Novos anti-histamínicos: uma visão crítica

Detalhes bibliográficos
Autor(a) principal: Camelo-nunes, Inês Cristina [UNIFESP]
Data de Publicação: 2006
Tipo de documento: Artigo
Idioma: por
Título da fonte: Repositório Institucional da UNIFESP
Texto Completo: http://dx.doi.org/10.1590/S0021-75572006000700007
http://repositorio.unifesp.br/handle/11600/3324
Resumo: OBJECTIVE: To perform a critical evaluation of the more recent H1 antihistamines and the various terms used to describe them, based on a review of evidence on their role in the treatment of allergic disorders. SOURCES: Original articles, reviews and consensus documents published from 1998 to 2006 and indexed in the MEDLINE and PubMed databases. Keyword: antihistamines. SUMMARY OF THE FINDINGS: Second-generation antihistamines differ from first-generation ones because of their elevated specificity and affinity for peripheral H1 receptors and because of their lower penetration of the central nervous system (CNS), having fewer sedative effects as a result. Whilst second-generation antihistamines are in general better tolerated than their predecessors, some adverse effects, principally cardiotoxicity, have been observed with some of them. Over the last 20 years, new compounds with different pharmacokinetic properties have been synthesized. The majority of these exhibit anti-inflammatory properties that are independent of their action on the H1 receptor. More recent improvements, generally in the form of active metabolites, led to the use of the term third-generation antihistamines. This term emerged spontaneously, with no clear definition of its meaning or clinical implications, creating great confusion among healthcare professionals. CONCLUSIONS: On the basis of the evidence on H1 antihistamines, none of them deserve the titlethird-generation antihistamine. As the Consensus Group on New Generation Antihistamines concluded, to merit this definition, a new class of antihistamines would have to demonstrate distinct clinical advantages over existing compounds and fulfill at least three prerequisites: they should be free from cardiotoxicity, drug interactions and effects on the CNS.
id UFSP_d5bb0da81d52b5a11b0800611cd8fa9d
oai_identifier_str oai:repositorio.unifesp.br/:11600/3324
network_acronym_str UFSP
network_name_str Repositório Institucional da UNIFESP
repository_id_str 3465
spelling Novos anti-histamínicos: uma visão críticaNew antihistamines: a critical viewAntihistaminesdesloratadinefexofenadinelevocetirizinerupatadineAnti-histamínicosdesloratadinafexofenadinalevocetirizinarupatadinaOBJECTIVE: To perform a critical evaluation of the more recent H1 antihistamines and the various terms used to describe them, based on a review of evidence on their role in the treatment of allergic disorders. SOURCES: Original articles, reviews and consensus documents published from 1998 to 2006 and indexed in the MEDLINE and PubMed databases. Keyword: antihistamines. SUMMARY OF THE FINDINGS: Second-generation antihistamines differ from first-generation ones because of their elevated specificity and affinity for peripheral H1 receptors and because of their lower penetration of the central nervous system (CNS), having fewer sedative effects as a result. Whilst second-generation antihistamines are in general better tolerated than their predecessors, some adverse effects, principally cardiotoxicity, have been observed with some of them. Over the last 20 years, new compounds with different pharmacokinetic properties have been synthesized. The majority of these exhibit anti-inflammatory properties that are independent of their action on the H1 receptor. More recent improvements, generally in the form of active metabolites, led to the use of the term third-generation antihistamines. This term emerged spontaneously, with no clear definition of its meaning or clinical implications, creating great confusion among healthcare professionals. CONCLUSIONS: On the basis of the evidence on H1 antihistamines, none of them deserve the titlethird-generation