Arzneimittelforschung 2010; 60(5): 249-255
DOI: 10.1055/s-0031-1296281
Antiallergic Drugs · Antiasthmatics · Antitussives · Bronchodilators · Bronchosecretogogues · Mucolytics
Editio Cantor Verlag Aulendorf (Germany)

Onset of action of loratadine/montelukast in seasonal allergic rhinitis patients exposed to grass pollen

Horak Friedrich
1   Medical University of Vienna, ENT Department, Vienna, Austria
Zieglmayer Petra
1   Medical University of Vienna, ENT Department, Vienna, Austria
Zieglmayer René
2   Allergy Center Vienna West, Vienna, Austria
Lemell Patrick
2   Allergy Center Vienna West, Vienna, Austria
› Author Affiliations
Further Information

Publication History

Publication Date:
02 December 2011 (online)


Given the impact of allergic rhinitis (AR) on quality of life, it is important that AR medications have rapid onset of symptom relief. The objective of this study was to determine the onset of action of lorata-dine (CAS 79794-75-5)/montelukast (CAS 151767-02-1) 10 mg/10 mg (L/M) versus placebo in seasonal AR (SAR) subjects. In this single-center, double-blind, crossover study, subjects with SAR and confirmed sensitivity to grass pollen received single doses of L/M or placebo following exposure to grass pollen in the Vienna Challenge Chamber. Subjects recorded symptoms at 15-min intervals during the first 2 h post dose and at 30-min interval during the next 2 h. After a 14-day washout, the subjects crossed over to the other treatment. The primary endpoint was onset of action of L/M, defined as the first time point at which the mean change from baseline in total symptom score became and remained significantly different with L/M versus placebo. Secondary end-points included nasal congestion score and rhinomanometry findings. Onset of action with L/M for total symptom score was 1 h, 45 min (P < 0.01 vs placebo). Significant improvements in subject-assessed nasal congestion scores (P < 0.01) and rhinomanometry (P = 0.036) were noted with L/M as compared with placebo. Overall, L/M was well tolerated. In conclusion, L/M demonstrated rapid onset for broad symptom relief, including nasal congestion, in subjects with SAR

