The effect of oral terfenadine on the sensitivity of the cough reflex in normal volunteers

Effects of bepotastine, a nonsedating H1-antihistamine, for the treatment of persistent cough and allergic rhinitis: a randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial

Background

Empirical therapy with oral histamine-1 receptor antagonists (H1RAs) is often used for patients with suspected upper airway cough syndrome. No placebo-controlled trials with nonsedating H1RAs (nsH1RAs) have evaluated validated cough outcomes. The objective of the present study was to assess the effect of an nsH1RA, bepotastine, on cough outcomes in patients with allergic rhinitis and persistent cough.

Methods

A randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial was conducted. Adult patients with persistent cough (>3 weeks in duration) and symptomatic allergic rhinitis were recruited and randomly assigned to receive either bepotastine or placebo at a 1:1 ratio. The primary outcome was cough-specific quality of life assessed using the Leicester Cough Questionnaire (LCQ). Secondary outcomes included cough severity visual analogue scale (VAS), throat VAS, Cough Hypersensitivity Questionnaire, Sinonasal Outcome Test-22 score and drug adverse events.

Results

Between October 2021 and September 2022, 50 participants (43 females; mean age 46.28 years; median cough duration 3 months) were assigned to either the bepotastine 10 mg twice daily or placebo group in a 1:1 ratio. After 2 weeks of treatment, both bepotastine and placebo groups showed significant improvements in the LCQ scores, but there was no significant difference in the magnitude of change between the groups (3.45±2.10 versus 3.04±2.94, p=0.576). Secondary outcomes were also comparable.

Conclusions

Despite the relatively small sample size, our study clearly demonstrated that a 2-week treatment with bepotastine did not provide therapeutic benefits for cough outcomes. These findings suggest against the use of nsH1RAs with the intention of improving cough outcomes, even in patients with persistent cough and allergic rhinitis.

Antitussive drugs--past, present, and future

Cough remains a serious unmet clinical problem, both as a symptom of a range of other conditions such as asthma, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, gastroesophageal reflux, and as a problem in its own right in patients with chronic cough of unknown origin. This article reviews our current understanding of the pathogenesis of cough and the hypertussive state characterizing a number of diseases as well as reviewing the evidence for the different classes of antitussive drug currently in clinical use. For completeness, the review also discusses a number of major drug classes often clinically used to treat cough but that are not generally classified as antitussive drugs. We also reviewed a number of drug classes in various stages of development as antitussive drugs. Perhaps surprising for drugs used to treat such a common symptom, there is a paucity of well-controlled clinical studies documenting evidence for the use of many of the drug classes in use today, particularly those available over the counter. Nonetheless, there has been a considerable increase in our understanding of the cough reflex over the last decade that has led to a number of promising new targets for antitussive drugs being identified and thus giving some hope of new drugs being available in the not too distant future for the treatment of this often debilitating symptom.

Review: Effect of drugs on human cough reflex sensitivity to inhaled capsaicin

Capsaicin, the pungent extract of red peppers, has been used in clinical research for almost three decades. Capsaicin has gained favor as the provocative agent of choice to measure cough reflex sensitivity, as it induces cough in a safe, reproducible, and dose-dependent manner. One of the major uses of capsaicin cough challenge testing has been to evaluate the effect of a pharmacological intervention on the human cough reflex. The current review summarizes the published experience with capsaicin inhalation challenge in the evaluation of drug effects on cough reflex sensitivity. A notable contrast evident between studies demonstrating a drug effect (inhibition of cough reflex sensitivity) and those that do not, is the predominance of healthy volunteers as subjects in the latter. This observation suggests that subjects with pathological cough, rather than normal volunteers, comprise the optimal group in which to evaluate the effect of potential antitussive agents on human cough reflex sensitivity.

Peripheral mechanisms II: the pharmacology of peripherally active antitussive drugs

Cough is an indispensable defensive reflex. Although generally beneficial, it is also a common symptom of diseases such as asthma, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, upper respiratory tract infections, idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis and lung cancer. Cough remains a major unmet medical need and although the centrally acting opioids have remained the antitussive of choice for decades, they have many unwanted side effects. However, new research into the behaviour of airway sensory nerves has provided greater insight into the mechanisms of cough and new avenues for the discovery of novel non-opioid antitussive drugs. In this review, the pathophysiological mechanisms of cough and the development of novel antitussive drugs are reviewed.

