-
The Journal of Allergy and Clinical... Jun 2024The benefits and harms of adding antileukotrienes to H1-antihistamines for the management of urticaria (hives, itch, and/or angioedema) remain unclear.
BACKGROUND
The benefits and harms of adding antileukotrienes to H1-antihistamines for the management of urticaria (hives, itch, and/or angioedema) remain unclear.
OBJECTIVE
We sought to systematically synthesize the treatment outcomes of antileukotrienes in combination with H1-antihistamines versus H1-antihistamines alone for acute and chronic urticaria.
METHODS
As part of updating American Academy of Allergy, Asthma & Immunology and American College of Allergy, Asthma, and Immunology Joint Task Force on Practice Parameters urticaria guidelines, we searched MEDLINE, Embase, CENTRAL, LILACS, WPRIM, IBECS, ICTRP, CBM, CNKI, VIP, Wanfang, FDA, and EMA databases from inception to December 18, 2023 for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) evaluating antileukotrienes and H1-antihistamines versus H1-antihistamines alone in patients with urticaria. Paired reviewers independently screened citations, extracted data, and assessed risk of bias. Random effects models pooled effect estimates for urticaria activity, itch, wheal, sleep, quality of life, and harms. The GRADE approach informed certainty of evidence ratings. Open Science Framework registration: https://osf.io/h2bfx/.
RESULTS
Thirty-four RCTs enrolled 3,324 children and adults. Compared to H1-antihistamines alone, the combination of a leukotriene receptor antagonist (LTRA) with H1-antihistamines probably modestly reduces urticaria activity (mean difference: -5.04, 95%CI -6.36 to -3.71; 7-day Urticaria Activity Score) with moderate certainty. We made similar findings for itch and wheal severity, and quality of life. Adverse events were probably not different between groups (moderate certainty), however, no RCT reported on neuropsychiatric adverse events.
CONCLUSION
Among patients with urticaria, adding LTRAs to H1-antihistamines probably modestly improves urticaria activity with little to no increase in overall adverse events. The added risk of neuropsychiatric adverse events in this population with LTRAs is small and uncertain.
PubMed: 38852861
DOI: 10.1016/j.jaci.2024.05.026 -
Frontiers in Medicine 2024This network meta-analysis was to analyze and rank the efficacy and safety of different systemic drugs in the treatment of uremic pruritus (UP) among hemodialysis...
Efficacy and safety of different systemic drugs in the treatment of uremic pruritus among hemodialysis patients: a network meta-analysis based on randomized clinical trials.
AIM
This network meta-analysis was to analyze and rank the efficacy and safety of different systemic drugs in the treatment of uremic pruritus (UP) among hemodialysis patients.
METHOD
PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library, and Web of Science databases were searched from inception to 10 July 2023 for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) investigating different drugs in the treatment of UP among hemodialysis patients. Drugs including cromolyn sodium, dexchlorpheniramine, difelikefalin, gabapentin, hydroxyzine, ketotifen, melatonin, montelukast, nalbuphine, nalfurafine, nemolizumab, nicotinamide, pregabalin, sertraline, thalidomide, and placebo were assessed. Outcome measures, including pruritus relief, response, and adverse events, were analyzed. Network plots, forest plots, league tables, and the surface under the cumulative ranking (SUCRA) probabilities were depicted for each outcome.
RESULTS
The network meta-analysis retrieved 22 RCTs. Gabapentin (69.74%) had the highest likelihood to be the most effective drug for pruritus relief in UP patients receiving hemodialysis, followed by cromolyn sodium and hydroxyzine. Thalidomide (60.69%) and gabapentin (58.99%) were associated with significantly more drug responses for treating UP among patients receiving hemodialysis. Patients who were treated with gabapentin (40.01%) were likely to have risks of adverse events and dizziness. Lower risks of adverse events, nausea, and diarrhea were found in patients who received cromolyn sodium and lower risks of somnolence.
CONCLUSION
This study suggests considering gabapentin treatment when facing a patient suffering from UP. This study provides a reference for the selection of drug therapy for UP patients receiving hemodialysis.
