J. Waitzinger et al., 3 EXPLORATIVE STUDIES ON THE EFFICACY OF THE ANTIHISTAMINE MEBHYDROLINE (OMERIL), International journal of clinical pharmacology and therapeutics, 33(7), 1995, pp. 373-383
The efficacy of a multiple oral dose treatment with mebhydroline (Omer
il coated tablets, 100 mg t.i.d.) was examined in 3 studies which were
performed in a randomized, double-blind and placebo-controlled 2-way
cross-over design. A second target was to investigate the suitability
of different pharmacodynamic models for testing the efficacy of antihi
stamines. Study A involved a nasal provocation with a specific allerge
n in 11 symptom-free patients suffering from seasonal allergic rhiniti
s. In study B, a nasal provocation with histamine was investigated in
11 healthy volunteers. Study C involved a cutaneous provocation with a
specific allergen in 12 symptom-free patients suffering from seasonal
allergic rhinitis/atopy. The mebhydroline treatment's superiority ove
r placebo was shown statistically at the 95% confidence level for the
symptoms itchy nose in study A and for nasal congestion in study B. In
study C, allergen-induced weals (planimetric measurement) and itching
(visual analog scale) were significantly changed by mebhydroline. A q
ualitative evaluation revealed a reaction intensity that differed betw
een the 2 treatments to a clinically relevant degree, however, without
reaching significance. On the basis of the data it is expected that t
he clinical efficacy of mebhydroline may be further substantiated in c
onfirmatory clinical trials which should include placebo and positive
controls. The test methods used differed in their suitability for meas
uring the pharmacodynamic effects of antihistamines. Overall, the most
clear-cut results were seen in hay fever patients using a specific al
lergen for provocation. The planimetric assessment of weal response sh
ould be preferred as a cutaneous model. Both AR and AARM have their cl
inical relevance. Based on highly significant results of a subgroup an
alysis there are indications in favor to AR, but momentary there is no
definite conclusion in favor of or against either of the 2 methods.