A comparison of the efficacy and tolerability of olopatadine hydrochloride 0.1% ophthalmic solution and cromolyn sodium 2% ophthalmic solution in seasonal allergic conjunctivitis

Katelaris, Constance H.; Ciprandi, Giorgio; Missotten, Luc; Turner, Frederic; Bertin, Donata; Berdeaux, G

doi:10.1016/s0149-2918(02)80060-1

Cited by 51 publications

(24 citation statements)

References 23 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The results are consistent with those found in the original trials, 8,9 in which interactions between the present treatments and age (all age groups) demonstrated greater benefits with olopatadine in young children. All 3 treatments were well tolerated by the children in the present studies.…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 91%

“…Data from both original trials 8,9 were reanalyzed post hoc to extract information on potential treatment effects in children. A number of caveats apply to the repeat analyses.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The 2 studies reported here are based on 2 original trials 8,9 that included both pediatric and adult patients (trial 1, N = 185 [155 adults, 30 children]; trial 2, N = 211 [189 adults, 22 children]). Trial 1, conducted at 15 centers in 7 countries (Europe and Australia) from October 1995 to December 1997, compared olopatadine hydrochloride ophthalmic solution 0.1% with cromolyn sodium 2% ophthalmic solution* in patients with SAC.…”

Section: G Ciprandi Et Almentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Trial 1, conducted at 15 centers in 7 countries (Europe and Australia) from October 1995 to December 1997, compared olopatadine hydrochloride ophthalmic solution 0.1% with cromolyn sodium 2% ophthalmic solution* in patients with SAC. 8 When the trial was designed, cromolyn sodium was one of the most widely used mast cell inhibitors in Europe for the treatment of allergic ocular disease. Trial 2, conducted at 17 centers in 8 countries (Europe and Australia) from November 1998 to June 2000, compared olopatadine with levocabastine ophthalmic solution † in patients with SAC.…”

Section: G Ciprandi Et Almentioning

confidence: 99%

“…[4][5][6] The efficacy of olopatadine has been demonstrated by comparative studies in patients with SAC and rhinoconjunctivitis; the agent was well tolerated when administered BID for 2 weeks. [6][7][8][9] *Trademark: Patanolா (US and Canada) or Opatanolா (Europe) (Alcon Laboratories Inc., Fort Worth, Texas).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 4 more Smart Citations

Double-masked, randomized, parallel-group study comparing olopatadine 0.1% ophthalmic solution with cromolyn sodium 2% and levocabastine 0.05% ophthalmic preparations in children with seasonal allergic conjunctivitis

Ciprandi

Turner

Gross

2004

Current Therapeutic Research

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background: It is estimated that >50% of medications have not been tested in children. Physicians need pediatric data to guide them in treating children. Olopatadine hydrochloride ophthalmic solution 0.1% is a topical antiallergic agent that is both an antihistamine with high affinity and selectivity for the histamine H 1 receptor and a mast cell stabilizer that inhibits the release of histamine and other proinflammatory mediators from human conjunctival mast cells. The efficacy and tolerability of olopatadine has been demonstrated by comparative studies in adults and children with seasonal allergic conjunctivitis (SAC).Objective: Pediatric patient data were extracted from 2 clinical trials to assess the efficacy and tolerability of olopatadine hydrochloride ophthalmic solution 0.1% compared with those of cromolyn sodium ophthalmic solution 2% and levocabastine ophthalmic solution 0.05% as treatment for SAC in children.Methods: In study 1, conducted at 15 centers in 7 countries (Europe and Australia) from October 1995 to December 1997, olopatadine was instilled BID and placebo (vehicle) BID for 6 weeks and compared with cromolyn instilled QID. Study 2, conducted at 17 centers in 8 countries (Europe and Australia) from November 1998 to June 2000, compared olopatadine BID with levocabastine BID. In both studies, children of either sex and any race, aged 4 to 11 years, and having proven grass pollen allergies were assigned to treatment in a double-masked, randomized fashion. Slit-lamp examination, the physician's imAccepted for publication February 22, 2004. Reproduction in whole or part is not permitted.0011-393X/04/$19.00 pression scale, and self-ratings were used to obtain efficacy data. Data analyses were based on pollen concentrations. The tolerability assessments were based on visual acuity, pupil diameter, intraocular pressure, and a dilated fundus examination. C U R R E N T T H E R A P E U T I C R E S E A R C H ாVResults: Study 1 comprised 30 children (olopatadine [n = 13] and cromolyn sodium [n = 17]; 18 boys, 12 girls; mean age, 7.9 years [range, 4-11 years]). Study 2 comprised 22 children (olopatadine [n = 10] and levocabastine [n = 12]; 12 boys, 10 girls; mean age, 8.6 years [range, 5-11 years]). In study 1, ocular itching (P = 0.010), redness seen on slit-lamp examination (P = 0.003), and eyelid swelling (P = 0.034) were significantly less intense with olopatadine than with cromolyn sodium during the peak pollen period. In study 2, redness seen on slit-lamp examination (P = 0.040) and self-rated ocular redness (P = 0.024) were significantly less intense with olopatadine than levocabastine during the peak pollen period. Olopatadine was well tolerated.Conclusion: Olopatadine hydrochloride ophthalmic solution 0.1% was more effective than both cromolyn sodium 2% and levocabastine 0.05% ophthalmic preparations in controlling ocular signs and symptoms of SAC in children and was well tolerated when administered twice daily for 6 weeks. (Curr Ther Res Clin Exp.

