Influence of food on the oral bioavailability of rupatadine tablets in healthy volunteers: a single-dose, randomized, open-label, two-way crossover study

A single-dose, randomized, open-label, four-period, crossover equivalence trial comparing the clinical similarity of the proposed biosimilar rupatadine fumarate to reference Wystamm® in healthy Chinese subjects

Purpose

The aim of this study was to evaluate the bioequivalence of two formulations of rupatadine (10-mg tablets) under fasting and fed conditions in healthy Chinese subjects.

Methods

A total of 72 subjects were randomly assigned to the fasting cohort (n = 36) and fed cohort (n = 36). Each cohort includes four single-dose observation periods and 7-day washout intervals. Blood samples were collected at several timepoints for up to 72 h post-dose. The plasma concentration of rupatadine and the major active metabolites (desloratadine and 3-hydroxydesloratadine) were analyzed by a validated HPLC-MS/MS method. The non-compartmental analysis method was employed to determine the pharmacokinetic parameters. Based on the within-subject standard deviation of the reference formulation, a reference-scaled average bioequivalence or average bioequivalence method was used to evaluate the bioequivalence of the two formulations.

Results

For the fasting status, the reference-scaled average bioequivalence method was used to evaluate the bioequivalence of the maximum observed rupatadine concentration (Cmax; subject standard deviation > 0.294), while the average bioequivalence method was used to evaluate the bioequivalence of the area under the rupatadine concentration-time curve from time 0 to the last detectable concentration (AUC0-t) and from time 0 to infinity (AUC0-∞). The geometric mean ratio (GMR) of the test/reference for Cmax was 95.91%, and the upper bound of the 95% confidence interval was 95.91%. For AUC0-t and AUC0-∞ comparisons, the GMR and 90% confidence interval (CI) were 98.76% (93.88%-103.90%) and 98.71% (93.93%-103.75%), respectively. For the fed status, the subject standard deviation values of Cmax, AUC0-t, and AUC0-∞ were all <0.294; therefore, the average bioequivalence method was used. The GMR and 90% CI for Cmax, AUC0-t, and AUC0-∞ were 101.19% (91.64%-111.74%), 98.80% (94.47%-103.33%), and 98.63% (94.42%-103.03%), respectively. The two-sided 90% CI of the GMR for primary pharmacokinetic endpoints of desloratadine and 3-hydroxydesloratadine was also within 80%-125% for each cohort. These results met the bioequivalence criteria for highly variable drugs. All adverse events (AEs) were mild and transient.

Conclusion

The test drug rupatadine fumarate showed a similar safety profile to the reference drug Wystamm® (J. Uriach y Compañía, S.A., Spain), and its pharmacokinetic bioequivalence was confirmed in healthy Chinese subjects based on fasting and postprandial status.

Clinical trial registration

http://www.chinadrugtrials.org.cn/index.html, identifier CTR20213217.

Rupatadine Oral Solution Titration by Body Weight in Paediatric Patients Suffering from Allergic Rhinitis: A Population Pharmacokinetic Study

Background

Allergic rhinitis (AR) and chronic urticaria, both are treated in children with doses of second generation of antihistamines that have been mostly based on extrapolation of data obtained in adults. The objectives of this work were to develop a model to explain the pharmacokinetics (PK) of rupatadine, a second generation antihistamine, administered to children 2−11 years old and to calculate the non-compartmental PK parameters for two groups of age (2–5 and 6–11 years old) based on the individual Bayesian estimates from the selected model.

Methods

Data from two PK studies with rupatadine oral solution (1 mg/mL) were pooled: Study A, an extensive blood sampling study performed in 11 children (6–11 years old) who received a single oral dose of rupatadine; and Study B, a sparse blood sampling study in 40 children (2–5 years old) receiving multiple oral doses. A simultaneous population PK model was developed using data available for all children. Using individual Bayesian estimates from the selected model, steady-state plasma concentrations for both studies were simulated and the non-parametric PK parameters were calculated for two age groups: 2–5 years (subgroup I) and 6–11 years (subgroup II).

Results

A two-compartment model with first-order absorption and elimination with clearance depending on body weight, better described the PK of rupatadine for 2–11 year old children. The plasma clearance dependence on weight was linear. The mean (SD) non-compartment PK parameters calculated using simulated plasma profiles at steady state were: C_max, 2.54 (1.26) vs 1.96 (0.52) ng/mL; AUC_0-24h, 10.74 (3.09) vs 10.38 (4.31) ng/mL/h; and t_1/2, 12.28 (3.09) vs 15.94 (4.09) h, for children 6–11 and 2–5 years old, respectively.

