H1‐antihistamines for chronic spontaneous urticaria

Maulina Sharma; Cathy Bennett<sup>a</sup>; Stuart N Cohen<sup>a</sup>; Ben Carter

doi:10.1002/14651858.CD006137.pub2

Scolaris Content Display Scolaris Content Display

Contenido relacionado

Ir a:

Revisiones y protocolos relacionados
Guías
Temas

Revisiones y protocolos relacionados

Topics

Temas

Figure 1

Study flow diagram.

Ir a la figura de la revisiónAbrir en una pestaña nueva

Figure 2

Risk of bias graph: review authors' judgements about each risk of bias item presented as percentages across all included studies.

Ir a la figura de la revisiónAbrir en una pestaña nueva

Figure 3

Risk of bias summary: review authors' judgements about each risk of bias item for each included study.

Ir a la figura de la revisiónAbrir en una pestaña nueva

Analysis 1.1

Comparison 1 Loratadine 10 mg versus placebo, Outcome 1 Proportion of participants with 'good' or 'excellent' response whilst taking H1‐antihistamines.

Ir a la figura de la revisiónAbrir en una pestaña nueva

Analysis 2.1

Comparison 2 Loratadine 10 mg versus cetirizine 10 mg, Outcome 1 Proportion of participants with complete suppression of urticaria whilst taking H1‐antihistamines.

Ir a la figura de la revisiónAbrir en una pestaña nueva

Analysis 3.1

Comparison 3 Loratadine 10 mg versus desloratadine 5 mg, Outcome 1 Proportion of participants with complete suppression of urticaria whilst taking H1‐antihistamines.

Ir a la figura de la revisiónAbrir en una pestaña nueva

Analysis 3.2

Comparison 3 Loratadine 10 mg versus desloratadine 5 mg, Outcome 2 Proportion of participants with 'good' or 'excellent' response whilst taking H1‐antihistamines.

Ir a la figura de la revisiónAbrir en una pestaña nueva

Analysis 4.1

Comparison 4 Loratadine 10 mg versus mizolastine 10 mg, Outcome 1 Proportion of participants with complete suppression of urticaria whilst taking H1‐antihistamines.

Ir a la figura de la revisiónAbrir en una pestaña nueva

Analysis 4.2

Comparison 4 Loratadine 10 mg versus mizolastine 10 mg, Outcome 2 Proportion of participants with 'good' or 'excellent' response whilst taking H1‐antihistamines.

Ir a la figura de la revisiónAbrir en una pestaña nueva

Analysis 4.3

Comparison 4 Loratadine 10 mg versus mizolastine 10 mg, Outcome 3 Proportion of participants with at least 50% improvement in QoL whilst taking H1‐antihistamines.

Ir a la figura de la revisiónAbrir en una pestaña nueva

Analysis 4.4

Comparison 4 Loratadine 10 mg versus mizolastine 10 mg, Outcome 4 Serious adverse events (i.e. serious enough to require withdrawal of treatment).

Ir a la figura de la revisiónAbrir en una pestaña nueva

Analysis 5.1

Comparison 5 Loratadine 10 mg versus emedastine 2 mg, Outcome 1 Proportion of participants with complete suppression of urticaria whilst taking H1‐antihistamines.

Ir a la figura de la revisiónAbrir en una pestaña nueva

Analysis 5.2

Comparison 5 Loratadine 10 mg versus emedastine 2 mg, Outcome 2 Proportion of participants with good or excellent response whilst taking H1‐antihistamines.

Ir a la figura de la revisiónAbrir en una pestaña nueva

Analysis 5.3

Comparison 5 Loratadine 10 mg versus emedastine 2 mg, Outcome 3 Serious adverse events (i.e. serious enough to require withdrawal of treatment).

Ir a la figura de la revisiónAbrir en una pestaña nueva

Analysis 6.1

Comparison 6 Loratadine 10 mg versus hydroxyzine 25 mg, Outcome 1 Proportion of participants with complete suppression of urticaria whilst taking H1‐antihistamines.

Ir a la figura de la revisiónAbrir en una pestaña nueva

Analysis 7.1

Comparison 7 Cetirizine 10 to 20 mg versus placebo, Outcome 1 Proportion of participants with complete suppression of urticaria whilst taking H1‐antihistamines.

