The Experts below are selected from a list of 195 Experts worldwide ranked by ideXlab platform

J. Andrew Grant - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.

  • Comparison of the sensitivity and precision of four skin test devices
    The Journal of Allergy and Clinical Immunology, 1992
    Co-Authors: David B. Engler, Alan Dejarnatt, J. Andrew Grant
    Abstract:

    Abstract Twenty volunteers were skin tested with seven concentrations of Histamine Phosphate and a glycerosaline control to determine the relative sensitivity and precision of four skin test devices Greer Pen (GP), Greer DermaPIK (DP), Center Multi-Test (MT), and Morrow Brown needle (MB). The end points of the study were (1) wheal and flare response of each device, with a dose-response curve, (2) the time required to apply each set of eight tests, and (3) the volunteers' subjective assessment of each device. On a different day, 10 of the volunteers were tested to determine the precision of each device. Dose-response curves for half-log dilutions of Histamine Phosphate were produced with a glycerosaline control. The DP and GP induced wheal and flare responses discernible from that of the glycerosaline control at a lower concentration of Histamine Phosphate than the MB and MT. The DP took a shorter time to apply eight samples than any other device. The MB was preferred by the most volunteers, but any device tested on the upper half of the back was usually preferred over that tested on the lower half. When 5 mgml Histamine Phosphate was used, coefficients of variation for each device demonstrated that for wheals the precision of the DP, GP, and MT was similar (mean, 21.1%, 23.1%, and 24.5%, respectively). The MB was larger (mean, 59.9%). For flares, the precision of GP and DP was similar (mean, 22.0% and 23.5%, respectively), with the MT and MB larger (mean, 35.5% and 58.@%, respectively). Repeating the analysis for the MB with 10 mgml Histamine Phosphate, we found a mean coefficient of variation of 16.5% for wheals and 19.6% for flares. We conclude that the DP is equal to the GP in precision and sensitivity for wheal and flare, but it has the advantage of allowing allergy skin testing to be performed more quickly. The MT has similar precision for wheals but has less precision for flares. The MB device is more precise only with higher concentrations of Histamine Phosphate than those routinely used in the clinical practice of allergy.

  • Comparison of the sensitivity and precision of four skin test devices.
    The Journal of allergy and clinical immunology, 1992
    Co-Authors: David B. Engler, Alan Dejarnatt, J. Andrew Grant
    Abstract:

    Twenty volunteers were skin tested with seven concentrations of Histamine Phosphate and a glycerosaline control to determine the relative sensitivity and precision of four skin test devices: Greer Pen (GP), Greer DermaPIK (DP), Center Multi-Test (MT), and Morrow Brown needle (MB). The end points of the study were (1) wheal and flare response of each device, with a dose-response curve, (2) the time required to apply each set of eight tests, and (3) the volunteers' subjective assessment of each device. On a different day, 10 of the volunteers were tested to determine the precision of each device. Dose-response curves for half-log dilutions of Histamine Phosphate were produced with a glycerosaline control. The DP and GP induced wheal and flare responses discernible from that of the glycerosaline control at a lower concentration of Histamine Phosphate than the MB and MT. The DP took a shorter time to apply eight samples than any other device. The MB was preferred by the most volunteers, but any device tested on the upper half of the back was usually preferred over that tested on the lower half. When 5 mg/ml Histamine Phosphate was used, coefficients of variation for each device demonstrated that for wheals the precision of the DP, GP, and MT was similar (mean, 21.1%, 23.1%, and 24.5%, respectively). The MB was larger (mean, 59.9%). For flares, the precision of GP and DP was similar (mean, 22.0% and 23.5%, respectively), with the MT and MB larger (mean, 35.5% and 58.2%, respectively).(ABSTRACT TRUNCATED AT 250 WORDS)

K J Simons - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.

