Randomized placebo-controlled trial comparing desloratadine and montelukast in monotherapy and desloratadine plus montelukast in combined therapy for chronic idiopathic urticaria

BACKGROUND: H 1 -receptor antagonists are considered to be particularly effective in reducing pruritus, and they are therefore recommended as first-line treatment in patients with chronic idiopathic urticaria (CIU). Recently, antileukotriene receptors have been used in patients with CIU, either administered as monotherapy or combined with H 1 -receptor antagonists. OBJECTIVE: We compared the clinical efficacy of 5 mg of desloratadine administered once daily either as monotherapy or combined with a leukotriene antagonist, 10 mg of montelukast daily, and 10 mg of montelukast administered daily as monotherapy for the treatment of patients affected by CIU with placebo. METHODS: One hundred sixty patients aged 18 to 69 years (mean +/- SD, 43.9 +/- 13.4 years) with a history of moderate CIU were selected. A randomized, double-blind, double-dummy, placebo-controlled, parallel-group study design was used. Patients were treated with 5 mg of desloratadine once daily (n = 40), 10 mg of montelukast once daily (n = 40), 5 mg of desloratadine (n = 40) in the morning plus montelukast in the evening, or matched placebo (n = 40). Assessment of treatment efficacy was based on scores of daily cutaneous symptoms evaluated reflectively and instantaneously. RESULTS: Only the group treated with desloratadine as monotherapy or as combined therapy concluded the whole study. Twenty-seven of the 40 patients in the montelukast group and 35 of the 40 patients in the placebo group discontinued the treatment. As reflective evaluation, all groups showed significant differences compared with the placebo group in terms of total symptom score, number of hives, and size of largest hive. In addition to the pruritus, only the groups treated with desloratadine as monotherapy or combined therapy showed significant differences compared with those receiving placebo, whereas there were no differences between the montelukast and placebo groups. Finally, no differences were found between the desloratadine group and the desloratadine plus montelukast group. The instantaneous evaluation demonstrated similar results regarding the desloratadine group and the desloratadine plus montelukast group versus the placebo group, whereas there were no significant differences between the group treated with montelukast alone and the placebo group for pruritus and size of largest hive. No differences were found between the group treated with desloratadine alone and the desloratadine plus montelukast group. CONCLUSIONS: The results of this comparative study demonstrate that desloratadine is highly effective for the treatment of patients affected by CIU. In addition, the regular combined therapy of desloratadine plus montelukast does not seem to offer a substantial advantage with respect to desloratadine as monotherapy in patients affected by moderate CIU