Patients with seasonal allergic rhinitis often present severe symptoms which are not well recognized or controlled by physicians using their own criteria of severity and treatment. Using a simple method for the evaluation of the severity and a simple therapeutic scheme based on International Guidelines, patients with seasonal allergic rhinitis presented a significant improvement by comparison with those receiving a non-standardized treatment.

No abstract

The respective roles of controlled clinical trials and observational studies (cohort or case-control studies) in evaluating the efficacy, safety and usefulness of a drug were analysed. A randomised, controlled, double-blind study is the best method of estimating the efficacy of a treatment. It provides the least biased and most robust estimate of the causal relationship. In certain situations and on the basis of certain criteria, observational studies can have a proof-of-efficacy value. Randomised, controlled, pre-and postmarketing authorisation (MA) clinical studies identify the rarer adverse effects and compare them with those resulting from the reference treatment. Before the MA, the pooled safety data from different controlled trials can provide an estimation of relatively frequent adverse events and subjects at risk. However, an observational study is the most appropriate method of evaluating the safety of a drug in the currently used conditions. By definition, a drug influences the health of a population if it directly or indirectly improves its health. A drug would have a major role in public health if it reduced mortality or morbidity related to a particular disease or if it improved the quality of life of patients with this disease. Prior to marketing a product, modelling is the approach of choice to quantify the expected effect. Pragmatic, postmarketing trials and observational studies are the reference methods used to define the population affected, the efficacy and safety of the drug in a real situation and its usefulness for public health. In conclusion, randomised clinical trials remain the reference approach for evaluating efficacy, while observational studies have a confirmatory value. Observational studies are the most appropriate way of evaluating safety in the currently used conditions, as the clinical trial has limited indications. In the interests of public health, modelling is the pre-marketing approach of choice, while pragmatic trials and observational studies are the postmarketing reference approaches.

The effectiveness of intravenously administered immunoglobulin (Ig) therapy for prophylaxis of infection was evaluated in high-risk preterm infants. Two hundred thirty-five premature newborns were randomly assigned, in a double-blind controlled trial, to treatment and placebo groups. Thirty-five infants (29%) of the Ig group and 29 (25%) of the placebo group had one or more episodes of certain infection. Thirty infants (25%) of the Ig group and 18 (16%) of the placebo group had one or more episodes of probable infection. No significant differences were observed in the incidence of certain or probable infection in treated and control infants. Nevertheless, among the infants who had one or more certain or probable episodes of infection, more of them belonged to the Ig group than to the placebo group. The possible deleterious effect of the administration of large amounts of polyspecific Ig is discussed.