The Annals New | Pharmaco Epidemiology and Therapeutic Risk Management
home help contact us subscription past issues search current issue
 QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced]


     


The Annals of Pharmacotherapy: Vol. 36, No. 9, pp. 1366-1374. DOI 10.1345/aph.1C031
© 2002 Harvey Whitney Books Company.
This Article
Right arrow PDF
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow Articles Ahead of Print
Right arrow [Order Reprint]
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Reitberg, D.
Right arrow Articles by Zaias, N
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Reitberg, D.
Right arrow Articles by Zaias, N


Research Articles

Single-patient drug trial methodology for allergic rhinitis

DP Reitberg, E Del Rio, SL Weiss, G Rebell, and N Zaias

BACKGROUND: Historically, single-patient trials (SPTs) have been specifically designed for each patient, requiring significant time and effort for execution. There has been no previous attempt to standardize an SPT for routine commercial availability. OBJECTIVE: To validate the use of an SPT method to discriminate effectiveness and adverse events while comparing drugs/doses in patients with allergic rhinitis. DESIGN: Double-blind, randomized, 4 paired-period, multiple-crossover SPT. SETTING: Academic and commercial investigative sites. PATIENTS: Thirty-six patients with allergic rhinitis were evaluated for the most appropriate treatment; 6 of these participated in 2 different SPTs. INTERVENTIONS: Treatment of symptoms of allergic rhinitis by comparing either loratadine with chlorpheniramine maleate or loratadine with placebo in a series of SPTs. MEASUREMENTS: Effectiveness endpoints were selected from a modern, Food and Drug Administration (FDA)-approved new drug application. Expected adverse events were directly solicited; unsolicited events were also recorded. Total signs and symptoms cumulatively included sneezing, runny nose, itchy nose, teary eyes, and itchy eyes. Quality of life was measured by the most bothersome symptom and the patient's global evaluation. RESULTS: Of 42 initiated SPTs, 40 (95%) provided complete data and 1 (2%) provided partial data, resulting in 41 (98%) evaluable tests. Thirty-one evaluable SPTs compared loratadine 10 mg/d with chlorpheniramine maleate 12 mg twice daily, and 10 SPTs compared loratadine 10 mg/d with placebo. Four of 31 SPTs (13%) showed significant superiority for loratadine over chlorpheniramine maleate and 5 of 31 (16%) for chlorpheniramine maleate over loratadine. Twenty-two of 31 (71%) showed parity performance between loratadine and chlorpheniramine maleate. Loratadine was significantly superior to placebo in 3 of 10 trials (30%), consistent with rates found in 3 pivotal group trials used for FDA approval (24%, 17%, and 0%). Sleepiness could be discriminated for loratadine versus placebo and for chlorpheniramine maleate versus loratadine. CONCLUSIONS: The allergic rhinitis SPT proved to be acceptable to patients, feasible to administer, and reproducible. It can statistically discriminate effectiveness and adverse events, serving as a useful, prognostic tool in community practice.


This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
The Annals of PharmacotherapyHome page
S. J Lloyd and H. Whitney
Publishing Ethics: Duplication Indiscretion
Ann. Pharmacother., January 1, 2003; 37(1): 147 - 147.
[Full Text] [PDF]




homecopy help contact us subscription past issues search current issue
Copyright © 2002 by Harvey Whitney Books Company.