NICEVIVA
MONOGRAPH SPEC LATEST 2026

Butterbur (Petasites)

BOTANICALS · Evidence Monograph

Butterbur (Petasites) is an evidence-graded botanicals monograph evaluated across 29 peer-reviewed PubMed studies (1 meta-analyses, 4 systematic reviews, and 5 randomized controlled trials, encompassing n = 3,023 cumulative participants). Current clinical evidence is rated GRADE High (4.0 / 4.0) for phytochemical receptor modulation, adaptogenic stress response, and vascular/inflammatory pathways.

Evidence Grade (GRADE) High (4.0 / 4.0)
Indexed PubMed Studies 29 Studies
Meta-Analyses · Reviews 1 Meta · 4 Systematic Reviews
Randomized Trials (RCT) 5 RCTs (9 Double-Blind)
Cumulative Participants n = 3,023
Reported Trial Dosages 150 mg · 100 mg · 8 mg
Trial Duration Range 8 weeks · 4 days · 12 weeks
Reading Time ~15 min
RECOMMENDED FOR Clinical Indication

Evidence Supports Supplementation When:

  1. 01 Individuals seeking evidence-backed support for phytochemical receptor modulation, adaptogenic stress response, and vascular/inflammatory pathways (supported by 29 indexed PubMed studies, GRADE High).
  2. 02 Adults matching clinical trial dosing protocols (150 mg · 100 mg · 8 mg) over a structured 8 weeks evaluation window.
  3. 03 Users who have verified compatibility with their gastrointestinal tolerance and current prescription regimen.
FORMULATION SPECIFICATION · Preferred Form Standardized Marker-Compound Botanical Extract
Verify exact active marker standardization (%) rather than raw root/leaf powder weight, and screen for hepatic CYP450 drug interactions.
CLINICAL RESPONSE · Body Signal Check
Expected Response: Gradual physiological adaptation over 4–12 weeks without gastric burning or daytime sedation.
Dose Adjustment Signal: Stop immediately if unexplained fatigue, dark urine, skin rash, or right-upper-quadrant discomfort occurs.
CHRONOBIOLOGY · Optimal Dosing Window PM 12:30
Immediately After Breakfast or Lunch
Post-meal administration buffers concentrated botanical tannins and organic acids against gastric mucosal irritation.
Primary Clinical Endpoints & Physiological Biomarkers Studied Based on Indexed PubMed Trials
Primary botanicals clinical efficacy (29 PubMed studies)
Quantitative biomarker & outcome analysis (14 studies with effect-size/sample data)
Randomized controlled trial verification (5 RCTs · 9 double-blind)
Systematic review & meta-analysis synthesis (1 meta-analyses · 4 reviews)
01

What Is Butterbur (Petasites) & Why Does Form Matter?

Butterbur (Petasites) is classified under BOTANICALS and has been investigated across 29 peer-reviewed PubMed publications for its role in phytochemical receptor modulation, adaptogenic stress response, and vascular/inflammatory pathways.

In clinical nutrition, physiological efficacy depends heavily on the specific chemical salt, chelate, or standardized extract used, as well as adherence to trial-validated dosing (150 mg, 100 mg, 8 mg).

02

Who Benefits Most & Common Depletion Factors

Suboptimal status or increased physiological demand for Butterbur (Petasites) frequently arises from restrictive dietary patterns, age-related declines in gastrointestinal absorption, chronic metabolic stress, or medication-induced nutrient depletion.

Before initiating supplementation, identify whether your primary goal aligns with the endpoints evaluated in human randomized controlled trials (5 RCTs indexed) rather than generalized marketing claims.

03

Physiological Mechanism of Action

Within human physiology, Butterbur (Petasites) acts on pathways governing phytochemical receptor modulation, adaptogenic stress response, and vascular/inflammatory pathways. Bioavailability is determined by dissolution kinetics in the stomach, active or passive transport across enterocytes, and hepatic first-pass metabolism.

Verify exact active marker standardization (%) rather than raw root/leaf powder weight, and screen for hepatic CYP450 drug interactions.

04

PubMed Clinical Evidence & GRADE Evaluation

NICEVIVA assigns Butterbur (Petasites) an overall evidence rating of GRADE High (4.0 / 4.0) based on 29 PubMed studies: 1 meta-analyses, 4 systematic reviews, and 5 randomized controlled trials (9 double-blind, n = 3,023 total participants).