Ir a la figura de la revisiónAbrir en una pestaña nueva

Analysis 7.2

Comparison 7 Cetirizine 10 to 20 mg versus placebo, Outcome 2 Serious adverse events (i.e. serious enough to require withdrawal of treatment).

Ir a la figura de la revisiónAbrir en una pestaña nueva

Analysis 8.1

Comparison 8 Cetirizine 10 mg versus hydroxyzine 25 mg, Outcome 1 Serious adverse events (i.e. serious enough to require withdrawal of treatment).

Ir a la figura de la revisiónAbrir en una pestaña nueva

Analysis 9.1

Comparison 9 Desloratadine 5 to 20 mg versus placebo, Outcome 1 Proportion of participants with complete suppression of urticaria whilst taking H1‐antihistamines.

Ir a la figura de la revisiónAbrir en una pestaña nueva

Analysis 9.2

Comparison 9 Desloratadine 5 to 20 mg versus placebo, Outcome 2 Serious adverse events (i.e. serious enough to require withdrawal of treatment).

Ir a la figura de la revisiónAbrir en una pestaña nueva

Analysis 10.1

Comparison 10 Hydroxyzine 25 mg versus placebo, Outcome 1 Serious adverse events (i.e. serious enough to require withdrawal of treatment to withdrawal).

Ir a la figura de la revisiónAbrir en una pestaña nueva

Analysis 11.1

Comparison 11 Levocetirizine 5 to 20 mg versus placebo, Outcome 1 Proportion of participants with complete suppression of urticaria whilst taking H1‐antihistamines.

Ir a la figura de la revisiónAbrir en una pestaña nueva

Analysis 12.1

Comparison 12 Rupatadine 10 to 20 mg versus placebo, Outcome 1 Proportion of participants with 'good' or 'excellent' response whilst taking H1‐antihistamines.

Ir a la figura de la revisiónAbrir en una pestaña nueva

Summary of findings for the main comparison. Cetirizine 10 to 20 mg versus placebo for chronic spontaneous urticaria

Cetirizine 10 to 20 mg versus placebo for chronic spontaneous urticaria
Patient or population: patients with chronic spontaneous urticaria Setting: research clinic Intervention: cetirizine 10 to 20 mg versus placebo
Outcomes	*Illustrative comparative risks (95% CI)**		Relative effect (95% CI)	Number of participants (studies)	Quality of the evidence (GRADE)	Comments
	Assumed risk	Corresponding risk
	Control (placebo)	Cetirizine 10 to 20 mg
Complete suppression of urticaria Global assessment of symptom scores	Study population		RR 2.72 (1.51 to 4.91)	178 (2 studies)	⊕⊕⊝⊝ Low^a,b	Favours cetirizine
	133 per 1000	363 per 1000 (201 to 655)
	Moderate
	146 per 1000	397 per 1000 (220 to 717)
Adverse events leading to withdrawal	Study population		RR 3 (0.68 to 13.22)	389 (3 studies)	⊕⊕⊝⊝ Low^a,b	Favours neither intervention nor control
	10 per 1000	30 per 1000 (7 to 132)
	Moderate
	14 per 1000	42 per 1000 (10 to 185)
The basis for the assumed risk* (e.g. median control group risk across studies) is provided in footnotes. The corresponding risk (and its 95% confidence interval) is based on the assumed risk in the comparison group and the relative effect of the intervention (and its 95% CI). CI: Confidence interval; RR: Risk ratio.
GRADE Working Group grades of evidence. High quality: Further research is very unlikely to change our confidence in the estimate of effect. Moderate quality: Further research is likely to have an important impact on our confidence in the estimate of effect and may change the estimate. Low quality: Further research is very likely to have an important impact on our confidence in the estimate of effect and is likely to change the estimate. Very low quality: We are very uncertain about the estimate.
^aDesign limitation (risk of bias). ^bRelatively few participants and few events and/or wide confidence intervals.