show abstract

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 91%

“…Data from both original trials 8,9 were reanalyzed post hoc to extract information on potential treatment effects in children. A number of caveats apply to the repeat analyses.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: G Ciprandi Et Almentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: G Ciprandi Et Almentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations

Double-masked, randomized, parallel-group study comparing olopatadine 0.1% ophthalmic solution with cromolyn sodium 2% and levocabastine 0.05% ophthalmic preparations in children with seasonal allergic conjunctivitis

Ciprandi

Turner

Gross

2004

Current Therapeutic Research

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Topical antihistamines and mast cell stabilisers for treating seasonal and perennial allergic conjunctivitis

Castillo

Scott

Mustafa

et al. 2015

Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background Seasonal/perennial allergic conjunctivitis is the most common allergic conjunctivitis, usually with acute manifestations when a person is exposed to allergens and with typical signs and symptoms including itching, redness, and tearing. The clinical signs and symptoms of allergic conjunctivitis are mediated by the release of histamine by mast cells. Histamine antagonists (also called antihistamines) inhibit the action of histamine by blocking histamine H1 receptors, antagonising the vasoconstrictor, and to a lesser extent, the vasodilator effects of histamine. Mast cell stabilisers inhibit degranulation and consequently the release of histamine by interrupting the normal chain of intracellular signals. Topical treatments include eye drops with antihistamines, mast cell stabilisers, non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs, combinations of the previous treatments, and corticosteroids. Standard treatment is based on topical antihistamines alone or topical mast cell stabilisers alone or a combination of treatments. There is clinical uncertainty about the relative efficacy and safety of topical treatment. Objectives The objective of this review was to assess the effects of topical antihistamines and mast cell stabilisers, alone or in combination, for use in treating seasonal and perennial allergic conjunctivitis.

show abstract

Anti-allergic drugs

McKay

Oosterhout

2005

Principles of Immunopharmacology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

A comparison of the efficacy and tolerability of olopatadine hydrochloride 0.1% ophthalmic solution and cromolyn sodium 2% ophthalmic solution in seasonal allergic conjunctivitis

Cited by 51 publications

References 23 publications

Double-masked, randomized, parallel-group study comparing olopatadine 0.1% ophthalmic solution with cromolyn sodium 2% and levocabastine 0.05% ophthalmic preparations in children with seasonal allergic conjunctivitis

Double-masked, randomized, parallel-group study comparing olopatadine 0.1% ophthalmic solution with cromolyn sodium 2% and levocabastine 0.05% ophthalmic preparations in children with seasonal allergic conjunctivitis

Topical antihistamines and mast cell stabilisers for treating seasonal and perennial allergic conjunctivitis

Anti-allergic drugs

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About