Rapid anti-inflammatory action of azelastine eyedrops for ongoing allergic reactions

Steering Mast Cells or Their Mediators as a Prospective Novel Therapeutic Approach for the Treatment of Hematological Malignancies

Tumor cells require signaling and close interaction with their microenvironment for their survival and proliferation. In the recent years, Mast cells have earned a greater importance for their presence and role in cancers. It is known that mast cells are attracted towards tumor microenvironment by secreted soluble chemotactic factors. Mast cells seem to exert a pro-tumorigenic role in hematological malignancies with a few exceptions where they showed anti-cancerous role. This dual role of mast cells in tumor growth and survival may be dependent on the intrinsic characteristics of the particular tumor, differences in tumor microenvironment according to tumor type, and the interactions and heterogeneity of mediators released by mast cells in the tumor microenvironment. In many studies, Mast cells and their mediators have been shown to affect tumor survival and growth, prognosis, inflammation, tumor vascularization and angiogenesis. Modulating mast cell accumulation, viability, activity and mediator release patterns may thus be important in controlling these malignancies. In this review, we emphasize on the role of mast cells in lymphoid malignancies and discuss strategies for targeting and steering mast cells or their mediators as a potential therapeutic approach for the treatment of these malignancies.

Review of the pharmacology, clinical efficacy, and safety of azelastine hydrochloride

Rhinitis is one of the most common diseases in the general population. Although it is not a life-threatening condition, rhinitis can cause significant discomfort and, therefore, negatively impact quality of life. Several treatment options are available; however, optimal relief of symptoms is difficult to achieve for most patients. Azelastine hydrochloride (Astelin) nasal spray is the only prescription intranasal antihistamine available in the USA, and is approved for treating symptoms of both seasonal allergic rhinitis and nonallergic vasomotor rhinitis. Oral formulations of azelastine are available outside the USA for use in seasonal and perennial allergic rhinitis, asthma and urticaria. Azelastine hydrochloride has demonstrated a favorable safety profile during approximately 20 years of clinical use.

The role of antihistamines in the treatment of vasomotor rhinitis

Background

The pathogenesis of vasomotor rhinitis is not understood. It is unlikely that antihistamines, based on their H1 antagonist activity alone, would be effective in this disorder.

Methods

Nonetheless, at least one double-blind, placebo-controlled multicenter trial has found that intranasal azelastine relieves symptoms of this disorder better than placebo. The mechanism responsible for its beneficial effect in nonallergic rhinitis is unclear but probably relates to "anti-inflammatory/antiallergic" activities.

Results

Such mechanisms have been demonstrated for a number of different oral antihistamines, but often the concentrations required in vitro are higher than those that are normally achieved in vivo using recommended dosing. It has been postulated that intranasal administration, which can achieve high local levels, might be a factor responsible for enhancing the "anti-inflammatory/antiallergic" properties.

Conclusions

Interpreting this information allows one to conclude that antihistamines may be potentially effective agents in vasomotor rhinitis, and are more likely to be so when administered intranasally, despite the fact that data documenting this beneficial effect are sparse.

Azelastine hydrochloride: a review of pharmacology, pharmacokinetics, clinical efficacy and tolerability

INTRODUCTION

Azelastine hydrochloride (Astelin) nasal spray 0.1% solution is a second-generation intranasal antihistamine available in the US for treatment of both seasonal allergic rhinitis (SAR) and nonallergic vasomotor rhinitis (VMR).

SCOPE

Searches of journal articles including the title word 'azelastine' from 1979 through the present were conducted by the product manufacturer primarily through Medline and EMBASE but also included, at various times, Dialog, Biosis, Toxline, and Diogenes (an adverse-event database). One limitation of the present review is that it could not exclude the possibility of publication bias, whereby findings from smaller studies and/or trials with negative findings may not have been published.

FINDINGS

Azelastine is a phthalazinone derivative with H(1)-receptor binding approximately tenfold greater than chlorpheniramine on a milligram-per-milligram basis. Azelastine has demonstrated a wide range of pharmacologic effects on chemical mediators of inflammation including leukotrienes, kinins, and platelet activating factor in vitro and in vivo. The molecule also has been shown to downregulate intercellular adhesion molecule-1 expression and to reduce inflammatory cell migration in patients with rhinitis. Well-controlled studies in SAR and VMR demonstrated that azelastine nasal spray improves nasal symptoms of rhinitis, including congestion and postnasal drip, and has a rapid onset of action that appears likely due to topical activity. Azelastine nasal spray has demonstrated greater efficacy when used in combination with fluticasone propionate nasal spray when compared to either agent alone, and this combination may provide benefit for patients with moderate-to-severe rhinitis. Bitter taste is the most common side effect associated with azelastine nasal spray and this problem can be mitigated by the dosing technique recommended by the manufacturer in the product labeling. The incidence of somnolence also may be reduced with the recommended administration technique.

