Ocular itch relief with alcaftadine 0.25% versus olopatadine 0.2% in allergic conjunctivitis: pooled analysis of two multicenter randomized clinical trials

Eugene B McLaurin, Nicholas P Marsico, Stacey L Ackerman, Joseph B Ciolino, Julia M Williams, Linda Villanueva, David A Hollander, Eugene B McLaurin, Nicholas P Marsico, Stacey L Ackerman, Joseph B Ciolino, Julia M Williams, Linda Villanueva, David A Hollander

Abstract

Introduction: The efficacy and safety of the once-daily topical ophthalmic solutions, alcaftadine 0.25% and olopatadine 0.2%, in preventing ocular itching associated with allergic conjunctivitis were evaluated.

Methods: Pooled analysis was conducted of two double-masked, multicenter, active- and placebo-controlled studies using the conjunctival allergen challenge (CAC) model of allergic conjunctivitis. Subjects were randomized 1:1:1 to receive alcaftadine 0.25%, olopatadine 0.2%, or placebo. The primary efficacy measure was subject-evaluated mean ocular itching at 3 min post-CAC and 16 h after treatment instillation. Secondary measures included ocular itching at 5 and 7 min post-CAC. Ocular itch was determined over all time points measured (3, 5, and 7 min) post-CAC and the proportion of subjects with minimal itch (itch score<1) and zero itch (itch score=0) was also assessed.

Results: A total of 284 subjects were enrolled in the two studies. At 3 min post-CAC and 16 h after treatment instillation, alcaftadine 0.25% achieved a significantly lower mean itch score compared with olopatadine 0.2% (0.50 vs. 0.87, respectively; P=0.0006). Alcaftadine demonstrated a significantly lower mean itch score over all time points compared with olopatadine (0.68 vs. 0.92, respectively; P=0.0390); both alcaftadine- and olopatadine-treated subjects achieved significantly lower overall mean ocular itching scores compared with placebo (2.10; P<0.0001 for both actives). Minimal itch over all time points was reported by 76.1% of alcaftadine-treated subjects compared with 58.1% of olopatadine-treated subjects (P=0.0121). Treatment with alcaftadine 0.25% and olopatadine 0.2% was safe and well tolerated; no serious adverse events were reported.

Conclusion: Once-daily alcaftadine 0.25% ophthalmic solution demonstrated greater efficacy in prevention of ocular itching compared with olopatadine 0.2% at 3 min post-CAC (primary endpoint), and over all time points, 16 h post-treatment instillation. Alcaftadine and olopatadine both provided effective relief compared with placebo and were generally well tolerated.

Trial registration: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT01470118 NCT01732757.

Figures

Fig. 1
Fig. 1
Subject disposition
Fig. 2
Fig. 2
Comparison of mean itch scores at baseline and 16 h after treatment instillation at 3 min post-conjunctival allergen challenge (primary endpoint). Mean itch scores for alcaftadine 0.25%, olopatadine 0.2%, and placebo. *P < 0.0001 for alcaftadine and olopatadine versus placebo; **P = 0.0006 for alcaftadine versus olopatadine. P values calculated using the two-sample t test
Fig. 3
Fig. 3
Comparison of overall mean itch scores at baseline and 16 h after treatment instillation over all time points (3, 5, and 7 min) post-conjunctival allergen challenge. Mean itch scores for alcaftadine 0.25%, olopatadine 0.2%, and placebo. *P < 0.0001 for alcaftadine and olopatadine versus placebo; **P = 0.0390 for alcaftadine versus olopatadine. P values calculated using the repeated measures analysis of covariance model accounting for treatment and time points
Fig. 4
Fig. 4
Comparison of overall percentage of subjects with minimal itch and zero itch scores at 16 h after treatment instillation. Percentage of subjects with minimal itch (itch score P < 0.0001 for alcaftadine and olopatadine versus placebo; **P ≤ 0.0006 for alcaftadine and olopatadine versus placebo; ***P = 0.0121 for alcaftadine versus olopatadine. P values calculated using Fisher’s exact test
Fig. 5
Fig. 5
Distribution of itch scores at baseline (a) and 16 h after treatment instillation (b). Itch scores of each eye at baseline (untreated) and 16 h after treatment with alcaftadine 0.25%, olopatadine 0.2%, and placebo at all time points measured (3, 5, and 7 min) post-conjunctival allergen challenge

