Literature DB >> 11057352

Comparative study of clinical efficacy and tolerance in seasonal allergic conjunctivitis management with 0.1% olopatadine hydrochloride versus 0.05% ketotifen fumarate.

A J Aguilar.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: To compare the clinical efficacy and tolerance of 0.1% olopatadine hydrochloride (OHC) versus 0.05% ketotifen fumarate (KF) in the management of allergic conjunctivitis.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: Eighty adult patients with a history of allergy (allergic conjunctivitis, hay fever, asthmatic bronchitis and dermatitis) that were showing allergic conjunctivitis signs and symptoms (itching, hyperemia, mucous discharge and tearing) at the time of inclusion in this study were evaluated. Patients were divided in two groups, A and B. Group A patients were treated with OHC and group B patients were treated with KF. Both groups received one drop in the affected eye every 12 hrs. The start time of this study was the first patient visit, in which the medication was instilled for the first time. Both groups of patients were evaluated 30 min, 48 hr., 7 days and 14 days later. Local tolerance of each medication was evaluated.
RESULTS: Clinical improvement of the signs and symptoms of allergic conjunctivitis occurred in 42.5% to 62.5% of the patients in Group A when assessed 30 min following the first topical ocular dose of olopatadine. However, mucous discharge was not affected. Forty-eight (48) hrs. after the first instillation, improvements in 57.5% to 75% of the patients were shown in every evaluated parameter. After 7 days of treatment, positive clinical results were observed in 80% to 87.5% of the treated patients. Except for the patients that were dismissed from the study before the seventh day of treatment due to the absence of therapeutic response (4/40), all patients satisfactorily completed the therapeutic plan by the seventh day. No intolerance reactions were observed in patients of this group. In Group B patients (KF), clinical improvement of the signs and symptoms measured in the study was shown in 20.0% to 47.5% 30 min after instillation. As observed with olopatadine, no improvement in the number of patients showing mucous discharge was noted at the 30-min time point. At 48 hr. after the first instillation, 27.5% to 48% of patients showed improvement in every evaluated parameter. After 7 days of treatment, improvement was observed in 60% to 75% of patients. On Day 14, positive responses were observed in 67.5% to 75% of patients. Seventeen and one-half percent of the patients were dismissed from the study before the seventh day of treatment due to the absence of a therapeutic response. Approximately 23% of the patients had mild reactions of intolerance (stinging) which was not a cause to discontinue the treatment.
CONCLUSION: Olopatadine hydrochloride controlled allergic conjunctivitis symptoms and signs more rapidly and to a greater extent than ketotifen fumarate. Fewer cases of treatment failure were noted with OHC, and no local intolerance reactions were observed, while KF triggered mild reactions (stinging) in 23% of patients.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2000        PMID: 11057352     DOI: 10.1034/j.1600-0420.2000.078s230052.x

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Acta Ophthalmol Scand Suppl        ISSN: 1395-3931


  13 in total

1.  Brain histamine H receptor occupancy of orally administered antihistamines measured by positron emission tomography with (11)C-doxepin in a placebo-controlled crossover study design in healthy subjects: a comparison of olopatadine and ketotifen.

Authors:  Manabu Tashiro; Hideki Mochizuki; Yumiko Sakurada; Kenji Ishii; Keiichi Oda; Yuichi Kimura; Toru Sasaki; Kiichi Ishiwata; Kazuhiko Yanai
Journal:  Br J Clin Pharmacol       Date:  2006-01       Impact factor: 4.335

2.  Double-masked, randomized, parallel-group study comparing olopatadine 0.1% ophthalmic solution with cromolyn sodium 2% and levocabastine 0.05% ophthalmic preparations in children with seasonal allergic conjunctivitis.

Authors:  Giorgio Ciprandi; Darell Turner; Robert D Gross
Journal:  Curr Ther Res Clin Exp       Date:  2004-03

Review 3.  Emerging Therapeutics for Ocular Surface Disease.

Authors:  Leonard Bielory; Dovid Schoenberg
Journal:  Curr Allergy Asthma Rep       Date:  2019-02-28       Impact factor: 4.806

Review 4.  Ocular allergy in pediatric practice.

Authors:  Mark B Abelson; David Granet
Journal:  Curr Allergy Asthma Rep       Date:  2006-07       Impact factor: 4.806

Review 5.  A review of the use of olopatadine in allergic conjunctivitis.

Authors:  James I McGill
Journal:  Int Ophthalmol       Date:  2004-05       Impact factor: 2.031

Review 6.  Efficacy and tolerability of newer antihistamines in the treatment of allergic conjunctivitis.

Authors:  Leonard Bielory; Kenneth W Lien; Steve Bigelsen
Journal:  Drugs       Date:  2005       Impact factor: 9.546

Review 7.  Ocular allergy guidelines: a practical treatment algorithm.

Authors:  Leonard Bielory
Journal:  Drugs       Date:  2002       Impact factor: 9.546

Review 8.  Ocular itch associated with allergic conjunctivitis: latest evidence and clinical management.

Authors:  Stacey Ackerman; Lisa M Smith; Paulo J Gomes
Journal:  Ther Adv Chronic Dis       Date:  2016-01       Impact factor: 5.091

9.  Treatment of allergic conjunctivitis with olopatadine hydrochloride eye drops.

Authors:  Eiichi Uchio
Journal:  Clin Ophthalmol       Date:  2008-09

Review 10.  Ocular allergy treatment comparisons: azelastine and olopatadine.

Authors:  Leonard Bielory; Praveen Buddiga; Stephen Bigelson
Journal:  Curr Allergy Asthma Rep       Date:  2004-07       Impact factor: 4.919

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.