-
BMC Pharmacology & Toxicology Nov 2019As a new generation antihistamine, fexofenadine has been widely used in allergic diseases. However, there is still a lack of collective evidence regarding the... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND
As a new generation antihistamine, fexofenadine has been widely used in allergic diseases. However, there is still a lack of collective evidence regarding the antihistamine effects and safety profiles of fexofenadine relative to other antihistamine drugs and placebo. Therefore, we aimed to systematically evaluate the antihistamine effects and safety of fexofenadine.
METHODS
An electronic literature search of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) was performed using Embase, Cochrane and PubMed from establishment to January 1st, 2018. RCTs comparing the antihistamine effects or safety (adverse events, sedative effects, and cognitive/psychomotor function) of fexofenadine with either other antihistamines or placebo for healthy subjects and patients with allergy were selected.
RESULTS
Fifty-one studies of 14,551 participants met the inclusion criteria. When compared with the first-generation antihistamines, fexofenadine produced significantly lower adverse events frequency (OR = 0.446; 95% CI: 0.214 to 0.929, P = 0.031), significantly lower sedative effects frequency (OR = 0.265; 95% CI: 0.072 to 0.976, P = 0.046) and significantly less change of all cognitive/psychomotor function. When compared with the second-generation antihistamines, fexofenadine produced significantly marginal sedative effects (OR = 0.59; 95% CI, 0.38 to 0.93; P = 0.02) and significantly less change of most of the cognitive/psychomotor function. When compared with placebo, fexofenadine produced more significant antihistamine effects.
CONCLUSIONS
Fexofenadine has a positive antihistamine effect, which is probably no worse than the second-generation antihistamines. Fexofenadine probably has a favorable safety profile, which is more likely better than that of the first-generation antihistamines. There is lack of data to support that fexofenadine has a better overall safety profile compared to the second-generation antihistamines, however, some presently available evidence on sedative effects and certain aspects of cognitive/psychomotor function favors fexofenadine. Therefore, fexofenadine may be worthy of recommendation for safety related workers.
Topics: Cognition; Drug-Related Side Effects and Adverse Reactions; Histamine H1 Antagonists, Non-Sedating; Humans; Psychomotor Performance; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Terfenadine
PubMed: 31783781
DOI: 10.1186/s40360-019-0363-1 -
Biomedicine & Pharmacotherapy =... Feb 2023Erythropoietic protoporphyria (EPP) and X-linked protoporphyria (XLP) are characterized by skin photosensitivity caused by accumulation of protoporphyrin IX. We aimed to... (Review)
Review
Erythropoietic protoporphyria (EPP) and X-linked protoporphyria (XLP) are characterized by skin photosensitivity caused by accumulation of protoporphyrin IX. We aimed to review the clinical evidence of efficacy and safety of skin photosensitivity treatments in individuals with EPP or XLP. We systematically searched MEDLINE, Embase, the Cochrane Library, and ClinicalTrials.gov. A total of 40 studies with data on 18 treatment modalities were included. Comprehensive treatment safety data were obtained from the European Medicines Agency and the United States Food and Drug Administration. The studies used different outcome measures to evaluate the sensitivity without a generally accepted method to assess treatment effect on skin photosensitivity. Of the included studies, 13 were controlled trials. Gathered, the trials showed moderate positive effect of inorganic sunscreen application and subcutaneous implant of afamelanotide and no effect of organic sunscreen application, or oral treatment with beta-carotene, cysteine, N-acetylcysteine, vitamin C, or warfarin. Studies without control groups suggested treatment effect of foundation cream, dihydroxyacetone/lawsone cream, narrow-band ultraviolet B phototherapy, erythrocyte transfusion, extracorporeal erythrocyte photodynamic therapy, or oral treatment with zinc sulphate, terfenadine, cimetidine, or canthaxanthin, but the real effect is uncertain. Assessment of treatment effect on photosensitivity in patients with EPP or XLP carries a high risk of bias since experienced photosensitivity varies with both weather conditions, exposure pattern, and pigmentation. Controlled trials of promising treatment options are important although challenging in this small patient population.
Topics: United States; Humans; Protoporphyria, Erythropoietic; Sunscreening Agents; Photosensitivity Disorders; Genetic Diseases, X-Linked; Protoporphyrins
PubMed: 36525819
DOI: 10.1016/j.biopha.2022.114132 -
Basic & Clinical Pharmacology &... Jan 2022Current data on use of antihistamines during breastfeeding and risks to the breastfed infant are insufficient. The aim of this systematic review was to provide an...
Current data on use of antihistamines during breastfeeding and risks to the breastfed infant are insufficient. The aim of this systematic review was to provide an overview of studies measuring the levels of antihistamines in human breast milk, estimating the exposure for breastfed infants and/or reporting possible adverse effects on the breastfed infant. An additional aim was to review the antihistamine product labels available in the European Union (EU) and the United States. We searched seven online databases and identified seven human lactation studies that included 25 mother-infant pairs covering cetirizine, clemastine, ebastine, epinastine, loratadine, terfenadine and triprolidine. In addition, one study investigated the impact of chlorpheniramine or promethazine on prolactin levels among 17 women, and one study investigated possible adverse drug reactions in 85 breastfed infants exposed to various antihistamines. The relative infant dose was below 5% for all antihistamines, ranging from 0.3% for terfenadine to 4.5% for clemastine. Most product labels of the 10 antihistamines with available information in both the EU and the United States reported lack of evidence and recommended to avoid use during breastfeeding. The knowledge gap on antihistamines and lactation is extensive, and further human studies are warranted to ensure optimal treatment of breastfeeding women with allergy.
Topics: Breast Feeding; Drug Labeling; European Union; Female; Histamine H1 Antagonists; Humans; Infant; Lactation; Milk, Human; United States
PubMed: 34587362
DOI: 10.1111/bcpt.13663