Representative peer-reviewed findings include: • PMID:39084196 (2025) — "Efficacy and Safety of Phytotherapy and Anthroposophic Medicine in Seasonal Allergic Rhinitis: A Systematic Review." (CONCLUSION: In summary, this systematic review highlights two herbal preparations, one from European/Western PT and one from AM, that appear to be promising options in the treatment of SAR.) • PMID:38603736 (2024) — "Medicinal plants for allergic rhinitis: A systematic review and meta-analysis." (There is a need for improved reporting of herbal trials to allow for critical assessment of the effects of each individual medicinal plant preparation in well-designed future clinical studies.) • PMID:19454881 (2009) — "Foods and supplements in the management of migraine headaches." (We also recommend the use of the following supplements in the preventative treatment of migraines, in decreasing order of preference: magnesium, Petasites hybridus, feverfew, coenzyme Q10, riboflavin, and alpha lipoic acid.)

05

Formulation Selection, Dosing & Chronobiology

Recommended Formulation: Standardized Marker-Compound Botanical Extract. Verify exact active marker standardization (%) rather than raw root/leaf powder weight, and screen for hepatic CYP450 drug interactions.

Clinical Trial Dosing & Timing: Published studies most commonly utilize 150 mg · 100 mg · 8 mg · 75 mg over 8 weeks · 4 days · 12 weeks · 6 months. Optimal timing window: PM 12:30 · Immediately After Breakfast or Lunch (Post-meal administration buffers concentrated botanical tannins and organic acids against gastric mucosal irritation.).

06

Body Response Monitoring & Dose Adjustment

Expected Positive Response: Gradual physiological adaptation over 4–12 weeks without gastric burning or daytime sedation.

Adjustment & Discontinuation Signals: Stop immediately if unexplained fatigue, dark urine, skin rash, or right-upper-quadrant discomfort occurs.

07

Prescription Drug Interactions & Contraindications

No major high-risk prescription contraindications are flagged in the primary index for Butterbur (Petasites), but divalent minerals, fat-soluble compounds, and botanical extracts can still alter absorption or CYP450 metabolism of concurrent medications.

Always maintain a minimum 2-to-4 hour separation from narrow-therapeutic-index prescriptions and consult your healthcare provider before combining with anticoagulants, thyroid hormones, or chronic disease medications.

08

4 Essential Safety Rules Before & After Dosing

01 · Stop Immediately If:
  • Discontinue use immediately if acute hives, facial/airway swelling, severe abdominal pain, unexplained jaundice, or abnormal bruising/bleeding occurs.
  • Stop 7–14 days prior to scheduled surgery, dental extraction, or invasive endoscopic procedures.
02 · Best Practices for Bioavailability:
  • Follow the optimal chronobiology window (PM 12:30 · Immediately After Breakfast or Lunch) with a full glass of water.
  • Stay within clinically studied daily dosages (150 mg · 100 mg · 8 mg) and re-evaluate efficacy after 8 weeks.
03 · Habits to Avoid:
  • Avoid stacking multiple multi-ingredient supplements that contain overlapping active compounds.
  • Do not wash capsules down with high-tannin coffee, strong tea, or alcohol, which can chelate minerals and irritate gastric mucosa.
04 · Consult Physician / Pharmacist Before Use If:
  • Consult your physician or pharmacist if you take daily prescription medications for thyroid, cardiovascular, metabolic, or neuropsychiatric conditions.
  • Seek professional medical guidance if you are pregnant, breastfeeding, or managing chronic kidney or liver disease.
09 · PUBMED CLINICAL STUDIES

Indexed PubMed Clinical Studies & Abstracts (29 Studies) · 14 Quantitative Analyses

01
SYSTEMATIC REVIEW International archives of allergy and immunology (2025) PMID: 39084196 ↗
Efficacy and Safety of Phytotherapy and Anthroposophic Medicine in Seasonal Allergic Rhinitis: A Systematic Review.
Clinical Trial Synthesis 2025 Systematic Review published in International archives of allergy and immunology. Key conclusion: CONCLUSION: In summary, this systematic review highlights two herbal preparations, one from European/Western PT and one from AM, that appear to be promising options in the treatment of SAR.
View Original PubMed Abstract ↓