Summary of findings for the main comparison. Cetirizine 10 to 20 mg versus placebo for chronic spontaneous urticaria

Desloratadine 5 to 20 mg versus placebo for chronic spontaneous urticaria
Patient or population: patients with chronic spontaneous urticaria Setting: research clinic Intervention: desloratadine 5 to 20 mg versus placebo
Outcomes	Illustrative comparative risks* (95% CI)		Relative effect (95% CI)	Number of participants (studies)	Quality of the evidence (GRADE)	Comments
	Assumed risk	Corresponding risk
	Control (placebo)	Desloratadine 5 to 20 mg
Complete suppression of urticaria: short‐term duration of intervention (desloratadine 5 mg) Global assessment of symptom scores	See comment	See comment	Not estimable	46 (1 study)	⊕⊕⊝⊝ Low^a,b	Favours neither intervention nor control Only 1 study, a conference abstract (Hoxha 2011)
Complete suppression of urticaria: short‐term duration of intervention (desloratadine 10 mg) Global assessment of symptom scores	See comment	See comment	Not estimable	46 (1 study)	⊕⊕⊝⊝ Low^a,b	Favours neither intervention nor control Only 1 study, a conference abstract (Hoxha 2011)
Complete suppression of urticaria: short‐term duration of intervention (desloratadine 20 mg) Global assessment of symptom scores	See comment	See comment	Not estimable	46 (1 study)	⊕⊕⊝⊝ Low^a,b	Favours desloratadine Only 1 study, a conference abstract (Hoxha 2011)
Complete suppression of urticaria: intermediate‐term duration of intervention (desloratadine 5 mg) Global assessment of symptom scores	See comment	See comment	Not estimable	80 (1 study)	⊕⊕⊝⊝ Low^a,b	Favours desloratadine Only 1 study (Di Lorenzo 2004)
Adverse effects leading to withdrawal: intermediate‐term duration of 5 mg of intervention	Study population		RR 1.46 (0.42 to 5.1)	466 (3 studies)	⊕⊕⊝⊝ Low^a,b	Favours neither intervention nor control
	17 per 1000	25 per 1000 (7 to 89)
	Moderate
	18 per 1000	26 per 1000 (8 to 92)
The basis for the assumed risk* (e.g. median control group risk across studies) is provided in footnotes. The corresponding risk (and its 95% confidence interval) is based on the assumed risk in the comparison group and the relative effect of the intervention (and its 95% CI). CI: Confidence interval; RR: Risk ratio.
GRADE Working Group grades of evidence. High quality: Further research is very unlikely to change our confidence in the estimate of effect. Moderate quality: Further research is likely to have an important impact on our confidence in the estimate of effect and may change the estimate. Low quality: Further research is very likely to have an important impact on our confidence in the estimate of effect and is likely to change the estimate. Very low quality: We are very uncertain about the estimate.
^aDesign limitation (risk of bias). ^bRelatively few participants and few events and/or wide confidence intervals.

Levocetirizine 5 to 20 mg versus placebo for chronic spontaneous urticaria
Patient or population: patients with chronic spontaneous urticaria Setting: research clinic Intervention: levocetirizine 5 to 20 mg versus placebo
Outcomes	Illustrative comparative risks* (95% CI)		Relative effect (95% CI)	Number of participants (studies)	Quality of the evidence (GRADE)	Comments
	Assumed risk	Corresponding risk
	Control (placebo)	Levocetirizine 5 to 20 mg
Complete suppression of urticaria: short‐term duration of intervention (levocetirizine 5 mg) Global assessment of symptom scores	See comment	See comment	Not estimable	49 (1 study)	⊕⊕⊝⊝ Low^a,b	Favours neither intervention nor control Only 1 study, a conference abstract (Hoxha 2011)
Complete suppression of urticaria: short‐term duration of intervention (levocetirizine 10 mg) Global assessment of symptom scores	See comment	See comment	Not estimable	49 (1 study)	⊕⊕⊝⊝ Low^a,b	Favours neither intervention nor control Only 1 study, a conference abstract (Hoxha 2011)
Complete suppression of urticaria: short‐term duration of intervention (levocetirizine 20 mg) Global assessment of symptom scores	See comment	See comment	Not estimable	49 (1 study)	⊕⊕⊝⊝ Low^a,b	Favours levocetirizine Only 1 study, a conference abstract (Hoxha 2011)
Complete suppression of urticaria: intermediate‐term duration of intervention (levocetirizine 5 mg) Global assessment of symptom scores	See comment	See comment	Not estimable	100 (1 study)	⊕⊕⊝⊝ Low^a,b	Favours levocetirizine Only 1 study (Nettis 2006)
The basis for the assumed risk* (e.g. median control group risk across studies) is provided in footnotes. The corresponding risk (and its 95% confidence interval) is based on the assumed risk in the comparison group and the relative effect of the intervention (and its 95% CI). CI: Confidence interval.
GRADE Working Group grades of evidence. High quality: Further research is very unlikely to change our confidence in the estimate of effect. Moderate quality: Further research is likely to have an important impact on our confidence in the estimate of effect and may change the estimate. Low quality: Further research is very likely to have an important impact on our confidence in the estimate of effect and is likely to change the estimate. Very low quality: We are very uncertain about the estimate.
^aDesign limitation (risk of bias). ^bRelatively few participants and few events and/or wide confidence intervals.

