parameters and PSQ scores. The majority of TEAEs were mild or moderate in intensity. TEAEs led to discontinuation of two patients treated with bilastine 10 mg and one patient treated with placebo.

CONCLUSIONS

Bilastine 10 mg had a safety and tolerability profile similar to that of placebo in children aged 2 to <12 years with allergic rhinoconjunctivitis or chronic urticaria.

Treatment of allergic rhinitis and urticaria: a review of the newest antihistamine drug bilastine

Allergic rhinitis and urticaria are common allergic diseases that may have a major negative impact on patients' quality of life. Bilastine, a novel new-generation antihistamine that is highly selective for the H1 histamine receptor, has a rapid onset and prolonged duration of action. This agent does not interact with the cytochrome P450 system and does not undergo significant metabolism in humans, suggesting that it has very low potential for drug-drug interactions, and does not require dose adjustment in renal impairment. As bilastine is not metabolized and is excreted largely unchanged, hepatic impairment is not expected to increase systemic exposure above the drug's safety margin. Bilastine has demonstrated similar efficacy to cetirizine and desloratadine in patients with seasonal allergic rhinitis and, in a Vienna Chamber study, a potentially longer duration of action than fexofenadine in patients with asymptomatic seasonal allergic rhinitis. It has also shown significant efficacy (similar to that of cetirizine) and safety in the long-term treatment of perennial allergic rhinitis. Bilastine showed similar efficacy to levocetirizine in patients with chronic spontaneous urticaria and can be safely used at doses of up to fourfold higher than standard dosage (80 mg once daily). The fourfold higher than standard dose is specified as an acceptable second-line treatment option for urticaria in international guidelines. Bilastine is generally well tolerated, both at standard and at supratherapeutic doses, appears to have less sedative potential than other second-generation antihistamines, and has no cardiotoxicity. Based on its pharmacokinetic properties, efficacy, and tolerability profile, bilastine will be valuable in the management of allergic rhinitis and urticaria.

Bilastine: new insight into antihistamine treatment

Bilastine is a new second generation H1-antihistamine recently approved for the symptomatic treatment of allergic rhinitis (AR) and chronic urticaria (CU). Bilastine epitomizes the evolution of research on antihistamines concerning both efficacy and safety. In AR treatment, a number of large controlled clinical trials documented its efficacy, as assessed by improvement of all nasal and ocular symptoms and quality of life. These outcomes show that bilastine meets current EAACI/ARIA criteria for medications used in the treatment of AR. Also in CU, the review of the literature indicates that once-daily treatment with bilastine 20 mg was effective in managing symptoms and improving patient's quality of life. Concerning safety and tolerability, the profile of bilastine is very similar to placebo and in particular the adverse effects on central nervous system are insignificant. The balance of efficacy and safety of bilastine is particularly helpful when dosages higher than standard are needed to control the symptoms, as frequently occurs in patients with urticaria, in whom antihistamines doses up to four times the standard dose may be administered.

Pro-arrhythmic potential of oral antihistamines (H1): combining adverse event reports with drug utilization data across Europe

Background

There is appreciable utilisation of antihistamines (H₁) in European countries, either prescribed by physician and purchased by patients for self-medication. Terfenadine and astemizole underwent regulatory restrictions in ’90 because of their cardiac toxicity, but only scarce clinical data are available on other antihistamines.

Aim

To investigate the pro-arrhythmic potential of antihistamines by combining safety reports of the FDA Adverse Event Reporting System (FAERS) with drug utilization data from 13 European Countries.

Methods

We identified signals of antihistamine arrhythmogenic potential by analyzing FAERS database for all cases of Torsades de Pointes (TdP), QT abnormalities (QTabn), ventricular arrhythmia (VA) and sudden cardiac death/cardiac arrest (SCD/CA). Number of cases ≥3 and disproportionality were used to define alert signals: TdP and QTabn identified stronger signals, whereas SCD/CA identified weaker signals. Drug utilization data from 2005 to 2010 were collected from administrative databases through health authorities and insurance.

Results

Antihistamines were reported in 109 cases of TdP/QT prolongation, 278 VA and 610 SCD/CA. Five agents resulted in stronger signals (cetirizine, desloratadine, diphenhydramine, fexofenadine, loratadine) and 6 in weaker signals (alimemazine, carbinoxamine, cyclizine, cyproeptadine, dexchlorpheniramine and doxylamine). Exposure to antihistamines with stronger signal was markedly different across European countries and was at least 40% in each Country. Cetirizine was >29 Defined Daily Doses per 1000 inhabitants per day (DID) in Norway, desloratadine >11 DID in France and loratadine >9 DID in Sweden and Croatia. Drugs with weaker signals accounted for no more than 10% (in Sweden) and in most European countries their use was negligible.