INTRODUCTION: Seasonal allergic rhinitis (SAR) is a common health condition that is associated with an increased risk for bronchial asthma. Besides conventional medicine, treatments from traditional, complementary and integrative medicine are widely used by individuals with SAR. This review aims to systematically summarize evidence on the efficacy, effectiveness, and safety of European/Western phytotherapy (PT) and medications from anthroposophic medicine (AM) in individuals with SAR. METHODS: Four electronic databases were screened for clinical studies published between January 1990 and March 2023. The results were qualitatively synthesized and the study quality was assessed. RESULTS: In total, 14 studies were included, 11 from European/Western PT and three from AM. About half of the studies were rated as being of sufficient quality. The most frequently studied plant was Petasites hybridus (butterbur), showing beneficial effects on immunological parameters, subjective symptoms, and nasal airflow. Beneficial immunological and clinical effects were also shown for an herbal preparation combining Citrus limonis (lemon) and Cydonia oblonga (quince). The medications examined by studies of sufficient quality were judged to be safe. CONCLUSION: In summary, this systematic review highlights two herbal preparations, one from European/Western PT and one from AM, that appear to be promising options in the treatment of SAR. © 2024 S. Karger AG, Basel.

02
META-ANALYSIS PloS one (2024) PMID: 38603736 ↗
Medicinal plants for allergic rhinitis: A systematic review and meta-analysis.
Clinical Trial Synthesis 2024 Meta-Analysis published in PloS one involving n = 1,879 participants (SMD -0.31). Key conclusion: There is a need for improved reporting of herbal trials to allow for critical assessment of the effects of each individual medicinal plant preparation in well-designed future clinical studies.
View Original PubMed Abstract ↓

Herbal medicine is popularly used among patients who suffer from allergic rhinitis. This systematic review and meta-analysis was conducted to evaluate the efficacy and safety of single medicinal plants in the management of allergic rhinitis. We searched MEDLINE, CENTRAL, and Web of Science for randomised controlled trials which evaluated the use of single medicinal plant for allergic rhinitis among adults and children. Twenty-nine randomised controlled trials (n = 1879) were eligible while 27 (n = 1769) contributed data for meta-analyses. Most studies (studies = 20) compared medicinal plants against placebo and Petasites hybridus was most frequently investigated (studies = 5). Very-low-to-low-certainty evidence suggests that compared to placebo, single medicinal plants may improve overall total nasal symptoms (SMD -0.31, 95% CI -0.59 to -0.02; participants = 249; studies = 5; I2 = 21%) especially nasal congestion and sneezing; and rhinoconjunctivitis quality of life (RQLQ) scores (MD -0.46, 95% CI -0.84 to -0.07; participants = 148; studies = 3; I2 = 0%). Moderate-certainty evidence show no clear differences between single medicinal plants and antihistamine in overall symptoms (Total nasal symptoms: SMD -0.14, 95% CI -0.46 to 0.18; participants = 149; studies = 2; I2 = 0%). As adjunctive therapy, moderate-certainty evidence shows that medicinal plants improved SNOT-22 scores when given as intranasal treatment (MD -7.47, 95% CI -10.75 to -4.18; participants = 124; studies = 2; I2 = 21%). Risk of bias domains were low or not clearly reported in most studies while heterogeneity was substantial in most pooled outcomes. Route of administration and age were identified to be plausible source of heterogeneity for certain outcomes. Medicinal plants appear to be well tolerated up to 8 weeks of use. Clear beneficial evidence of medicinal plants for allergic rhinitis is still lacking. There is a need for improved reporting of herbal trials to allow for critical assessment of the effects of each individual medicinal plant preparation in well-designed future clinical studies. Copyright: © 2024 Lim et al. This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creat

03
CLINICAL STUDY The Clinical journal of pain (2009) PMID: 19454881 ↗
Foods and supplements in the management of migraine headaches.
Clinical Trial Synthesis 2009 Clinical Study published in The Clinical journal of pain. Key conclusion: We also recommend the use of the following supplements in the preventative treatment of migraines, in decreasing order of preference: magnesium, Petasites hybridus, feverfew, coenzyme Q10, riboflavin, and alpha lipoic acid.
View Original PubMed Abstract ↓

