Isomura Tatsuya, Kono Takeshi, Hindmarch Ian, Kikuchi Norimasa, Murakami Aya, Inuzuka Kyoko, Kawana Seiji
CLINICAL STUDY SUPPORT, Inc., Nagoya, Aichi, Japan; Institute of Medical Science, Tokyo Medical University, Tokyo, Japan.
Department of Dermatology, Nippon Medical School Chiba-Hokusoh Hospital, Chiba, Japan.
PLoS One. 2014 Dec 12;9(12):e114336. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0114336. eCollection 2014.
Second-generation antihistamines (AHs) have, in general, fewer sedative effects than the first-generation. However, important inter-drug differences remain in the degree of cognitive and/or psychomotor impairment. The extent to which a particular compound causes disruption can be conveniently compared, to all other AHs, using the Proportional Impairment Ratio (PIR). Although the PIR can differentiate the relative impairment caused by individual drugs, there is no indication of the reliability of the ratios obtained.
To calculate the PIRs -together with 95% confidence intervals (CIs), as an index of reliability- and compare AHs currently, or soon to be, available in Japan, with respect to their intrinsic capacity to cause impairment.
Results from studies of cetirizine, desloratadine, ebastine, fexofenadine, levocetirizine, loratadine, mequitazine, and olopatadine were included in the PIR calculations. All data utilised came from crossover studies in healthy volunteers which were randomised and placebo and positive-internal controlled. Existing databases from studies reporting the sedative effects of AHs on objective (speed, accuracy, memory) and subjective (feeling) psychometrics were augmented, via results from suitable studies published after the previous reviews. The null value for a PIR was one.
A total of 45 studies were finally included for this review. Of the AHs assessed, fexofenadine, ebastine, and levocetirizine showed a PIR for objective tests of 0. However, only fexofenadine (PIR = 0.49) had an upper limit of the 95% CI of less than 1. Fexofenadine, levocetirizine, desloratadine, olopatadine, loratadine, and mequitazine all had a PIR for subjective ratings of 0, but the upper limits of the 95% CIs were all in excess of 1, although fexofenadine (PIR = 2.57) was the lowest.
The results show that there are differences between second-generation AHs in the extent of sedation produced. However, subjective ratings indicate that patients may not necessarily be aware of this.
第二代抗组胺药(AHs)总体上比第一代的镇静作用更少。然而,不同药物在认知和/或精神运动损害程度方面仍存在重要差异。使用比例损害率(PIR)可以方便地将特定化合物导致功能紊乱的程度与所有其他抗组胺药进行比较。尽管PIR可以区分不同药物引起的相对损害,但对于所得比率的可靠性并无指示。
计算PIR及其95%置信区间(CIs)作为可靠性指标,并比较目前或即将在日本上市的抗组胺药在导致损害方面的内在能力。
西替利嗪、地氯雷他定、依巴斯汀、非索非那定、左西替利嗪、氯雷他定、美喹他嗪和奥洛他定的研究结果被纳入PIR计算。所有使用的数据均来自健康志愿者的交叉研究,这些研究是随机的,且有安慰剂和阳性内部对照。通过上次综述后发表的合适研究结果,增加了报告抗组胺药对客观(速度、准确性、记忆力)和主观(感觉)心理测量指标镇静作用的现有数据库。PIR的零值为1。
本综述最终共纳入45项研究。在评估的抗组胺药中,非索非那定、依巴斯汀和左西替利嗪的客观测试PIR为0。然而,只有非索非那定(PIR = 0.49)的95%CI上限小于1。非索非那定、左西替利嗪、地氯雷他定、奥洛他定、氯雷他定和美喹他嗪的主观评分PIR均为0,但95%CI上限均超过1,尽管非索非那定(PIR = 2.57)是最低的。
结果表明第二代抗组胺药在产生镇静作用的程度上存在差异。然而,主观评分表明患者不一定意识到这一点。