Conclusions

The PK of rupatadine depends on the weight of paediatric patients but not on their age. The dosage strategy adjusted by body weight in children 2–11 years old (2.5 mL if weight 10–25 kg, and 5 mL if ≥ 25 kg) provides similar exposure between the two groups of age, and to that obtained in adults with the 10 mg dose tablet formulation.

Use of Phenotypically Poor Metabolizer Individual Donor Human Liver Microsomes To Identify Selective Substrates of UGT2B10

UDP-glucuronosyltransferase (UGT)1A4 and UGT2B10 are the human UGT isoforms most frequently involved in N-glucuronidation of drugs. UGT2B10 exhibits higher affinity than UGT1A4 for numerous substrates, making it potentially the more important enzyme for metabolism of these compounds in vivo. Clinically relevant UGT2B10 polymorphisms, including a null activity splice site mutation common in African populations, can lead to large exposure differences for UGT2B10 substrates that may limit their developability as marketed drugs. UGT phenotyping approaches using recombinantly expressed UGTs are limited by low enzyme activity and lack of validation of scaling to in vivo. In this study, we describe the use of an efficient experimental protocol for identification of UGT2B10-selective substrates (i.e., those with high fraction metabolized by UGT2B10), which exploits the activity difference between pooled human liver microsomes (HLM) and HLM from a phenotypically UGT2B10 poor metabolizer donor. Following characterization of the approach with eight known UGT2B10 substrates, we used ligand-based virtual screening and literature precedents to select 24 potential UGT2B10 substrates of 140 UGT-metabolized drugs for testing. Of these, dothiepin, cidoxepin, cyclobenzaprine, azatadine, cyproheptadine, bifonazole, and asenapine were indicated to be selective UGT2B10 substrates that have not previously been described. UGT phenotyping experiments and tests comparing conjugative and oxidative clearance were then used to confirm these findings. These approaches provide rapid and sensitive ways to evaluate whether a potential drug candidate cleared via glucuronidation will be sensitive to UGT2B10 polymorphisms in vivo. SIGNIFICANCE STATEMENT: The role of highly polymorphic UDP-glucuronosyltransferase (UGT)2B10 is likely to be underestimated currently for many compounds cleared via N-glucuronidation due to high test concentrations often used in vitro and low activity of UGT2B10 preparations. The methodology described in this study can be combined with the assessment of UGT versus oxidative in vitro metabolism to rapidly identify compounds likely to be sensitive to UGT2B10 polymorphism (high fraction metabolized by UGT2B10), enabling either chemical modification or polymorphism risk assessment before candidate selection.

Second generation H1 - antihistamines interaction with food and alcohol-A systematic review

Histamine is a mediator of many physiological processes. It plays an important role in modulating allergy reactions and immune system responses. H1 receptor is a therapeutic target for drugs applied in allergic diseases such as allergic rhinoconjunctivitis, urticarial, or atopic dermatitis. H1-antihistamines display different chemical structures, pharmacokinetics and a potential for drug-drug and drug-food interactions. Drug-food interactions are known to reduce therapeutic effects of the medicine, as well as to induce a potent adverse drug reactions. Considering it all, a systematic review was conducted to investigate the importance of drug-food interaction for H1-antihistamine drugs. As non-sedating second generation H1-antihistamines remain to be drugs of choice in treating allergic conditions, the review has been focused on this particular class of medicines. The aim of this paper is to examine the evidence of food-drug and food-alcohol interactions for second generation H1-antihistamine drugs. A systematic literature queries were performed in the following databases: Medline (via PubMed), Cochrane Library, Embase and Web of Science (all from their inception date till October 2016). The queries covered nine specific names of second generation anthistamine drugs, namely bilastine, cetirizine, desloratadine, ebastine, fexofenadine, levocetirizine, loratadine, mizolastine, and rupatadine, in combinations with such terms as "food", "juice", "grapefruit", "fruits", "alcohol", "pharmacokinetics", and "meal". Additional publications were found by checking all the reference lists. Where none data on drug-food interaction could be found within the investigated databases, a specific drug prescribing information was used. 2326 publications were identified with the database queries. Articles were subjected to analysis by reviewing their title, abstract and full text; duplicated papers were removed. Having collected a complete set of data, a critical review was undertaken. For selected H1-antihistamines food, fruit juices or alcohol consumption may significantly impact the efficacy and safety of the therapy. This issue shall be well understood to educate patients properly, as it provides the major therapeutic element in allergic diseases.

