Pharmacology of chlorphenamine and pseudoephedrine use in the common cold: a narrative review.

IF 4.6 Q2 MATERIALS SCIENCE, BIOMATERIALS
Romain Douhard, Philippe Humbert, Jean-Yves Milon, Rassa Pegahi
{"title":"Pharmacology of chlorphenamine and pseudoephedrine use in the common cold: a narrative review.","authors":"Romain Douhard, Philippe Humbert, Jean-Yves Milon, Rassa Pegahi","doi":"10.1080/03007995.2024.2424422","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>The common cold is the most frequent upper respiratory viral infection. Although benign, it represents a high socioeconomic burden. Many over-the-counter drugs are available to manage the symptoms of this condition, with antihistamines and vasoconstrictors being the most widely used. This review aimed to compare the potential mechanisms underlying the efficacy and safety of chlorphenamine and pseudoephedrine, the most commonly used agents in these two classes of drugs, and provide a useful perspective to impact appropriate decisions when considering these options for symptomatic common cold treatment. To conduct a comprehensive analysis, we systematically reviewed the use of pseudoephedrine and chlorphenamine using various databases, including MEDLINE, Google Scholar, Scopus, and Embase. We also perused the bibliographies of relevant articles and the EudraVigilance database. The findings suggest that pseudoephedrine may offer specific benefits in rapidly alleviating nasal congestion in the short term. Chlorphenamine appears to exhibit a higher degree of efficacy in alleviating rhinorrhea and other specific cold symptoms compared to pseudoephedrine. Pharmacovigilance data and case report reviews showed that pseudoephedrine may induce a higher incidence of less common but potentially life-threatening adverse effects compared to chlorphenamine. We concluded that antihistamine drugs exhibit a more favorable benefit/risk profile than vasoconstrictors for treating symptomatic common colds.</p>","PeriodicalId":2,"journal":{"name":"ACS Applied Bio Materials","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":4.6000,"publicationDate":"2024-11-12","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"ACS Applied Bio Materials","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/03007995.2024.2424422","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"MATERIALS SCIENCE, BIOMATERIALS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

The common cold is the most frequent upper respiratory viral infection. Although benign, it represents a high socioeconomic burden. Many over-the-counter drugs are available to manage the symptoms of this condition, with antihistamines and vasoconstrictors being the most widely used. This review aimed to compare the potential mechanisms underlying the efficacy and safety of chlorphenamine and pseudoephedrine, the most commonly used agents in these two classes of drugs, and provide a useful perspective to impact appropriate decisions when considering these options for symptomatic common cold treatment. To conduct a comprehensive analysis, we systematically reviewed the use of pseudoephedrine and chlorphenamine using various databases, including MEDLINE, Google Scholar, Scopus, and Embase. We also perused the bibliographies of relevant articles and the EudraVigilance database. The findings suggest that pseudoephedrine may offer specific benefits in rapidly alleviating nasal congestion in the short term. Chlorphenamine appears to exhibit a higher degree of efficacy in alleviating rhinorrhea and other specific cold symptoms compared to pseudoephedrine. Pharmacovigilance data and case report reviews showed that pseudoephedrine may induce a higher incidence of less common but potentially life-threatening adverse effects compared to chlorphenamine. We concluded that antihistamine drugs exhibit a more favorable benefit/risk profile than vasoconstrictors for treating symptomatic common colds.

在普通感冒中使用氯苯那敏和伪麻黄碱的药理学:叙述性综述。
普通感冒是最常见的上呼吸道病毒感染。虽然是良性疾病,但却造成了沉重的社会经济负担。许多非处方药可用于控制感冒症状,其中抗组胺药和血管收缩药使用最为广泛。本综述旨在比较氯苯那敏和伪麻黄碱(这两类药物中最常用的药剂)的疗效和安全性的潜在机制,并提供一个有用的视角,以便在考虑将这些药剂用于对症治疗普通感冒时做出适当的决定。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
ACS Applied Bio Materials
ACS Applied Bio Materials Chemistry-Chemistry (all)
CiteScore
9.40
自引率
2.10%
发文量
464
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信