A randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled comparison of emedastine 0.05% Ophthalmic solution with loratadine 10 mg and their combination in the human conjunctival allergen challenge model

Clinical Therapeutics

Volumn 24, Issue 3, 2002, Pages 445-456

  Abelson, Mark B ^a,b   Kaplan, Allen P ^c  

^a HARVARD MEDICAL SCHOOL   (United States)

^b SCHEPENS EYE RESEARCH INSTITUTE   (United States)

^c MEDICAL UNIVERSITY OF SOUTH CAROLINA   (United States)

Author keywords

Conjunctival allergen challenge; Emedastine; Loratadine; Ocular allergy

Indexed keywords

EMEDASTINE; LORATADINE; PLACEBO;

ADULT; ALLERGIC CONJUNCTIVITIS; ARTICLE; CLINICAL FEATURE; CLINICAL TRIAL; CONTROLLED CLINICAL TRIAL; CONTROLLED STUDY; DISEASE SEVERITY; DOSE CALCULATION; DOSE RESPONSE; DOUBLE BLIND PROCEDURE; DRUG EFFICACY; EYE IRRITATION; FEMALE; HUMAN; HYPEREMIA; MAJOR CLINICAL STUDY; MALE; PROVOCATION TEST; RANDOMIZED CONTROLLED TRIAL; RATING SCALE; SCREENING TEST; SLIT LAMP; TREATMENT INDICATION; TREATMENT OUTCOME; TREATMENT PLANNING;

EID: 0036203667     PISSN: 01492918     EISSN: 1879114X     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/S0149-2918(02)85045-7     Document Type: Article

References (23)

1. Current and future topical treatments for ocular allergy
2. Genetic and environmental factors in ocular allergy
3. Conjunctivitis of allergic origin: Immunologic mechanisms and current approaches to therapy
4. 1-receptor-selective antagonist for ocular use: Receptor binding and second messenger studies
5. Inhibition of histamine-induced human conjunctival epithelial cell responses by ocular allergy drugs
6. 1 antagonist for topical ocular use
7. Emedastine ophthalmic solution 0.05% versus levocabastine ophthalmic suspension 0.05% in the treatment of allergic conjunctivitis using the conjunctival allergen challenge model
8. Onset and duration of the effects of three antihistamines in current use - Astemizole, loratadine and terfenadine forte - Studied during prolonged, controlled allergen challenges in volunteers
9. Loratadine: A nonsedating antihistamine with once-daily dosing
10. Conjunctival allergen challenge: A clinical approach to studying allergic conjunctivitis
11. An efficacy and tolerance comparison of emedastine difumarate 0.05% and levocabastine hydrochloride 0.05%: Reducing chemosis and eyelid swelling in subjects with seasonal allergic conjunctivitis
12. Safety and efficacy comparison of emedastine 0.05% ophthalmic solution compared to levocabastine 0.05% ophthalmic suspension in pediatric subjects with allergic conjunctivitis
13. Comparison of the topical ocular antiallergic efficacy of emedastine 0.05% ophthalmic solution to ketorolac 0.5% ophthalmic solution in a clinical model of allergic conjunctivitis
14. Topical levocabastine compared with oral loratadine for the treatment of seasonal allergic rhinoconjunctivitis
15. Protective effect of loratadine on late phase reaction induced by conjunctival provocation test
16. An evaluation of onset and duration of action of Patanol (olopatadine hydrochloride ophthalmic solution 0.1%) compared to Claritin (loratadine 10 mg) tablets in acute allergic conjunctivitis in the conjunctival allergen challenge model
17. The added benefit of local Patanol therapy when combined with systemic Claritin for the inhibition of ocular itching in the conjunctival antigen challenge model
18. Comparison of the topical anti-histamine/decongestant Ocuhist vs the oral antihistamine Claritin
19. Ocuhist is superior to Benadryl in inhibiting the signs and symptoms of allergic conjunctivitis
20. Nedocromil sodium and astemizole, alone or combined, in the treatment of seasonal allergic conjunctivitis. A multicentre double blind clinical trial
21. 1 histamine receptors
22. The ocular drying effect of oral antihistamines (loratadine) in the normal population - An evaluation