Conceptos Categóricos

LA OLOPATADINA ES EFICAZ Y SEGURA EN ENFERMEDADES ALERGICAS OCULARES

LA OLOPATADINA ES EFICAZ Y SEGURA EN ENFERMEDADES ALERGICAS OCULARES

(especial para SIIC © Derechos reservados)
La olopatadina al 0.1% es una de las drogas más modernas para el tratamiento de la alergia ocular. Su mecanismo de acción incluye antagonismo del receptor de histamina y estabilización de células cebadas. Numerosos estudios preclínicos y clínicos demostraron su eficacia, seguridad y acción prolongada.
abelson9.jpg Autor:
Mark B Abelson
Columnista Experto de SIIC

Institución:
Department of Ophthalmology, Harvard Medical School and Schepens Eye Research Institute


Artículos publicados por Mark B Abelson
Recepción del artículo
3 de Abril, 2006
Aprobación
11 de Abril, 2006
Primera edición
27 de Octubre, 2006
Segunda edición, ampliada y corregida
7 de Junio, 2021

Resumen
Se espera que la incidencia de alergia ocular se eleve paralelamente con la de la alergia en general, posiblemente como consecuencia de la mayor urbanización y polución en países industrializados. Las formas más comunes de alergia ocular son la conjuntivitis alérgica estacional (CAE) y la conjuntivitis alérgica perenne (CAP). El tratamiento consiste en la terapia tópica con agentes antialérgicos, aisladamente o en combinación. La olopatadina al 0.1% en solución oftálmica es una de las moléculas disponibles más nuevas; actualmente está aprobada para el tratamiento de todos los signos y síntomas en pacientes de 3 años o más, en más de 30 países. Este compuesto es único porque tiene un doble mecanismo de acción; inhibe la desgranulación de las células cebadas y la activación de los receptores H1 por histamina. Suprime el prurito, el eritema, el lagrimeo, la quemosis y el edema palpebral que definen la reacción alérgica ocular. Su habilidad para estabilizar las células cebadas se demostró in vitro en mastocitos conjuntivales humanos e in vivo en pruebas de provocación alergénica. Los estudios clínicos y de laboratorio establecieron la eficacia, seguridad y comodidad de la olopatadina.

Palabras clave
Olopatadina, conjuntivitis alérgica, alergia ocular, prueba de provocación alergénica ocular, ensayos clínicos


Artículo completo

(castellano)
Extensión:  +/-13.41 páginas impresas en papel A4
Exclusivo para suscriptores/assinantes

Abstract
The incidence of ocular allergy is expected to rise with that of general allergy, possibly due to the increasing urbanization and pollution of developed countries. The most common forms of ocular allergy are seasonal (SAC) and perennial (PAC) allergic conjunctivitis. Their treatment involves local topical therapy with anti-allergic agents, either single or combination products. Olopatadine 0.1% ophthalmic solution is one of the newest molecules available, currently approved for the treatment of all allergic signs and symptoms in patients = 3 years of age in over 30 countries. This compound is unique in that it has a dual mechanism of action, inhibiting both mast cell degranulation and H1 receptor activation by histamine. It inhibits the itching, redness, chemosis, tearing and lid swelling that define the ocular allergic reaction. Its mast cell stabilizing ability has been demonstrated in vitro in human conjunctival mast cells and in vivo in allergen challenge studies. Laboratory and clinical studies have established the efficacy, safety, and comfort of olopatadine.

Key words
Olopatadine, allergic conjunctivitis, ocular allergy, conjunctival allergen challenge, clinical trials


Full text
(english)
para suscriptores/ assinantes

Clasificación en siicsalud
Artículos originales > Expertos del Mundo >
página   www.siicsalud.com/des/expertocompleto.php/

Especialidades
Principal: Oftalmología
Relacionadas: Alergia, Farmacología, Medicina Farmacéutica, Medicina Interna