Conclusions

Some second-generation antihistamines are associated with signal of torsadogenicity and largely used in most European countries. Although confirmation by analytical studies is required, regulators and clinicians should consider risk-minimisation activities. Also antihistamines without signal but with peculiar use in a few Countries (e.g., levocetirizine) or with increasing consumption (e.g., rupatadine) deserve careful surveillance.

Cardiovascular safety of antihistamines

Histamine is a mediator, which increases the permeability of capillaries during the early phase of allergic reaction, causes smooth muscle contraction of bronchi and stimulates mucous glands in the nasal cavity. Antihistamines are the basis of symptomatic treatment in the majority of allergic diseases, especially allergic rhinitis, allergic conjunctivitis, urticaria and anaphylaxis. The cardiotoxic effects of the two withdrawn drugs, terfenadine and astemizole, were manifested by prolonged QT intervals and triggering torsades de pointes (TdP) caused by blockade of the ‘rapid’ I_Kr potassium channels. These phenomena, however, are not a class effect. This review deals with a new generation of antihistamine drugs in the context of QT interval prolongation risk.

Evaluation of the single-dose pharmacokinetics of bilastine in subjects with various degrees of renal insufficiency

BACKGROUND

Bilastine is a novel second-generation H1 antihistamine, which has not shown sedative or cardiotoxic effects in clinical trials and in post-marketing experience so far, developed for the symptomatic treatment of allergic rhinoconjunctivitis and urticaria. It has recently been granted marketing authorization for these therapeutic indications in adults and adolescents at a once-daily oral dose of 20 mg in several European countries.

OBJECTIVE

This study was conducted to determine the pharmacokinetics of bilastine at a single oral dose of 20 mg in renally impaired subjects. The need for a dose adjustment in patients with renal insufficiency was assessed by comparing the exposure to bilastine in these subjects with the estimated exposure of a dose corresponding to the safety margin.

METHODS

The study was an open-label, single-dose, parallel-group study of the pharmacokinetics and safety of a single dose of bilastine. The study was conducted as an in-patient setting at a clinical pharmacology facility. A total of 24 male or female subjects aged 18-80 years were to be enrolled in four groups of six subjects each. The groups were as follows: (1) healthy [glomerular filtration rate (GFR) >80 mL/min/1.73 m(2)]; (2) mild renal insufficiency (GFR 50-80 mL/min/1.73 m(2)); (3) moderate renal insufficiency (GFR 30-50 mL/min/1.73 m(2)); and (4) severe renal insufficiency (GFR ≤30 mL/min/1.73 m(2)). A single 20 mg bilastine tablet was administered in a fasted state. Blood and urine samples were collected from pre-dose up to 72 h post-dose for bilastine pharmacokinetic analysis. Pharmacokinetic results were summarized using appropriate descriptive statistics.

RESULTS

There was a clear trend of increasing area under the plasma concentration-time curve (AUC) and maximum plasma concentration (C(max)) through the groups 1-4. The mean AUC from time zero to infinity (AUC(∞)) ranged from 737.4 to 1708.5 ng·h/mL in healthy subjects and severely impaired subjects, respectively. No significant differences among groups in median time to reach Cmax (tmax) or in the mean terminal disposition rate constants for bilastine were found. Renal and plasma clearance paralleled GFR. In all groups of renally impaired subjects the corresponding 90 % confidence interval of both AUC(∞) and AUC from time zero to time of last measurable plasma concentration (AUC(last)) were not within the 0.8-1.25 interval, indicating that bioequivalence between groups could not be demonstrated. The majority of bilastine was excreted within the first 12 h, and elimination was essentially complete by 72 h.

CONCLUSION

An oral dose of bilastine (20 mg) was well-tolerated in renal insufficiency, despite the increase in exposure. The oral plasma clearance to renal clearance ratio [(CL(P)/F)/CL(R)] was approximately equal in the different groups, suggesting that renal excretion was the main elimination route for bilastine, and no alternative elimination routes were used even in severe renal insufficiency. Although exposure to bilastine was higher in renally impaired subjects, it remained well within the safety margins, thus allowing the conclusion that a 20-mg daily dose can be safely administered to subjects with different degrees of renal insufficiency without the need for dose adjustments.