Pharmacokinetics, Safety and Cognitive Function Profile of Rupatadine 10, 20 and 40 mg in Healthy Japanese Subjects: A Randomised Placebo-Controlled Trial

Introduction

Rupatadine is a marketed second generation antihistamine, with anti-PAF activity, indicated for symptomatic treatment of allergic rhinitis and urticaria. This study was conducted to evaluate the pharmacokinetics (PK), pharmacodynamics (PD), safety and tolerability of rupatadine in healthy Japanese subjects after single and multiple oral doses.

Methods

In this randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled study, 27 male and female healthy Japanese subjects were administered single and multiple escalating rupatadine dose of 10, 20 and 40 mg or placebo. Blood samples were collected at different time points for PK measurements and subjects were assessed for safety and tolerability. The effect of rupatadine on cognitive functioning was evaluated by means of computerized cognitive tests: rapid visual information processing (RVP), reaction time (RT), spatial working memory (SWM) and visual analogue scales (VAS).

Results

Exposure to rupatadine as measured by C_max and AUC was found to increase in a dose dependent manner over the dose range of 10–40 mg for both single and multiple dose administration. The safety assessments showed that all treatment related side effects were of mild intensity and there were no serious adverse events (SAEs) or withdrawals due to treatment–emergent adverse events (TEAEs) in this study. The therapeutic dose of rupatadine did not show any CNS impairment in any of the cognitive tests.

Conclusions

This study demonstrated that rupatadine is safe and well tolerated by Japanese healthy subjects. The PK-PD profile confirmed previous experience with rupatadine.

Rupatadine: global safety evaluation in allergic rhinitis and urticaria

INTRODUCTION

Rupatadine is a second-generation H1-antihistamine with dual affinity for histamine H1 and PAF receptors. Rupatadine is indicated for the treatment of allergic rhinitis and urticaria.

AREAS COVERED

A Medline search was conducted to identify preclinical and clinical studies of rupatadine. This was supplemented with additional articles obtained from online sources. The focus of this review is on the safety profile of rupatadine.

EXPERT OPINION

The review of these data indicates that rupatadine is highly selective for histamine H1-receptors, exhibits additional PAF antagonism in in vitro and in vivo studies, does not cross the blood-brain barrier, and has similar adverse events comparable with other second-generation antihistamines. Rupatadine is a safe and well tolerated drug in patients over 2 years old, with no central nervous system or cardiovascular effects and it can be taken with or without foods.

Update on rupatadine in the management of allergic disorders

In a review of rupatadine published in 2008, the primary focus was on its role as an antihistamine, with a thorough evaluation of its pharmacology and interaction with histamine H1 -receptors. At the time, however, evidence was already emerging of a broader mechanism of action for rupatadine involving other mediators implicated in the inflammatory cascade. Over the past few years, the role of platelet-activating factor (PAF) as a potent mediator involved in the hypersensitivity-type allergic reaction has gained greater recognition. Rupatadine has dual affinity for histamine H1 -receptors and PAF receptors. In view of the Allergic Rhinitis and its Impact on Asthma group's call for oral antihistamines to exhibit additive anti-allergic/anti-inflammatory properties, further exploration of rupatadine's anti-PAF effects was a logical step forward. New studies have demonstrated that rupatadine inhibits PAF effects in nasal airways and produces a greater reduction in nasal symptoms than levocetirizine. A meta-analysis involving more than 2500 patients has consolidated the clinical evidence for rupatadine in allergic rhinoconjunctivitis in adults and children (level of evidence Ia, recommendation A). Other recent advances include observational studies of rupatadine in everyday clinical practice situations and approval of a new formulation (1 mg/ml oral solution) for use in children. In this reappraisal, we revisit some key properties and pivotal clinical studies of rupatadine and examine new clinical data in more detail including studies that measured health-related quality of life and studies that investigated the efficacy and safety of rupatadine in other indications such as acquired cold urticaria, mosquito bite allergy and mastocytosis.