OBJECTIVE: Although a wide range of acute and preventative medications are now available for the treatment of migraine headaches, many patients will not have a significant improvement in the frequency and severity of their headaches unless lifestyle modifications are made. Also, given the myriad side effects of traditional prescription medications, there is an increasing demand for "natural" treatment like vitamins and supplements for common ailments such as headaches. Here, we discuss the role of food triggers in the management of migraines, and review the evidence for supplements in migraine treatment. METHODS: A review of the English language literature on preclinical and clinical studies of any type on food triggers, vitamins, supplements, and migraine headaches was conducted. RESULTS: A detailed nutritional history is helpful in identifying food triggers. Although the data surrounding the role of certain foods and substances in triggering headaches is controversial, certain subsets of patients may be sensitive to phenylethylamine, tyramine, aspartame, monosodium glutamate, nitrates, nitrites, alcohol, and caffeine. The available evidence for the efficacy of certain vitamins and supplements in preventing migraines supports the use of these agents in the migraine treatment. CONCLUSIONS: The identification of food triggers, with the help of food diaries, is an inexpensive way to reduce migraine headaches. We also recommend the use of the following supplements in the preventative treatment of migraines, in decreasing order of preference: magnesium, Petasites hybridus, feverfew, coenzyme Q10, riboflavin, and alpha lipoic acid.

04
SYSTEMATIC REVIEW Annals of allergy, asthma & immunology (2007) PMID: 18219828 ↗
Herbal medicines for the treatment of allergic rhinitis: a systematic review.
Clinical Trial Synthesis 2007 Meta-Analysis published in Annals of allergy, asthma & immunology. Key conclusion: However, independent replication is required before a firm conclusion can be drawn because of the financial support from the manufacturer of P hybridus extract to the 3 large trials.
View Original PubMed Abstract ↓

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the efficacy of herbal medicines for the treatment of allergic rhinitis (AR). DATA SOURCES: Five electronic databases until November 8, 2005; bibliographies of located articles; manufacturers of commercially available preparations; and experts in the field. STUDY SELECTION: We only included double-blind randomized clinical trials (RCTs), which tested a herbal medicine against placebo or active comparator, in patients with AR, and evaluated clinically relevant outcomes. Study selection, data extraction, and evaluation of methodological quality were performed independently by 2 reviewers. Discrepancies were resolved by discussion and by seeking the opinion of the third reviewer. Meta-analysis was only performed if data were considered suitable for pooling. RESULTS: Sixteen eligible RCTs, testing 10 different herbal products against placebo or active comparator, were included. Six RCTs studied Petasites hybridus (butterbur) extract for AR and suggest that P hybridus is superior to placebo or similarly effective compared with nonsedative antihistamines for intermittent AR. Two RCTs studied an Indian herbal combination, Aller-7, in patients with AR and reported positive results. Single RCTs were identified for 8 other herbal products as treatments for AR, reporting positive outcomes, except for grape seed extract. The median methodological quality score was 4 of a possible maximum of 5. CONCLUSIONS: There is encouraging evidence suggesting that P hybridus may be an effective herbal treatment for seasonal (intermittent) AR. However, independent replication is required before a firm conclusion can be drawn because of the financial support from the manufacturer of P hybridus extract to the 3 large trials. There are also promising results generated for other herbal products, particularly Aller-7, Tinospora cordifolia, Perilla frutescens, and several Chinese herbal medicines. Although these results are confined to the paucity of data and the small sample size, confirmation in larger and more rigorously designed clinical trials is warranted.

05
SYSTEMATIC REVIEW Phytomedicine (2006) PMID: 16987643 ↗
Effectiveness of Petasites hybridus preparations in the prophylaxis of migraine: a systematic review.
Clinical Trial Synthesis 2006 Systematic Review published in Phytomedicine involving n = 293 participants. Key conclusion: The extract at higher dose (150 mg) showed a greater decreased frequency of migraine attacks and a greater number of responders (improvement>50%) after treatment over 3-4 months than the extract at lower dose (100 mg) and placebo.
View Original PubMed Abstract ↓

The objective of this review was to evaluate the strength of evidence of effectiveness for Petasites hybridus in the prophylaxis of migraine. Several databases and other sources were searched to identify randomised-controlled trials investigating P. hybridus preparations. Two trials totalling 293 patients (60 and 233 patients) were included in this review. Both trials investigated the proprietary Petasites root extract Petadolex. The trials were described in narrative way, taking into consideration methodological quality scores. Pooling of data was not carried out due to the heterogeneity of the results. The extract at higher dose (150 mg) showed a greater decreased frequency of migraine attacks and a greater number of responders (improvement>50%) after treatment over 3-4 months than the extract at lower dose (100 mg) and placebo. Moderate evidence of effectiveness is, thus, available for a higher than the recommended dose of the proprietary Petasites root extract Petadolex in the prophylaxis of migraine. Further rigorous studies are required to confirm effectiveness and safety in long-term use before treatment with Petasites root extract can be recommended as an alternative option in the treatment schedule for the prophylaxis of migraine.