PubMed: 38646551
DOI: 10.3389/fmed.2024.1334944 -
Frontiers in Pharmacology 2023Loratadine and montelukast are clinical first-line drugs in the treatment of allergic rhinitis (AR). However, there is no clear evidence of the efficacy of loratadine...
Loratadine and montelukast are clinical first-line drugs in the treatment of allergic rhinitis (AR). However, there is no clear evidence of the efficacy of loratadine combined with montelukast in the treatment of AR. This study aimed to evaluate the efficacy and safety of the loratadine-montelukast combination on AR. In this meta-analysis, searches were conducted on PubMed, Embase, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, Web of Science, and China National Knowledge Infrastructure (CNKI). The search terms included loratadine, montelukast, allergic rhinitis, and clinical trials. Meta-analyses were conducted using Rev Man 5.3 and Stata 15 statistical software. A total of 23 studies with 4,902 participants were enrolled. For the primary outcome, pooled results showed that loratadine-montelukast can significantly reduce total nasal symptom scores (TNSS), when compared with loratadine (SMD, -1.00; 95% CI, -1.35 to -0.65, < 0.00001), montelukast (SMD, -0.46; 95% CI, -0.68 to -0.25, < 0.0001), or placebo (SMD, -0.93; 95% CI, -1.37 to -0.49, < 0.00001). For secondary outcomes, pooled results showed that compared with loratadine, loratadine-montelukast can significantly improve nasal congestion, nasal itching, nasal sneezing, nasal rhinorrhea, and rhinoconjunctivitis quality of life questionnaires (RQLQ). Compared with montelukast, loratadine-montelukast can significantly improve nasal itching, and nasal sneezing. Compared with placebo, loratadine-montelukast can significantly improve nasal congestion, and RQLQ. Loratadine-montelukast combination is superior to loratadine monotherapy, montelukast monotherapy, or placebo in improving AR symptoms. Therefore, loratadine-montelukast combination can be an option for patients with moderate-severe AR or poorly response to monotherapy. Systematic review registration number: clinicaltrials.gov, identifier CRD42023397519.
PubMed: 37915414
DOI: 10.3389/fphar.2023.1287320 -
European Respiratory Review : An... Dec 2023We aim to assess the impact of montelukast on paediatric patients with asthma/allergic rhinitis, measured using patient-reported outcome measures, compared with other... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND
We aim to assess the impact of montelukast on paediatric patients with asthma/allergic rhinitis, measured using patient-reported outcome measures, compared with other treatments or placebo.
METHODS
Protocol registration CRD42020216098 (www.crd.york.ac.uk/PROSPERO). MEDLINE and Embase databases were used to conduct the search. Two authors independently selected studies and extracted data, and a third reviewer resolved discrepancies. Meta-analyses were constructed to estimate the standardised mean difference (SMD) using a random-effects model.
RESULTS
Out of 3937 articles identified, 49 studies met the inclusion criteria, mostly randomised clinical trials (sample sizes: 21-689 patients). The SMD of change pooled estimators for the global, mental and physical domains of health-related quality of life were not statistically significant. For daytime and night-time symptoms scores, the SMD (95% CI) was in favour of inhaled corticosteroids (-0.12, -0.20- -0.05 and -0.23, -0.41- -0.06, respectively). The pooled estimator for global asthma symptoms was better for montelukast when compared with placebo (0.90, 0.44-1.36).
CONCLUSIONS
The synthesis of the available evidence suggests that, in children and adolescents, montelukast was effective in controlling asthma symptoms when compared with placebo, but inhaled corticosteroids were superior in controlling symptoms, especially at night-time. These findings of our systematic review concur with current guidelines for asthma treatment.
Topics: Adolescent; Humans; Child; Quality of Life; Asthma; Rhinitis, Allergic; Adrenal Cortex Hormones
PubMed: 37852659
DOI: 10.1183/16000617.0124-2023 -
European Respiratory Review : An... Sep 2023The United States Food and Drug Administration issued a black box warning on the mental health adverse effects of montelukast in 2020. Age-related effects on the risk of... (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND
The United States Food and Drug Administration issued a black box warning on the mental health adverse effects of montelukast in 2020. Age-related effects on the risk of developing specific neuropsychiatric events in montelukast users remain largely unknown.
