CRP relevance in clinical assessment of chronic spontaneous urticaria Tunisian patients.

BACKGROUND: Chronic spontaneous urticaria (CSU) is a common dermatological condition defined by the sudden occurrence of daily wheals and pruritus for at least six weeks. Multifactorial origin is suggested such as oxidative stress. This latter may play a double role as a trigger and remnant agent. OBJECTIVES: The first aim of this study is to investigate antioxidant status, inflammatory proteins, hematologic counts and clinical assessment in CSU patients. The second aim is to evaluate the effect of a first-line treatment: desloratadine 5 mg/d on these different parameters. PATIENTS AND METHODS: This study enrolled 30 CSU patients and same number of controls. We assessed the urticaria activity score (UAS), total antioxidant status (TAS), glutathione S-transferase (GST), superoxide dismutase (SOD), glutathione peroxidase (GPx), catalase (CAT), albumin, alpha1, alpha2, beta1 beta2, gamma globulins, c-reactive protein (CRP) and hematologic numeration. RESULTS: At baseline alpha1, alpha2, beta1, beta2, gamma globulins, CRP, SOD activity, leukocytes and basophils were significantly higher in patients versus controls (p < 0.05). TAS, GST, CAT, GPx and albumin were significantly low in patients versus controls (p < 0.05). After treatment, TAS, GST and GPx were significantly increased in patients versus patients before treatment (p < 0.001). SOD, alpha1, alpha2, beta1, beta2, gamma globulins, CRP, albumin, leukocytes and basophils were significantly decreased after treatment versus before treatment (p < 0.05). A significant correlation between CRP and UAS (r = 0.3; p = 0.011) was noted. UAS assessment revealed the efficacy of 30 d-antihistaminic treatment. CONCLUSIONS: Desloratadine exerted anti-inflammatory and antioxidant effects on CSU patients revealed by CRP. Patients' remission was synergistic to CRP attenuation emphasizing CRP relevance for CSU clinical assessment.

Assessment of the effects of antihistamine drugs on mood, sleep quality, sleepiness, and dream anxiety.

OBJECTIVE: There are limited comparative studies on classic and new-generation antihistamines that affect sleep quality and mood. The purpose of this study was to determine and compare the effects of classic and new-generation antihistamines on sleep quality, daytime sleepiness, dream anxiety, and mood. METHODS: Ninety-two patients with chronic pruritus completed study in the dermatology outpatient clinic. Treatments with regular recommended therapeutic doses were administered. The effects of antihistaminic drugs on mood, daytime sleepiness, dream anxiety, and sleep quality were assessed on the first day and 1 month after. RESULTS: Outpatients who received cetirizine and hydroxyzine treatments reported higher scores on the depression, anxiety, and fatigue sub-scales than those who received desloratadine, levocetirizine, and rupatadine. Pheniramine and rupatadine were found to be associated with daytime sleepiness and better sleep quality. UKU side effects scale scores were significantly elevated among outpatients receiving pheniramine. Classic antihistamines increased daytime sleepiness and decreased the sleep quality scores. New-generation antihistamines reduced sleep latency and dream anxiety, and increased daytime sleepiness and sleep quality. CONCLUSION: Both antihistamines, significantly increased daytime sleepiness and nocturnal sleep quality. Daytime sleepiness was significantly predicted by rupadatine and pheniramine treatment. Cetirizine and hydroxyzine, seem to have negative influences on mood states. Given the extensive use of antihistamines in clinical settings, these results should be more elaborately examined in further studies.

Assessment of antihistamines in the treatment of skin allergies.

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: Antihistamines, both old first-generation and new, are frequently prescribed to patients with allergic skin diseases. As the expected roles of antihistamines differ in each dermatosis, we should carefully consider the characteristics of each antihistamine prior to use. This review covers recent antihistamine topics, including novel pharmacological action, and enhancement of patient quality of life (QoL). RECENT FINDINGS: Nonsedative, second-generation antihistamines are recommended as first-line treatment for urticaria. For atopic dermatitis, most position papers doubt their efficacy of treatment due to insufficient evidence. However, recent articles revealed novel H1 receptor-independent properties for these agents, such as modulation of cytokine and chemokine production, tissue remodeling, and indicated its favorable effects on atopic dermatitis. Furthermore, several important benefits of second-generation antihistamines on the amelioration of atopic dermatitis symptoms, patient QoL and labor efficiency including loss of productivity and absenteeism from the workplace have been reported. In contrast, prescription of first-generation antihistamines for skin allergies should be avoided due to their bad risk/benefit ratio. Whereas they are not better in controlling itch, they also fail to improve patient labor efficiency unlike second-generation antihistamines. SUMMARY: Although antihistamine usefulness varies greatly, understanding the characteristics of each antihistamine will allow more personalized therapy for skin allergies.

The cost-effectiveness of treatment with desloratadine in patients with persistent allergic rhinitis.

OBJECTIVES: A new classification of persistent allergic rhinitis (PER) has been developed by the ARIA working group. Although the burden of AR is significant, treatment itself is also costly. It is unclear if treatment based on the new definition of PER is cost-effective. METHODS: The current study simulated the cost-effectiveness of desloratadine compared to placebo in the treatment of PER from the French societal perspective. Decision analysis was used to model the costs, effectiveness and cost-effectiveness over 12 months. Costs included medical expenditures (physician visits and prescription drugs) attributable to PER and related comorbidities and lost productivity due to absenteeism and presenteeism. Prices, tariffs and national wages were estimated from French national sources. MEASURES OF EFFECTIVENESS INCLUDED: symptom-based visual analogue scale (VAS), Rhinoconjunctivitis Quality of Life Questionnaire (RQLQ), Total 5 Symptoms Score (T5SS), categorical improvement in therapeutic response, interference with activities of daily living (ADL) and sleep outcomes. Mild or symptom-free days and 'responders' were also captured as outcomes. Univariate and second-order multivariate probabilistic sensitivity analyses were conducted. RESULTS: Treatment with desloratadine dominated placebo (cost less and resulted in greater effectiveness) for all measures of effectiveness. Of the individuals taking desloratadine 46.8% were classified as 'responders' vs. 34.8% for placebo (p = 0.0012). Individuals taking desloratadine experienced mild/no symptoms for 57.6% of study days vs. 36.5% for placebo (p = 0.002). The expected annual cost of treatment with desloratadine (1819 euro) was less than placebo (2618 euro). Lost productivity was the most significant contributor to total cost. Results of the 10,000 Monte Carlo simulations showed that treatment was cost-saving in 99.6% of simulations. CONCLUSIONS: Treatment of PER with desloratadine resulted in improved effectiveness and significant savings. While the cost of drug treatment is greater than that of no treatment, the downstream costs associated with not treating PER significantly outweigh the cost of treatment. Key limitations include the comparison of desloratadine to placebo and the sources of cost and effectiveness measures. Future studies should examine the cost-effectiveness of all available treatments for PER. In addition, many utilization, productivity and effectiveness measures were taken from clinical trials and may not accurately reflect 'real world' treatment patterns and outcomes.