Allergic Rhinitis: A Review.

Importance: Allergic rhinitis affects an estimated 15% of the US population (approximately 50 million individuals) and is associated with the presence of asthma, eczema, chronic or recurrent sinusitis, cough, and both tension and migraine headaches. Observations: Allergic rhinitis occurs when disruption of the epithelial barrier allows allergens to penetrate the mucosal epithelium of nasal passages, inducing a T-helper type 2 inflammatory response and production of allergen-specific IgE. Allergic rhinitis typically presents with symptoms of nasal congestion, rhinorrhea, postnasal drainage, sneezing, and itching of the eyes, nose, and throat. In an international study, the most common symptoms of allergic rhinitis were rhinorrhea (90.38%) and nasal congestion (94.23%). Patients with nonallergic rhinitis present primarily with nasal congestion and postnasal drainage frequently associated with sinus pressure, ear plugging, muffled sounds and pain, and eustachian tube dysfunction that is less responsive to nasal corticosteroids. Patients with seasonal allergic rhinitis typically have physical examination findings of edematous and pale turbinates. Patients with perennial allergic rhinitis typically have erythematous and inflamed turbinates with serous secretions that appear similar to other forms of chronic rhinitis at physical examination. Patients with nonallergic rhinitis have negative test results for specific IgE aeroallergens. Intermittent allergic rhinitis is defined as symptoms occurring less than 4 consecutive days/week or less than 4 consecutive weeks/year. Persistent allergic rhinitis is defined as symptoms occurring more often than 4 consecutive days/week and for more than 4 consecutive weeks/year. Patients with allergic rhinitis should avoid inciting allergens. In addition, first-line treatment for mild intermittent or mild persistent allergic rhinitis may include a second-generation H1 antihistamine (eg, cetirizine, fexofenadine, desloratadine, loratadine) or an intranasal antihistamine (eg, azelastine, olopatadine), whereas patients with persistent moderate to severe allergic rhinitis should be treated initially with an intranasal corticosteroid (eg, fluticasone, triamcinolone, budesonide, mometasone) either alone or in combination with an intranasal antihistamine. In contrast, first-line therapy for patients with nonallergic rhinitis consists of an intranasal antihistamine as monotherapy or in combination with an intranasal corticosteroid. Conclusions and Relevance: Allergic rhinitis is associated with symptoms of nasal congestion, sneezing, and itching of the eyes, nose, and throat. Patients with allergic rhinitis should be instructed to avoid inciting allergens. Therapies include second-generation H1 antihistamines (eg, cetirizine, fexofenadine, desloratadine, loratadine), intranasal antihistamines (eg, azelastine, olopatadine), and intranasal corticosteroids (eg, fluticasone, triamcinolone, budesonide, mometasone) and should be selected based on the severity and frequency of symptoms and patient preference.

Comparing the Risk of Infusion-Related Reactions and Tolerability in Patients Given Cetirizine or Diphenhydramine Prior to Ocrelizumab Infusion (PRECEPT).

Background: Ocrelizumab is an effective medication for multiple sclerosis. However, infusion-related reactions (IRRs) are a concern for patients and may lead to discontinuation of ocrelizumab. To minimize IRRs, pre-medications are administered. However, from our experience, these medications, especially diphenhydramine, can cause marked drowsiness. The primary objective of this study was to evaluate whether cetirizine is non-inferior to diphenhydramine in limiting the proportion and severity of reactions from ocrelizumab infusions. Methods: Twenty participants were serially randomized in a 1:1 ratio to receive 10 mg of cetirizine or 25 mg of diphenhydramine orally prior to their first three ocrelizumab infusions. Results: The rate of IRRs in this study was similar across both treatment groups with no increase in the risk of severity, and no grade 3 IRRs. Further, patients receiving cetirizine experienced a reduction in fatigue. While there was not a significant difference in global satisfaction, this score increased over time in the cetirizine arm while it remained unchanged in the diphenhydramine arm. Conclusions: Overall, our results suggest that cetirizine does not increase the risk of infusion-related reactions compared to diphenhydramine.

Efficacy of levocetirizine in isolated rat tracheal smooth muscle.

