Efficacy and safety of on-demand versus daily rupatadine in chronic spontaneous urticaria: A randomized trial

Chronic spontaneous urticaria; On-demand; RupatadineUrticaria crónica espontánea; Bajo demanda; RupatadinaUrticària crònica espontània; Sota demanda; RupatadinaBackground Non-sedating H1-antihistamines (nsAH) are the most commonly used treatment for chronic spontaneous urticaria (CSU). Many patients use them as on-demand (OD) therapy rather than a maintenance treatment. Here, we compared OD versus daily maintenance treatment with the nsAH rupatadine, assessed the efficacy of rupatadine updosing, and investigated potential long-term disease-modifying effects. Methods This multicenter, randomized study consisted of 2 weeks of screening, 8 weeks of double-blind treatment, and 6 weeks of treatment-free follow-up (OD allowed). Adult patients were randomized to 10 mg rupatadine OD or 10 mg rupatadine daily. At Week 4, if patients did not have a complete response, they switched from 10 to 20 mg rupatadine daily or underwent sham updosing (patients on 10 mg rupatadine OD). The primary aim was to compare CSU disease activity at the end of follow-up between daily versus OD. Additionally, we assessed the efficacy of rupatadine updosing. Major outcomes were disease activity, CSU-related quality of life (QoL), and disease control. Results At Week 4, disease activity and QoL significantly improved in daily versus OD-treated patients. Updosing of rupatadine did not improve the mean disease activity, but the number of complete responders increased during updosing from 5% to 22%. At the end of follow-up, the disease activity of patients treated OD versus daily was not significantly different. Conclusions Daily rupatadine treatment significantly improved CSU disease activity and QoL during treatment versus OD treatment but not after discontinuation of rupatadine, indicating the benefits of a daily maintenance nsAH schedule.This study was funded in part by URIACH, and the analysis was funded by Charité—Universitätsmedizin Berlin as part of the “CU-LATER” study. Other features of the study were supported by intramural funding. In addition, this study benefited from the network of Urticaria Centers of Reference and Excellence (UCAREs; https://ga2len-ucare.com) of GA2LEN, the Global Allergy and Asthma European Network

Efficacy and safety of on-demand versus daily rupatadine in chronic spontaneous urticaria: A randomized trial

Background: Non-sedating H1 -antihistamines (nsAH) are the most commonly used treatment for chronic spontaneous urticaria (CSU). Many patients use them as on-demand (OD) therapy rather than a maintenance treatment. Here, we compared OD versus daily maintenance treatment with the nsAH rupatadine, assessed the efficacy of rupatadine updosing, and investigated potential long-term disease-modifying effects. Methods: This multicenter, randomized study consisted of 2 weeks of screening, 8 weeks of double-blind treatment, and 6 weeks of treatment-free follow-up (OD allowed). Adult patients were randomized to 10 mg rupatadine OD or 10 mg rupatadine daily. At Week 4, if patients did not have a complete response, they switched from 10 to 20 mg rupatadine daily or underwent sham updosing (patients on 10 mg rupatadine OD). The primary aim was to compare CSU disease activity at the end of follow-up between daily versus OD. Additionally, we assessed the efficacy of rupatadine updosing. Major outcomes were disease activity, CSU-related quality of life (QoL), and disease control. Results: At Week 4, disease activity and QoL significantly improved in daily versus OD-treated patients. Updosing of rupatadine did not improve the mean disease activity, but the number of complete responders increased during updosing from 5% to 22%. At the end of follow-up, the disease activity of patients treated OD versus daily was not significantly different. Conclusions: Daily rupatadine treatment significantly improved CSU disease activity and QoL during treatment versus OD treatment but not after discontinuation of rupatadine, indicating the benefits of a daily maintenance nsAH schedule

Evidence-based recommendations for the therapeutic management of angioedema owing to hereditary C1 inhibitor deficiency: consensus report of an International Working Group

A ngioedema owing to hereditary deficiency of C1 inhibitor (HAE) is a rare, life-threatening, disabling disease. In the last 2 years, the results of well-designed and controlled trials with existing and new therapies for this condition have been published, and new treatments reached the market. Current guidelines for the treatment for HAE were released before the new trials and before the new treatments became available and were essentially based on observational studies and expert opinion. To provide evidence-based HAE treatment guidelines supported by the new studies, a conference was held in Gargnano del Garda, Italy, from September 26 to 29, 2010. The meeting hosted 58 experienced HAE expert physicians, representatives of pharmaceutical companies and representatives of HAE patients' associations. Here, we report the topics discussed during the meeting and evidence-based consensus about management approaches for HAE in adult/adolescent patients