An open-label prospective clinical study to assess the efficacy of increasing levocetirizine dose up to four times in chronic spontaneous urticaria not controlled with standard dose
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: The EAACI/GA2LEN/EDF/WAO recommendation of increasing antihistamines' dose up to four times in urticaria not adequately controlled with the standard dose is largely based on expert opinion. The objective of this study is to test the current urticaria guidelines of up-dosing antihistamines as second-line treatment.
METHODS: This was an open-label study conducted prospectively on 113 patients with chronic spontaneous urticaria. All patients were treated with sequentially increasing doses of levocetrizine (5 mg, 10 mg, 15 mg and 20 mg/day) every week till the patients became completely asymptomatic or dose of 20 mg/day reached. Urticaria Activity Score (UAS)-7, urticaria-related quality-of-life (CU-Q2oL) and patients' global assessment were used to assess treatment response.
RESULTS: Twenty-one (18.58%) patients became asymptomatic with levocetirizine 5 mg/day, while 50 required higher doses of levocetirizine for complete control: 29/92 (31.52%), 6/63 (9.52%) and 15/57 (26.31%) with 10 mg, 15 mg and 20 mg/day, respectively. The percentage of patients experiencing >75% improvement increased with increasing doses of levocetirizine: 26.54%, 53.98%, 60.17% and 69.91% with 5 mg, 10 mg, 15 mg and 20 mg/day, respectively. Sequential up-dosing of levocetirizine produced a progressive improvement in both urticaria control (UAS-7) and quality-of-life (CU-Q2oL) without significantly increasing somnolence.
CONCLUSIONS: Our results support the current recommendations of…
How strong is the evidence?
Evidence Hub reads this as a clinical 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: 113 participants or records.
Read the paper
Related studies
- Artificial Intelligence in Medicine: Cross-Sectional Study Among Medical Students on Application, Education, and Ethical Aspects
- Information quality of videos related to esophageal cancer on tiktok, kwai, and bilibili: a cross-sectional study
- The quality and reliability of short videos about hypertension on TikTok: a cross-sectional study
- Quality and reliability evaluation of pancreatic cancer-related video content on social short video platforms: a cross-sectional study
- Quality and reliability of pediatric pneumonia related short videos on mainstream platforms: cross-sectional study
- Association between metabolic score for insulin resistance (METS-IR) and hypertension: a cross-sectional study based on NHANES 2007–2018
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.