Histamine receptor-1 (H1) antagonists like levocetirizine are frequently used nowadays to treat rhinitis patients who experience rhinorrhea and sneezing. The trachea may be affected by the H1 antagonist when it is used to treat nasal symptoms, either orally or through inhalation. The purpose of this study was to ascertain in vitro effects of levocetirizine on isolated tracheal smooth muscle. As a parasympathetic mimetic, methacholine (10-6 M) causes contractions in tracheal smooth muscle, which is how we tested effectiveness of levocetirizine on isolated rat tracheal smooth muscle. We also tested the drug's impact on electrically induced tracheal smooth muscle contractions. The impact of menthol (either before or after) on the contraction brought on by 10-6 M methacholine was also investigated. According to the results, the addition of levocetirizine at concentrations of 10-5 M or more caused a slight relaxation in response to methacholine's 10-6 M contraction. Levocetirizine could prevent spike contraction brought on by electrical field stimulation (EFS). As the concentration rose, it alone had a neglect effect on the trachea's basal tension. Before menthol was applied, levocetirizine might have also inhibited the function of the cold receptor. According to this study, levocetirizine might potentially impede the parasympathetic function of the trachea. If levocetirizine was used prior to menthol addition, it also reduced the function of cold receptors.

Effects of second-generation H1-antihistamine drugs on angiogenesis in in vivo chick chorioallantoic membrane model.

BACKGROUND: Literature on the effects of second-generation H1-antihistamines on angiogenesis is limited. OBJECTIVES: To investigate the effects of cetirizine, desloratadine, and rupatadine (second-generation H1-antihistamines commonly used in dermatology clinics) on angiogenesis in an in vivo chick chorioallantoic membrane (CAM) model. METHODS: The study was approved by the local ethics committee on animal experimentation. Forty fertilized specific pathogen free eggs were incubated and kept under appropriate temperature and humidity control. Drug solutions were prepared in identical concentrations by dissolving powders in phosphate-buffered saline (PBS). On the third day of the incubation, a small window was opened on the CAM and 0.1 mL desloratadine (1.5 µg/0.1 mL) in the first group, 0.1 mL cetirizine (1.5 µg/0.1 mL) in the second group, 0.1 mL rupatadine in the third group (1.5 µg/0.1 mL), and PBS (0.1 mL) in the fourth group were administered by injection. On the eighth day of incubation, the vascular structures of the CAMs were macroscopically examined and standard digital photographs were taken. The digital images were analyzed and data including mean vessel density, thickness, and number were compared between groups. p < 0.05 was considered statistically significant. RESULTS: Vessel densities were similar in the desloratadine, cetirizine, and control groups, whereas they were significantly less in the rupatadine group (p = 0.01). Furthermore, the rupatadine group had significantly lower vessel thickness and number compared with the other groups (p < 0.05 for both). CONCLUSIONS: Rupatadine showed anti-angiogenic effects in the chick CAM model, compared with desloratadine and cetirizine. The anti-angiogenic effect of rupatadine could be due to its platelet-activating factor (PAF) receptor inhibition. Thus, rupatadine could be a treatment agent in pathological processes in which angiogenesis is responsible. Further studies with larger series are needed to clarify this potential.

Concomitant medication of cetirizine in advanced melanoma could enhance anti-PD-1 efficacy by promoting M1 macrophages polarization.

BACKGROUND: The clinical observation showed a potential additive effect of anti-PD-1 agents and cetirizine in patients with advanced melanoma. METHODS: Clinical outcomes of concomitant cetirizine/anti-PD-1 treatment of patients with stage IIIb-IV melanoma were retrospectively collected, and a transcriptomic analysis was performed on blood samples obtained at baseline and after 3 months of treatment. RESULTS: Patients treated with cetirizine concomitantly with an anti-PD-1 agent had significantly longer progression-free survival (PFS; mean PFS: 28 vs 15 months, HR 0.46, 95% CI: 0.28-0.76; p = 0.0023) and OS (mean OS was 36 vs 23 months, HR 0.48, 95% CI: 0.29-0.78; p = 0.0032) in comparison with those not receiving cetirizine. The concomitant treatment was significantly associated with ORR and DCR (p < 0.05). The expression of FCGR1A/CD64, a specific marker of macrophages, was increased after the treatment in comparison with baseline in blood samples from patients receiving cetirizine, but not in those receiving only the anti-PD1, and positively correlated with the expression of genes linked to the interferon pathway such as CCL8 (rho = 0.32; p = 0.0111), IFIT1 (rho = 0.29; p = 0.0229), IFIT3 (rho = 0.57; p < 0.0001), IFI27 (rho = 0.42; p = 0.008), MX1 (rho = 0.26; p = 0.0383) and RSAD2 (rho = 0.43; p = 0.0005). CONCLUSIONS: This retrospective study suggests that M1 macrophage polarization may be induced by cetirizine through the interferon-gamma pathway. This effect may synergize with the immunotherapy of advanced melanoma with anti-PD-1 agents.