References

    1. Mortemousque B, Fauquert JL, Chiambaretta F, Demoly P, Helleboid L, Creuzot-Garcher C, et al. Conjunctival provocation test: recommendations. J Fr Ophtalmol. 2006;29:837–846. doi: 10.1016/S0181-5512(06)73857-8.
    1. Leonardi A, Bogacka E, Fauquert JL, Kowalski ML, Groblewska A, Jedrzejczak-Czechowicz M, et al. Ocular allergy: recognizing and diagnosing hypersensitivity disorders of the ocular surface. Allergy. 2012;67:1327–1337. doi: 10.1111/all.12009.
    1. Rosario N, Bielory L. Epidemiology of allergic conjunctivitis. Curr Opin Allergy Clin Immunol. 2011;11:471–476. doi: 10.1097/ACI.0b013e32834a9676.
    1. Blaiss MS. Allergic rhinoconjunctivitis: burden of disease. Allergy Asthma Proc. 2007;28:393–397. doi: 10.2500/aap.2007.28.3013.
    1. Singh K, Axelrod S, Bielory L. The epidemiology of ocular and nasal allergy in the United States, 1988–1994. J Allergy Clin Immunol. 2010;126:778.e6–783.e6. doi: 10.1016/j.jaci.2010.06.050.
    1. Björksten B, Clayton T, Ellwood P, Stewart A, Strachan D, ISAAC Phase III Study Group Worldwide time trends for symptoms of rhinitis and conjunctivitis: phase III of the International Study of Asthma and Allergies in Childhood. Pediatr Allergy Immunol. 2008;19:110–124. doi: 10.1111/j.1399-3038.2007.00601.x.
    1. Collum L, Kilmartin DJ. Acute Allergic Conjunctivitis. In: Abelson MB, editor. Allergic diseases of the eye. Philadelphia: W.B. Saunders Co; 2000. pp. 108–132.
    1. Leonardi A, De Dominicis C, Motterle L. Immunopathogenesis of ocular allergy: a schematic approach to different clinical entities. Curr Opin Allergy Clin Immunol. 2007;7:429–435. doi: 10.1097/ACI.0b013e3282ef8674.
    1. Ono SJ, Abelson MB. Allergic conjunctivitis: update on pathophysiology and prospects for future treatment. J Allergy Clin Immunol. 2005;115:118–122. doi: 10.1016/j.jaci.2004.10.042.
    1. Abelson MB, Udell IJ. H2-receptors in the human ocular surface. Arch Ophthalmol. 1981;99:302–304. doi: 10.1001/archopht.1981.03930010304018.
    1. Bielory L, Ghafoor S. Histamine receptors and the conjunctiva. Curr Opin Allergy Clin Immunol. 2005;5:437–440. doi: 10.1097/01.all.0000183113.63311.11.
    1. Nakano Y, Takahashi Y, Ono R, Kurata Y, Kagawa Y, Kamei C. Role of histamine H4 receptor in allergic conjunctivitis in mice. Eur J Pharmacol. 2009;608:71–75. doi: 10.1016/j.ejphar.2009.02.035.
    1. Zampeli E, Thurmond RL, Tiligada E. The histamine H4 receptor antagonist JNJ7777120 induces increases in the histamine content of the rat conjunctiva. Inflamm Res. 2009;58:285–291. doi: 10.1007/s00011-009-8245-4.
    1. Greiner JV, Edwards-Swanson K, Ingerman A. Evaluation of alcaftadine 0.25% ophthalmic solution in acute allergic conjunctivitis at 15 minutes and 16 hours after instillation versus placebo and olopatadine 0.1% Clin Ophthalmol. 2011;5:87–93.
    1. Torkildsen G, Shedden A. The safety and efficacy of alcaftadine 0.25% ophthalmic solution for the prevention of itching associated with allergic conjunctivitis. Curr Med Res Opin. 2011;27:623–631. doi: 10.1185/03007995.2010.548797.
    1. Lastacaft® (alcaftadine ophthalmic solution) 0.25% Prescribing Information, Allergan, Inc., Irvine, CA. 2011. URL: . Accessed March 14, 2014.
    1. Abelson MB, Spangler DL, Epstein AB, Mah FS, Crampton HJ. Efficacy of once-daily olopatadine 0.2% ophthalmic solution compared to twice-daily olopatadine 0.1% ophthalmic solution for the treatment of ocular itching induced by conjunctival allergen challenge. Curr Eye Res. 2007;32:1017–1022. doi: 10.1080/02713680701736558.
    1. Scoper SV, Berdy GJ, Lichtenstein SJ, Rubin JM, Bloomenstein M, Prouty RE, et al. Perception and quality of life associated with the use of olopatadine 0.2% (Pataday) in patients with active allergic conjunctivitis. Adv Ther. 2007;24:1221–1232. doi: 10.1007/BF02877768.
