Efficacy and safety of switching to bilastine, an H1-antihistamine, in patients with refractory chronic spontaneous urticaria (H1-SWITCH): a multicenter, open-label, randomized, parallel-group comparative study.

Background

For treating patients with refractory chronic spontaneous urticaria (CSU) resistant to standard doses of 2

Methods

This phase IV, multicenter, open-label, randomized, parallel-group trial evaluated the efficacy and safety of switching treatment to bilastine compared to treatment with a 2-fold dose of H1AH in patients with CSU refractory to standard dose H1AH. The primary endpoint was the mean total symptom score (TSS) at Day 5-7 after the start of administration.

Results

Treatment efficacy and safety were evaluated in 128 patients (bilastine, n=64; 2-fold dose of H1AH, n=64). The mean TSS at Day 5-7 after the start of administration was smaller than the non-inferiority margin of 0.8, demonstrating non-inferiority of the bilastine switching group to the double-dose H1AH group (0.17 (95% CI -0.32, 0.67)). No difference in Japanese version of Epworth Sleepiness Scale (JESS), DLQI, and urticaria activity score over 7 consecutive days (UAS7) was observed between the two groups. There were no serious adverse events in either group. H1AH-related adverse events occurred in 5 subjects (8 cases) and 2 subjects (3 cases) in the double-dose H1AH and bilastine groups, respectively.

Conclusions

Switching treatment to bilastine demonstrated non-inferiority to a double-dose of H1AH in terms of efficacy in patients with CSU refractory to standard dose H1AH with a favorable safety profile.

Clinical trial registration

https://jrct.niph.go.jp/latest-detail/jRCTs051180105, identifier jRCTs051180105.

Informations de copyright

Copyright © 2024 Fukunaga, Kakei, Murakami, Kan, Masuda, Jinnin, Washio, Amano, Nagano, Yamamoto, Otsuka, Takahagi, Takenaka, Ishiguro, Hayama, Inomata, Nakagawa, Sugiyama and Hide.

Déclaration de conflit d'intérêts

AF reports study grants and honoraria from Novartis and Taiho, and honoraria as a speaker from Sanofi, Kyowa Kirin, Kyorin, Mitsubishi-Tanabe, and Kaken Pharmaceutical. KM reports speaking fees from Sanofi, Eli Lilly Japan K.K. Maruho Co. Ltd, Mitsubishi Tanabe Pharma Corporation, and honoraria as an investigator of Eli Lilly Japan K.K. MJ reports study grants from Sanofi. KW reports speaking fee from Sanofi, Novartis, Eli Lilly, Pfizer, Kyowa Kirin, Otsuka Pharmaceutical, Mitsubishi-Tanabe, Kyorin, and Taiho. HA declares receiving consulting fees and speaker fees from Taiho. ST reports research grant from Sanofi, Maruho, Tanabe-Mitsubishi, Eli Lilly, Torii and Taiho Pharmaceutical, honorarium from Tanabe-Mitsubishi, Taiho Pharmaceutical, CSL Behring, Kaken, Maruho, Otsuka and Abbvie, advisory fees from Sanofi, and gift of a medication for a clinical study from Takeda. NIs reports study grants from Maruho. KH reports study grants and honoraria from Kaken Pharmaceutical, Kyowa Kirin, Meiji Seika Pharma, Mitsubishi-Tanabe, and Taiho, and honoraria as a speaker from Kyorin, and honoraria as a speaker and advisory fees from Novartis and Sanofi. NIn reports study grants and honoraria from Taiho, and honoraria as a speaker from Sanofi, Novartis, Kyowa Kirin, Mitsubishi-Tanabe, and Kaken Pharmaceutical. MH has received lecture and/or consultation fees from Kaken Pharmaceutical, Kyorin Pharmaceutical, Kyowa-Kirin, Mitsubishi Tanabe Pharma, Novartis, Sanofi/Regeneron, TAIHO Pharmaceutical, and Teikoku Seiyaku. The remaining authors declare that the research was conducted in the absence of any commercial or financial relationships that could be construed as a potential conflict of interest.