Improving the Quality of Life in the Management of Allergic Rhinitis: New Perspective on Cetirizine.

BACKGROUND: Allergic rhinitis (AR) is associated with disturbed sleep and subsequent functioning, and an impaired quality of life (QoL). The symptoms of AR exhibit prominent circadian variations, with symptoms being more common at the night-time or early morning. Addressing these allergy-related sleep issues, impaired QoL, and circadian variation in symptoms is important from the patient perspective and should be considered in the management of AR. OBJECTIVE: To review the efficacy of cetirizine, a second-generation antihistamine and selective H1-receptor antagonist, in relation to improvement in the QoL of the patients, addressing the sleep disturbances and circadian variations in the symptoms of AR in clinical practice, and establishing its role as a contemporary antihistamine for the management of AR compared to newer antihistamines. METHODS: Systematic literature review of the databases such as PubMed/MEDLINE, Google Scholar, and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials from 1990 to 2020. RESULTS: The symptoms of AR exhibited a circadian variation, with symptoms being worse during the night and early morning. The patients with AR encountered several sleep-related symptoms, including poor sleep quality, daytime somnolence, fatigue, and impaired productivity and QoL. Impaired QoL in AR was related to the disease severity. Administration of cetirizine at bedtime provides effective control of sleep impairment and symptoms of AR, besides improving the QoL. The efficacy of cetirizine has been demonstrated to be superior or comparable to the newer second-generation antihistamines. Cetirizine exhibits a tolerability profile comparable to the newer antihistamines. CONCLUSION: With long years of clinical experience and a good tolerability profile, cetirizine represents a valuable therapeutic option for the management of AR, even 30 years after its introduction. Cetirizine is included in the National List of Essential Medicines of India for the management of allergic disorders in view of its established efficacy and safety profile as well as being a cost-effective option.

Mast cell function in prostate inflammation, fibrosis, and smooth muscle cell dysfunction.

Intraurethral inoculation of mice with uropathogenic Escherichia coli (CP1) results in prostate inflammation, fibrosis, and urinary dysfunction, recapitulating some but not all of the pathognomonic clinical features associated with benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH) and lower urinary tract symptoms (LUTS). In both patients with LUTS and CP1-infected mice, we observed increased numbers and activation of mast cells and elevated levels of prostate fibrosis. Therapeutic inhibition of mast cells using a combination of a mast cell stabilizer, cromolyn sodium, and the histamine 1 receptor antagonist cetirizine di-hydrochloride in the mouse model resulted in reduced mast cell activation in the prostate and significant alleviation of urinary dysfunction. Treated mice showed reduced prostate fibrosis, less infiltration of immune cells, and decreased inflammation. In addition, as opposed to symptomatic CP1-infected mice, treated mice showed reduced myosin light chain-2 phosphorylation, a marker of prostate smooth muscle contraction. These results show that mast cells play a critical role in the pathophysiology of urinary dysfunction and may be an important therapeutic target for men with BPH/LUTS.NEW & NOTEWORTHY LUTS-associated benign prostatic hyperplasia is derived from a combination of immune activation, extracellular matrix remodeling, hyperplasia, and smooth muscle cell contraction in prostates of men. Using a mouse model, we describe the importance of mast cells in regulating these multiple facets involved in the pathophysiology of LUTS. Mast cell inhibition alleviates both pathology and urinary dysfunction in this model, suggesting the potential for mast cell inhibition as a therapeutic that prevents and reverses pathology and associated symptomology.

Environmental exposure unit simulates natural seasonal birch pollen exposures while maximizing change in allergic symptoms.