Rupatadine inhibits inflammatory mediator release from human laboratory of allergic diseases 2 cultured mast cells stimulated by platelet-activating factor

BACKGROUND

Mast cells are involved in allergy and inflammation by the secretion of multiple mediators, including histamine, cytokines, and platelet-activating factor (PAF), in response to different triggers, including emotional stress. PAF has been associated with allergic inflammation, but there are no clinically available PAF inhibitors.

OBJECTIVE

To investigate whether PAF could stimulate human mast cell mediator release and whether rupatadine (RUP), a dual histamine-1 and PAF receptor antagonist, could inhibit the effect of PAF on human mast cells.

METHODS

Laboratory of allergic diseases 2 cultured mast cells were stimulated with PAF (0.001, 0.01, and 0.1 μmol/L) and substance P (1 μmol/L) with or without pretreatment with RUP (2.5 and 25 μmol/L), which was added 10 minutes before stimulation. Release of β-hexosaminidase was measured in supernatant fluid by spectrophotoscopy, and histamine, interleukin-8, and tumor necrosis factor were measured by enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay.

RESULTS

PAF stimulated a statistically significant release of histamine, interleukin-8, and tumor necrosis factor (0.001-0.1 μmol/L) that was comparable to that stimulated by substance P. Pretreatment with RUP (25 μmol/L) for 10 minutes inhibited this effect. In contrast, pretreatment of laboratory of allergic diseases 2 cells with diphenhydramine (25 μmol/L) did not inhibit mediator release, suggesting that the effect of RUP was not due to its antihistaminic effect.

CONCLUSION

PAF stimulates human mast cell release of proinflammatory mediators that is inhibited by RUP. This action endows RUP with additional properties in treating allergic inflammation.

Rupatadine for the treatment of urticaria

INTRODUCTION

Rupatadine fumarate is a second-generation antihistamine provided with a potent, long-lasting and balanced in vivo dual platelet-activating factor (PAF) and histamine antagonist activity and it uniquely combines both activities at a high level of potency. Rupatadine has a rapid onset of action and a long-lasting effect, so a once-daily dosing is permitted, moreover is well tolerated by young adults and the elders. Rupatadine does not present the side effects of first-generation H1-antihistamines, such as somnolence, fatigue, headache, impaired memory and learning, sedation, increased appetite, dry mouth, dry eyes, visual disturbances, constipation, urinary retention and erectile dysfunction.

AREAS COVERED

This study evaluates the effectiveness and safety of rupatadine in chronic urticaria (CU) and acquired cold urticaria (ACU), through a systematic review of the literature.

EXPERT OPINION

Patients affected by urticaria are often discouraged because frequently their disease does not recognize a cause and it is unresponsive to treatments. Patients can control their symptoms assuming second-generation H1-antihistamines, such as rupatadine. Several randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trials testify effectiveness and safety of rupatadine in CU and ACU. However, further clinical trials to evaluate the efficacy of rupatadine in different urticaria subtypes and to test the safety of doses higher than 20 mg are encouraged.

Food- and gender-dependent pharmacokinetics of paeoniflorin after oral administration with Samul-tang in rats

ETHNOPHARMACOLOGICAL RELEVANCE

Samul-tang (Si-Wu-tang in Chinese, Shimotsu-to in Japanese), widely used in eastern Asia, is composed of Angelica gigas (Angelicae Gigantis Radix), Cnidium officinale (Cnidii Rhizoma), Paeonia lactiflora (Paeonia Radix) and Rehmannia glutinosa (Rehmanniae Radix Preparata). Paeoniflorin, one of active components in Samul-tang has anti-platelet, anti-inflammation, anti-cancer and neuroprotective properties. However, there is no information about the effects of gender and food intake on the pharmacokinetics of paeoniflorin till now.

AIM OF THE STUDY

This study was conducted to investigate whether food and gender could influence pharmacokinetic profiles of paeoniflorin after oral administration of Samul-tang.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Male and female rats were administered with a single oral dose of Samul-tang equivalent to 80 mg/kg of paeoniflorin. Plasma concentrations of paeoniflorin were measured by high-performance liquid chromatography. The statistical differences of each group were evaluated using the analysis of variance (ANOVA) or Student t-test.

RESULTS

The pharmacokinetic parameters of paeoniflorin were not significant different by gender difference. However, the maximum plasma concentration (C(max), 0.47±0.29 μg/mL versus 1.10±0.35 μg/mL), area under the concentration-time curve (AUC(0→∞), 1.41±0.89 h · μg/mL versus 3.12±1.61 h · μg/mL) and relative bioavailability (F(rel)=2.21) of fed rats were significantly increased in comparison with those of fasted rats (P<0.05).

