The Efficacy and Safety of High-Dose Nonsedating Antihistamines in Chronic Spontaneous Urticaria: A Systematic Review of Randomized Clinical Trials

Xianjun Xiao,Yunzhou Shi,Junpeng Yao,Wei Cao,Leixiao Zhang,Zihao Zou,Siyuan Zhou,Chuan Wang,Mingling Chen,Rongjiang Jin,Ying Li,Qianhua Zheng
DOI: https://doi.org/10.21203/rs.3.rs-1070216/v1
2022-01-20
Abstract:Abstract Background Standard doses of second-generation H 1 -antihistamines (sgAHs) as first-line treatment are not always effective in treating chronic spontaneous urticaria (CSU), and hence an increase in the dose of sgAHs is recommended. However, literature evaluating the efଁcacy and safety of this treatment remains inconclusive, highlighting the need for a meta-analysis. The aim of this meta-analysis was to evaluate the efଁcacy and safety of high-dose sgAHs compared with standard-dose sgAHs in treating CSU. Methods A systematic literature search of double-blind, randomized controlled trials (RCT) utilizing multiple doses of sgAHs was performed by searching the electronic databases Medline, Embase, PsycINFO, Cochrane databases, and Web of Science. The response rate, the number of adverse events, somnolence, and withdrawal due to adverse events were extracted from each article. The data were combined and analyzed to quantify the safety and efficacy of the treatment. Results A total of 12 studies were identified, six of which met the eligibility criteria for the meta-analysis. Our pooled meta-analyses showed that high-dose sgAHs was associated with a significantly higher response rate than standard-dose (RR 1.12, 95% CI 1.01 to 1.24; P = 0.04). Conversely, high doses of sgAHs were associated with significantly higher somnolence rates than standard dose (RD 0.05, 95% CI 0.01 to 0.09; P = 0.02). There was no significant difference in adverse events or withdrawal due to adverse events between standard- and high-dose treatments. Conclusions Our analyses showed that a high dose of sgAHs (up to two times the standard dose) might be more effective than a standard dose in CSU treatment. High-dose and standard-dose sgAHs showed similar adverse events, except for somnolence, where incidence was found to be dose-dependent in some studies. However, given the limited number of studies, our meta-analysis results should be interpreted with caution.
What problem does this paper attempt to address?