Finegold Ira, Granet David B, D'Arienzo Peter A, Epstein Arthur B
Division of Allery and lmmunoloy, St. Luke's-Roosevelt Hospital Center, Columbia University, New York, New York, USA.
Clin Ther. 2006 Oct;28(10):1630-8. doi: 10.1016/j.clinthera.2006.10.003.
This post hoc analysis used data from a previous study to more precisely evaluate the efficacy of olopatadine hydrochloride and epinastine hydrochloride in alleviating various levels of severity of ocular itching and conjunctival redness and to determine whether there were any significant differences in the number of responders to treatment.
The original study was a randomized, double-masked allergen challenge comparison assessment. Adult patients with allergic conjunctivitis were screened (visits 1 and 2); those who exhibited positive allergic reactions at both visits were randomized to 1 of 3 groups. olopatadine/epinastine, olopatadine/placebo, or epinastine/placebo. At visit 3, each eye was treated with study medication, and then challenged with allergen. Itching, redness, and chemosis assessments were recorded. For the present post hoc analysis, each eye in the olopatadine/epinastine group was separately classified at each time point, based on the pretreatment severity of their symptom (itching) and sign (conjunctival redness) scores, as moderate, moderate/severe, or severe. Data were analyzed to determine responders (eyes with itching and/or conjunctival redness scores of 0 [none]).
Of 96 patients screened, 66 were randomized to treatment (36 women, 30 men; mean age, 44.38 years [range, 20-71 years]). Olopatadine-treated eyes exhibited lower mean itching scores than epinastine-treated eyes in the moderate/severe and severe groups at all 3 time points (3, 5, and 7 minutes), with significance in the moderate/severe group at 5 minutes (P = 0.05) and in the severe group at 5 and 7 minutes (P = 0.017 and P = 0.02, respectively). Olopatadine-treated eyes had mean conjunctival redness scores similar to epinastine-treated eyes in all severity groups at all time points (10, 15, and 20 minutes) except in the severe group at 10 minutes (P = 0.03). On response analysis, for itching, the proportion of responders was significantly greater in the olopatadine group versus the epinastine group 7 minutes after challenge (27 [50.9%] vs 14 [26.4%]; P = 0.016). For conjunctival redness, the proportion of responders was significantly greater with olopatadine treatment versus epinastine treatment at 15 and 20 minutes after challenge (15 minutes, 12 [22.6%] vs 1 [1.9%] [P = 0.002]; 20 minutes, 10 [18.9%] vs 1 [1.9%] [P = 0.008]).
这项事后分析使用了先前一项研究的数据,以更精确地评估盐酸奥洛他定和盐酸依匹斯汀在缓解不同严重程度的眼部瘙痒和结膜充血方面的疗效,并确定治疗反应者的数量是否存在显著差异。
原研究是一项随机、双盲变应原激发对照评估。对成年过敏性结膜炎患者进行筛查(第1次和第2次就诊);在两次就诊时均表现出阳性过敏反应的患者被随机分为3组中的1组。奥洛他定/依匹斯汀组、奥洛他定/安慰剂组或依匹斯汀/安慰剂组。在第3次就诊时,每只眼睛用研究药物治疗,然后用变应原激发。记录瘙痒、充血和球结膜水肿的评估情况。对于本次事后分析,奥洛他定/依匹斯汀组的每只眼睛在每个时间点根据其症状(瘙痒)和体征(结膜充血)评分的治疗前严重程度分别分类为中度、中度/重度或重度。分析数据以确定反应者(瘙痒和/或结膜充血评分为0[无]的眼睛)。
在96名筛查的患者中,66名被随机分配接受治疗(36名女性,30名男性;平均年龄44.38岁[范围20 - 71岁])。在所有3个时间点(3、5和7分钟),奥洛他定治疗的眼睛在中度/重度和重度组中的平均瘙痒评分均低于依匹斯汀治疗的眼睛,在中度/重度组5分钟时具有显著性差异(P = 0.05),在重度组5分钟和7分钟时具有显著性差异(分别为P = 0.017和P = 0.02)。除了在10分钟时重度组外(P = 0.03),奥洛他定治疗的眼睛在所有时间点(10、15和20分钟)的所有严重程度组中的平均结膜充血评分与依匹斯汀治疗的眼睛相似。在反应分析中,对于瘙痒,激发后7分钟时奥洛他定组的反应者比例显著高于依匹斯汀组(27只[50.9%]对14只[26.4%];P = 0.016)。对于结膜充血,激发后15分钟和20分钟时,奥洛他定治疗组的反应者比例显著高于依匹斯汀治疗组(15分钟时,12只[22.6%]对1只[1.9%][P = 0.002];20分钟时,10只[18.9%]对1只[1.9%][P = 0.008])。