Olopatadine hydrochloride ophthalmic solution for the treatment of allergic conjunctivitis

References

• Wallace DV, Dykewicz MS, Bernstein DI, et al. The diagnosis and management of rhinitis: an update practice parameter. J Allergy Clin Immunol. 2008;122:S1–S84.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Canonica GW. Treating asthma as an inflammatory disease. Chest. 2006;130:21S–28S.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Meltzer EO, Bukstein DA. The economic impact of allergic rhinitis and current guidelines for treatment. Ann Allergy Asthma Immunol. 2011;106:S12–S16.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lamb CE, Ratner PH, Johnson CE, et al. Economic impact of workplace productivity losses due to allergic rhinitis compared with select medical conditions in the United States from an employer perspective. Curr Med Res Opin. 2006;22:1203–1210.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Roland PS, Ryan MW, Wall GM. Olopatadine nasal spray for the treatment of seasonal allergic rhinitis in patients aged 6 years and older. Expert Opin Pharmacother. 2010;11:1559–1567.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Patanase nasal spray prescribing information. Alcon, 2017 [cited 2017 Mar 14]. Available from: http://www.accessdata.fda.gov/drugsatfda_docs/label/2012/021861s009lbl.pdf
   Google Scholar
• Yanni JM, Stephens DJ, Miller ST, et al. The in vitro and vivo ocular pharmacology of olopatadine (al-4943a), an effective anti-allergic/antihistaminic agent. J Ocul Pharmacol Ther. 196;12:389–400.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Meltzer EO, Hampel FC, Ratner PH, et al. Safety and efficacy of olopatadine hydrochloride nasal spray for the treatment of seasonal allergic rhinitis. Ann Allergy Asthma Immunol. 2005;95:600–606.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ratner PH, Hampel FC, Amar NJ, et al. Safety and efficacy of olopatadine hydrochloride nasal spray for the treatment of seasonal allergic rhinitis to mountain cedar. Ann Allergy Asthma Immunol. 2005;95:474–479.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Tokildsen G, Narvekar A, Bergmann M. Efficacy of olopatadine hydrochloride 0.77% in patients with allergic conjunctivitis using a conjunctival allergen-challenge model. Clin Opthalmol. 2015;9:1703–1713.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• McLaurin E, Narvekar A, Gomes P, et al. Phase 3 randomized double-masked study of efficacy and safety of once-daily 0.77% olopatadine hydrochloride ophthalmic solution in subjects with allergic conjunctivitis using the conjunctival allergen challenge model. Cornea. 2015;34:1245–1251.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Chu N-N, Chen W-L, Xu H-R, et al. Pharmacokinetics of orally administered single- and multiple-dose olopatadine in healthy Chinese subjects: an open-label study. Clin Drug Investig. 2009;29:451–457.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ohmori K, Hayashi K, Kaise T, et al. Pharmacological, pharmacokinetic and clinical properties of olopatadine hydrochloride, a new antiallergic drug. Jpn J Pharmacol. 2002;88:379–397.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Patanol prescribing information: 2017. [cited 2017 Mar 14]. Available from: http://www.accessdata.fda.gov/drugsatfda_docs/label/2003/20688slr016_patanol_lbl.pdf
   Google Scholar
• Kaliner MA, Oppenheimer J, Farrar JR. Comprehensive review of olopatadine: the molecule and its clinical entities. Allergy Asthma Proc. 2010;31:112–119.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Yamamoto H, Yamada T, Kubo S, et al. Efficacy of oral olopatadine hydrochloride for the treatment of seasonal allergic rhinitis: a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled study. Allergy Asthma Proc. 2010;31:296–303.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Okubo K, Okuda M, Magara H, et al. Olopatadine hydrochloride in children: efficacy and safety for perennial allergic rhinitis. Curr Med Res Opin. 2010;26:1657–1665.