A combined neurophysiological and behavioural study into the stimulating effects of fexofenadine on performance

Innovative mechanisms of action for pharmaceutical cognitive enhancement: A systematic review

Pharmacological cognitive enhancement refers to improvement in cognitive functions after drug use in healthy individuals. This popular topic attracts attention both from the general public and the scientific community. The objective was to explore innovative mechanisms of psychostimulant's action, whose potential effectiveness was assessed in randomized placebo-controlled trials (RCTs). A systematic review was carried out, using the words "attention", "memory", "learning", "executive functions", and "vigilance/wakefulness" combined to "cognitive enhancer" or "smart drug". Methylphenidate, amphetamines, modafinil, nicotine, acetylcholine esterase inhibitors and antidepressants were extensively studied in previous meta-analyses and were not included in the present work. Drugs were classified according to their primary mode of action, namely catecholaminergic drugs (tolcapone, pramipexole, guanfacine), cholinergic drugs (anticholinergics), glutamatergic drugs (ampakines), histaminergic drugs, and non-specified (glucocorticoids). Overall, 50 RCTs were included in the present review. In conclusion, a number of new active drugs were found to improve some cognitive functions, in particular verbal episodic memory. However the number of RCTs was limited, and most of the studies found negative results. Future studies should assess both effectiveness and tolerance of repeated doses administration, and individual variability in dose response (including baseline characteristics and potential genetic polymorphisms). One explanation for the limited number of recent RCTs with new psychostimulants seems to be the ethical debate surrounding pharmaceutical cognitive enhancement in healthy subjects.

The role of P-glycoprotein in CNS antihistamine effects

RATIONALE

P-glycoprotein (P-gp) is a drug efflux pump expressed, amongst others, on the luminal surface of the cerebral endothelial cells forming the blood-brain barrier. Studies in rodents have demonstrated that antihistamines that are substrates of the P-gp transporter display no or minor central nervous system (CNS) effects as compared to antihistamines that are not P-gp transporter substrates.

OBJECTIVES

The present study explored whether P-gp contributes in similar ways to the occurrence of sedative effects of antihistamines in humans.

METHODS

An fMRI study was conducted according to a double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled, cross-over design in 13 healthy volunteers. Participants received cetirizine 15 mg (an antihistamine), verapamil 120 mg (a P-gp blocker), a combination of cetirizine + verapamil, and a placebo. Brain activity was assessed while conducting the attention network test (ANT) in a 3T magnetic resonance scanner. The ANT measures three independent attention domains: i.e., alerting, orienting, and executive attention. It was expected that the combined treatment of cetirizine with verapamil would prevent efflux of cetirizine from the CNS, thus increasing attentional impairment, as compared to cetirizine administered alone.

RESULTS

The present study provides evidence that the P-gp transporter is involved in central antihistamine effects in humans. Participants were less alert during the combined treatment of cetirizine and verapamil as indicated by longer reaction times and decreased blood oxygen level-dependent response in the right superior temporal gyrus.

CONCLUSION

It is concluded that the affinity for the P-gp transporter may contribute to the lower incidence of CNS side effects of certain antihistamines.

Acute and subchronic effects of bilastine (20 and 40 mg) and hydroxyzine (50 mg) on actual driving performance in healthy volunteers

Bilastine is a new second-generation H1 antagonist. Although bilastine has been demonstrated to produce little or no performance impairment in laboratory tests, it cannot be excluded that it produces impairments in real-life performance such as driving. This study aims to assess the effects of two doses of bilastine (20 and 40 mg) on actual driving after single and repeated administration. Hydroxyzine 50 mg was included as an active control. Twenty-two participants (11 females, 11 males) were tested in a placebo-controlled, randomized, double-blind, four-way cross-over design. Participants were treated with once-daily doses for eight consecutive days. On day 1 and 8 of each treatment period participants performed an actual highway driving test. The primary variable was standard deviation of lateral position (SDLP), a measure of weaving. Results demonstrated that hydroxyzine significantly increased SDLP on days 1 and 8 of treatment. Bilastine did not affect SDLP. It is concluded that hydroxyzine produces severe driving impairment after single doses and that this impairment only partly mitigates over time due to a lack of complete tolerance. Bilastine did not produce any driving impairment after single and repeated doses and can be safely used in traffic in doses up to 40 mg.

