Drug Investigation

, Volume 7, Issue 1, pp 34–40 | Cite as

Azelastine in Pollen-Induced Allergic Rhinitis

A Pharmacodynamic Study of Onset of Action and Efficacy
  • E. Horak
  • S. Jäger
  • J. Toth
  • U. Berger
  • E. Nirnberger
Original Research Article


The manifestation of rhinitic symptoms in 9 patients with grass pollen-induced rhinitis was studied during long term allergen exposure at physiological concentrations in the ‘Vienna Challenge Chamber’. Patients were pretreated with a single dose of azelastine (either 2.2mg orally or 0.28mg intranasally) or placebo. Nasal resistance was estimated by active anterior rhinomanometry every 15 minutes. Analysis of changes in nasal airways resistance demonstrated significant protection against allergen-induced nasal obstruction (p < 0.01) for azelastine administered by either route. The onset of action of treatment in relation to nasal obstruction was significantly more rapid for the nasal spray (135 minutes) than for the tablet (205 minutes) [p < 0.01] formulation. Similarly, the onset of effect derived from subjective assessment of symptom severity was markedly more rapid (60 minutes) after intranasal azelastine than after administration of the oral form (120 minutes). Tolerability of azelastine was good, with no side effects reported with either oral or intranasal therapy.


Rhinitis Allergic Rhinitis Nasal Spray Grass Pollen Seasonal Allergic Rhinitis 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. Achterrath-Tuckermann U, Simmet T, Luck W, Szelenyi I, Peskar BA. Inhibition of cysteinyl-leukotriene production by azelastine and its biological significance. Agents and Actions 24: 217–223, 1988PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Albazzaz MK, Patel KR. Effect of azelastine on bronchoconstriction induced by histamine and leukotriene C4 in patients with extrinsic asthma. Thorax 43: 306, 1988PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Bisgaard H, Olsson P, Bende M. Effect of leukotriene D4 on nasal mucosal blood flow, nasal airway resistance and nasal secretion in humans. Clinical Allergy 16: 289–297, 1986PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Casale TB. The interaction of azelastine with human lung histamine H1, beta and muscarinic receptor sites. Journal of Allergy and Clinical Immunology 83: 771–776, 1989PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Cauna N, Hinderer KH, Weniges RT. Sensory receptor organs of the human nasal respiratory mucosa. American Journal of Anatomy 124: 1323–1328, 1969CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Chand N, Diamantis W, Sofia RD. Antagonism of histamine and leukotrienes by azelastine in isolated guinea pig ileum. Agents and Actions 19: 164–168, 1986aPubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Chand N, Nolan K, Diamantis W, Perhach Jr JL, Sofia RD. Inhibition of leukotriene (SRS-A-mediated acute lung anaphylaxis by azelastine in guinea pigs. Allergy 41: 473–478, 1986bPubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Chand N, Pillar J, Diamantis W, Sofia RD. Inhibition of IgE-mediated allergic histamine release from rat peritoneal mast cells by azelastine and selected antiallergic drugs. Agents and Actions 16: 318–322, 1985PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Corrado OJ, Gomez E, Baldwin DL, Clague JE, Davies RJ. The effect of nedocromil sodium on nasal provocation with allergen. Journal of Allergy and Clinical Immunology 80: 218–222, 1987PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Devillier P, Dessanges JF, Rakotosihanaka F, Ghaem A, Bousley HA, et al. Nasal response to substance P and methacholine in subjects with and without allergic rhinitis. European Respiratory Journal 1: 356–361, 1988PubMedGoogle Scholar
  11. Dockhorn FJ, Bergner A, Connell JF, Falliers CJ, Grabiec SV, et al. Safety and efficacy of loratadine (Sch-29851), a new non-sedating antihistamine in seasonal allergic rhinitis. Annals of Allergy 58: 407–411, 1987PubMedGoogle Scholar