CONCLUSION

Taken together, food intake can affect both the rate and extent of absorption of paeoniflorin when Samul-tang was administered orally. Furthermore, this study demonstrates a readily preparative HPLC method in the research of traditional herbal medicine.

Rupatadine for the treatment of allergic rhinitis and urticaria

Allergies are a widespread group of diseases of civilization and most patients are still undertreated. Since histamine is considered to be the most important mediator in allergies such as allergic rhinitis and urticaria, the most commonly used drugs to treat these disorders are antihistamines acting on the histamine 1 (H1) receptor. The currently available antihistamines, however, have significant differences in their effects and safety profiles. Furthermore, the Allergic Rhinitis and its Impact on Asthma initiative calls for additional desirable properties of antihistamines. Here, we review the profile of rupatadine, a new dual platelet-activating factor and H1-receptor antagonist that fulfils these criteria and therefore offers an excellent option for the treatment of allergic diseases.

Food-drug interactions

The effect of drug on a person may be different than expected because that drug interacts with another drug the person is taking (drug-drug interaction), food, beverages, dietary supplements the person is consuming (drug-nutrient/food interaction) or another disease the person has (drug-disease interaction). A drug interaction is a situation in which a substance affects the activity of a drug, i.e. the effects are increased or decreased, or they produce a new effect that neither produces on its own. These interactions may occur out of accidental misuse or due to lack of knowledge about the active ingredients involved in the relevant substances. Regarding food-drug interactions physicians and pharmacists recognize that some foods and drugs, when taken simultaneously, can alter the body's ability to utilize a particular food or drug, or cause serious side effects. Clinically significant drug interactions, which pose potential harm to the patient, may result from changes in pharmaceutical, pharmacokinetic, or pharmacodynamic properties. Some may be taken advantage of, to the benefit of patients, but more commonly drug interactions result in adverse drug events. Therefore it is advisable for patients to follow the physician and doctors instructions to obtain maximum benefits with least food-drug interactions. The literature survey was conducted by extracting data from different review and original articles on general or specific drug interactions with food. This review gives information about various interactions between different foods and drugs and will help physicians and pharmacists prescribe drugs cautiously with only suitable food supplement to get maximum benefit for the patient.

No cardiac effects of therapeutic and supratherapeutic doses of rupatadine: results from a 'thorough QT/QTc study' performed according to ICH guidelines

AIMS

To evaluate the effects of therapeutic and supratherapeutic doses of rupatadine on cardiac repolarization in line with a 'thorough QT/QTc study' protocol performed according to International Conference on Harmonization guidelines.

METHODS

This was a randomized (gender-balanced), parallel-group study involving 160 healthy volunteers. Rupatadine, 10 and 100 mg day(-1), and placebo were administered single-blind for 5 days, whilst moxifloxacin 400 mg day(-1) was given on days 1 and 5 in open-label fashion. ECGs were recorded over a 23-h period by continuous Holter monitoring at baseline and on treatment days 1 and 5. Three 10-s ECG samples were downloaded at regular intervals and were analysed independently. The primary analysis of QTc was based on individually corrected QT (QTcI). Treatment effects on QTcI were assessed using the largest time-matched mean difference between the drug and placebo (baseline-subtracted) for the QTcI interval. A negative 'thorough QT/QTc study' is one where the main variable is around < or =5 ms, with a one-sided 95% confidence interval that excludes an effect >10 ms.

RESULTS

The validity of the trial was confirmed by the fact that the moxifloxacin-positive control group produced the expected change in QTcI duration (around 5 ms). The ECG data for rupatadine at both 10 and 100 mg showed no signal effects on the ECG, after neither single nor repeated administration. Furthermore, no pharmacokinetic/pharmacodynamic relationship, gender effects or clinically relevant changes in ECG waveform outliers were observed. No deaths or serious or unexpected adverse events were reported.

CONCLUSIONS

This 'thorough QT/QTc study' confirmed previous experience with rupatadine and demonstrated that it had no proarrhythmic potential and raised no concerns regarding its cardiac safety.