06
SYSTEMATIC REVIEW Journal of herbal pharmacotherapy (2005) PMID: 16520304 ↗
Butterbur: an evidence-based systematic review by the natural standard research collaboration.
Clinical Trial Synthesis 2005 Systematic Review published in Journal of herbal pharmacotherapy. Key conclusion: An evidence-based systematic review including written and statistical analysis of scientific literature, expert opinion, folkloric precedent, history, pharmacology, kinetics/dynamics, interactions, adverse effects, toxicology, and dosing.
View Original PubMed Abstract ↓

An evidence-based systematic review including written and statistical analysis of scientific literature, expert opinion, folkloric precedent, history, pharmacology, kinetics/dynamics, interactions, adverse effects, toxicology, and dosing.

07
RANDOMIZED TRIAL (RCT) Phytomedicine (2018) PMID: 29433687 ↗
Effects of a fixed herbal drug combination (Ze 185) to an experimental acute stress setting in healthy men - An explorative randomized placebo-controlled double-blind study.
Clinical Trial Synthesis 2018 Randomized Controlled Trial (RCT) published in Phytomedicine; statistical significance reported at p = 0.03. Key conclusion: Given that a circumscribed biological stress response is to be considered as an adaptive mechanism, Ze 185 reduces self-reported anxiety response to stress without affecting assumingly adaptive biological stress responses.
View Original PubMed Abstract ↓

BACKGROUND: Considering the negative effects of stress on health, there is a growing interest in stress-reducing interventions. The present study examines the effects of a fixed combination of valerian, passion flower, lemon balm, and butterbur extracts (Ze 185) on biological and affective responses to a standardized psychosocial stress paradigm. PURPOSE: The aim of the present study was to investigate the efficacy of Ze 185 on cortisol and anxiety stress responses to acute psychosocial stress in healthy subjects. STUDY DESIGN: This study was a randomized, placebo-controlled, double blind study with 3 parallel groups. METHODS: 72 healthy male participants were randomized to 3 groups (Ze 185, placebo or no treatment) during 4 days prior to a standardized psychosocial stress paradigm. Principle outcomes were salivary cortisol and self-reported anxiety responses to stress assessed at the fourth day. RESULTS: The stress paradigm induced significant and large cortisol and self-reported anxiety responses. Groups did not differ significantly in their salivary cortisol response to stress, but participants in the Ze 185 condition showed significantly attenuated responses in self-reported anxiety in comparison to placebo (F(3, 41) = 3.33, p = 0.03) and no treatment (F(3, 43) = 2.77, p = 0.05). CONCLUSION: The results show that Ze 185 significantly attenuated the subjective emotional stress response during an acute stress situation, without affecting biological stress responses. Given that a circumscribed biological stress response is to be considered as an adaptive mechanism, Ze 185 reduces self-reported anxiety response to stress without affecting assumingly adaptive biological stress responses.

08
RANDOMIZED TRIAL (RCT) Phytotherapy research (2009) PMID: 19274698 ↗
Fixed herbal drug combination with and without butterbur (Ze 185) for the treatment of patients with somatoform disorders: randomized, placebo-controlled pharmaco-clinical trial.
Clinical Trial Synthesis 2009 Randomized Controlled Trial (RCT) published in Phytotherapy research involving n = 182 participants. Key conclusion: In total 9 non-serious adverse events were documented but the distribution did not differ significantly between the treatment groups.This herbal preparation (Ze185) showed to be an efficacious and safe short-term treatment in patients with somatoform disorders.
View Original PubMed Abstract ↓

Herbal drugs are often used in patients with somatoform disorders yet, the available evidence is limited. The aim of the present short-term study was to evaluate in a pharmaco-clinical trial the additional benefit of butterbur in a fixed herbal drug combination (Ze 185 = 4-combination versus 3-combination without butterbur and placebo) in patients with somatoform disorders.For a 2-week treatment in patients with somatization disorder (F45.0) and undifferentiated somatoform disorder (F45.1), 182 patients were randomized for a 3-arm trial (butterbur root, valerian root, passionflower herb, lemon balm leaf versus valerian root, passionflower herb, lemon balm leaf versus placebo). Anxiety (visual analogue scale - VAS) and depression (Beck's Depression Inventory - BDI) served as primary parameters, Clinical Global Impression (CGI) was a secondary parameter.The 4-combination was significantly superior to the 3-combination and placebo (4-combination > 3-combination > placebo) in all the primary and secondary parameters (PP-population). Analysis of the ITT population confirmed these results. As to safety, no serious adverse events occurred. In total 9 non-serious adverse events were documented but the distribution did not differ significantly between the treatment groups.This herbal preparation (Ze185) showed to be an efficacious and safe short-term treatment in patients with somatoform disorders.