  • Literature

  • 1 Horak F, Jager S, Nirnberger G, Berger U, Andresen L, Vix JM, Rehn D. Pharmacodynamic dose finding of dimetindene in a sustained release formulation. Arzneimittelforschung. 1993; 43 (11) 1193-5
  • 2 Day JH, Ellis AK, Rafeiro E, Ratz JD, Briscoe MP. Experimental models for the evaluation of treatment of allergic rhinitis. Ann Allergy Asthma Immunol. 2006; 96: 263-77
  • 3 Day JH, Horak F, Briscoe MP, Canonicaz GW, Fineman SM, Krugz N et al. The role of allergen challenge chambers in the evaluation of anti-allergic medication: an international consensus paper. Clin Exp Allergy Rev. 2006; 6: 31-59
  • 4 Krug N, Hohlfeld JM, Larbig M, Buckendahl A, Badorrek P, Geldmacher H et al. Validation of an environmental exposure unit for controlled human inhalation studies with grass pollen in patients with seasonal allergic rhinitis. Clin Exp Allergy. 2003; 33: 1667-74
  • 5 Horak F, Stubner UP, Zieglmayer R, Harris AG. Effect of desloratadine versus placebo on nasal airflow and subjective measures of nasal obstruction in subjects with grass pollen-induced allergic rhinitis in an allergen-exposure unit. J Allergy Clin Immunol. 2002; 109: 956-61
  • 6 Horak F, Stubner P, Zieglmeyer R, Harris Ag. Comparison of the effects of desloratadine 5-mg daily and placebo on nasal airflow and seasonal allergic rhinitis symptoms induced by grass pollen exposure. Allergy. 2003; 58: 481-5
  • 7 Stuebner P, Horak F, Zieglmayer R, Arnaiz E, Leuratti C, Perez I, et al. Effects of rupatadine vs. placebo on allergen-induced symptoms in patients exposed to aeroallergens in the Vienna challenge chamber. Ann Allergy Asthma Immunol. 2006; 96: 37-44
  • 8 Horak F, Jager S, Toth J, Berger U. Efficacy and tolerability of astemizole-D and loratadine-D during prolonged, controlled allergen challenge in the Vienna challenge chamber. Arzneimittelforschung. 1996; 46 (11) 1077-81
  • 9 Kyrein HJ, Horak F, Nirnberger G, Rehn D. Efficacy of intranasally applied dimethindene maleate solution as spray in adult volunteers with symptoms of seasonal allergic rhinitis in the Vienna challenge chamber. Arzneimittelforschung. 1996; 46 (8) 794-9
  • 10 Horak F, Unkauf M, Beckers C, Mittermaier EM. Efficacy and tolerability of intranasally applied dimetindene maleate solution versus placebo in the treatment of seasonal allergic rhinitis. Arzneimittelforschung. 2000; 50 (1) 1099-105
  • 11 Shedden A. Impact of nasal congestion on quality of life and work productivity in allergic rhinitis: findings from a large online survey. Treat Respir Med. 2005; 4: 439-46
  • 12 Allergies in America: A landmark survey of nasal allergy sufferers. Executive summary: available at: accessed January 21, 2009. Florham Park, NJ: Altana Pharma US 2006.
  • 13 Jessen M, Malm L. Definition, Prevalence and development of nasal obstruction. Allergy. 1997; 52: 3-6
  • 14 Corey JP, Houser SM, Ng BA. Nasal congestion: a review of its etiology, evaluation, and treatment. Ear Nose Throat J. 2000; 79: 690-693 696, 698 passim
  • 15 Banerji A, Long AA, Camargo Jr. CA. Diphenhydramine versus nonsedating antihistamines for acute allergic reactions: a literature review. Allergy Asthma Proc. 2007; 28: 418-26
  • 16 Bousquet J, Van PCauwenberge, Bachert C, Canonica GW, Demoly P, Durham SR, et al. Requirements for medications commonly used in the treatment of allergic rhinitis. European academy of allergy and clinical immunology (EAACI), Allergic rhinitis and its impact on asthma (ARIA). Allergy. 2003; 58: 192-7
  • 17 Meltzer EO, Malmstrom K, Lu S, Prenner BM, Wei LX, Weinstein SF et al. Concomitant montelukast and lorata-dine as treatment for seasonal allergic rhinitis: a randomized, placebo-controlled clinical trial. J Allergy Clin Immunol. 2000; 105: 917-22
  • 18 Nayak AS, Philip G, Lu S, Malice MP, Reiss TF. Efficacy and tolerability of montelukast alone or in combination with loratadine in seasonal allergic rhinitis: a multicenter, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial performed in the fall. Ann Allergy Asthma Immunol. 2002; 88: 592-600
  • 19 Prenner B, Anolik R, Danzig M, Yao R. Efficacy and safety of fixed-dose loratadine/montelukast in seasonal allergic rhinitis: effects on nasal congestion. Allergy Asthma Proc. 2009; 30 (3) 263-9
  • 20 Day J, Briscoe M, Ratz J, Danzig M, Yao R. Efficacy of loratadine/montelukast on the symptom of nasal congestion in subjects with seasonal allergic rhinitis in an environmental exposure unit. Ann Allergy Asthma Immunol. 2009; 102 (4) 328-38
  • 21 Day J, Briscoe M, Ratz J, Ellis A, Yao R, Danzig M. Onset of action of loratadine/montelukast in seasonal allergic rhinitis subjects exposed to ragweed pollen in the environmental exposure unit. Allergy Asthma Proc. 2009; 30 (3) 270-6
  • 22 Nathan RA, Eccles R, Howarth Hh, Steinsvag SK, Togias A. Objective monitoring of nasal patency and nasal physiology in rhinitis. J Allergy Clin Immunol. 2005; 115: S442-59
  • 23 Green RJ, Davis G, Price D. Concerns of patients with allergic rhinitis: the allergic rhinitis care programme in South Africa. Prim Care Respir J. 2007; 16: 299-303