BACKGROUND: Birch pollen is a prevalent aeroallergen during the springtime allergy season. In field studies, variable allergen exposure and environmental factors can affect data quality while environmental exposure units (EEUs) deliver controlled, standardized, and reproducible allergen exposures. OBJECTIVE: To inform study design for EEU trials evaluating antiallergic therapies. METHODS: In this prospective study, 76 participants with birch allergy experienced 3 exposures to birch pollen: (1) an out-of-season EEU challenge (two 3-hour sessions on consecutive days); (2) a natural seasonal exposure; and (3) an in-season EEU challenge (3-hour exposure for 2 weeks after birch pollen season initiation). RESULTS: The total nasal symptom score, total ocular symptom score, and total symptom score (TSS = total nasal symptom score plus total ocular symptom score) were assessed every 30 minutes and daily during EEU and natural exposures. A high association between TSSs and day 2 of the out-of-season and in-season EEU challenges was noted, with a good association between the maximum TSS during the natural and in-season EEU challenges, and natural season and day 2 of the out-of-season EEU challenge (P < .001 for all). Participants had higher maximum change from the baseline TSS during day 2 of the out-of-season EEU challenge (12.4) vs the following: (1) first day (9.8); (2) in-season EEU challenge (8.4); and (3) natural seasonal exposure (7.6) (P < .001 for all). CONCLUSION: A strong association was seen between the presence of allergy symptoms and exposure to birch pollen in the EEU (maximum change in symptom scores during day 2) and in the field. A hybrid trial design may be useful to demonstrate the clinical efficacy of novel antiallergic therapies requiring fewer participants and shorter timelines and expediting treatment availability.

Efficacy of Cetirizine 1% Versus Minoxidil 5% Topical Solution in the Treatment of Male Alopecia: A Randomized, Single-blind Controlled Study.

PURPOSE: Prostaglandins play a pivotal role in modulating hair growth cycle. Prostaglandin F2α and prostaglandin E have stimulating and prostaglandin D has inhibitory effects on hair follicle. Cetirizine inhibits release of prostaglandin D2 and stimulates the release of prostaglandin E2. In the present study, the efficacy and safety of twice daily application of topical cetirizine 1% versus minoxidil 5% solutions for 16 weeks were compared in male androgenetic alopecia (AGA). METHODS: Forty men, aged 18 to 49 years, were randomly divided into two equal groups to apply either cetirizine 1% or minoxidil 5% solutions. The study was divided into two phases, a 16-week treatment phase either with cetirizine or minoxidil (anagen phase), followed by an 8-week drug-free (telogen phase) with a follow-up when patients used placebo. Efficacy outcomes included the change in total hair density, vellus and terminal hair density, hair diameter and the percentage of hair in anagen and telogen phases from baseline in 16 and 24 weeks. RESULTS: After 16 weeks, we observed a significant increase in total and vellus hair density in both minoxidil and cetirizine groups, but the improvement was much higher in the minoxidil group. The percentage of hair in the anagen phase also increased in both groups after 16 weeks of treatment, but then diminished after 8 weeks of placebo consumption. No significant adverse reactions associated with the administration of cetirizine solution were reported. CONCLUSION: Cetirizine 1% solution was effective in hair growth without any complications for treatment of male AGA.

A new treatment of alopecia induced by palbociclib: Topical cetirizine.

INTRODUCTION: Recently CDK4/6 inhibitors have been introduced for the treatment of hormone positive breast cancer resistant to endocrine therapy. Among their side effects, alopecia is often reported being associated to patients' distress and depressive symptoms. CASE REPORT: We report the case of a 70-year-old woman affected by breast cancer in treatment with Palbociclib, who developed alopecia.Management and Outcome: We prescribed a topical solution with cetirizine. Global photography, trichoscopy and trichogram were assessed. All evaluations demonstrated alopecia improvement. DISCUSSION: Currently, no treatment options for CDK 4/6 inhibitors induced alopecia have been proposed. Herein, we report the use of topical cetirizine.

Cetirizine inhibits gender-specific blood cell dynamics upon allergen contact in allergic rhinitis.