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Fairchild CJ, Meltzer EO, Roland PS, et al. Comprehensive report of the efficacy, safety, quality of life, and work impact of olopatadine 0.6% and olopatadine 0.4% treatment in patients with seasonal allergic rhinitis. Allergy Asthma Proc. 2007;28:716–723.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Berger WE, Ratner PH, Casale TB, et al. Safety and efficacy of olopatadine hydrochloride nasal spray 0.6% in pediatric subjects with allergic rhinitis. Allergy Asthma Proc. 2009;30:612–623.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Abelson MB, Chambers WA, Smith LM. Conjunctival allergen challenge. A clinical approach to studying allergic conjunctivitis. Arch Ophtalmol. 1990;108:84–88.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Abelson MB, Spitalny L. Combined analysis of two studies using the conjunctival allergen challenge model to evaluate olopatadine hydrochloride, a new ophthalmic antiallergic agent with dual activity.. Am J Ophthalmol. 1998;125:797–804.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Uchio E. Treatment of allergic conjunctivitis with olopatadine hydrochloride eye drops. Clin Ophthalmol. 2008;2:525–531.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Spangler DL, Bensch G, Berdy GJ. Evaluation of the efficacy of olopatadine hydrochloride 0.1% ophthalmic solution and azelastine hydrochloride 0.05% ophthalmic solution in the conjunctival allergen challenge model. Clin Ther. 2001;23:1272–1280.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Fukushima A, Ebihara N. Efficacy of olopatadine versus epinastine for treating allergic conjunctivitis caused by Japanese cedar pollen: a double-blind randomized controlled trial. Adv Ther. 2014;31:1045–1058.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lanier BQ, Finegold I, D’Arienzo P, et al. Clinical efficacy of olopatadine vs epinastine ophthalmic solution in the conjunctival allergen challenge model. Curr Med Res Opin. 2004;20:1227–1233.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Abelson MB, Greiner JV. Comparative efficacy of olopatadine 0.1% ophthalmic solution versus levocabastine 0.05% ophthalmic suspension using the conjunctival allergen challenge model. Curr Med Res Opin. 2004;20:1953–1958.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Berdy GJ, Stoppel JO, Epstein AB. Comparison of the clinical efficacy and tolerability of olopatadine hydrochloride 0.1% ophthalmic solution and loteprednol etabonate 0.2% ophthalmic suspension in the conjunctival allergen challenge model. Clin Ther. 2002;24:918–929.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Butrus S, Greiner JV, Discepola M, et al. Comparison of the clinical efficacy and comfort of olopatadine hydrochloride 0.1% ophthalmic solution and nedocromil sodium 2% ophthalmic solution in the human conjunctival allergen challenge model. Clin Ther. 2000;22:1462–1472.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Berdy GJ, Spangler DL, Bensch G, et al. A comparison of the relative efficacy and clinical performance of olopatadine hydrochloride 0.1% ophthalmic solution and ketotifen fumarate 0.025% solution in the conjunctival antigen allergen model. Clin Ther. 2000;22:826–833.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Avunduk AM, Tekelioglu Y, Turk A, et al. Comparison of the effects of ketotifen fumarate 0.025% and olopatadine HCI 0.1% ophthalmic solutions in seasonal allergic conjunctivitis: a 30-day, randomized, double-masked, artificial tear substitute-controlled trial. Clin Ther. 2005;27:1392–1402.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Varguez-Rodriguez ME, Hernandez-Lopez A, Gomez-Davila Rde L. Comparison of olopatadine and ketotifen in the treatment of allergic conjunctivitis. Rev Med Inst Mex Seguro Soc. 2009;47:399–404.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Castillo M, Scott NW, Mustafa MZ, et al. Topical antihistamines and mast cell stabilisers for treating seasonal and perennial allergic conjunctivitis. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2015;1:6.