  • Levocetirizine: pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics in children age 6 to 11 years.
    The Journal of Allergy and Clinical Immunology, 2005
    Co-Authors: F E Simons, K J Simons
    Abstract:

    Background The pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics of medications may differ between children and adults, necessitating different dose regimens for different age groups. Levocetirizine, the active enantiomer of cetirizine, is used in the treatment of allergic rhinitis and chronic urticaria in Europe. Its pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics have not yet been studied prospectively in school-age children. Objectives This study was performed to investigate levocetirizine pharmacokinetic disposition and pharmacodynamics in relation to skin reactivity to Histamine in children aged 6 to 11 years. Methods Blood samples were obtained at predose baseline and at defined intervals up to and including 28 hours after a 5-mg levocetirizine dose. Concurrently, epicutaneous tests with Histamine Phosphate, 1 mg/mL, were performed. Wheals and flares were traced at 10 minutes, and the areas were measured with a computerized digitizing system. Results In children aged 8.6 ± 0.4 years (± SEM), the peak levocetirizine concentration was 450 ± 37 ng/mL, and the time at which peak concentrations occurred was 1.2 ± 0.2 hours. The terminal elimination half-life was 5.7 ± 0.2 hours, the oral clearance was 0.82 ± 0.05 mL/min/kg, and the volume of distribution was 0.4 ± 0.02 L/kg. Compared with predose areas, the wheals and flares produced by Histamine Phosphate were significantly decreased from 1 to 28 hours, inclusive ( P Conclusions Levocetirizine had an onset of action within 1 hour and provided significant peripheral antihistaminic activity for 28 hours after a single dose. Once-daily dosing may be optimal in children aged 6 to 11 years, as it is in adults.

  • The clinical pharmacology of brompheniramine in children.
    The Journal of allergy and clinical immunology, 1999
    Co-Authors: F E Simons, J R Roberts, X Gu, S Kapur, K J Simons
    Abstract:

    Brompheniramine has been widely used in the treatment of allergic rhinitis and other disorders during the past 4 decades. There are no published studies of its clinical pharmacology in children. This study was performed to test the hypothesis that brompheniramine would have a prompt onset of action and a 24-hour duration of action in children. Before brompheniramine 4 mg was ingested, and at intervals from 0.5 to 30 hours thereafter, blood samples were obtained for quantitation of plasma brompheniramine concentrations by means of HPLC. Concurrently, epicutaneous tests with Histamine Phosphate were performed; wheals and flares were traced at 10 minutes, and the areas were measured by using a computerized digitizing system. In 14 children, mean age 9.5 +/- 0.4 years (SEM), the peak brompheniramine concentration was 7.7 +/- 0.7 ng/mL, and the time at which peak concentrations occurred was 3.2 +/- 0.3 hours. The terminal elimination half-life was 12.4 +/- 1.1 hours, and the oral clearance was 20.2 +/- 2.1 mL/min/kg. Compared with predose areas, the wheals and flares produced by Histamine Phosphate 1 mg/mL were significantly decreased from 0.5 to 30 hours and from 1 to 30 hours, respectively (P <.05), with mean maximum inhibition at 12 (52% +/- 9%) and 6 hours (72% +/- 10%), respectively. In children a single dose of brompheniramine produces prompt, long-lasting peripheral H1 -blockade. Revised dosage regimens may be needed in this population.

  • The clinical pharmacology of brompheniramine in children.
    The Journal of Allergy and Clinical Immunology, 1999
    Co-Authors: F E Simons, J R Roberts, X Gu, S Kapur, K J Simons
    Abstract:

    Abstract Background: Brompheniramine has been widely used in the treatment of allergic rhinitis and other disorders during the past 4 decades. There are no published studies of its clinical pharmacology in children. Objectives: This study was performed to test the hypothesis that brompheniramine would have a prompt onset of action and a 24-hour duration of action in children. Methods: Before brompheniramine 4 mg was ingested, and at intervals from 0.5 to 30 hours thereafter, blood samples were obtained for quantitation of plasma brompheniramine concentrations by means of HPLC. Concurrently, epicutaneous tests with Histamine Phosphate were performed; wheals and flares were traced at 10 minutes, and the areas were measured by using a computerized digitizing system. Results: In 14 children, mean age 9.5 ± 0.4 years (SEM), the peak brompheniramine concentration was 7.7 ± 0.7 ng/mL, and the time at which peak concentrations occurred was 3.2 ± 0.3 hours. The terminal elimination half-life was 12.4 ± 1.1 hours, and the oral clearance was 20.2 ± 2.1 mL/min/kg. Compared with predose areas, the wheals and flares produced by Histamine Phosphate 1 mg/mL were significantly decreased from 0.5 to 30 hours and from 1 to 30 hours, respectively ( P Conclusions: In children a single dose of brompheniramine produces prompt, long-lasting peripheral H 1 -blockade. Revised dosage regimens may be needed in this population. (J Allergy Clin Immunol 1999;103:223-6.)

  • a double blind single dose crossover comparison of cetirizine terfenadine loratadine astemizole and chlorpheniramine versus placebo suppressive effects on Histamine induced wheals and flares during 24 hours in normal subjects
    The Journal of Allergy and Clinical Immunology, 1990
    Co-Authors: F Estelle, R Simons, Janice L Mcmillan, K J Simons
    Abstract:

    We objectively tested the relative antihistaminic effects of cetirizine, 10 mg; terfenadine, 120 mg; terfenadine, 60 mg; loratadine, 10 mg; astemizole, 10 mg; chlorpheniramine, 4 mg; and placebo in healthy, male volunteers, mean age 25±4 years, and mean weight, 73±9 kg. The wheal areas and flare areas produced by epicutaneous tests with Histamine Phosphate, 1 mg/ml, before ingestion of the H 1 -receptor antagonist or placebo, and afterward, at 0.3 and 0.7 hours, then hourly from 1 to 12 hours and at 24 hours, were traced at 10 minutes and measured with an IBM-PC digitizer and stereometric software. In this experimental model, the H 1 -receptor antagonists differed significantly with regard to time of onset of action, amount of suppression of the Histamine-induced wheal and flare, and duration of action. The rank order was, from most effective to least effective, cetirizine, 10 mg; terfenadine, 120 mg; terfenadine, 60 mg; loratadine, 10 mg; astemizole, 10 mg; chlorpheniramine, 4 mg; and placebo.

David B. Engler - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.

  • Comparison of the sensitivity and precision of four skin test devices
    The Journal of Allergy and Clinical Immunology, 1992
    Co-Authors: David B. Engler, Alan Dejarnatt, J. Andrew Grant
    Abstract:

    Abstract Twenty volunteers were skin tested with seven concentrations of Histamine Phosphate and a glycerosaline control to determine the relative sensitivity and precision of four skin test devices Greer Pen (GP), Greer DermaPIK (DP), Center Multi-Test (MT), and Morrow Brown needle (MB). The end points of the study were (1) wheal and flare response of each device, with a dose-response curve, (2) the time required to apply each set of eight tests, and (3) the volunteers' subjective assessment of each device. On a different day, 10 of the volunteers were tested to determine the precision of each device. Dose-response curves for half-log dilutions of Histamine Phosphate were produced with a glycerosaline control. The DP and GP induced wheal and flare responses discernible from that of the glycerosaline control at a lower concentration of Histamine Phosphate than the MB and MT. The DP took a shorter time to apply eight samples than any other device. The MB was preferred by the most volunteers, but any device tested on the upper half of the back was usually preferred over that tested on the lower half. When 5 mgml Histamine Phosphate was used, coefficients of variation for each device demonstrated that for wheals the precision of the DP, GP, and MT was similar (mean, 21.1%, 23.1%, and 24.5%, respectively). The MB was larger (mean, 59.9%). For flares, the precision of GP and DP was similar (mean, 22.0% and 23.5%, respectively), with the MT and MB larger (mean, 35.5% and 58.@%, respectively). Repeating the analysis for the MB with 10 mgml Histamine Phosphate, we found a mean coefficient of variation of 16.5% for wheals and 19.6% for flares. We conclude that the DP is equal to the GP in precision and sensitivity for wheal and flare, but it has the advantage of allowing allergy skin testing to be performed more quickly. The MT has similar precision for wheals but has less precision for flares. The MB device is more precise only with higher concentrations of Histamine Phosphate than those routinely used in the clinical practice of allergy.

  • Comparison of the sensitivity and precision of four skin test devices.
    The Journal of allergy and clinical immunology, 1992
    Co-Authors: David B. Engler, Alan Dejarnatt, J. Andrew Grant
    Abstract:

