ADVERTISEMENT

If you are seeing this message, you may be experiencing temporary network problems. Please wait a few minutes and refresh the page. If the problem persists, you may wish to report it to your local Network Manager.

It is also possible that your web browser is not configured or not able to display style sheets. In this case, although the visual presentation will be degraded, the site should continue to be functional. We recommend using the latest version of Microsoft or Mozilla web browser to help minimise these problems.

Wiley InterScience

Allergy

Allergy

Volume 49 Issue 8, Pages 668 - 672

Published Online: 28 Apr 2007

Journal compilation © 2010 John Wiley & Sons A/S



< Previous Abstract  |  Next Abstract >

Save Article to My Profile      Download Citation      Request Permissions

Abstract |  References  |  Full Text: PDF (Size: 5604K)  | Related Articles | Citation Tracking

Dose-ranging, placebo-controlled study of cetirizine nasal spray in adults with perennial allergic rhinitis
P. Clement 1 , M. H. W. Roovers 2 , C. Francillon 3 , P. Dodion 4
  1 Academisch Ziekenhuis Jette V.U.B, Brussels, Belgium   2 Allergologisch Diagnostisch Centrum, Tilburg, The Netherlands   3 Division d'Immunologie et d'Allergie, CHUV, Lausanne, Switzerland   4 UCB SA, Pharma Sector, Research and Development, Braine l'Alleud, Belgium
Correspondence to  Dr P. Dodion, UCB SA, Pharma Sector, Research and Development, Building R3, Chemin du Foriest, Braine l'Alleud, Belgium
Copyright Munksgaard 1994
KEYWORDS
allergic rhinitis • cetirizine • nasal spray

ABSTRACT

A total of 360 patients with perennial allergic rhinitis were randomized in a placebo-controlled, dose-finding study comparing three concentrations (0.06%, 0.125%, and 0.25%) of a cetirizine nasal spray, administered three times a day for 2 weeks. The primary criterion of efficacy was the percentage of days with no or only mild symptoms of rhinitis (PDMax1), as evaluated by the patients. The median PDMax1 were 16.7%, 30.8%, 42.9% and 26.7% for the placebo, 0.06%, 0.125%, and 0.25% groups, respectively. Although the global comparison among the four groups only approached statistical significance (P= 0.076), the difference (26.2%) between the placebo and 0.125% groups was clinically and statistically significant (P= 0.011). For the global evaluation by the investigator, the best results were seen in the 0.125% group (P= 0.03). The occurrence of adverse events did not differ among the four treatment groups and consisted mainly of nasal events, occurring in 22.5%, 17.1%, 12.9%, and 24.4% of the patients for the placebo, 0.06%, 0.125%, and 0.25% groups, respectively (P=0.184). These results indicate that the 0.125% concentration is significantly better than placebo and offers the best therapeutic ratio.


Accepted for publication 3 March 1994

DIGITAL OBJECT IDENTIFIER (DOI)
10.1111/j.1398-9995.1994.tb00138.x About DOI

Related Articles

  • Find other articles like this in Wiley InterScience
  • Find articles in Wiley InterScience written by any of the authors

Wiley InterScience is a member of CrossRef.

Cross Ref Member


Sign Up Now
Sign Up Now
Sign Up Now

Sign Up Now

Be the first to know about new research in your field

Sign up for FREE e-alerts from Wiley-Blackwell journals!

Sign Up Now