   Google Scholar
• Katelaris CH, Ciprandi G, Missotten L, et al. A comparison of the efficacy and tolerability of olopatadine hydrochloride 0.1% ophthalmic solution and cromolyn sodium 2% ophthalmic solution in seasonal allergic conjunctivitis. Clin Ther. 2002;24:1561–1575.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ono SJ, Lane K. Comparison of effects of alcaftadine and olopatadine on conjunctival epithelium and eosinophil recruitment in a murine model of allergic conjunctivitis. Drug Des Devel Ther. 2011;5:77–84.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Greiner JV, Edwards-Swanson K, Ingerman A. Evaluation of alcalfatadine 0.25% ophthalmic solution in acute allergic conjunctivitis at 15 minutes and 16 hours after instillation versus placebo and olopatadine 0.1%. Clin Ophtalmol. 2011;5:87–93.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Abelson MB, Gomes PJ, Vogelson CT, et al. Clinical efficacy of olopatadine hydrochloride ophthalmic solution 0.2% compared with placebo in patients with allergic conjunctivitis or rhinoconjunctivitis: A randomized, double-masked environmental study. Clin Ther. 2004;26:1237–1248.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Vogelson CT, Abelson MB, Pasquine T, et al. Preclinical and clinical antiallergic effect of olopatadine 0.2% solution 24 hours after topical ocular administration. Allergy Asthma Proc. 2004;25:69–75.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Scoper SV, Berdy GJ, Lichtenstein SJ, et al. Perception and quality of life associated with the use of olopatadine 0.2% (Pataday) in patients with active allergic conjunctivitis. Adv Ther. 2007;24:1221–1232.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Abelson MB, Spangler DL, Epstein AB, et al. Efficacy of once-daily olopatadine 0.2% ophthalmic solution compared to twice-daily olopatadine 0.1% ophthalmic solution for the treatment of ocular itching induced by conjunctival allergen challenge. Curr Eye Res. 2007;32:1017–1022.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mah FS, Rosenwasser LJ, Townsend WD, et al. Efficacy and comfort of olopatadine 0.2% versus epinastine 0.05% ophthalmic solution for treating itching and redness induced by conjunctival allergen challenge. Curr Med Res Opin. 2007;23:1445–1452.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ackerman S, D’Ambrosio F Jr, Greiner JV, et al. A multicenter evaluation of the efficacy and duration of action of alcaftadine 0.025% and olopatadine 0.2% in the conjunctival allergen challenge model. J Asthma Allergy. 2013;6:43–52.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• McLaurin EB, Marsico NP, Ackerman SL, et al. Ocular itch relief with alcaftadine 0.25% versus olopatadine 0.2% in allergic rhinitis: pooled analysis of two multicenter randomized clinical trials. Adv Ther. 2014;31:1059–1071.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Pazeo prescribing information: 2017. [cited 2017 Mar 14]. Available from: http://www.accessdata.fda.gov/drugsatfda_docs/label/2015/206276s000lbl.pdf
   Google Scholar
• Abelson MB, Gomes PJ, Vogelson CT, et al. Effects of a new formulation of olopatadine ophthalmic solution on nasal relative to placebo in two studies involving subjects with allergic conjunctivitis or rhinoconjunctivitis. Curr Med Res Opin. 2005;21:683–691.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bernstein DI, Levy AL, Hampel FC, et al. Treatment with intranasal fluticasone propionate significantly improves ocular symptoms in patients with season allergic rhinitis. Clin Exp Allergy. 2004;34:952–957.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rosenwasser LJ, Mahr T, Abelson MB, et al. A comparison of olopatadine 0.2% ophthalmic solution versus fluticasone furoate nasal spray for the treatment of allergic conjunctivitis. Allergy Asthma Proc. 2008;29:644–653.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Meltzer EO, Garadi R, Laforce C, et al. Comparative study of sensory attributes of two antihistamine nasal sprays: olopatadine 0.6% and azelastine 0.1%. Allergy Asthma Proc. 2008;29:659–668.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Pataday prescribing information: 2017. [cited 2017 Mar 14]. Available from: http://www.accessdata.fda.gov/drugsatfda_docs/nda/2004/021545s000_PRNTLBL.pdf
   Google Scholar
• Dassanayake NL, Carey TC, Owen GR. A laboratory model to determine the uptake and release of olopatadine by soft contact lenses. Acta Ophthalmol Scand Suppl. 2000;78:16–17.
   Google Scholar
• Brodsky M, Berger WE, Butrus S, et al. Evaluation of comfort using olopatadine hydrochloride 0.1% ophthalmic solution in the treatment of allergic conjunctivitis in contact lens wearer compared to placebo using the conjunctival allergen-challenge model. Eye Contact Lens. 2003;29:113–116.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Ratner PH, Hampel F, Van Bavel J, et al. Combination therapy with azelastine hydrochloride nasal spray and fluticasone propionate nasal spray in the treatment of patients with seasonal allergic rhinitis. Ann Allergy Asthma Immunol. 2008;100:74–81.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hankin CS, Cox L, Lang D, et al. Medical costs and adherence in patients receiving aqueous versus pressurized aerosol formulations of intranasal corticosteroids. Allergy Asthma Proc. 2012;33:258–264.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hampel FC, Ratner PH, Van Bavel J, et al. Double-blind, placebo-controlled study of azelastine and fluticasone in a single nasal spray delivery device. Ann Allergy Asthma Immunol. 2010;105:168–173.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar