Ahluwalia P, Anderson D F, Wilson S J, McGill J I, Church M K
Allergy and Inflammation Sciences, Southampton University Medical School, Southampton, United Kingdom.
J Allergy Clin Immunol. 2001 Sep;108(3):449-54. doi: 10.1067/mai.2001.117591.
Nedocromil sodium and levocabastine are widely used for the treatment of ocular allergy, but their mechanisms of action are unclear.
We sought to compare the efficacy and mechanisms of action of nedocromil sodium and levocabastine in reducing conjunctival symptoms after ocular allergen challenge.
We performed a double-blind, placebo-controlled study in which 48 subjects were randomized to 3 groups to receive nedocromil sodium (2%), levocabastine (0.05%), or placebo eye drops twice daily for 2 weeks before ocular challenge with 10 microL of ryegrass extract. Symptoms and tear histamine and PGD(2) concentrations were determined before challenge and at 10, 20, 30, 60, 180, and 360 minutes after challenge. Bulbar biopsy specimens were taken at 6 and 24 hours after challenge to assess conjunctival inflammatory cell numbers, adhesion molecule expression, and mast cell-associated IL-4, IL-5, IL-6, IL-13, and TNF-alpha levels.
Both drugs significantly reduced total symptom scores (P <.05) at all times after challenge compared with placebo. Itching, hyperemia, and lacrimation were most affected. Nedocromil sodium treatment reduced tear concentrations of histamine (by 77%) and PGD(2) (by 70%) at 30 minutes after challenge (both P <.05). In biopsy specimens nedocromil sodium reduced the number of 3H4-positive mast cells (purportedly the secreted form of IL-4) by 49% at 6 hours and 59% at 24 hours (both P <.05). Levocabastine reduced intercellular adhesion molecule 1 expression by 52% at 6 hours and 45% at 24 hours (both P <.05).
Nedocromil sodium and levocabastine both reduced the conjunctival symptoms after ocular allergen challenge but appeared to work by different mechanisms. Nedocromil sodium reduced mast cell function, whereas levocabastine appeared to have primarily antihistaminic actions, although it also reduced the expression of intercellular adhesion molecule 1.
奈多罗米钠和左卡巴斯汀广泛用于治疗眼部过敏,但它们的作用机制尚不清楚。
我们试图比较奈多罗米钠和左卡巴斯汀在眼部过敏原激发后减轻结膜症状的疗效和作用机制。
我们进行了一项双盲、安慰剂对照研究,48名受试者被随机分为3组,在眼部用10微升黑麦草提取物激发前2周,每天两次接受奈多罗米钠(2%)、左卡巴斯汀(0.05%)或安慰剂滴眼液治疗。在激发前以及激发后10、20、30、60、180和360分钟测定症状以及泪液组胺和前列腺素D2(PGD2)浓度。在激发后6小时和24小时采集球结膜活检标本,以评估结膜炎症细胞数量、黏附分子表达以及肥大细胞相关的白细胞介素-4(IL-4)、白细胞介素-5(IL-5)、白细胞介素-6(IL-6)、白细胞介素-13(IL-13)和肿瘤坏死因子-α(TNF-α)水平。
与安慰剂相比,两种药物在激发后的所有时间均显著降低总症状评分(P<.05)。瘙痒、充血和流泪受影响最大。奈多罗米钠治疗在激发后30分钟时使泪液组胺浓度降低77%,PGD2浓度降低70%(均P<.05)。在活检标本中,奈多罗米钠在6小时时使3H4阳性肥大细胞(据推测为IL-4的分泌形式)数量减少49%,在24小时时减少59%(均P<.05)。左卡巴斯汀在6小时时使细胞间黏附分子1表达降低5,2%,在24小时时降低45%(均P<.05)。
奈多罗米钠和左卡巴斯汀均可减轻眼部过敏原激发后的结膜症状,但作用机制似乎不同。奈多罗米钠降低肥大细胞功能,而左卡巴斯汀似乎主要具有抗组胺作用,尽管它也降低细胞间黏附分子1的表达。