|
ZYRTEC (cetirizine 10 mg)
|
 |
|
|
|
 |
Reviews |
|
Drugs. 2005;65(2):215-28.
Efficacy and tolerability of newer antihistamines
in the treatment of allergic conjunctivitis.
Bielory L, Lien KW, Bigelsen S.
Department of Medicine, Pediatrics and Ophthalmology, Division
of Allergy, Immunology and Rheumatology, UMDNJ-New Jersey Medical School,
Immuno-Ophthalmology Service, 90 Bergen Street, DOC Suite 4700, Newark,
NJ 07103, USA. bielory@umdnj.edu.
Treatment for allergic conjunctivitis has markedly expanded in recent years,
providing opportunities for more focused therapy, but often leaving both
physicians and patients confused over the variety of options. As monotherapy,
oral antihistamines are an excellent choice when attempting to control multiple
early-phase, and some late-phase, allergic symptoms in the eyes, nose and
pharynx. Unfortunately, despite their efficacy in relief of allergic symptoms,
systemic antihistamines may result in unwanted adverse effects, such as
drowsiness and dry mouth. Newer second-generation antihistamines (cetirizine,
fexofenadine, loratadine and desloratadine) are preferred over older first-generation
antihistamines in order to avoid the sedative and anticholinergic effects
that are associated with first-generation agents. When the allergic symptom
or complaint, such as ocular pruritus, is isolated, focused therapy with
topical (ophthalmic) antihistamines is often efficacious and clearly superior
to systemic antihistamines, either as monotherapy or in conjunction with
an oral or intranasal agent.Topical antihistaminic agents not only provide
faster and superior relief than systemic antihistamines, but they may also
possess a longer duration of action than other classes including vasoconstrictors,
pure mast cell stabilisers, NSAIDs and corticosteroids. Many antihistamines
have anti-inflammatory properties as well. Some of this anti-inflammatory
effect seen with 'pure' antihistamines (levocabastine and emedastine) may
be directly attributed to the blocking of the histamine receptor that has
been shown to downregulate intercellular adhesion molecule-1 expression
and, in turn, limit chemotaxis of inflammatory cells. Some topical multiple-action
histamine H(1)-receptor antagonists (olopatadine, ketotifen, azelastine
and epinastine) have been shown to prevent activation of neutrophils, eosinophils
and macrophages, or inhibit release of leukotrienes, platelet-activating
factors and other inflammatory mediators. Topical vasoconstrictor agents
provide rapid relief, especially for redness; however, the relief is often
short-lived, and overuse of vasoconstrictors may lead to rebound hyperaemia
and irritation. Another class of topical agents, mast cell stabilisers (sodium
cromoglicate [cromolyn sodium], nedocromil and lodoxamide), may be considered;
however, they generally have a much slower onset of action. The efficacy
of mast cell stabilisers may be attributed to anti-inflammatory properties
in addition to mast cell stabilisation. In the class of topical NSAIDs,
ketorolac has been promoted for ocular itching but has been found to be
inferior for relief of allergic conjunctivitis when compared with olopatadine
and emedastine. Lastly, topical corticosteroids may be considered for severe
seasonal ocular allergy symptoms, although long-term use should be avoided
because of risks of ocular adverse effects, including glaucoma and cataract
formation.
|
BMJ. 2002 Jan 19;324(7330):144-6.
Randomised controlled trial of butterbur and cetirizine
for treating seasonal allergic rhinitis.
Schapowal A; Petasites Study Group.
Allergy Clinic, Hochwangstrasse 3, CH-7302 Landquart, Switzerland.
OBJECTIVES: To compare the efficacy and tolerability of butterbur (Petasites
hybridus) with cetirizine in patients with seasonal allergic rhinitis (hay
fever). DESIGN: Randomised, double blind, parallel group comparison. SETTING:
Four outpatient general medicine and allergy clinics in Switzerland and
Germany. PARTICIPANTS: 131 patients were screened for seasonal allergic
rhinitis and 125 patients were randomised (butterbur 61; cetirizine 64).
INTERVENTIONS: Butterbur (carbon dioxide extract tablets, ZE 339) one tablet,
four times daily, or cetirizine, one tablet in the evening, both given for
two consecutive weeks. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Scores on SF-36 questionnaire
and clinical global impression scale. RESULTS: Improvement in SF-36 score
was similar in the two treatment groups for all items tested hierarchically.
Butterbur and cetirizine were also similarly effective with regard to global
improvement scores on the clinical global impression scale (median score
3 in both groups). Both treatments were well tolerated. In the cetirizine
group, two thirds (8/12) of reported adverse events were associated with
sedative effects (drowsiness and fatigue) despite the drug being considered
a non-sedating antihistamine. CONCLUSIONS: The effects of butterbur are
similar to those of cetirizine in patients with seasonal allergic rhinitis
when evaluated blindly by patients and doctors. Butterbur should be considered
for treating seasonal allergic rhinitis when the sedative effects of antihistamines
need to be avoided. |
Allerg Immunol (Paris). 1989 Oct;21(8):312-3,
316, 318.
Importance of Zyrtec in the treatment of chronic urticaria
and allergic rhinopathies apropos of 1168 cases seen by hospital practitioners
Billardon M.
Laboratoires Nanterre, France.