Comprar este artículo
Extensión: 13.41 páginas impresas en papel A4

file05.gif (1491 bytes) Artículos seleccionados para su compra



Enviar correspondencia a:
Mark B. Abelson, Department of Ophthalmology, Harvard Medical School and Schepens Eye Research Institute, MA 01845, 863 Turnpike St., North Andover, EE.UU.
Bibliografía del artículo
1. Belfort R, Marbeck P, Hsu CC, Freitas D. Epidemiological study of 134 subjects with allergic conjunctivitis. Acta Ophthalmol Scand Suppl 2000; 230:38-40.
2. Smith AF, Pitt AD, Rodruiguez AE et al. The economic and quality of life impact of seasonal allergic conjunctivitis in a Spanish setting. Ophthalmol Epidemiol 2005; 12:233-242.
3. Prescription Audit (SPA) from Verispan LLC. February 1997 - July 2003.
3(5):541-53.
4. Sharif NA, Xu SX, Miller ST et al. Characterization of the ocular antiallergic and antihistaminic effects of olopatadine (AL-4943A), a novel drug for treating ocular allergic diseases. J Pharmacol Exp Ther 1996; 278(3):1252-61.
5. Yanni JM, Stephens DJ, Miller ST et al. The in vitro and in vivo ocular pharmacology of olopatadine (AL-4943A), an effective anti-allergic/antihistaminic agent. J Ocul Pharmacol Ther 1996; 12(4):389-400.
6. Sharif NA, Xu SX, Yanni JM. Olopatadine (AL-4943A): Ligand binding and functional studies on a novel, long acting H1-selective histamine antagonist and anti-allergic agent for use in allergic conjunctivitis. J Ocul Pharmacol Ther 1996; 12(4):401-7.
7. Yanni JM, Weimer LK, Sharif NA et al. Inhibition of histamine-induced human conjunctival epithelial cell responses by ocular allergy drugs. Arch Ophthalmol 1999; 117(5):643-7.
8. Brockman HL, Graff G, Spellman J, Yanni J. A comparison of the effects of olopatadine and ketotifen on model membranes. Acta Ophthalmol Scand Suppl 2000; 230:10-15.
9. Brockman HL, Momsen MM, Knudtson JR, Miller ST, Graff G, Yanni JM. Interactions of olopatadine and selected antihistamines with model and natural membranes. Ocul Immunol Inflamm 2003; 11(4):247-68.
10. Yanni JM, Miller ST, Gamache DA, et al. Comparative effects of topical ocular anti-allergy drugs on human conjunctival mast cells. Ann Allergy Asthma Immunol 1997; 79(6):541-5.
11. Cook EB, Stahl JL, Barney NP, Graziano FM. Olopatadine inhibits TNF-a release from human conjunctival mast cells. Ann Allergy Asthma Immunol 2000; 84(5):504-8.
12. Cook EB, Stahl JL, Barney NP, Graziano FM. Olopatadine inhibits anti-immunoglobulin E-stimulated conjunctival mast cell upregulation of ICAM-1 expression on conjunctival epithelial cells. Ann Allergy Asthma Immunol 2001; 87(5):424-9.
13. Cook EB, Stahl JL, Sedgwick JB et al. The promotion of eosinophil degranulation and adhesion to conjunctival epithelial cells by IgE-activated conjunctival mast cells. Ann Allergy Asthma Immunol 2004; 92(1):65-72.
14. Fukuishi N, Matsuhisa M, Shimono T et al. Inhibitory effect of olopatadine on antigen-induced eosinophil infiltration and the LFA-1 and Mac-1 expression in eosinophils. Jpn J Pharmacol 2002; 88:463.
15. Matsubara M, Masaki S, Ohmori K, Karasawa A, Hasegawa K. Differential regulation of IL-4 expression and degranulation by anti-allergic olopatadine in rat basophilic leukemia (RBL-2H3) cells. Biochem Pharmacol 2004; 67(7):1315-26.
16. Matsubara M, Tamura T, Ohmori K, Hasegawa K. Histamine H1 receptor antagonist blocks histamine-induced proinflammatory cytokine production through inhibition of Ca2+-dependent protein kinase C, Raf/MEK/ERK and IKK/I kappa B/NF-kappa B signal cascades. Biochem Pharmacol 2005; 69(3):433-49.
17. Tamura T, Matsubara M, Hasegawa K, Ohmori K, Karasawa A. Olopatadine hydrochloride suppresses the rebound phenomenon after discontinuation of treatment with a topical steroid in mice with chronic contact hypersensitivity. Clin Exp Allergy 2005; 35(1):97-103.
18. Furukawa H, Takahashi M, Nakamura K, Kaneko F. Effect of an anti-allergic drug (Olopatadine hydrochloride) on TARC/CCL17 and MDC/CCL22 production by PBMCs from patients with atopic dermatitis. J Dermatol Sci 2004; 36(3):165-172.