  12. Holmber K, Bake B, Blychert LO, Pipkorn U. Effects of topical H1 and 2 receptor antagonists on symptoms and local vascular reactions induced by nasal allergen challenge. Allergy 44: 281–287, 1989CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Horak F, Jäger S. The Vienna Challenge Chamber — a new method of allergy exposition tests. Wiener Klinische Wochenschrift 99: 509–510, 1987Google Scholar
  14. Howarth PH, Holgate ST. Comparative trial of two non-sedative H1 antihistamines, terfenadine and astemizole, for hayfever. Thorax 39: 668–672, 1984PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Inoue Y. Basic studies on the antiallergic drug, 4-(p-chlorobenzyl)-2-[N-methylperhydroazepinyl-(4)]-1-(2H)-phthalazinone hydrochloride (azelastine). Nippon Ika Daigaku Zasshi 50: 371–378, 1983PubMedGoogle Scholar
  16. Katayama S, Tsunoda H, Sakuma Y, Kai H, Tanaka I, et al. Effect of azelastine on the release and action of leukotriene C4 and D4. International Archives of Allergy and Applied Immunology 83: 284–289, 1987PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Kemp GJP, Buckley CE, Gershwin ME, Buchman E, Cascio FL, et al. Multicentre, double-blind, placebo controlled trial of terfenadine in seasonal allergic rhinitis and conjunctivitis. Annals of Allergy 54: 502, 1985PubMedGoogle Scholar
  18. Lenhard G, Gerhardt G. Azelastine, a new drug in the treatment of allergic rhinitis. New England and Regional Allergy Proceedings 9: 366, 1988Google Scholar
  19. Meltzer EO, Storms WW, Pierson WE, Cummins LH, Orgel HA, et al. Efficacy of azelastine in perennial allergic rhinitis: clinical and rhinomanometric evaluation. Journal of Allergy and Clinical Immunology 82: 447–455, 1988PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Miadonna A, Tedeschi A, Leggiere E, Lorini M, Folio G, et al. Behaviour and clinical relevance of histamine and leukotrienes C4 and B4 in grass pollen-induced rhinitis. American Review of Respiratory Diseases 136: 357–362, 1987CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Middleton E, Ferriola P, Drzewiecki G, Sofia RD. The effect of azelastine and some other antiasthmatic and antiallergic drugs on calmodulin and protein kinase C. Agents and Actions 28: 8–15, 1989CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Rajakulasingam K, Polosa R, Holgate ST, Church MK, Howarth PH. Comparative nasal responses to bradykinin, kallidin and des-arg9 bradykinin in non-rhinitic and atopic rhinitic subjects. Clinical and Experimental Allergy 20 (Suppl. 1): 57, 1990Google Scholar
  23. Spector SL, Perhach JL, Rohr AS, Rackelefsky GS, Katz RM, et al. Pharmacodynamic evaluation of azelastine in subjects with asthma. Journal of Allergy and Clinical Immunology 80: 75–80, 1987PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Walsh S, Robinson C, Howarth PH. The nasal effects of prostaglandin D2 in non-rhinitic and atopic rhinitic subjects. Abstract. Clinical and Experimental Allergy 20: 115, 1990Google Scholar
  25. Weiler JM, Donnelly A, Campbell BH, Connell JT, Diamond L, et al. Multicentre, double-blind, multiple dose, parallel-groups efficacy and safety trial of azelastine, chlorpheniramine, and placebo in the treatment of spring allergic rhinitis. Journal of Allergy and Clinical Immunology 32: 801–811, 1988CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Zechel HJ, Brock N, Lenke D, Achterrath-Tuckermann U. Pharmacological and toxicological properties of azelastine, a novel antiallergic agent. Arzneimittel-Forschung/Drug Research 31: 1184–1193, 1981Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Adis International Limited 1994

Authors and Affiliations

  • E. Horak
    • 1
  • S. Jäger
    • 1
  • J. Toth
    • 1
  • U. Berger
    • 1
  • E. Nirnberger
    • 1
  1. 1.University ENT ClinicViennaAustria

Personalised recommendations