CONCLUSIONS

Azelastine is an effective, rapid-acting, and well-tolerated second-generation antihistamine that improves nasal symptoms associated with SAR and VMR. Clinical studies demonstrated that azelastine nasal spray can improve symptoms of SAR in patients who remained symptomatic after treatment with oral antihistamines and that azelastine nasal spray in combination with fluticasone nasal spray provided significantly (p < 0.05) greater relief than either agent alone in patients with SAR.

Les tests de provocation conjonctivaux

The conjunctival provocation test (CPT) is a human model of ocular allergy that has been used to study the ocular response to allergenic stimuli and to evaluate antiallergic therapy. Considerable useful information has been gained on the ocular allergic response and drug efficacy using the conjunctival provocation test and naturally occurring seasonal allergic conjunctivitis. The safety and the efficacy of these CPTs has resulted in many authors using this tool in the etiologic diagnosis of allergic conjunctivitis. This article summarizes the possibilities of these CPTs as a tool for the study, evaluation, diagnosis, and therapeutic follow-up of allergic conjunctivitis.

Effect of 0.03% tacrolimus ointment on conjunctival cytology in patients with severe atopic blepharoconjunctivitis: a retrospective study

PURPOSE

To evaluate the efficacy and effect of tacrolimus ointment on conjunctival cytology in patients with atopic blepharoconjunctivitis or keratoconjunctivitis.

METHODS

Ten patients with severe atopic blepharoconjunctivitis treated with 0.03% tacrolimus ointment once daily as an intermittent treatment were analysed retrospectively. The main outcome measures were clinical response to topical tacrolimus, adverse events and changes in the inflammatory cells obtained from conjunctival brush samples.

RESULTS

Marked clinical responses in blepharitis and conjunctivitis symptoms were seen after a mean follow-up time of 6 weeks. Clinical scores decreased by 67% in blepharitis and 74% in conjunctivitis symptoms. No severe adverse events or signs of immunosuppression such as herpes simplex infections occurred. No significant changes occurred in visual acuity, refraction, anterior chamber, retina or intraocular pressure. Median decreases were 85% (p =0.01) in conjunctival eosinophils, 50% (p = 0.01) in neutrophils and 58% (p = 0.02) in lymphocytes.

CONCLUSIONS

Tacrolimus ointment is potentially a safe and effective treatment for atopic blepharoconjunctivitis. Regular treatment of the eyelids once daily may also lead to clinical and cytological improvement of the conjunctivitis.

Comparative study of topical anti-allergic eye drops on human conjunctiva-derived cells: responses to histamine and IFNγ and toxicological profiles

BACKGROUND

The purpose of the study was to compare toxic effects and responses to histamine and IFN gamma associated with the use of some widely used anti-allergic eye drops commercially available today.

METHODS

For dynamic studies, the Wong-Kilbourne cell line was stimulated for 24 h with histamine or IFN gamma in the presence or absence of anti-allergic eye drops. Supernatants of histamine-stimulated cells were evaluated for the production of IL-6 and IL-8 by ELISA, while the expression of ICAM-1 was evaluated by flow cytometry on IFN gamma-stimulated cells. Toxicological assays were performed using cold light cytofluorometry: viability and apoptosis as well as reactive oxygen species (ROS) and O2(.)- production were assessed using neutral red, Hoechst/propidium iodide, H(2)-DCFDA and hydroethidine tests, respectively.

RESULTS

Antihistamines reduced IL-6 release and presented dose-dependent inhibitory effects on IL-8 production. None of the eye drops decreased the basal or IFN gamma-stimulated expression of ICAM-1. Conversely, eye drops preserved with benzalkonium chloride (BAC) induced even higher ICAM-1 expression levels on IFN gamma-stimulated cells than did IFN gamma alone, whereas unpreserved drugs had no effect. Toxicological assays confirmed the pivotal role of BAC in proportionally reducing cell viability while increasing apoptosis and oxidative stress.

CONCLUSIONS

The ability of topical ocular anti-H(1) drugs to significantly reduce the production of IL-6 and IL-8 argues that they may help treat the inflammatory processes occurring in allergic ocular surface disorders. Nevertheless, preserved ophthalmic formulations may enhance epithelial conjunctival expression of ICAM-1 in the presence of a low inflammatory stimulus, such as IFN gamma, and displayed toxic as well as pro-oxidative effects on these cells. Therefore, BAC used as preservative might in part interfere with the potential anti-inflammatory properties of the active compound by modulating the immuno-inflammatory response of epithelial conjunctival cells.

Ocular allergy treatment comparisons: azelastine and olopatadine

Azelastine hydrochloride 0.05% and olopatadine hydrochloride 0.1% are topical ocular allergy treatments that have demonstrated multiple pharmacologic actions, including antihistamine, mast cell stabilization, and inhibition of proinflammatory mediators. In this article, the mechanisms of action, efficacy, and tolerability of these two agents on ocular signs and symptoms are examined. By studying the various target sites of drug action, an enhanced clinical response algorithm of these topical ocular agents can be implemented to maximize the response for patients suffering from ocular allergy.