antihistamine. As the Consensus Group on New Generation Antihistamines concluded, to merit this definition, a new class of antihistamines would have to demonstrate distinct clinical advantages over existing compounds and fulfill at least three prerequisites: they should be free from cardiotoxicity, drug interactions and effects on the CNS.OBJETIVO: Avaliar criticamente os mais novos anti-histamínicos anti-H1 e os diferentes termos utilizados para denominá-los, com base na revisão de evidências sobre o papel dos anti-H1 no tratamento das doenças alérgicas. FONTES DOS DADOS: Artigos originais, revisões e consensos indexados nos bancos de dados MEDLINE e PUBMED de 1998 a 2006. Palavra chave: anti-histamínicos. SÍNTESE DOS DADOS: Os anti-histamínicos de segunda geração diferenciam-se dos de primeira geração por sua elevada especificidade e afinidade pelos receptores H1 periféricos e pela menor penetração no sistema nervoso central (SNC), com conseqüente redução dos efeitos sedativos. Embora os anti-histamínicos de segunda geração sejam, geralmente, melhor tolerados do que seus predecessores, alguns efeitos adversos, principalmente cardiotoxicidade, surgiram com alguns deles. Nos últimos 20 anos, novos compostos, com diferentes farmacocinéticas, foram sintetizados. A maioria deles manifesta propriedades antiinflamatórias que independem de sua atividade no receptor H1. Aprimoramentos mais recentes, geralmente na forma de metabólitos ativos, levaram ao uso do termo anti-histamínico de terceira geração. Esse termo surgiu espontaneamente, sem uma descrição clara de seu significado e implicações clínicas, criando grande confusão entre os profissionais da saúde. CONCLUSÕES: Com base nas evidências sobre anti-histamínicos anti-H1, nenhum deles pode ser considerado como anti-histamínico de terceira geração. Para tanto, seria preciso comprovar que a nova classe de anti-histamínicos possui vantagens clínicas distintas sobre os compostos existentes e preenche pelo menos três pré-requisitos: ausência de cardiotoxicidade, de interações medicamentosas e de efeitos sobre o SNC.Universidade Federal de São Paulo (UNIFESP) Escola Paulista de Medicina Departamento de PediatriaUNIFESP, EPM, Depto. de PediatriaSciELOSociedade Brasileira de PediatriaUniversidade Federal de São Paulo (UNIFESP)Camelo-nunes, Inês Cristina [UNIFESP]2015-06-14T13:36:30Z2015-06-14T13:36:30Z2006-11-01info:eu-repo/semantics/articleinfo:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersionS173-S180application/pdfhttp://dx.doi.org/10.1590/S0021-75572006000700007Jornal de Pediatria. Sociedade Brasileira de Pediatria, v. 82, n. 5, p. S173-S180, 2006.10.1590/S0021-75572006000700007S0021-75572006000700007.pdf0021-7557S0021-75572006000700007http://repositorio.unifesp.br/handle/11600/3324porJornal de Pediatriainfo:eu-repo/semantics/openAccessreponame:Repositório Institucional da UNIFESPinstname:Universidade Federal de São Paulo (UNIFESP)instacron:UNIFESP2024-08-04T16:32:57Zoai:repositorio.unifesp.br/:11600/3324Repositório InstitucionalPUBhttp://www.repositorio.unifesp.br/oai/requestbiblioteca.csp@unifesp.bropendoar:34652024-08-04T16:32:57Repositório Institucional da UNIFESP - Universidade Federal de São Paulo (UNIFESP)false
dc.title.none.fl_str_mv Novos anti-histamínicos: uma visão crítica
New antihistamines: a critical view
title Novos anti-histamínicos: uma visão crítica
spellingShingle Novos anti-histamínicos: uma visão crítica
Camelo-nunes, Inês Cristina [UNIFESP]
Antihistamines
desloratadine
fexofenadine
levocetirizine
rupatadine
Anti-histamínicos
desloratadina
fexofenadina
levocetirizina
rupatadina
title_short Novos anti-histamínicos: uma visão crítica
title_full Novos anti-histamínicos: uma visão crítica
title_fullStr Novos anti-histamínicos: uma visão crítica
title_full_unstemmed Novos anti-histamínicos: uma visão crítica
title_sort Novos anti-histamínicos: uma visão crítica
author Camelo-nunes, Inês Cristina [UNIFESP]
author_facet Camelo-nunes, Inês Cristina [UNIFESP]
author_role author