Rupatadine 10 to 20 mg versus placebo for chronic spontaneous urticaria
Patient or population: patients with chronic spontaneous urticaria Setting: research clinic Intervention: rupatadine 10 to 20 mg versus placebo
Outcomes	*Illustrative comparative risks (95% CI)**		Relative effect (95% CI)	Number of participants (studies)	Quality of the evidence (GRADE)	Comments
	Assumed risk	Corresponding risk
	Control (placebo)	Rupatadine 10 to 20 mg
Good or excellent response Global assessment of symptom scores	Study population		RR 1.35 (1.03 to 1.77)	245 (1 study)	⊕⊕⊝⊝ Low^a,b	Favours rupatadine
	509 per 1000	687 per 1000 (524 to 901)
	Moderate
	509 per 1000	687 per 1000 (524 to 901)
The basis for the assumed risk* (e.g. median control group risk across studies) is provided in footnotes. The corresponding risk (and its 95% confidence interval) is based on the assumed risk in the comparison group and the relative effect of the intervention (and its 95% CI). CI: Confidence interval; RR: Risk ratio.
GRADE Working Group grades of evidence. High quality: Further research is very unlikely to change our confidence in the estimate of effect. Moderate quality: Further research is likely to have an important impact on our confidence in the estimate of effect and may change the estimate. Low quality: Further research is very likely to have an important impact on our confidence in the estimate of effect and is likely to change the estimate. Very low quality: We are very uncertain about the estimate.
^aDesign limitation (risk of bias). ^bRelatively few participants and few events and/or wide confidence intervals.

Loratadine 10 mg versus placebo for chronic spontaneous urticaria
Patient or population: patients with chronic spontaneous urticaria Setting: research clinic Intervention: loratadine 10 mg versus placebo
Outcomes	*Illustrative comparative risks (95% CI)**		Relative effect (95% CI)	Number of participants (studies)	Quality of the evidence (GRADE)	Comments
	Assumed risk	Corresponding risk
	Control (placebo)	Loratadine 10 mg
Good or excellent response Global assessment of symptom scores	Study population		RR 1.86 (0.91 to 3.79)	124 (2 studies)	⊕⊕⊝⊝ Low^a,b	Favours neither intervention nor control
	155 per 1000	289 per 1000 (141 to 588)
	Moderate
	160 per 1000	298 per 1000 (146 to 606)
The basis for the assumed risk* (e.g. median control group risk across studies) is provided in footnotes. The corresponding risk (and its 95% confidence interval) is based on the assumed risk in the comparison group and the relative effect of the intervention (and its 95% CI). CI: Confidence interval; RR: Risk ratio.
GRADE Working Group grades of evidence. High quality: Further research is very unlikely to change our confidence in the estimate of effect. Moderate quality: Further research is likely to have an important impact on our confidence in the estimate of effect and may change the estimate. Low quality: Further research is very likely to have an important impact on our confidence in the estimate of effect and is likely to change the estimate. Very low quality: We are very uncertain about the estimate.
^aDesign limitation (risk of bias). ^bRelatively few participants and few events and/or wide confidence intervals.

