A PHP Error was encountered

Severity: Warning

Message: file_get_contents(https://...@pubfacts.com&api_key=b8daa3ad693db53b1410957c26c9a51b4908&a=1): Failed to open stream: HTTP request failed! HTTP/1.1 429 Too Many Requests

Filename: helpers/my_audit_helper.php

Line Number: 176

Backtrace:

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 176
Function: file_get_contents

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 250
Function: simplexml_load_file_from_url

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 3122
Function: getPubMedXML

File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 575
Function: pubMedSearch_Global

File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 489
Function: pubMedGetRelatedKeyword

File: /var/www/html/index.php
Line: 316
Function: require_once

Comparative antiallergic effects of second-generation H1-antihistamines ebastine, cetirizine and loratadine in preclinical models. | LitMetric

Comparative antiallergic effects of second-generation H1-antihistamines ebastine, cetirizine and loratadine in preclinical models.

Arzneimittelforschung

Department of Pharmacological Development, Almirall Prodesfarma, Research Centre, Cardener 68-74, 08024-Barcelona, Spain.

Published: April 2003

Ebastine (CAS 90729-43-4), cetirizine (CAS 83881-51-0) and loratadine (CAS 79794-75-5) are second generation H1-antihistamines of proven efficacy for treating allergy. Recent clinical studies have found ebastine to be more effective than cetirizine or loratadine in alleviating the symptoms of seasonal allergic rhinitis. The objective of this study was to compare the efficacy of these compounds in three guinea-pig modeles of bronchoconstriction, elicited either by histamine, allergen or leukotriene C4 in order to shed light onto the mechanisms that might explain differences found in clinical studies. In the present experiments, ebastine and cetirizine were equipotent against aerosol histamine-induced bronchospasm in guinea pigs (ED50 115 and 100 micrograms/kg p.o., respectively), while loratadine was three-fold less potent. In the same model the effects of ebastine, loratadine and cetirizine lasted 21, 19 and 15 h, respectively. Ebastine (ED50 334 micrograms/kg p.o.) was the most potent compound in inhibiting allergen-induced bronchospasm in conscious guinea pigs. In vitro studies in tracheally perfused guinea pig lungs demonstrated that ebastine and loratadine inhibited with equal potency the bronchoconstriction induced by leukotriene C4 whilst cetirizine was significantly less potent. Finally, in another in vivo study, ebastine reverted the changes in pulmonary resistance induced by leukotriene C4 in anaesthetised guinea pigs, whereas cetirizine and loratadine were devoid of activity in this model. In accordance with the clinical data, ebastine proved to be the substance with the widest range of application in animal experiments, too.

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://dx.doi.org/10.1055/s-0031-1297078DOI Listing

Publication Analysis

Top Keywords

cetirizine loratadine
12
guinea pigs
12
ebastine
9
ebastine cetirizine
8
clinical studies
8
ebastine loratadine
8
induced leukotriene
8
cetirizine
7
loratadine
7
comparative antiallergic
4

Similar Publications

Want AI Summaries of new PubMed Abstracts delivered to your In-box?

Enter search terms and have AI summaries delivered each week - change queries or unsubscribe any time!