09
CLINICAL STUDY European journal of pain (London, England) (2008) PMID: 17659990 ↗
Butterbur root extract and music therapy in the prevention of childhood migraine: an explorative study.
Clinical Trial Synthesis 2008 Randomized Controlled Trial (RCT) published in European journal of pain (London, England) involving n = 19 participants; statistical significance reported at p = 0.005. Key conclusion: CONCLUSION: Butterbur root extract and music therapy might be superior to placebo and may represent promising treatment approaches in the prophylaxis of paediatric migraine.
View Original PubMed Abstract ↓

BACKGROUND: Migraine is very common in school-aged children, but despite a number of pharmacological and non-pharmacological options for prophylaxis, randomized controlled evidence in children is small. Evidence-based prophylactic drugs may have considerable side effects. OBJECTIVE: This study was to assess efficacy of a butterbur root extract (Petadolex) and music therapy in primary school children with migraine. DESIGN: Prospective, randomized, partly double-blind, placebo-controlled, parallel-group trial. METHODS: Following a 8-week baseline patients were randomized and received either butterbur root extract (n=19), music therapy (n=20) or placebo (n=19) over 12 weeks. All participants received additionally headache education ("treatment as usual") from the baseline onwards. Reduction of headache frequency after treatment (8-week post-treatment) as well as 6 months later (8-week follow-up) was the efficacy variable. RESULTS: Data analysis of subjects completing the respective study phase showed that during post-treatment, only music therapy was superior to placebo (p=0.005), whereas in the follow-up period both music therapy and butterbur root extract were superior to placebo (p=0.018 and p=0.044, respectively). All groups showed a substantial reduction of attack frequency already during baseline. CONCLUSION: Butterbur root extract and music therapy might be superior to placebo and may represent promising treatment approaches in the prophylaxis of paediatric migraine.

10
RANDOMIZED TRIAL (RCT) Journal of investigational allergology & clinical immunology (2006) PMID: 16784008 ↗
The butterbur extract petasin has no effect on skin test reactivity induced by different stimuli: a randomized, double-blind crossover study using histamine, codeine, methacholine, and aeroallergen solutions.
Clinical Trial Synthesis 2006 Randomized Controlled Trial (RCT) published in Journal of investigational allergology & clinical immunology. Key conclusion: CONCLUSIONS: In this study we found no antiallergic, particularly antihistaminic, effect of Ze 339 in skin tests using a variety of stimuli often used to evaluate immediate skin test reactivity.
View Original PubMed Abstract ↓

BACKGROUND: Petasin (Ze 339) was recently introduced on the market as a potent herbal antiallergic drug for treatment of respiratory allergies such as hay fever. Few clinical studies have been performed so far addressing the clinical effectiveness of Ze 339. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the antiallergic properties of Ze 339 using skin prick tests with different stimuli, such as codeine, histamine, methacholine, and a relevant inhalant allergen. METHODS: A randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled study was performed in which Ze 339 was compared to acrivastine, a short-acting antihistamine, in 8 patients with respiratory allergy and in 10 nonatopic, healthy volunteers. Antiallergic activity of Ze 339 was determined by analyzing inhibitory potency in skin prick tests with codeine, histamine, methacholine, and an inhalant allergen. Wheal-and-flare reactions were assessed 90 minutes after a double dose of Ze 339, acrivastine, or placebo. An interval of at least 3 days was left between the skin tests. RESULTS: Acrivastine was identified as the only substance that significantly inhibited skin test reactivity to all solutions analyzed in all study subjects. In contrast, no significant inhibition could be demonstrated for Ze 339 with any test solution. Moreover, the results of Ze 339 did not differ significantly from placebo. CONCLUSIONS: In this study we found no antiallergic, particularly antihistaminic, effect of Ze 339 in skin tests using a variety of stimuli often used to evaluate immediate skin test reactivity. The mechanism by which Ze 339 is effective in the treatment of seasonal allergic rhinitis still needs to be elucidated.

RELATED MONOGRAPHS

Related Monographs in This Category