Loratadine 10 mg versus cetirizine 10 mg for chronic spontaneous urticaria
Patient or population: patients with chronic spontaneous urticaria Setting: research clinic Intervention: loratadine 10 mg versus cetirizine 10 mg
Outcomes	*Illustrative comparative risks (95% CI)**		Relative effect (95% CI)	Number of participants (studies)	Quality of the evidence (GRADE)	Comments
	Assumed risk	Corresponding risk
	Control (cetirizine 10 mg)	Loratadine 10 mg
Complete cessation of urticaria Global assessment of symptom scores	Study population		RR 1.05 (0.76 to 1.43)	103 (2 studies)	⊕⊕⊝⊝ Low^a,b	Combined short and intermediate‐term duration of intervention. Favours neither intervention nor control
	588 per 1000	618 per 1000 (447 to 841)
	Moderate
	574 per 1000	603 per 1000 (436 to 821)
The basis for the assumed risk* (e.g. median control group risk across studies) is provided in footnotes. The corresponding risk (and its 95% confidence interval) is based on the assumed risk in the comparison group and the relative effect of the intervention (and its 95% CI). CI: Confidence interval; RR: Risk ratio.
GRADE Working Group grades of evidence. High quality: Further research is very unlikely to change our confidence in the estimate of effect. Moderate quality: Further research is likely to have an important impact on our confidence in the estimate of effect and may change the estimate. Low quality: Further research is very likely to have an important impact on our confidence in the estimate of effect and is likely to change the estimate. Very low quality: We are very uncertain about the estimate.
^aDesign limitation (risk of bias). ^bRelatively few participants and few events and/or wide confidence intervals.

Loratadine 10 mg versus desloratadine 5 mg for chronic spontaneous urticaria
Patient or population: patients with chronic spontaneous urticaria Setting: research clinic Intervention: loratadine 10 mg versus desloratadine 5 mg
Outcomes	Illustrative comparative risks* (95% CI)		Relative effect (95% CI)	Number of participants (studies)	Quality of the evidence (GRADE)	Comments
	Assumed risk	Corresponding risk
	Control (desloratadine 5 mg)	Loratadine 10 mg
Complete suppression of urticaria: intermediate‐term duration of intervention	Study population		RR 0.91 (0.78 to 1.06)	369 (2 studies)	⊕⊕⊝⊝ Low^a,b	Favours neither intervention nor control
	658 per 1000	598 per 1000 (513 to 697)
	Moderate
	670 per 1000	610 per 1000 (523 to 710)
Good or excellent response: intermediate‐term duration of intervention Global assessment of symptom scores	Study population		RR 1.04 (0.64 to 1.71)	410 (3 studies)	⊕⊕⊝⊝ Low^a,b	Favours neither intervention nor control No participants reported a good or excellent response in the loratadine group in Zou 2002 We found low levels of statistical heterogeneity in this analysis I² = 40%)
	263 per 1000	274 per 1000 (169 to 450)
	Moderate
	228 per 1000	237 per 1000 (146 to 390)
The basis for the assumed risk* (e.g. median control group risk across studies) is provided in footnotes. The corresponding risk (and its 95% confidence interval) is based on the assumed risk in the comparison group and the relative effect of the intervention (and its 95% CI). CI: Confidence interval; RR: Risk ratio.
GRADE Working Group grades of evidence. High quality: Further research is very unlikely to change our confidence in the estimate of effect. Moderate quality: Further research is likely to have an important impact on our confidence in the estimate of effect and may change the estimate. Low quality: Further research is very likely to have an important impact on our confidence in the estimate of effect and is likely to change the estimate. Very low quality: We are very uncertain about the estimate.
^aDesign limitation (risk of bias). ^bRelatively few participants and few events and/or wide confidence intervals.

