EFFECT OF AZELASTINE ON THE SEASONAL INCREASE IN NONSPECIFIC BRONCHIAL RESPONSIVENESS TO METHACHOLINE IN POLLEN ALLERGIC PATIENTS - A RANDOMIZED, DOUBLE-BLIND PLACEBO-CONTROLLED, CROSSOVER STUDY
G. Balzano et al., EFFECT OF AZELASTINE ON THE SEASONAL INCREASE IN NONSPECIFIC BRONCHIAL RESPONSIVENESS TO METHACHOLINE IN POLLEN ALLERGIC PATIENTS - A RANDOMIZED, DOUBLE-BLIND PLACEBO-CONTROLLED, CROSSOVER STUDY, Clinical and experimental allergy, 22(3), 1992, pp. 371-377
Azelastine, a phthalazinone derivative, is a new potent, long acting,
orally active anti-allergic compound with particularly strong H-1-hist
amine receptor antagonistic effects which has been proven to possess i
n vitro and in vivo a number of anti-inflammatory properties. The aim
of the present study was to investigate whether azelastine would be ab
le to prevent and/or reverse the seasonal increase in non-specific bro
nchial responsiveness to methacholine in pollen allergic patients. Twe
lve atopic patients (5 males, mean age 31 years), skin positive exclus
ively to grass and/or Parietaria pollen extract, with rhinitis and mil
d asthma occurring in the spring for at least two years previously, we
re studied. After a 2 week run-in period, oral azelastine, 4 mg twice
daily, or placebo, was given for 2 weeks from the start of the pollen
season, according to a randomized, double-blind design. After 2 weeks,
the treatments were crossed over. During both the run-in and study pe
riods, patients recorded rhinitis and asthma symptoms, additional anti
histamine and bronchodilator drugs taken and peak expiratory flow meas
urements. A methacholine inhalation test was carried out on four occas
ions in each patient: before the run-in period, before the start of th
e treatment, and at the end of the two 2 week treatment periods. Azela
stine significantly reduced rhinitis symptoms and the need for antihis
tamine drugs, whereas asthmatic symptoms, use of bronchodilator drugs,
peak flow recordings and bronchial responsiveness to methacholine wer
e unaffected by the treatment. Compliance level and adverse side-effec
ts were not significantly different between active treatment and place
bo. In the final subjective evaluation of the two treatments, eight ou
t of 12 patients preferred azelastine. Thus, azelastine has been confi
rmed to be effective and safe in the treatment of seasonal allergic rh
initis. However, in our patients, we have not been able to demonstrate
any anti-asthmatic action of the drug.