Literature DB >> 18225707

Allergic rhinitis: continuous or on demand antihistamine therapy?

J Montoro1, J Sastre, I Jáuregui, J Bartra, I Dávila, A del Cuvillo, M Ferrer, J Mullol, A Valero.   

Abstract

Allergic rhinitis is an inflammatory disease of the nasal mucosa, caused by an IgE-mediated reaction after exposure to the allergen to which the patient is sensitized. Histamine is the most important preformed mediator released in the early stage of the allergic reaction, and also contributes to the late phase of the latter, exhibiting proinflammatory effects. Minimal persistent inflammation is a physiopathological phenomenon induced by the presence of an inflammatory cell infiltrate, together with ICAM-1 expression in the epithelial cells of the mucosa exposed to the allergen to which they are sensitized, in the absence of clinical symptoms. This molecule is considered to be an allergic inflammatory marker. The priming effect first described by Connell in 1968 consists of the reduction in the allergen concentration required to elicit a nasal hyper-response when performing a daily nasal exposure test. This implies that with natural exposure to inhaled allergens, small amounts of environmental allergen will maintain the patient symptoms, and thus of course minimal persistent inflammation. Considering the above, it is questionable whether antihistamines should be administered on a continuous basis or upon demand. The antihistamines, and fundamentally the second-generation drugs, have been shown to exert an antiinflammatory effect, and this effect is greater when the drug is administered continuously than when administered upon demand. Likewise, a reduction in treatment cost and an improvement in quality of life among patients treated on a continuous basis has been documented. However, no studies have been specifically designed to clarify the indication of treatment on a continuous basis or upon demand, as occurs in the GINA. As a result, the individualization of treatment according to the concrete characteristics of each patient seems to be the best approach, at least for the time being.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2007        PMID: 18225707

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Investig Allergol Clin Immunol        ISSN: 1018-9068            Impact factor:   4.333


  5 in total

1.  Establishment of a new animal model of allergic rhinitis with biphasic sneezing by intranasal sensitization with Staphylococcal enterotoxin B.

Authors:  Rong Sun; Xinye Tang; Hongbing Yao; Suling Hong; Yang Yang; Wei Kou; Ping Wei
Journal:  Exp Ther Med       Date:  2015-05-21       Impact factor: 2.447

Review 2.  Minimal persistent inflammation in allergic rhinitis: implications for current treatment strategies.

Authors:  G W Canonica; E Compalati
Journal:  Clin Exp Immunol       Date:  2009-08-25       Impact factor: 4.330

3.  Impact of allergic rhinitis and specific subcutaneous immunotherapy on peripheral blood basophils of patients sensitized to Dermatophagoides pteronyssinus.

Authors:  Ana Lopes; Patrícia Azenha; Cristina Teodósio; Maria Inácio; Isabel Silva; Graça Loureiro; António Martinho; António S Luís; Hélder Trindade; Celso Pereira; Artur Paiva
Journal:  Allergy Asthma Clin Immunol       Date:  2013-10-11       Impact factor: 3.406

4.  Ethnobotanical study of curative plants used by traditional healers to treat rhinitis in the Limpopo Province, South Africa.

Authors:  Sebua Silas Semenya; Alfred Maroyi
Journal:  Afr Health Sci       Date:  2018-12       Impact factor: 0.927

5.  Role of antioxidants on the clinical outcome of patients with perennial allergic rhinitis.

Authors:  Bhushan Chauhan; Manish Gupta; Komal Chauhan
Journal:  Allergy Rhinol (Providence)       Date:  2016-01
  5 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.