Older-generation antihistamines and cough due to upper airway cough syndrome (UACS): efficacy and mechanism

Older-generation H1 antihistamines are recommended in empiric protocols for the treatment of cough due to upper airway cough syndrome (UACS). Data from double-blind placebo-controlled trials that support the use of older-generation antihistamines in UACS are limited to a single study of cough due to the common cold. However, several empiric trials strongly support efficacy of older-generation antihistamines in patients with chronic cough. Data from a variety of studies support the concept that newer-generation H1 antihistamines are not useful in the treatment of cough due to UACS. The mechanism of action of older-generation H1 antihistamines has been proposed to be anticholinergic activity, but the rank order potency of these drugs as muscarinic receptor antagonists is not consistent with this hypothesis. Actions of these drugs on histamine H1 and/or nonhistaminergic receptors in the central nervous system remain a possible explanation for their effects on cough due to UACS. The effects of older H1 antihistamines may also be molecule specific, rather than attributable to the entire class of compounds. Additional studies should be performed to document the activity of these drugs in double-blind placebo-controlled trials.

Safety of capsaicin cough challenge testing

BACKGROUND

Capsaicin, the pungent extract of red peppers, has achieved widespread use in clinical research because it induces cough in a dose-dependent and reproducible manner. Although > 2 decades of experience has led investigators to consider capsaicin cough challenge testing a safe diagnostic modality, this issue has not been specifically addressed in the literature.

STUDY OBJECTIVES

To review the published experience with capsaicin inhalation challenge testing in terms of safety.

DESIGN

Literature review and personal communication with study authors.

SETTING

Academic medical center.

RESULTS

One hundred twenty-two published studies since 1984 described 4,833 subjects (4,374 adults, 459 children) undergoing capsaicin cough challenge, with no serious adverse events reported. Subjects included healthy volunteers as well as patients with asthma, COPD, pathologic cough, and other respiratory conditions. Minor complaints described in a small fraction of studies consisted mainly of transient throat irritation. Personal communication with the authors of > 90% of the studies confirmed an absence of any serious adverse events. Furthermore, these investigators have performed thousands of additional capsaicin challenge studies not reported in the literature, also without any associated serious adverse events.

CONCLUSIONS

A review of the 20-year clinical experience has failed to uncover a single serious adverse event associated with capsaicin cough challenge testing in humans. Given the need for better antitussive therapies, capsaicin represents a vital component of future scientific inquiry in the field of cough.

Effect of the second-generation antihistamine, fexofenadine, on cough reflex sensitivity and pulmonary function

AIMS

Current guidelines recommend the use of first-generation antihistamines for the treatment of cough due to rhinitis/postnasal drip syndrome. The antitussive activity of the second-generation antihistamine, fexofenadine, has not been investigated. Therefore, we evaluated the effect of fexofenadine on capsaicin-induced cough in healthy volunteers and in subjects with acute viral upper respiratory tract infection (URI).

METHODS

Twelve healthy volunteers and 12 subjects with URI underwent pulmonary function testing and capsaicin cough challenge on two separate days, 2 h after ingesting 180 mg fexofenadine or matched placebo. Subjects inhaled single, vital-capacity breaths of capsaicin aerosol, administered in incremental doubling concentrations, until the concentration inducing five or more coughs (C5) was determined.

RESULTS

In both subject groups, C5 was not significantly different after fexofenadine compared to placebo. In subjects with URI, pulmonary function studies were also similar. In healthy volunteers, however, FEV1 and FEF(25-75), pulmonary function parameters reflecting the degree of airway dilatation, were significantly increased after fexofenadine. Mean (95% CI) values for FEV1(L) after fexofenadine and placebo were 3.16 (2.77, 3.55) and 3.08 (2.69, 3.47), respectively (P = 0.017). Mean values for FEF(25-75)(L/s) were 3.49 (3.10, 3.88) and 3.26 (2.79, 3.72), respectively (P = 0.029).

CONCLUSIONS

Fexofenadine demonstrated no antitussive activity against capsaicin-induced cough in healthy volunteers and subjects with URI. The ineffectiveness of fexofenadine in suppressing cough probably reflects the lack of anticholinergic activity and central nervous system penetrance that is characteristic of first-generation antihistamines. The mild bronchodilation induced by fexofenadine in healthy volunteers is of unclear clinical significance and requires further investigation.