Up-dosing with bilastine results in improved effectiveness in cold contact urticaria

Background

Cold contact urticaria (CCU) is characterized by itchy wheal and flare responses due to the release of histamine and other pro-inflammatory mediators after exposure to cold. The treatment of choice is nonsedating antihistamines, dosages of which may be increased up to fourfold if standard doses are ineffective. Here, we assess the effects of a standard 20 mg dose and up-dosing to 40 and 80 mg of bilastine in reducing the symptoms of CCU and inflammatory mediator release following cold challenge.

Methods

Twenty patients with CCU were included in this randomized, crossover, double-blind, placebo-controlled 12-week study. They received placebo, 20, 40 or 80 mg of bilastine daily each for 7 days with 14-day washout periods. The primary readout was change in critical temperature thresholds (CTT). Secondary readouts were changes in pruritus, levels of histamine IL-6, IL-8 and TNF-α collected by skin microdialysis and safety and tolerability of bilastine.

Results

Bilastine 20 mg was highly effective (P < 0.0001) in reducing CTT. Up-dosing to 80 mg significantly (P < 0.04) increased its effectiveness. At this dose, 19 of 20 (95%) patients responded to treatment, with 12 of 20 (60%) becoming symptom free. Only one patient was refractory to treatment. Microdialysis levels of histamine, IL-6 and IL-8 assessed 1–3 h after cold challenge were significantly (P < 0.05) decreased following up-dosing with 80 mg bilastine. Bilastine treat-ment was well tolerated without evidence of increased sedation with dose escala-tion.

Conclusions

Bilastine was effective in reducing the symptoms of patients with CCU. Increased efficacy of bilastine with fourfold up-dosing was without sedation and supports urticaria treatment guidelines.

Critical appraisal of bilastine for the treatment of allergic rhinoconjunctivitis and urticaria

Bilastine is a second generation antihistamine indicated for the treatment of seasonal or perennial allergic rhinoconjunctivitis and chronic urticaria with a daily dose of 20 mg, in adults and children over 12 years of age. The efficacy of bilastine has been shown to be similar to that of the comparator drugs for the control of the nasal and nonnasal symptoms of allergic rhinoconjunctivitis, while also showing a subjective improvement in the quality of life and in overall clinical impression. For chronic urticaria the symptoms (itching and the development of papules) lessens from the second day of treatment onwards, in a similar way to other antihistamines used as comparators. Bilastine should not be administered at meal times to avoid interference with the absorption process. It is not distributed to the central nervous system, is scarcely metabolized, and elimination is through the kidneys and feces, with a 14-hour elimination half-life. It has no effect on cytochrome P450. During clinical development, bilastine was shown to be a drug that is adequately tolerated, with a similar effect to placebo with regard to drowsiness and changes in heart rate. In relation to its use, headaches were the most frequent adverse effect to be reported. No cardiotoxic effects have been observed, and the therapeutic dose does not alter the state of alertness.

Bilastine: in allergic rhinitis and urticaria

Bilastine is an orally administered, second-generation antihistamine used in the symptomatic treatment of seasonal or perennial allergic rhinoconjunctivitis and urticaria. In two well designed phase III trials, 14 days' treatment with bilastine was associated with a significantly lower area under the effect curve (AUEC) for the reflective total symptom score (TSS) than placebo in patients with symptomatic seasonal allergic rhinitis. Additionally, reflective nasal symptom scores were significantly lower in bilastine than placebo recipients in patients with a history of seasonal allergic rhinitis who were challenged with grass pollen allergen in a single-centre, phase II study. Neither bilastine nor cetirizine was effective in the treatment of perennial allergic rhinitis with regard to the mean AUEC for reflective TSS in another well designed phase III trial. However, results may have been altered by differences in some baseline characteristics and placebo responses between study countries. In another well designed phase III trial, compared with placebo, bilastine was associated with a significantly greater change from baseline to day 28 in the mean reflective daily urticaria symptom score in patients with chronic urticaria. There were no significant differences in primary endpoint results between bilastine and any of the active comparators used in these trials (i.e. cetirizine, levocetirizine and desloratadine). Bilastine was generally well tolerated, with a tolerability profile that was generally similar to that of the other second-generation antihistamines included in phase III clinical trials.