Randomised controlled trial of butterbur and cetirizine for treating seasonal allergic rhinitis

Allergy Clinic, Hochwangstrasse 3, CH-7302 Landquart, Switzerland.
BMJ Clinical Research (Impact Factor: 14.09). 02/2002; 324(7330):144-6. DOI: 10.1136/bmj.324.7330.144
Source: PubMed

ABSTRACT To compare the efficacy and tolerability of butterbur (Petasites hybridus) with cetirizine in patients with seasonal allergic rhinitis (hay fever).
Randomised, double blind, parallel group comparison.
Four outpatient general medicine and allergy clinics in Switzerland and Germany.
131 patients were screened for seasonal allergic rhinitis and 125 patients were randomised (butterbur 61; cetirizine 64).
Butterbur (carbon dioxide extract tablets, ZE 339) one tablet, four times daily, or cetirizine, one tablet in the evening, both given for two consecutive weeks.
Scores on SF-36 questionnaire and clinical global impression scale.
Improvement in SF-36 score was similar in the two treatment groups for all items tested hierarchically. Butterbur and cetirizine were also similarly effective with regard to global improvement scores on the clinical global impression scale (median score 3 in both groups). Both treatments were well tolerated. In the cetirizine group, two thirds (8/12) of reported adverse events were associated with sedative effects (drowsiness and fatigue) despite the drug being considered a non-sedating antihistamine.
The effects of butterbur are similar to those of cetirizine in patients with seasonal allergic rhinitis when evaluated blindly by patients and doctors. Butterbur should be considered for treating seasonal allergic rhinitis when the sedative effects of antihistamines need to be avoided.


Available from: Andreas Schapowal, Mar 26, 2014
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: In the presence of neostigmine (0.1 microM), S-isopetasin competitively antagonized cumulative acetylcholine-induced contractions in guinea pig trachealis, because the slope [1.18+/-0.15 (n=6)] of Schild's plot did not significantly differ from unity. The pA2 value of S-isopetasin was calculated to be 4.62+/-0.05 (n=18). The receptor binding assay for muscarinic receptors of cultured human tracheal smooth muscle cells (HTSMCs) was performed using [3H]-N-methylscopolamine ([3H]-NMS). Saturation binding assays were carried out with [3H]-NMS in the presence (non-specific binding) and absence (total binding) of atropine (1 microM). Analysis of the Scatchard plot (y=0.247-1.306x, r2=0.95) revealed that the muscarinic receptor binding sites in cultured HTSMCs constituted a single population (n(H)=1.00). The equilibrium dissociation constant (Kd) and the maximal receptor density (B(max)) for [3H]-NMS binding were 766 pM and 0.189 pmol/mg of protein, respectively. The -logIC50 values of S-isopetasin, methoctramine, and 1,1-Dimethyl-4-diphenylacetoxypiperidinium iodide (4-DAMP) for displacing 0.4 nM [3H]-NMS-specific binding were 5.05, 6.25, and 8.56, respectively, which suggests that [3H]-NMS binding is predominantly on muscarinic M3 receptors of cultured HTSMCs. The inhibitory effects of S-isopetasin on enhanced pause (P(enh)) value were similar to that of ipratropium bromide, a reference drug. The duration of action of S-isopetasin (20 microM), also similar to that of ipratropium bromide (20 microM), was 3 h. In contrast to ipratropium bromide, which non-selectively acts on muscarinic receptors, S-isopetasin preferentially acts on muscarinic M3 receptors. In conclusion, S-isopetasin may be beneficial as a bronchodilator in the treatment of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease and asthma exacerbations.
    European Journal of Pharmacology 05/2008; 584(2-3):398-404. DOI:10.1016/j.ejphar.2008.02.034 · 2.68 Impact Factor
  • Source
    Journal of Allergy and Clinical Immunology 11/2012; 130(5):1049-62. · 11.25 Impact Factor
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Allergic rhinitis represents a global health problem affecting 10% to 20% of the population. The Allergic Rhinitis and its Impact on Asthma (ARIA) guidelines have been widely used to treat the approximately 500 million affected patients globally. To develop explicit, unambiguous, and transparent clinical recommendations systematically for treatment of allergic rhinitis on the basis of current best evidence. The authors updated ARIA clinical recommendations in collaboration with Global Allergy and Asthma European Network following the approach suggested by the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation working group. This article presents recommendations about the prevention of allergic diseases, the use of oral and topical medications, allergen specific immunotherapy, and complementary treatments in patients with allergic rhinitis as well as patients with both allergic rhinitis and asthma. The guideline panel developed evidence profiles for each recommendation and considered health benefits and harms, burden, patient preferences, and resource use, when appropriate, to formulate recommendations for patients, clinicians, and other health care professionals. These are the most recent and currently the most systematically and transparently developed recommendations about the treatment of allergic rhinitis in adults and children. Patients, clinicians, and policy makers are encouraged to use these recommendations in their daily practice and to support their decisions.
    The Journal of allergy and clinical immunology 09/2010; 126(3):466-76. DOI:10.1016/j.jaci.2010.06.047 · 11.25 Impact Factor