19. Abelson MB, Spitalny L. Combined analysis of two studies using the conjunctival allergen challenge model to evaluate olopatadine hydrochloride, a new ophthalmic antiallergic agent with dual activity. Am J Ophthalmol 1998; 125(6):797-804.
20. Abelson MB. Evaluation of olopatadine, a new ophthalmic antiallergic agent with dual activity, using the conjunctival allergen challenge model. Ann Allergy Asthma Immunol 1998; 81(3):221-8.
21. Leonardi AA, Abelson MB. Double-masked, randomized, placebo-controlled clinical study of the mast cell stabilizing effect of treatment with olopatadine in the conjunctival allergen challenge model in humans. Clin Ther 2003; 25(10):2539-2552.
22. Abelson MB, Pratt S, Mussoline JF, Townsend D. One-visit, randomized, placebo-controlled, conjunctival allergen challenge study of scanning and imaging technology for objective quantification of eyelid swelling in the allergic reaction with contralateral use of olopatadine and artificial tears. Clin Ther 2003; 25(7):2070-2084.
23. Abelson MB, Spangler D, Giovanoni A, Gomes P. Chemosis is an important diagnostic tool for evaluating new ophthalmic anti-allergic agents using the conjunctival allergen challenge model. Poster presented at ACAAI, 1998.
24. Bertin D, Fedrigo A, Cano-Parra J, for the International Patanol Clinical Group. Efficacy and safety of olopatadine (Patanol®) eyedrops 0.1% compared to levocabastine 0.05% in seasonal allergic conjunctivitis. Ophthal Res 2001; EVER suppl, abstract 3201.
25. Abelson MB, Greiner JV. Comparative efficacy of olopatadine 0.1% ophthalmic solution versus levocabastine 0.05% ophthalmic suspension using the conjunctival allergen challenge model. Curr Med Res Opin 2004; 20(12):1953-8.
26. Abelson MB, Lanier RQ. The added benefit of local Patanol therapy when combined with systemic Claritin for the inhibition of ocular itching in the conjunctival allergen challenge model. Acta Ophthalmol Scand Suppl 1999; (228):53-6.
27. Abelson MB, Welch DL. An evaluation of onset and duration of action of Patanol (olopatadine hydrochloride ophthalmic solution 0.1%) compared to Claritin (loratadine 10 mg) tablets in acute allergic conjunctivitis in the conjunctival allergen challenge model. Acta Ophthalmol Scand Suppl 2000; (230):60-3.
28. Ousler GW, Wilcox KA et al. An evaluation of the ocular drying effects of 2 systemic antihistamines: loratadine and cetirizine hydrochloride. Ann Allergy Asthma Immunol 2004; 93:460-464.
29. Welch D, Ousler GW, Nally LA, Abelson MB, Wilcox KA. Ocular drying associated with oral antihistamines (loratadine) in the normal population -an evaluation of exaggerated dose effect. Adv Exp Med Biol; 506(Pt B):1051-55.
30. Torkildsen G, MB Abelson. Comparison of Topical and Systemic Anti-Allergy Treatments Relative to Ocular Dryness. Abstract accepted for poster presentation: Association for Research in Vision and Ophthalmology, 2006.
31. Katelaris CH, Cipriandi G, Missotten L et al. A comparison of the efficacy and tolerability of olopatadine hydrochloride 0.1% ophthalmic solution and cromolyn sodium 2% ophthalmic solution in seasonal allergic conjunctivitis. Clin Ther 2002; 24(10):1561-75.
32. Butrus S, Greiner JV, Discepola M, Finegold I. Comparison of the clinical efficacy and comfort of olopatadine hydrochloride 0.1% ophthalmic solution and nedocromil sodium 2% ophthalmic solution in the human conjunctival allergen challenge model. Clin Ther 2000; 22(12):1462-72.
33. Deschenes J, Discepola M, Abelson MB. Comparative evaluation of olopatadine ophthalmic solution (0.1%) versus ketorolac ophthalmic solution (0.5%) using the provocative antigen challenge model. Acta Ophthalmol Scand Suppl 1999; 228:47-52.
34. Berdy GJ, Stoppel JO, Epstein AB. Comparison of the clinical efficacy and tolerability of olopatadine hydrochloride 0.1% ophthalmic solution and loteprednol etabonate 0.2% ophthalmic suspension in the conjunctival allergen challenge model. Clin Ther 2002; 24(6):918-929.