Short-term effects of morning versus evening dose of hydroxyzine 50 mg on cognition in healthy volunteers

It is well known that the sedative properties of antihistamines can differ considerably between individual drugs. Several factors have been suggested to determine the presence, absence, and/or magnitude of sedation by antihistamines. Research has suggested that the sedative effects caused by central H1 blockade partly depend on the availability of histamine competing for the same receptor and that this competition is affected by a mechanism related to sleep. Consequently, the present study was designed to compare the effects of evening and morning doses of the first-generation antihistamine hydroxyzine on cognition. It was expected that the sedative effect of hydroxyzine would be apparent in the evening after an evening dose but would be smaller in the morning after a morning dose owing to the greater release of histamine shortly after awakening. Eighteen participants (9 females) participated in a placebo-controlled, randomized, double-blind 3-way crossover design. Performance was assessed using several psychomotor tests: that is, divided attention task, critical tracking task, stop signal task, the attention network test, and the experimental attention switch task. Results demonstrated that evening doses of hydroxyzine impaired performance on the divided attention and the attention network test. Impairment after morning doses was generally larger in magnitude and affected performance measures in all tasks. It is concluded that hydroxyzine-induced impairment at tmax is more prominent after morning doses compared with evening doses and that the present study could not present direct evidence to substantiate the hypothesis that histamine availability inversely affects the magnitude of antihistamine impairment.

Cognitive domains affected by histamine H(1)-antagonism in humans: a literature review

The neurotransmitter histamine has been suggested to be involved in cognitive functioning. Generally, studies in animals have shown a decrease in performance after decreasing histamine neurotransmission and improved performance after increasing histamine neurotransmission. It is unclear, however, what role histamine plays in cognition in humans. Up until now, most data are derived from studies and reviews that aimed to assess the sedative potential of H(1)-antagonists and not the effects on cognition in particular. The objective of this paper is specifically to review which cognitive domains are affected by H(1)-antagonists. Taken together, 90 experimental studies on the performance effects of sedative H(1)-antagonists published between 1973 and 2009 were reviewed. Results showed that psychomotor skills and attention are most frequently impaired and memory the least. Tasks assessing memory that were affected usually required rapid responses. It was concluded that both the complexity of the task as well as the demand for information processing speed determines the sensitivity to the effects of central H(1)-antagonism. The importance of the sensitive cognitive domains to histaminergic dysfunction, as well as the relation between histamine related decrease in arousal and task performance deserve further research.

Memory in humans is unaffected by central H1-antagonism, while objectively and subjectively measured sedation is increased

Animal literature suggests an important role for histamine in memory. In humans, this hypothesis has been scarcely tested and results from studies that have addressed this are conflicting. Second, impaired memory performance may be secondary to sedation. This study aimed to determine whether a centrally active antihistamine impairs memory performance and to dissociate such effects from sedation. Eighteen healthy volunteers received single oral doses of dexchlorpheniramine 4 mg, lorazepam 1mg and placebo in a 3-way, double blind, crossover designed study. The active control lorazepam impaired episodic- and working memory performance and increased sedation, while dexchlorpheniramine only increased sedation.

Effects of sedative and nonsedative antihistamines on prefrontal activity during verbal fluency task in young children: a near-infrared spectroscopy (NIRS) study

INTRODUCTION

Antagonists of histamine H(1) receptors (antihistamines) are widely used for the treatment of allergic disorders in children. These drugs' sedative effect on brain function, however, has been mostly examined in adults.

OBJECTIVE

The objective of this study was to examine the effects of anitihistamines on prefrontal cortex activity in young children using near-infrared spectroscopy (NIRS), a novel brain-imaging method.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

In 15 healthy children (mean age, 7.7 years), we examined changes of oxygenated hemoglobin concentration in the prefrontal cortex while they performed a verbal fluency task 3 h after taking a sedating antihistamine (ketotifen), nonsedating antihistamine (epinastine), or placebo.

RESULTS

Ketotifen significantly impaired behavioral performance and cortical activation at the lateral prefrontal cortex compared with placebo. There were no sedative effects on neural response or behavioral performance after epinastine administration.

CONCLUSIONS

NIRS revealed that sedating and nonsedating antihistamines exert differential effects on brain hemodynamic response in young children.

Comparing the stimulant effects of the H1-antagonist fexofenadine with 2 psychostimulants, modafinil and methylphenidate

BACKGROUND

Although antihistamines are known for their sedative adverse effects, fexofenadine was previously shown to have stimulating effects. These stimulant effects were rather mild in magnitude and were only demonstrated in tasks with a high workload.

AIM

The present study was set up to compare the magnitude of the stimulant effect of fexofenadine with those of 2 psychostimulants, modafinil and methylphenidate.

METHOD

Sixteen healthy volunteers (5 males and 11 females; mean age, 21.8 years) participated in a 4-way, placebo-controlled, crossover study. The effects of fexofenadine (360 mg), modafinil (200 mg), methylphenidate (20 mg), and placebo were compared in a critical tracking, divided attention, motor impulsivity, and vigilance task.

RESULTS

In this study, no significant stimulant effects of fexofenadine were found in any of the tasks. Modafinil only improved reaction time in the vigilance task, whereas methylphenidate improved performance in the divided attention and vigilance tasks. In addition, performance after methylphenidate treatment was also better than after fexofenadine in the divided attention and vigilance tasks.