Loratadine 10 mg compared to mizolastine 10 mg for chronic spontaneous urticaria
Patient or population: patients with chronic spontaneous urticaria Setting: research clinic Intervention: loratadine 10 mg Comparison: mizolastine 10 mg
Outcomes	*Illustrative comparative risks (95% CI)**		Relative effect (95% CI)	Number of participants (studies)	Quality of the evidence (GRADE)	Comments
	Assumed risk	Corresponding risk
	Control (mizolastine 10 mg)	Loratadine 10 mg
Complete cessation of urticaria: intermediate‐term duration of intervention Global assessment of symptom scores	Study population		RR 0.86 (0.64 to 1.16)	316 (3 studies)	⊕⊝⊝⊝ Very low^a,b,c	Overall, favours neither loratadine nor mizolastine In Guo 2003, more participants in mizolastine group had complete cessation of urticaria than in the other 2 studies (Liu 2003 and Yin 2003b)
	675 per 1000	581 per 1000 (432 to 783)
	Moderate
	667 per 1000	574 per 1000 (427 to 774)
Good or excellent response: intermediate‐term duration of intervention Global assessment of symptom scores	Study population		RR 0.88 (0.55 to 1.42)	314 (3 studies)	⊕⊕⊝⊝ Low^a,c	Favours neither loratadine nor mizolastine
	187 per 1000	165 per 1000 (103 to 266)
	Moderate
	174 per 1000	153 per 1000 (96 to 247)
Adverse events leading to withdrawal: intermediate‐term duration of intervention	Study population		RR 0.38 (0.04 to 3.6)	267 (2 studies)	⊕⊕⊝⊝ Low^a,c	Favours neither loratadine nor mizolastine
	15 per 1000	6 per 1000 (1 to 53)
	Moderate
	19 per 1000	7 per 1000 (1 to 68)
Proportion of participants with at least 50% improvement in QoL: intermediate‐term duration of intervention Symptom score reducing index (SSRI)	Study population		RR 3.21 (0.32 to 32.33)	252 (2 studies)	⊕⊝⊝⊝ Very low^a,b,c	Favours neither loratadine nor mizolastine No participants in the mizolastine group in Guo 2003 reported at least 50% improvement in QoL
	104 per 1000	334 per 1000 (33 to 1000)
	Moderate
	64 per 1000	205 per 1000 (20 to 1000)
The basis for the assumed risk* (e.g. median control group risk across studies) is provided in footnotes. The corresponding risk (and its 95% confidence interval) is based on the assumed risk in the comparison group and the relative effect of the intervention (and its 95% CI). CI: Confidence interval; RR: Risk ratio.
GRADE Working Group grades of evidence. High quality: Further research is very unlikely to change our confidence in the estimate of effect. Moderate quality: Further research is likely to have an important impact on our confidence in the estimate of effect and may change the estimate. Low quality: Further research is very likely to have an important impact on our confidence in the estimate of effect and is likely to change the estimate. Very low quality: We are very uncertain about the estimate.
^aDesign limitation (risk of bias). ^bWidely differing estimates of the treatment effect (i.e. heterogeneity or variability in results) across studies. ^cRelatively few participants and few events and/or wide confidence intervals.

Loratadine 10 mg versus emedastine 2 mg for chronic spontaneous urticaria
Patient or population: patients with chronic spontaneous urticaria Setting: research clinic Intervention: loratadine 10 mg versus emedastine 2 mg
Outcomes	*Illustrative comparative risks (95% CI)**		Relative effect (95% CI)	Number of participants (studies)	Quality of the evidence (GRADE)	Comments
	Assumed risk	Corresponding risk
	Control (emedastine 2 mg)	Loratadine 10 mg
Complete cessation of urticaria: intermediate‐term duration of intervention Global assessment of symptom scores	Study population		RR 1.04 (0.78 to 1.39)	161 (1 study)	⊕⊕⊕⊝ Moderate^a	Favours neither loratadine nor emedastine Only 1 study (Pons‐Guiraud 2006)
	524 per 1000	545 per 1000 (409 to 728)
	Moderate
	524 per 1000	545 per 1000 (409 to 728)
Good or excellent response: intermediate‐term duration of intervention Global assessment of symptom scores	Study population		RR 1.09 (0.96 to 1.24)	160 (1 study)	⊕⊕⊕⊝ Moderate^a	Favours neither loratadine nor emedastine Only 1 study (Pons‐Guiraud 2006)
	819 per 1000	893 per 1000 (787 to 1000)
	Moderate
	819 per 1000	893 per 1000 (786 to 1000)
Adverse events leading to withdrawal: intermediate‐term duration of intervention	Study population		RR 1.09 (0.07 to 17.14)	161 (1 study)	⊕⊕⊕⊝ Moderate^a	Favours neither loratadine nor emedastine Only 1 study (Pons‐Guiraud 2006)
	12 per 1000	13 per 1000 (1 to 204)
	Moderate
	12 per 1000	13 per 1000 (1 to 206)
The basis for the assumed risk* (e.g. median control group risk across studies) is provided in footnotes. The corresponding risk (and its 95% confidence interval) is based on the assumed risk in the comparison group and the relative effect of the intervention (and its 95% CI). CI: Confidence interval; RR: Risk ratio.
GRADE Working Group grades of evidence. High quality: Further research is very unlikely to change our confidence in the estimate of effect. Moderate quality: Further research is likely to have an important impact on our confidence in the estimate of effect and may change the estimate. Low quality: Further research is very likely to have an important impact on our confidence in the estimate of effect and is likely to change the estimate. Very low quality: We are very uncertain about the estimate.
^aRelatively few participants and few events and/or wide confidence intervals.