    Twenty volunteers were skin tested with seven concentrations of Histamine Phosphate and a glycerosaline control to determine the relative sensitivity and precision of four skin test devices: Greer Pen (GP), Greer DermaPIK (DP), Center Multi-Test (MT), and Morrow Brown needle (MB). The end points of the study were (1) wheal and flare response of each device, with a dose-response curve, (2) the time required to apply each set of eight tests, and (3) the volunteers' subjective assessment of each device. On a different day, 10 of the volunteers were tested to determine the precision of each device. Dose-response curves for half-log dilutions of Histamine Phosphate were produced with a glycerosaline control. The DP and GP induced wheal and flare responses discernible from that of the glycerosaline control at a lower concentration of Histamine Phosphate than the MB and MT. The DP took a shorter time to apply eight samples than any other device. The MB was preferred by the most volunteers, but any device tested on the upper half of the back was usually preferred over that tested on the lower half. When 5 mg/ml Histamine Phosphate was used, coefficients of variation for each device demonstrated that for wheals the precision of the DP, GP, and MT was similar (mean, 21.1%, 23.1%, and 24.5%, respectively). The MB was larger (mean, 59.9%). For flares, the precision of GP and DP was similar (mean, 22.0% and 23.5%, respectively), with the MT and MB larger (mean, 35.5% and 58.2%, respectively).(ABSTRACT TRUNCATED AT 250 WORDS)

Alan Dejarnatt - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.

  • Comparison of the sensitivity and precision of four skin test devices
    The Journal of Allergy and Clinical Immunology, 1992
    Co-Authors: David B. Engler, Alan Dejarnatt, J. Andrew Grant
    Abstract:

    Abstract Twenty volunteers were skin tested with seven concentrations of Histamine Phosphate and a glycerosaline control to determine the relative sensitivity and precision of four skin test devices Greer Pen (GP), Greer DermaPIK (DP), Center Multi-Test (MT), and Morrow Brown needle (MB). The end points of the study were (1) wheal and flare response of each device, with a dose-response curve, (2) the time required to apply each set of eight tests, and (3) the volunteers' subjective assessment of each device. On a different day, 10 of the volunteers were tested to determine the precision of each device. Dose-response curves for half-log dilutions of Histamine Phosphate were produced with a glycerosaline control. The DP and GP induced wheal and flare responses discernible from that of the glycerosaline control at a lower concentration of Histamine Phosphate than the MB and MT. The DP took a shorter time to apply eight samples than any other device. The MB was preferred by the most volunteers, but any device tested on the upper half of the back was usually preferred over that tested on the lower half. When 5 mgml Histamine Phosphate was used, coefficients of variation for each device demonstrated that for wheals the precision of the DP, GP, and MT was similar (mean, 21.1%, 23.1%, and 24.5%, respectively). The MB was larger (mean, 59.9%). For flares, the precision of GP and DP was similar (mean, 22.0% and 23.5%, respectively), with the MT and MB larger (mean, 35.5% and 58.@%, respectively). Repeating the analysis for the MB with 10 mgml Histamine Phosphate, we found a mean coefficient of variation of 16.5% for wheals and 19.6% for flares. We conclude that the DP is equal to the GP in precision and sensitivity for wheal and flare, but it has the advantage of allowing allergy skin testing to be performed more quickly. The MT has similar precision for wheals but has less precision for flares. The MB device is more precise only with higher concentrations of Histamine Phosphate than those routinely used in the clinical practice of allergy.

  • Comparison of the sensitivity and precision of four skin test devices.
    The Journal of allergy and clinical immunology, 1992
    Co-Authors: David B. Engler, Alan Dejarnatt, J. Andrew Grant
    Abstract:

    Twenty volunteers were skin tested with seven concentrations of Histamine Phosphate and a glycerosaline control to determine the relative sensitivity and precision of four skin test devices: Greer Pen (GP), Greer DermaPIK (DP), Center Multi-Test (MT), and Morrow Brown needle (MB). The end points of the study were (1) wheal and flare response of each device, with a dose-response curve, (2) the time required to apply each set of eight tests, and (3) the volunteers' subjective assessment of each device. On a different day, 10 of the volunteers were tested to determine the precision of each device. Dose-response curves for half-log dilutions of Histamine Phosphate were produced with a glycerosaline control. The DP and GP induced wheal and flare responses discernible from that of the glycerosaline control at a lower concentration of Histamine Phosphate than the MB and MT. The DP took a shorter time to apply eight samples than any other device. The MB was preferred by the most volunteers, but any device tested on the upper half of the back was usually preferred over that tested on the lower half. When 5 mg/ml Histamine Phosphate was used, coefficients of variation for each device demonstrated that for wheals the precision of the DP, GP, and MT was similar (mean, 21.1%, 23.1%, and 24.5%, respectively). The MB was larger (mean, 59.9%). For flares, the precision of GP and DP was similar (mean, 22.0% and 23.5%, respectively), with the MT and MB larger (mean, 35.5% and 58.2%, respectively).(ABSTRACT TRUNCATED AT 250 WORDS)

F Estelle - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.