35. Berdy GJ, Spangler DL, Bensch G, et al. A comparison of the relative efficacy and clinical performance of olopatadine hydrochloride 0.1% ophthalmic solution and ketotifen fumarate 0.025% ophthalmic solution in the conjunctival allergen challenge model. Clin Ther 2000; 22(7):826-33.
36. Artal MN, Luna JD, Discepola M. A forced choice comfort study of olopatadine hydrochloride 0.1% versus ketotifen fumarate 0.05%. Acta Opthalmol Scand Suppl 2000; 78:64-5.
37. Aguilar AJ. Comparative study of clinical efficacy and tolerance in seasonal allergic conjunctivitis management with 0.1% olopatadine hydrochloride versus 0.05% ketotifen fumarate. Acta Ophthalmol Scand Suppl 2000; 230:52-5.
38. Tashiro M, Mochizuki H, Sakurada Y et al. Brain histamine H receptor occupancy of orally administered antihistamines measured by positron emission tomography with (11)C-doxepin in a placebo-controlled crossover study design in healthy subjects: a comparison of olopatadine and ketotifen. Br J Clin Pharmacol 2006; 61(1):16-26.
39. Spangler DL, Bensch G, Berdy GJ. Evaluation of the efficacy of olopatadine hydrochloride 0.1% ophthalmic solution and azelastine hydrochloride 0.5% ophthalmic solution in the conjunctival allergen challenge model. Clin Ther 2001; 23(8):1272-80.
40. Lanier BQ, Finegold I, D'Arienzo P, Granet D, Epstein AB, Ledgerwood GL. Clinical efficacy of olopatadine vs epinastine ophthlmaic solution in the conjunctival allergen challenge model. Curr Med Res Opin 2004; 20(8):1227-1233.
41. Lanier RQ, Abelson MB, Berger WE, et al. Comparison of the efficacy of combined fluticasone propionate and olopatadine versus combined fluticasone propionate and fexofenadine for the treatment of allergic rhinoconjunctivitis induced by conjunctival allergen challenge. Clin Ther 2002; 24(7):1161-1174.
42. Spangler DL, Abelson MB, Ober A, Gomes PJ. Randomized, double-masked comparison of olopatadine ophthalmic solution, mometasone furoate monohydrate nasal spray, and fexofenadine hydrochloride tablets using the conjunctival and nasal allergen challenge models. Clin Ther 2003; 25(8):2245-2267.
43. Abelson MB, Turner D. A randomized, double-blind, parallel-group comparison of olopatadine 0.1% ophthalmic solution versus placebo for controlling the signs and symptoms of seasonal allergic conjunctivitis and rhinoconjunctivitis. Clin Ther 2003; 25(3):931-947.
44. Berger W, Abelson MB, Gomes P et al. Effects of adjuvant therapy with 0.1% olopatadine hydrochloride ophthalmic solution on quality of life in patients with allergic rhinitis using systemic or nasal therapy. Ann Allergy Asthma Immunol 2005; 95:361-371.
45. Brodsky M. Allergic conjunctivitis and contact lenses: experience with olopatadine hydrochloride 0.1% therapy. Acta Ophthalmol Scand Suppl 2000; 230:56-9.
46. Dassanayake NL, Carey TC, Owen GR. A laboratory model to determine the uptake and release of olopatadine by soft contact lenses. Acta Ophthalmol Scand 2000; 78:16-17.
47. Brodsky M, Berger WE, Butrus S et al. Evaluation of comfort using olopatadine hydrochloride 0.1% ophthalmic solution in the treatment of allergic conjunctivitis in contact lens wearers compared to placebo using the conjunctiva allergen-challenge model. Eye Contact Lens 2003; 29(2):113-6.
48. Dogru M, Ozmen A, Erturk H, Sanli O, Karatas A. Changes in tear function and the ocular surface after topical olopatadine treatment for allergic conjunctivitis: an open-label study. Clin Ther 2002; 24(8):1309-21.
49. Corum I, Yeniad B, Bilgin LK, Ilhan R. Efficiency of olopatadine hydrochloride 0.1% in the treatment of vernal keratoconjunctivitis and goblet cell density. J Ocul Pharmacol Ther 2005; 21(5):400-5.

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Está expresamente prohibida la redistribución y la redifusión de todo o parte de los contenidos de la Sociedad Iberoamericana de Información Científica (SIIC) S.A. sin previo y expreso consentimiento de SIIC.
ua31618
-->