Loratadine 10 mg versus hydroxyzine 25 mg for chronic spontaneous urticaria
Patient or population: patients with chronic spontaneous urticaria Setting: research clinic Intervention: loratadine 10 mg versus hydroxyzine 25 mg
Outcomes	*Illustrative comparative risks (95% CI)**		Relative effect (95% CI)	Number of participants (studies)	Quality of the evidence (GRADE)	Comments
	Assumed risk	Corresponding risk
	Control (hydroxyzine 25 mg)	Loratadine 10 mg
Complete suppression of urticaria: short‐term duration of intervention Global assessment of symptom scores	Study population		RR 1 (0.32 to 3.1)	12 (1 study)	⊕⊕⊝⊝ Low^a,b	Favours neither intervention or control Only 1 study (Monroe 1992)
	500 per 1000	500 per 1000 (160 to 1000)
	Moderate
	500 per 1000	500 per 1000 (160 to 1000)
The basis for the assumed risk* (e.g. median control group risk across studies) is provided in footnotes. The corresponding risk (and its 95% confidence interval) is based on the assumed risk in the comparison group and the relative effect of the intervention (and its 95% CI). CI: Confidence interval; RR: Risk ratio.
GRADE Working Group grades of evidence. High quality: Further research is very unlikely to change our confidence in the estimate of effect. Moderate quality: Further research is likely to have an important impact on our confidence in the estimate of effect and may change the estimate. Low quality: Further research is very likely to have an important impact on our confidence in the estimate of effect and is likely to change the estimate. Very low quality: We are very uncertain about the estimate.
^aDesign limitation (risk of bias). ^bRelatively few participants and few events and/or wide confidence intervals.

Cetirizine 10 mg versus hydroxyzine 25 mg for chronic spontaneous urticaria
Patient or population: patients with chronic spontaneous urticaria Setting: research clinic Intervention: cetirizine 10 mg versus hydroxyzine 25 mg
Outcomes	*Illustrative comparative risks (95% CI)**		Relative effect (95% CI)	Number of participants (studies)	Quality of the evidence (GRADE)	Comments
	Assumed risk	Corresponding risk
	Control (hydroxyzine 25 mg)	Cetirizine 10 mg
Adverse events leading to withdrawal	Study population		RR 0.78 (0.25 to 2.45)	261 (2 studies)	⊕⊕⊝⊝ Low^a,b	Favours neither cetirizine nor hydroxyzine
	53 per 1000	41 per 1000 (13 to 130)
	Moderate
	54 per 1000	42 per 1000 (14 to 132)
The basis for the assumed risk* (e.g. median control group risk across studies) is provided in footnotes. The corresponding risk (and its 95% confidence interval) is based on the assumed risk in the comparison group and the relative effect of the intervention (and its 95% CI). CI: Confidence interval; RR: Risk ratio.
GRADE Working Group grades of evidence. High quality: Further research is very unlikely to change our confidence in the estimate of effect. Moderate quality: Further research is likely to have an important impact on our confidence in the estimate of effect and may change the estimate. Low quality: Further research is very likely to have an important impact on our confidence in the estimate of effect and is likely to change the estimate. Very low quality: We are very uncertain about the estimate.
^aDesign limitation (risk of bias). ^bRelatively few participants and few events and/or wide confidence intervals.

	Idioma de la Revisión Cochrane Escoja su idioma de preferencia para las revisiones Cochrane y otros contenidos. Las secciones sin una traducción aparecerán en inglés.

	Idioma de la web Escoja su idioma de preferencia para la web de la Biblioteca Cochrane.