IgE-mediated inflammatory responses upon allergen contact in allergic rhinitis (AR) are associated with rapid alterations of circulating blood cell numbers detectable in a complete blood count (CBC). Aim of this study was to evaluate whether intake of antihistamines may modulate allergen-induced CBC dynamics in male and female patients. A total of N = 112 specific allergen challenges were performed in otherwise healthy AR subjects. Seventy-two (n = 72) subjects received placebo and forty (n = 40) received cetirizine (H1-receptor antagonist) per os prior to allergen exposure in a randomized, double-blind trial at the Vienna Challenge Chamber (VCC); a subgroup of twenty-five (n = 25) subjects received cetirizine and placebo on different study days (parallel group). Blood samples and symptom scores were taken at baseline and immediately after 6 h of airway challenge simulating ambient allergen contact. Female sex was associated with a pronounced circulating monocyte increase (p < .01) and male sex with an eosinophil decrease (p < .05) in the placebo group, but not in cetirizine treated subjects. The significant increase in segmented neutrophils (p < .001) and decrease in circulating erythrocytes (p < .01) upon allergen challenge was less prominent after cetirizine intake in both sexes. A more prominent thrombocyte increase in female subjects (p < .05) was noted upon allergen exposure, regardless of prior cetirizine intake. Cetirizine inhibited the mobilization of neutrophils, lymphocytes and decline in erythrocyte numbers, but did not affect thrombocyte increase upon allergen challenge. It further diminished gender-specific blood cell dynamics. Overall, as reflected in a simple CBC, cetirizine critically diminished immediate and late innate immune responses subsequent to allergen exposure.

Intravenous Cetirizine Versus Intravenous Diphenhydramine for the Treatment of Acute Urticaria: A Phase III Randomized Controlled Noninferiority Trial.

STUDY OBJECTIVE: Acute urticaria is a frequent presentation in emergency departments (EDs), urgent care centers, and other clinical arenas. Treatment options are limited if diphenhydramine is the only intravenous antihistamine offered because of its short duration of action and well-known adverse effects. We evaluate cetirizine injection, the first second-generation injectable antihistamine, for acute urticaria in this multicenter, randomized, noninferiority, phase 3 clinical trial. METHODS: Adult patients presenting to EDs and urgent care centers with acute urticaria requiring an intravenous antihistamine were randomized to either intravenous cetirizine 10 mg or intravenous diphenhydramine 50 mg. The primary endpoint was the 2-hour pruritus score change from baseline, with time spent in treatment center and rate of return to treatment centers as key secondary endpoints. Frequency of sedation and anticholinergic adverse effects were also recorded. RESULTS: Among 262 enrolled patients, the 2-hour pruritus score change from baseline for intravenous cetirizine was statistically noninferior to that for intravenous diphenhydramine (-1.6 versus -1.5; 95% confidence interval -0.1 to 0.3), and in favor of cetirizine. Treatment differences also favored cetirizine for mean time spent in treatment center (1.7 versus 2.1 hours; P=.005), return to treatment center (5.5% versus 14.1%; P=.02), lower change from baseline sedation score at 2 hours (0.1 versus 0.5; P=.03), and adverse event rate (3.9% versus 13.3%). CONCLUSION: Intravenous cetirizine is an effective alternative to intravenous diphenhydramine for treating acute urticaria, with benefits of less sedation, fewer adverse events, shorter time spent in treatment center, and lower rates of revisit to treatment center.

Allergic inflammation of the anterior surface of the eye.

Background: Ocular allergies affect an estimated 40% of the population, 98% of which are because of allergic conjunctivitis and includes tear film dysfunction. With the current advent of both repurposed drugs for ocular allergies, as well as novel drugs, lubricants and methods of administration, there is a need to update new treatments to optimize the care of ocular allergy patients. Methods: An overview of mediators, clinical characteristics and management is provided in a summary format. Results: Lubricants (best when refrigerated provide immediate relief that is short lived (several minutes) due to its dilutional effect on mediators and pollen in the tear film. Immediate and longer-term benefit occurs from different topical and oral medications - primarily histamine receptor agonists. Conclusion: The newest prescription topical ophthalmic histamine H1 receptor antagonist (an inverse agonist) to be approved by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration in the past 10 years (U.S. NDA approved May 30, 2017) is cetirizine ophthalmic solution for the treatment of ocular itching with allergic conjunctivitis in adults and in children more than 2 years old.

Effect of diphenhydramine and cetirizine on immediate and late-phase cutaneous allergic reactions in healthy dogs: a randomized, double-blinded crossover study.