This was a phase IV prospective trial involving out-patients from 80
hospital respiratory diseases and ENT departments, and 40 hospital dermatology
departments. More than 1,000 cases were collected and used to evaluate
the efficacy of Zyrtec at the dose of 10 mg per day. The aim of the trial
was to assess the rapidity of action and good acceptability of treatment
for 10 days and 2 weeks respectively in cases of seasonal and perennial
rhinopathy. Similarly, in pruritic allergic skin disorders, the aim was
to measure the degree of activity and acceptability of treatment for 2
weeks. Overall evaluation of results provided clinical evidence of satisfactory
rapidity of action with an appreciable acceptability level. This prospective
study confirms the good therapeutic index of Zyrtec as a new anti-allergic
agent.
|
Ann Allergy Asthma Immunol 2002 Dec;89(6):589-98
The comparison of the efficacy and safety of cetirizine,
oxatomide, ketotifen, and a placebo for the treatment of childhood perennial
allergic rhinitis
Lai DS, Lue KH, Hsieh JC, Lin KL, Lee HS
Department of Pediatrics, Chung Shan Medical University Hospital, Taichung,
Taiwan, ROC.
BACKGROUND: There has been no study comparing the long-term effects of ketotifen,
oxatomide, and cetirizine for the treatment of perennial allergic rhinitis
among children. OBJECTIVE: We conducted a study to compare the efficacy
of the three agents for the treatment of perennial allergic rhinitis among
children. METHODS: The study consisted of a double-blind, placebo-controlled,
randomized design, comprising 69 perennial allergic rhinitis patients with
mite allergy, aged 6 to 12 years, randomly assigned to 1 of 4 test treatment
groups for 3 months: 19 in the cetirizine group (10 mg daily), 18 in the
ketotifen group (1 mg, twice daily), 16 in the oxatomide group (1 mg/kg,
twice daily), and 16 in the placebo group. We used the nasal symptom score
of diary card and the Pediatric Rhinoconjunctivitis Quality of Life Questionnaire
and eosinophil cation protein peripheral blood total eosinophil count and
immunoglobulin E level, eosinophil proportion from a nasal smear, and nasal
peak expiratory flow rate to evaluate the effect of the four agents. RESULTS:
Cetirizine was significantly more effective at reducing the mean rhinorrhea
score compared with oxatomide for both weeks 8 and 12 (P < 0.01). Before
the end of week 12, cetirizine was significantly more effective than ketotifen
(P < 0.01). Cetirizine and oxatomide significantly decreased the mean
Pediatric Rhinoconjunctivitis Quality of Life Questionnaire score compared
with the placebo for week 12 (P < 0.05). CONCLUSIONS: Cetirizine was
more effective than oxatomide and ketotifen for the relief of nasal congestion
and rhinorrhea, and was responsible for significantly decreasing the eosinophil
representation of a posttreatment nasal smear. |
|
|
|
Drug information |
|
| GENERIC NAME: cetirizine
BRAND NAME: Zyrtec
DRUG CLASS AND MECHANISM: Cetirizine is the fourth addition
to a new generation of allergy medications called "non- sedating"
antihistamines or histamine (H-1) receptor blockers. These new antihistamines
are called non-sedating because they cause less sedation than their predecessors;
however, cetirizine is more sedating than the other non-sedating antihistamines.
Antihistamines block the effects of histamines. Histamines cause symptoms
of allergy when released by allergic reactions in the body. Antihistamines
block the ability of histamine to promote the allergy symptoms. For further
information, please read the Allergic Rhinitis article.
PREPARATIONS: 5mg and 10mg oral tablets.
STORAGE: Store in a dry place at 15-30 degrees C (59-
86 F).
PRESCRIBED FOR: Cetirizine is used by people who suffer
from allergic symptoms such as sneezing, itchy nose (allergic rhinitis)
and itchy eyes. It also has been used to treat hives.
DOSING: Cetirizine should be taken at doses specifically
directed by a physician. Cetirizine can be taken with food.
DRUG INTERACTIONS: Cetirizine should be taken only in
doses prescribed. Increasing the dose can be dangerous. When taking cetirizine
with theophylline the dose of theophylline may need to be reduced. Cetirizine
occasionally can cause sleepiness . Cetirizine can be taken with erythromycin
or ketaconazole without the increased risk of heart irregularities common
to other non-sedating antihistamines. Cetirizine also can be used to treat
children.
SIDE EFFECTS: Sleepiness occurs in 14% of patients.
Dry mouth, nausea, headache, fatigue, jitteriness and sore throat are
infrequently reported with cetirizine.
Caution! Before starting
to take this medicine, it is vital that you should consult your doctor!
Do not use it on your own initiative, without medical advice.
|
|
|
|
Order now ! |
|
|
MILGAMMA
Substance (drage): 250 mcg cyancobalaminum, 50 mg benfotiaminum.
Substance (injection): 1 mg cyancobalaminum, 100 mg pyridoxinum chloratim, 100 mg thiaminium chloratum, 20 mg lidocainium chloratum / 2 ml
Substance (capsules): 250 mcg cyancobalaminum, 40 mg benfotiaminum, 90 mg pyridoxinium chloratum
|
 |
|
Dosage
|
Packing
|
Price
|
Pay now
|
|
mg
|
50 drage
|
USD 39.00
|
|
|
mg
|
100 drage
|
USD 74.00
|
|
|
mg
|
500 drage
|
USD 297.00
|
|
|
2 ml
|
10 amp
|
USD 26.00
|
|
|
2 ml
|
30 amp
|
USD 79.00
|
|
|
mg
|
20 caps
|
USD 0.00
|
|
|
mg
|
50 caps
|
USD 37.00
|
|
|
mg
|
100 caps
|
USD 76.00
|
|
|
mg
|
500 caps
|
USD 297.00
|
|
|
|
| |
|
 
|
|