OBJECTIVE
To describe the risk of neuropsychiatric events associated with montelukast in adults and children with asthma.
METHODS
A systematic search of all studies investigating neuropsychiatric events in montelukast users was performed in PubMed, the Cochrane Library and Embase from inception to 7 September 2022. Animal studies and conference abstracts were excluded.
RESULTS
59 studies (21 pharmacovigilance studies, four reviews from 172 randomised controlled trials, 20 observational studies, 10 case reports and four case series) evaluating neuropsychiatric events in patients with asthma on montelukast were reviewed. No significant association was shown between montelukast and suicide-related events in six of the observational studies. No association was found for depression as defined by the International Classification of Diseases 10 revision codes in three observational studies and a review of randomised clinical trials. However, findings from four studies using antidepressant prescriptions as the outcome identified significant associations. Consistent with nine pharmacovigilance studies, two large-scale observational studies revealed possible associations of montelukast with anxiety and sleeping disorders in adult patients with asthma, respectively. However, the results were not replicated in two observational studies on children.
CONCLUSION
Montelukast is not associated with suicide- and depression-related events in asthma patients. Older adults may be particularly susceptible to anxiety and sleeping disorders.
Topics: Child; Animals; Humans; Aged; Asthma; Acetates; Quinolines; Cyclopropanes; Anti-Asthmatic Agents
PubMed: 37758273
DOI: 10.1183/16000617.0079-2023 -
The Clinical Respiratory Journal Oct 2023Montelukast is a highly selective and specific cysteinyl leukotriene receptor antagonist used in the treatment of asthma. Whether montelukast as adjuvant therapy can... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND
Montelukast is a highly selective and specific cysteinyl leukotriene receptor antagonist used in the treatment of asthma. Whether montelukast as adjuvant therapy can significantly and safely treat adults with cough variant asthma (CVA) remains inconclusive.
AIMS
This meta-analysis systematically evaluated the efficacy and safety of montelukast as an adjuvant treatment for adults with CVA.
MATERIALS AND METHODS
Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) on montelukast combined with inhaled corticosteroids (ICS) and long-acting β2 agonists (LABAs) to treat CVA in adults, from inception to March 6, 2023, were retrieved from the CNKI, Wanfang, VIP, CBM, PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library, and Web of Science databases and Clinical Trials website. Review Manager (version 5.4) and Stata (version 15.0) were used to conduct the meta-analysis.
RESULTS
A total of 15 RCTs were ultimately included in the meta-analysis. It was established that montelukast as adjuvant therapy raised the total effective rate (RR = 1.20, 95% confidence interval [CI] [1.13, 1.27], P < 0.01) and improved the FEV1% (SMD = 0.91, 95% CI [0.40, 1.41], P < 0.01), PEF% (SMD = 0.63, 95% CI [0.38, 0.88], P < 0.01), FEV1 (SMD = 1.15, 95% CI [0.53, 1.77], P < 0.01), PEF (SMD = 0.64, 95% CI [0.42, 0.86], P < 0.01), and FEV1/FVC% (SMD = 0.76, 95% CI [0.51, 1.01], P < 0.01) and reduced the recurrence rate (RR = 0.28, 95% CI [0.15, 0.53], P < 0.01). The incidence of adverse reactions was higher in the montelukast auxiliary group compared to the control group but with no statistical difference (RR = 1.32, 95% CI [0.89, 1.96], P = 0.17).
CONCLUSION
Existing evidence indicated that the use of montelukast as an adjuvant therapy had therapeutic efficacy superior to ICS + LABA alone for the treatment of adult patients with CVA. However, further research is needed, especially a combination of high-quality long-term prospective studies and carefully designed RCTs.
Topics: Adult; Humans; Anti-Asthmatic Agents; Cough; Adrenergic beta-Agonists; Drug Therapy, Combination; Asthma; Adrenal Cortex Hormones
PubMed: 37218346
DOI: 10.1111/crj.13629