BACKGROUND: Currently, there is insufficient evidence to confirm oral diphenhydramine (DPH) efficacy to prevent mast cell degranulation and histamine release in dogs. HYPOTHESIS/OBJECTIVE: To determine and compare the effects oral of DPH and cetirizine on the immediate- and late-phase cutaneous allergic reactions in healthy dogs. ANIMALS: Twelve healthy laboratory beagle dogs. METHODS AND MATERIALS: The study was designed as a randomized, double-blinded crossover study in which each dog served as its own control; twice-daily oral DPH (2.2 mg/kg) or cetirizine (2 mg/kg) were given for six days with a two week washout period. Intradermal injections of histamine, compound 48/80 (positive control) and saline (negative control) were performed on the right thorax 10 days before drug administration (baseline), during oral antihistamine administration on Day 6 and 10 days after last medication dosage. Global wheal scores (GWS) at 20 min and late-phase reactions (LPR) at 6 h post-injection were evaluated by an investigator blinded to the drug and the interventions. RESULTS: Treatment with cetirizine significantly reduced histamine and compound 48/80 GWS and LPR compared to baseline; there was no significant difference for DPH. In all dogs, oral DPH and cetirizine reached plasma concentrations considered therapeutic in people. No adverse effect or behavioural changes were observed during the study. CONCLUSION AND CLINICAL SIGNIFICANCE: In conclusion, oral cetirizine was effective in preventing cutaneous allergic reactions without any obvious adverse effects in dogs. Oral DPH failed to show an inhibitory effect despite attaining plasma drug concentrations that are considered effective in people.

Efficacy of Desloratadine and Levocetirizine in Patients with Cedar Pollen-Induced Allergic Rhinitis: A Randomized, Double-Blind Study.

BACKGROUND: No comparative study of antihistamines that differ in structural system has been conducted in allergic rhinitis. OBJECTIVE: This was a randomized, double-blind, crossover comparative study to verify the efficacy of antihistamines that differ in structural system. METHODS: A total of 50 patients with moderate or more severe Japanese cedar pollen-induced allergic rhinitis were randomized to receive either placebo, desloratadine 5 mg (a tricyclic), or levocetirizine 5 mg (a piperazine). One dose of the study drug was orally administered at 9 pm on the day before a pollen exposure test, which was performed for 3 h (9 a.m. to 12 p.m.) to assess symptoms in an environmental challenge chamber (ECC). Nasal and ocular symptoms were compared at an airborne pollen level of 8,000 grains/m3. The primary endpoint was mean total nasal symptom score (TNSS) from 120 to 180 min in the ECC. Subjects with a difference of ≥1 in TNSS between 2 drugs were extracted to the relevant drug-responsive group. RESULTS: The difference in TNSS from placebo was -2.42 (p < 0.0001) with levocetirizine and -1.66 (p < 0.01) with desloratadine, showing that both drugs were significantly more effective than placebo in controlling symptoms, but with no statistically significant difference between the 2 drugs. There were 12 subjects in the desloratadine-responsive group and 24 subjects in the levocetirizine-responsive group, with no contributor to response was detected. CONCLUSION: Levocetirizine tended to control nasal symptoms more effectively than desloratadine. However, the response to each antihistamine varied among individuals and the predictors to the response are unknown. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: UMIN ID: UMIN000029653.

Real-life experience in the treatment of solar urticaria: retrospective cohort study.

BACKGROUND: Solar urticaria (SU) is a rare photodermatosis causing a significant impact on patients' quality of life (QoL), and treatment is often challenging. AIM: To analyse clinical experience with a tailored stepwise therapeutic approach. METHODS: A retrospective cohort design was used. Patients with suspected SU underwent laboratory investigations and photoprovocation. Those with a high minimal urticaria dose (MUD) were treated with a single antihistamine (protocol 1), and those with a lower MUD received three types of antihistamines (protocol 2); both protocols included a leucotriene receptor antagonist (LRA). In cases of failure, treatment was switched to omalizumab at doses of < 300 mg/month with incremental dosage increases as necessary (monthly dose range, 150-600 mg/month). Symptom relief and photoprovocation under treatment were evaluated. RESULTS: In total, 30 patients (10 men, 20 women) were enrolled. Most (87%) were sensitive to visible light (1-70 J/cm2 ) with or without extension to ultraviolet A. Of the 30 patients, 23 opted for our stepwise approach: 22 achieved complete remission on protocols 1 or 2 (n = 17) or after switching to omalizumab (n = 5), and another patient achieved partial remission under omalizumab. There were no treatment-related severe adverse effects. CONCLUSIONS: Symptoms of SU can be well controlled by treatment with antihistamines and an LRA tailored to the degree of photosensitivity, followed by omalizumab in refractory cases. This has important implications for patient QoL.