    1. Pataday® (olopatadine hydrochloride ophthalmic solution) 0.2% Prescribing Information, Alcon Laboratories, Inc., Fort Worth, TX. 2010. URL: . Accessed March 14, 2014.
    1. Wade L, Bielory L, Rudner S. Ophthalmic antihistamines and H1–H4 receptors. Curr Opin Allergy Clin Immunol. 2012;12:510–516. doi: 10.1097/ACI.0b013e328357d3ba.
    1. Abelson MB, Chambers WA, Smith LM. Conjunctival allergen challenge. A clinical approach to studying allergic conjunctivitis. Arch Ophthalmol. 1990;108:84–88. doi: 10.1001/archopht.1990.01070030090035.
    1. Abelson MB, Loeffler O. Conjunctival allergen challenge: models in the investigation of ocular allergy. Curr Allergy Asthma Rep. 2003;3:363–368. doi: 10.1007/s11882-003-0100-z.
    1. Abelson MB. Evaluation of olopatadine, a new ophthalmic antiallergic agent with dual activity, using the conjunctival allergen challenge model. Ann Allergy Asthma Immunol. 1998;81:211–218. doi: 10.1016/S1081-1206(10)62814-1.
    1. Abelson MB, Gomes P, Crampton HJ, Schiffman RM, Bradford RR, Whitcup SM. Efficacy and tolerability of ophthalmic epinastine assessed using the conjunctival antigen challenge model in patients with a history of allergic conjunctivitis. Clin Ther. 2004;26:35–47. doi: 10.1016/S0149-2918(04)90004-5.
    1. Abelson MB, Torkildsen GL, Williams JI, Gow JA, Gomes PJ. McNamara TR; Bepotastine Besilate Ophthalmic Solutions Clinical Study Group. Time to onset and duration of action of the antihistamine bepotastine besilate ophthalmic solutions 1.0% and 1.5% in allergic conjunctivitis: a phase III, single-center, prospective, randomized, double-masked, placebo-controlled, conjunctival allergen challenge assessment in adults and children. Clin Ther. 2009;31:1908–1921. doi: 10.1016/j.clinthera.2009.09.001.
    1. Ackerman S, D’Ambrosio F., Jr Greiner JV, Villanueva L, Ciolino JB, Hollander DA. A multicenter evaluation of the efficacy and duration of action of alcaftadine 0.25% and olopatadine 0.2% in the conjunctival allergen challenge model. J Asthma Allergy. 2013;6:43–52. doi: 10.2147/JAA.S38671.
    1. McLaurin EB, Marsico NP, Ciolino JB, Williams JM, Hollander DA. Alcaftadine 0.25% versus olopatadine 0.2% in the prevention of ocular itching in allergic conjunctivitis. Presented at: American College of Allergy, Asthma and Immunology 2013 Annual Scientific Meeting; November 7–11, 2013; Baltimore, MD.
    1. McLaurin EB, Marsico NP, Ciolino JB, Williams JM, Hollander DA. Alcaftadine 0.25% versus olopatadine 0.2% in prevention of ocular itching due to allergic conjunctivitis in a CAC™ model. Presented at: American Academy of Ophthalmology 2013 Annual Meeting; November 16–19, 2013; New Orleans, LA.
    1. Medical Dictionary for Regulatory Activities, MedDRA MSSO, McLean, VA. 2013. URL: . Accessed February 28, 2013.
    1. Namdar R, Valdez C. Alcaftadine: a topical antihistamine for use in allergic conjunctivitis. Drugs Today (Barc). 2011;47:883–890. doi: 10.1358/dot.2011.47.12.1709243.
    1. Ling P, Ngo K, Nguyen S, Thurmond RL, Edwards JP, Karlsson L, et al. Histamine H4 receptor mediates eosinophil chemotaxis with cell shape change and adhesion molecule upregulation. Br J Pharmacol. 2004;142:161–171. doi: 10.1038/sj.bjp.0705729.
    1. Ono SJ, Lane K. Comparison of effects of alcaftadine and olopatadine on conjunctival epithelium and eosinophil recruitment in a murine model of allergic conjunctivitis. Drug Des Devel Ther. 2011;5:77–84.
    1. Contreras-Ruiz L, Schulze U, García-Posadas L, Arranz-Valsero I, Lopez-Garcia A, Paulsen F, et al. Structural and functional alteration of corneal epithelial barrier under inflammatory conditions. Curr Eye Res. 2012;37:971–981. doi: 10.3109/02713683.2012.700756.

Source: PubMed

Sponsoren und Mitarbeiter

Krankheiten

Drogeninterventionen

3
Abonnieren