dc.contributor.none.fl_str_mv Universidade Federal de São Paulo (UNIFESP)
dc.contributor.author.fl_str_mv Camelo-nunes, Inês Cristina [UNIFESP]
dc.subject.por.fl_str_mv Antihistamines
desloratadine
fexofenadine
levocetirizine
rupatadine
Anti-histamínicos
desloratadina
fexofenadina
levocetirizina
rupatadina
topic Antihistamines
desloratadine
fexofenadine
levocetirizine
rupatadine
Anti-histamínicos
desloratadina
fexofenadina
levocetirizina
rupatadina
description OBJECTIVE: To perform a critical evaluation of the more recent H1 antihistamines and the various terms used to describe them, based on a review of evidence on their role in the treatment of allergic disorders. SOURCES: Original articles, reviews and consensus documents published from 1998 to 2006 and indexed in the MEDLINE and PubMed databases. Keyword: antihistamines. SUMMARY OF THE FINDINGS: Second-generation antihistamines differ from first-generation ones because of their elevated specificity and affinity for peripheral H1 receptors and because of their lower penetration of the central nervous system (CNS), having fewer sedative effects as a result. Whilst second-generation antihistamines are in general better tolerated than their predecessors, some adverse effects, principally cardiotoxicity, have been observed with some of them. Over the last 20 years, new compounds with different pharmacokinetic properties have been synthesized. The majority of these exhibit anti-inflammatory properties that are independent of their action on the H1 receptor. More recent improvements, generally in the form of active metabolites, led to the use of the term third-generation antihistamines. This term emerged spontaneously, with no clear definition of its meaning or clinical implications, creating great confusion among healthcare professionals. CONCLUSIONS: On the basis of the evidence on H1 antihistamines, none of them deserve the titlethird-generation antihistamine. As the Consensus Group on New Generation Antihistamines concluded, to merit this definition, a new class of antihistamines would have to demonstrate distinct clinical advantages over existing compounds and fulfill at least three prerequisites: they should be free from cardiotoxicity, drug interactions and effects on the CNS.
publishDate 2006
dc.date.none.fl_str_mv 2006-11-01
2015-06-14T13:36:30Z
2015-06-14T13:36:30Z
dc.type.driver.fl_str_mv info:eu-repo/semantics/article
dc.type.status.fl_str_mv info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersion
format article
status_str publishedVersion
dc.identifier.uri.fl_str_mv http://dx.doi.org/10.1590/S0021-75572006000700007
Jornal de Pediatria. Sociedade Brasileira de Pediatria, v. 82, n. 5, p. S173-S180, 2006.
10.1590/S0021-75572006000700007
S0021-75572006000700007.pdf
0021-7557
S0021-75572006000700007
http://repositorio.unifesp.br/handle/11600/3324
url http://dx.doi.org/10.1590/S0021-75572006000700007
http://repositorio.unifesp.br/handle/11600/3324
identifier_str_mv Jornal de Pediatria. Sociedade Brasileira de Pediatria, v. 82, n. 5, p. S173-S180, 2006.
10.1590/S0021-75572006000700007
S0021-75572006000700007.pdf
0021-7557
S0021-75572006000700007
dc.language.iso.fl_str_mv por
language por
dc.relation.none.fl_str_mv Jornal de Pediatria
dc.rights.driver.fl_str_mv info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess
eu_rights_str_mv openAccess
dc.format.none.fl_str_mv S173-S180
application/pdf
dc.publisher.none.fl_str_mv Sociedade Brasileira de Pediatria
publisher.none.fl_str_mv Sociedade Brasileira de Pediatria
dc.source.none.fl_str_mv reponame:Repositório Institucional da UNIFESP
instname:Universidade Federal de São Paulo (UNIFESP)
instacron:UNIFESP
instname_str Universidade Federal de São Paulo (UNIFESP)
instacron_str UNIFESP
institution UNIFESP
reponame_str Repositório Institucional da UNIFESP
collection Repositório Institucional da UNIFESP
repository.name.fl_str_mv Repositório Institucional da UNIFESP - Universidade Federal de São Paulo (UNIFESP)
repository.mail.fl_str_mv biblioteca.csp@unifesp.br
_version_ 1814268450736963584