CONCLUSION

From the results, it can be concluded that the stimulating effects of methylphenidate are confirmed, whereas the stimulating effects of fexofenadine were not demonstrated in this study. It is evident that the stimulating effects of fexofenadine, which were apparent in previous studies, are not of the same magnitude as the effects of known psychostimulants such as methylphenidate.

Fexofenadine hydrochloride in the treatment of allergic disease: a review

Fexofenadine is a selective, non-sedating H1 receptor antagonist, marketed in the United States since 2000. The FDA approved an oral suspension in 2006, for the treatment of seasonal allergic rhinitis and chronic idiopathic urticaria in children. The tablet, capsule, and oral suspension are bioequivalent. Although fexofenadine does not use P450 CYP 3A4 it does interact with a number of drugs at P-glycoprotein and organic anion transporter polypeptides. The risk of toxicity from other drugs may increase with the administration of fexofenadine. Orange and grapefruit juices reduce the bioavailability of fexofenadine. Fexofenadine has been shown to have an impact on inflammatory mediators, other than histamine, such as decreasing the production of LTC₄, LTD₄, LTE₄, PGE₂, and PGF_2α; inhibiting cyclo-oxygenase 2, thromboxane; limiting iNOS generation of NO; decreasing cytokine levels (ICAM-1, ELAM-1, VCAM-1, RANTES, I-TAC, MDC, TARC, MMP-2, MMP-9, tryptase); and diminishing eosinophil adherence, chemotaxis, and opsonization of particles. These effects may provide benefit to some of the inflammatory responses of an acute allergic reaction and provide a basis for future development of H1 antagonists with stronger anti-inflammatory effects. These studies also support the contention that fexofenadine is effective for the treatment of allergic rhinits and chronic idiopathic urticaria.

Lack of effects between rupatadine 10 mg and placebo on actual driving performance of healthy volunteers

INTRODUCTION

Rupatadine fumarate is a potent, selective, histamine H(1)-receptor antagonist and PAF inhibitor with demonstrated efficacy for the relief of allergic rhinitis. Rupatadine does not easily cross the blood-brain barrier and is believed to be non-sedating at therapeutic doses. Consequently, rupatadine should show no impairment on car driving.

OBJECTIVE

This study compared the acute effects of rupatadine, relative to placebo and hydroxyzine (as an active control), on healthy subjects' driving performance.

METHODS

Twenty subjects received a single dose of rupatadine 10 mg, hydroxyzine 50 mg, or placebo in each period of this randomized, double-blind, three-way crossover study. Two hours postdosing, subjects operated a specially instrumented vehicle in tests designed to measure their driving ability. Before and after the driving tests ratings of sedation were recorded.

RESULTS

There was no significant difference between rupatadine and placebo in the primary outcome variable: standard deviation of lateral position (SDLP); however, hydroxyzine treatment significantly increased SDLP (p < 0.001 for both comparisons). Objective (Stanford sleepiness scale) and subjective sedation ratings (Visual Analogue Scales) showed similar results: subjects reported negative effects after hydroxyzine but not after rupatadine.

CONCLUSION

Rupatadine 10 mg is not sedating and does not impair driving performance.

Stimulating effects of the antihistamine fexofenadine: testing the dopamine transporter hypothesis

RATIONALE

First- and second-generation antihistamines are known to produce different degrees of sedation. However, a few studies have shown that the H1-antagonist fexofenadine produces mild stimulating effects. One hypothesis suggests that this is due to fexofenadine producing an increase in dopamine levels by blocking the dopamine transporter.

OBJECTIVE

In this study, it was investigated whether a high dose of fexofenadine blocks the dopamine transporter in the striatum. In addition, the effect of fexofenadine on cognitive performance and motor impulsivity was investigated.

METHODS

Sixteen healthy subjects were given either placebo or fexofenadine 360 mg. The binding potential of N-w-fluoropropyl-2beta-carbomethoxy-3beta-[4-iodophenyl] nortropane ([123I]FP-CIT) was measured using single-photon emission computed tomography (SPECT). Cognitive performance was measured in 40 subjects (20 placebo, 20 fexofenadine) using a digit symbol substitution test (DSST) and a stop signal task. In addition, subjective and physiological effects of fexofenadine were observed.

RESULTS

The SPECT data demonstrated that there was no difference in the binding potential of FP-CIT at the dopamine transporter in the striatum between the placebo- and fexofenadine-treated subjects. The behavioral results showed that fexofenadine improved performance on the DSST at T (max) of the drug. Fexofenadine did not affect motor impulsivity, subjective experience, or physiological measures.

CONCLUSION

No evidence was provided to support the hypothesis that fexofenadine stimulates performance by blocking the dopamine transporter. The behavioral data suggest that a high dose of fexofenadine can stimulate performance in cognitive tasks.