Comparison of the efficacy of XXXX 5 mg and @entity14295 5 mg in @entity14687 @entity1 .

@entity1 @entity14294 @entity14687 @entity111 @entity110 @entity14295
BACKGROUND: Nonsedating H(1)-antihistamines are recommended for the treatment of @entity110 by the recent EAACI/GA(2)LEN/EDF guidelines. The aim of this study was to compare the efficacy, after 4 weeks of treatment, with @entity14294 5 mg and @entity14295 5 mg, both once daily in the morning, in symptomatic @entity14687 ( @entity14687 ) @entity1 . METHODS: This multi-center, randomized, double-blind study involved 886 @entity1 (438 on @entity14294 and 448 on @entity14295 ). The primary objective was to compare their efficacy on the mean @entity111 severity score after 1 week of treatment. Mean @entity111 severity score over 4 weeks and @entity111 duration score, number and size of wheals, mean @entity14687 composite score (sum of the scores for @entity111 severity and numbers of wheals), quality of life, and the @entity1 's and investigator's global satisfaction with treatment, were secondary efficacy measures. RESULTS: @entity14294 led to a significantly greater decrease in @entity111 severity than @entity14295 over the first treatment week; mean @entity111 severity scores of 1.02 and 1.18 for @entity14294 and @entity14295 , respectively (P < 0.001). The result was similar for the entire 4-week treatment period (P = 0.004). In addition, @entity14294 decreased @entity111 duration and the mean @entity14687 composite scores to a significantly greater extent than @entity14295 during the first week (P = 0.002 and 0.005, respectively) and over the entire study (P = 0.009 and P < 0.05, respectively). Similarly, @entity14294 increased the @entity1 ' global satisfaction after one and 4 weeks (P = 0.012 and 0.021, respectively), compared with @entity14295 . Safety and tolerability were similar in both groups. CONCLUSIONS: @entity14294 5 mg was significantly more efficacious than @entity14295 5 mg in the treatment of @entity14687 symptoms.