Therapeutic management of allergic diseases

Allergic diseases are characterized by the activation of inflammatory cells and by a massive release of mediators. The aim of this chapter was to describe succinctly the modes of action, indications, and side effects of the major antiallergic and antiasthmatic drugs. When considering the ideal pharmacokinetic characteristics of a drug, a poorly metabolized drug may confer a lower variability in plasma concentrations and metabolism-based drug interactions, although poorly metabolized drugs may be prone to transporter-based disposition and interactions. The ideal pharmacological properties of a drug include high binding affinity, high selectivity, and appropriate association and dissociation rates. Finally, from a patient perspective, the frequency and route of administration are important considerations for ease of use.

Rupatadine inhibits proinflammatory mediator secretion from human mast cells triggered by different stimuli

BACKGROUND

Mast cells are involved in allergy and inflammation by secreting multiple mediators including histamine, cytokines and platelet-activating factor. Certain histamine 1 receptor antagonists have been reported to inhibit histamine secretion, but the effect on cytokine release from human mast cells triggered by allergic and other stimuli is not well known. We investigated the ability of rupatadine, a potent histamine 1 receptor antagonist that also blocks platelet-activating factor actions, to also inhibit mast cell mediator release.

METHODS

Rupatadine (1-50 microM) was used before stimulation by: (1) interleukin (IL)-1 to induce IL-6 from human leukemic mast cells (HMC-1 cells), (2) substance P for histamine, IL-8 and vascular endothelial growth factor release from LAD2 cells, and (3) IgE/anti-IgE for cytokine release from human cord blood-derived cultured mast cells. Mediators were measured in the supernatant fluid by ELISA or by Milliplex microbead arrays.

RESULTS

Rupatadine (10-50 microM) inhibited IL-6 release (80% at 50 microM) from HMC-1 cells, whether added 10 min or 24 h prior to stimulation. Rupatadine (10-50 microM for 10 min) inhibited IL-8 (80%), vascular endothelial growth factor (73%) and histamine (88%) release from LAD2 cells, as well as IL-6, IL-8, IL-10, IL-13 and tumor necrosis factor release from human cord blood-derived cultured mast cells.

CONCLUSION

Rupatadine can inhibit histamine and cytokine secretion from human mast cells in response to allergic, immune and neuropeptide triggers. These actions endow rupatadine with unique properties in treating allergic inflammation, especially perennial rhinitis and idiopathic urticaria.

Rupatadine in allergic rhinitis and chronic urticaria

Histamine is the primary mediator involved the pathophysiology of allergic rhinitis and chronic urticaria, and this explains the prominent role that histamine H(1)-receptor antagonists have in the treatment of these disorders. However, histamine is clearly not the only mediator involved in the inflammatory cascade. There is an emerging view that drugs which can inhibit a broader range of inflammatory processes may prove to be more effective in providing symptomatic relief in both allergic rhinitis and chronic urticaria. This is an important consideration of the Allergic Rhinitis and its Impact on Asthma (ARIA) initiative which provides a scientific basis for defining what are the desirable properties of an 'ideal' antihistamine. In this review of rupatadine, a newer dual inhibitor of histamine H(1)- and PAF-receptors, we evaluate the evidence for a mechanism of action which includes anti-inflammatory effects in addition to a powerful inhibition of H(1)- and PAF-receptors. We assess this in relation to the clinical efficacy (particularly the speed of onset of action) and safety of rupatadine, and importantly its longer term utility in everyday life. In clinical trials, rupatadine has been shown to be an effective and well-tolerated treatment for allergic rhinitis and chronic idiopathic urticaria (CIU). It has a fast onset of action, producing rapid symptomatic relief, and it also has an extended duration of clinical activity which allows once-daily administration. In comparative clinical trials rupatadine was shown to be at least as effective as drugs such as loratadine, cetirizine, desloratadine and ebastine in reducing allergic symptoms in adult/adolescent patients with seasonal, perennial or persistent allergic rhinitis. Importantly, rupatadine demonstrated no adverse cardiovascular effects in preclinical or extensive clinical testing, nor negative significant effects on cognition or psychomotor performance (including a practical driving study). It improved the overall well-being of patients with allergic rhinitis or CIU based on findings from quality of life questionnaires and patient global rating scores in clinical trials. Thus, rupatadine is a recently introduced dual inhibitor of histamine H(1)- and PAF-receptors, which has been shown to be an effective and generally well-tolerated treatment for allergic rhinitis and chronic urticaria. It possesses a broader profile of anti-inflammatory properties inhibiting both inflammatory cells and a range of mediators involved in the early- and late-phase inflammatory response, but the clinical relevance of these effects remain to be clarified.