Cetirizine versus diphenhydramine in the prevention of chemotherapy-related hypersensitivity reactions.

OBJECTIVE: This study evaluated the role of cetirizine compared to diphenhydramine as premedications for patients receiving paclitaxel, cetuximab, and rituximab infusions. Historically, diphenhydramine has been linked with more sedation in comparison to cetirizine; however, it is unknown if cetirizine can replace diphenhydramine in the prevention of hypersensitivity reactions in patients receiving chemotherapy. METHODS: This is a retrospective study designed to assess infusion reactions occurring in patients receiving diphenhydramine or cetirizine premedication for rituximab, paclitaxel, or cetuximab therapies. Infusion reactions were defined as various symptoms such as flushing, itching, alterations in heart rate and blood pressure, and dyspnea plus the clinical setting of a concurrent or very recent infusion. RESULTS: A total of 207 patients were evaluated in this study with 83 patients receiving cetirizine and 124 diphenhydramine patients. Overall, the percentage of patients with at least one chemotherapy-related infusion event in the cetirizine group was 19.3% (95% CI 11.4-29.4) compared to diphenhydramine group 24.2% (95% CI 17.0-32.7), P = 0.40. Of the patients who received cetirizine and then experienced an event in the first cycle, 41.7% (95% CI 13.7-74.3) of the events were due to paclitaxel, 50.0% (95% CI 19.4-80.6) were due to rituximab, and 8.3% (95% CI 0.1-43.6) were due to cetuximab. Of the patients who received diphenhydramine and then experienced an event in the first cycle, 26.1% (95% CI 5.7-51.4) were due to paclitaxel, 73.9% (95% CI 48.6-94.3) were due to rituximab and none due to cetuximab. CONCLUSION: Cetirizine appears to be a viable substitute for diphenhydramine for the prevention of infusions reactions with cetuximab, paclitaxel, and rituximab infusions in adults. Prospective studies are needed to determine the efficacy and safety of cetirizine compared with diphenhydramine in the prevention of chemotherapy-related infusion reactions.

Vesiculobullous Darier Disease Symptomatically Responsive to Cetirizine

Darier disease is an autosomal dominant genodermatosis of abnormal keratinization characterized by hyperkeratotic papules and plaques with a predilection for seborrheic areas. We report a case of a rare vesiculobullous variant of treatment-resistant Darier disease in a 55-year-old woman that failed topical tacrolimus and topical and oral glucocorticoids. Cetirizine was initiated at 10 mg daily and increased to 40 mg daily over four weeks, with resultant marked improvement of the patient's burning sensation. A punch biopsy revealed a perivascular infiltrate of eosinophils. This patient's symptomatic improvement with cetirizine, which has antagonizing properties against eosinophils, highlights the potential role of eosinophils in the pathogenesis of vesiculobullous Darier disease. We suggest that major basic protein secreted by eosinophils may propagate blister formation in vesiculobullous Darier disease by disrupting desmosomes. J Drugs Dermatol. 2019;18(2):213-214.

Management of a neonate with diffuse cutaneous mastocytosis: Case report and literature review.

Mastocytosis is an accumulation of clonal mast cells within tissues, commonly caused by mutations in the KIT proto-oncogene. This report describes the management of a neonate with diffuse cutaneous mastocytosis (DCM) caused by a rare activating KIT mutation, specifically internal tandem duplication of the Ala502Tyr503 pair on exon 9, and reviews current data regarding work-up of DCM in pediatric patients.

Eosinophilic pustular folliculitis of infancy suppressed with cetirizine.

Eosinophilic pustular folliculitis of infancy is a rare inflammatory disease characterized by recurrent, itchy sterile pustules mainly located on the scalp. Topical agents are mostly effective to suppress the symptoms in the majority of cases. However, systemic agents that are safe for long-term use are required for patients with widespread or resistant lesions. We present a case with eosinophilic pustular folliculitis of infancy whose disease was suppressed with cetirizine but recurred after ceasing the drug.