Outcome or subgroup title	No. of studies	No. of participants	Statistical method	Effect size
1 Proportion of participants with 'good' or 'excellent' response whilst taking H1‐antihistamines Show forest plot	2	124	Risk Ratio (M‐H, Random, 95% CI)	1.86 [0.91, 3.79]

1.1 Short‐term duration of intervention (10 mg)	1	12	Risk Ratio (M‐H, Random, 95% CI)	3.0 [0.42, 21.30]
1.2 Intermediate‐term duration of intervention (10 mg)	1	112	Risk Ratio (M‐H, Random, 95% CI)	1.73 [0.81, 3.72]

Outcome or subgroup title	No. of studies	No. of participants	Statistical method	Effect size
1 Proportion of participants with complete suppression of urticaria whilst taking H1‐antihistamines Show forest plot	2	103	Risk Ratio (M‐H, Random, 95% CI)	1.05 [0.76, 1.43]

1.1 Short‐term duration of intervention	1	37	Risk Ratio (M‐H, Random, 95% CI)	1.13 [0.64, 2.01]
1.2 Intermediate‐term duration of intervention	1	66	Risk Ratio (M‐H, Random, 95% CI)	1.01 [0.69, 1.47]

Outcome or subgroup title	No. of studies	No. of participants	Statistical method	Effect size
1 Proportion of participants with complete suppression of urticaria whilst taking H1‐antihistamines Show forest plot	1		Risk Ratio (M‐H, Random, 95% CI)	Totals not selected

1.1 Intermediate‐term duration of intervention	1		Risk Ratio (M‐H, Random, 95% CI)	0.0 [0.0, 0.0]
2 Proportion of participants with good or excellent response whilst taking H1‐antihistamines Show forest plot	1		Risk Ratio (M‐H, Random, 95% CI)	Totals not selected

2.1 Intermediate‐term duration of intervention	1		Risk Ratio (M‐H, Random, 95% CI)	0.0 [0.0, 0.0]
3 Serious adverse events (i.e. serious enough to require withdrawal of treatment) Show forest plot	1		Risk Ratio (M‐H, Random, 95% CI)	Totals not selected

3.1 Intermediate‐term duration of intervention	1		Risk Ratio (M‐H, Random, 95% CI)	0.0 [0.0, 0.0]

Hydroxyzine 25 mg versus placebo for chronic spontaneous urticaria
Patient or population: patients with chronic spontaneous urticaria Setting: research clinic Intervention: hydroxyzine 25 mg versus placebo
Outcomes	*Illustrative comparative risks (95% CI)**		Relative effect (95% CI)	Number of participants (studies)	Quality of the evidence (GRADE)	Comments
	Assumed risk	Corresponding risk
	Control (placebo)	Hydroxyzine 25 mg
Adverse events leading to withdrawal: intermediate‐term duration of intervention	Study population		RR 3.64 (0.77 to 17.23)	270 (2 studies)	⊕⊕⊝⊝ Low^a,b	Favours neither intervention nor control
	14 per 1000	53 per 1000 (11 to 250)
	Moderate
	15 per 1000	55 per 1000 (12 to 258)
The basis for the assumed risk* (e.g. median control group risk across studies) is provided in footnotes. The corresponding risk (and its 95% confidence interval) is based on the assumed risk in the comparison group and the relative effect of the intervention (and its 95% CI). CI: Confidence interval; RR: Risk ratio.
GRADE Working Group grades of evidence. High quality: Further research is very unlikely to change our confidence in the estimate of effect. Moderate quality: Further research is likely to have an important impact on our confidence in the estimate of effect and may change the estimate. Low quality: Further research is very likely to have an important impact on our confidence in the estimate of effect and is likely to change the estimate. Very low quality: We are very uncertain about the estimate.
^aDesign limitation (risk of bias). ^bRelatively few participants and few events and/or wide confidence intervals.

Idioma de la Revisión Cochrane

Idioma de la web

Contenido relacionado

Revisiones y protocolos relacionados

Temas

Copiar o descargar referencia

Idioma de la Revisión Cochrane

Idioma de la web

Instituciones a las que se accedió previamente

Usuarios institucionales

Instituciones a las que se accedió previamente

Otras opciones de acceso