GLORIA

GEOMAR Library Ocean Research Information Access

feed icon rss

Your email was sent successfully. Check your inbox.

An error occurred while sending the email. Please try again.

Proceed reservation?

Export
Filter
Document type
Years
  • 1
    ISSN: 1398-9995
    Source: Blackwell Publishing Journal Backfiles 1879-2005
    Topics: Medicine
    Notes: This multicentre, double-blind, randomized parallel-group study compared 3 weeks' treatment with either loratadine (Clarityn®) 10 mg once daily, or clemastine (Tavegyl®) 1 mg twice daily, and placebo in outpatients with active perennial allergic rhinitis. 155 patients were evaluated for efficacy and safety. Grading of four nasal and three non-nasal symptoms, rhinoscopy signs, and therapeutic response was performed on treatment days 6, 13, and 20. Patients recorded daily symptoms and possible adverse experiences in a diary, also indicating when symptoms of active rhinitis were relieved. Loratadine and clemastine were statistically significantly superior to placebo throughout the study (P 〈 0.05), based on assessment of patients' nasal and eye symptoms, patients' diary scores, rhinoscopy signs of symptoms, and onset of relief. The loratadine group showed a statistically significantly (P 〈 0.05) faster onset of relief of symptoms compared with the group treated with clemastine. Concerning nasal stuffiness, loratadine was significantly (P 〈 0.05) superior to clemastine after 1 week's treatment. Reports of adverse reactions showed that significantly (P 〈 0.03) more patients complained of sedation in the clemastine than in the loratadine group. Regarding other adverse experiences and laboratory tests, the three treatment groups were statistically comparable (P 〈 0.05). The study showed that compared with placebo both loratadine and clemastine were effective in relieving nasal and eye symptoms in patients with perennial allergic rhinitis. Loratadine was safe and well tolerated and was significantly less sedative than clemastine; loratadine may therefore possess an advantage in clinical use in the treatment of perennial allergic rhinitis.
    Type of Medium: Electronic Resource
    Location Call Number Limitation Availability
    BibTip Others were also interested in ...
  • 2
    Electronic Resource
    Electronic Resource
    Oxford, UK : Blackwell Publishing Ltd
    Allergy 45 (1990), S. 0 
    ISSN: 1398-9995
    Source: Blackwell Publishing Journal Backfiles 1879-2005
    Topics: Medicine
    Notes: The efficacy and safety of loratadine, a new orally active specific H-receptor blocking antihistamine with poor penetration into the CNS, was evaluated in a double blind comparative study. One hundred and seven hay fever patients, sensitive to birch pollen, were randomized into three parallel groups receiving loratadine 40 mg once daily, clemastine 1 mg twice daily, or placebo during the birch pollen season. Both active treatments showed reduction of symptoms in comparison with placebo, but the results were more pronounced with loratadine treatment, which significantly reduced the overall allergic condition as well as all separate allergic rhino-conjunctivitis symptoms except nasal stuffiness. Compared with placebo the sedation rate was significantly higher with clemastine treatment (P 〈 0.05) but not with loratadine, Loratadine was thus concluded to be efficacious in hay fever treatment with a sedation rate not differing from placebo.
    Type of Medium: Electronic Resource
    Location Call Number Limitation Availability
    BibTip Others were also interested in ...
Close ⊗
This website uses cookies and the analysis tool Matomo. More information can be found here...