Evidence Hub

An Investigator-Blind Randomized Controlled Trial Comparing Effectiveness, Safety of Levocetirizine and Bepotastine in Chronic Urticaria

A. Sil, S. Rahaman, Nasiruddin Mondal, S. Ahmed, Dhiman Tarafdar, A. Patra, Sudipta Roy, N. Das

Indian Journal of Dermatology, 2021

29 participants · 4 citations

Abstract

Introduction: Chronic urticaria is common and distressing dermatosis where the search for newer agents with improved effectiveness and tolerability profile is a felt need. Bepotastine, a second-generation antihistamine, with added effect on suppression of eosinophil migration has a prospect in the management of chronic urticaria. Aims: To assess and compare effectiveness and safety of bepotastine versus levocetirizine in chronic urticaria. Materials and Methods: Single-center, investigator-blind, randomized, active-controlled, parallel-group phase IV trial (CTRI REF/2018/04/019692) conducted on adult patients of chronic urticaria of either sex. Patients were randomized into receiving either bepotastine besilate 10 mg tablet twice daily or levocetirizine 5 mg tablet once daily with fortnightly follow-up for 6 follow-up visits after thebaseline evaluation. The primary outcome measures were Urticaria Activity Score 7 (UAS7) and Urticaria Total Severity Score (TSS). Routine hematological, biochemical tests, treatment-emergent adverse events were monitored for safety. Results: Thirty patients in the bepotastine group and 29 patients in the levocetirizine group were analyzed by modified-intention-to-treat criteria. The study groups were comparable at the baseline with respect to the severity of chronic urticaria. UAS7 and TSS reduced significantly (P < 0.001, Friedman's ANOVA) in both treatment groups from 1st follow-up visit and 2nd follow-up visits (P < 0.05, Post Hoc Dunn's…

How strong is the evidence?

Evidence Hub reads this as a randomized trial, done in people. Its evidence level is 3 of 5 (Moderate · trial / cohort / secondary analysis). Trials without a large randomized design, cohorts and secondary analyses give moderate evidence. Reported size: 29 participants or records.

How the five levels of evidence work. The level is assigned automatically from the abstract and can be wrong, so check the paper.

Read the paper

Related studies

Go deeper in Evidence Hub

Evidence Hub adds a study data sheet (design, sample size, evidence level, key numbers), an AI summary and a chat grounded in the paper's text.

Open this study Sign up free