Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Ocular allergy in pediatric practice

  • Published:
Current Allergy and Asthma Reports Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Allergies occur frequently in all pediatric age groups, affecting up to 40% of children. Allergic conjunctivitis is the most common ocular allergy syndrome among children, with atopic keratoconjunctivitis and vernal keratoconjunctivitis comprising less common, but potentially more severe, forms of ocular allergy. In this article, we review the impact, diagnosis, potential complications, and treatment of these ocular allergic pediatric conditions. Early detection is necessary to prevent potentially serious consequences of pediatric ocular allergy. Involvement of pediatric ophthalmologists may be necessary to avoid preventable vision loss in severe cases.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References and Recommended Reading

  1. Nathan R, Meltzer E, Selner J, Storms W: Prevalence of allergic rhinitis in the United States. J Allergy Clin Immunol 1997, 99:S808-S814.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. Meltzer EO: Quality of life in adults and children with allergic rhinitis. J Allergy Clin Immunol 2001, 108:S45-S53.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  3. Juniper EF, Guyatt GH, Dolovich J: Assessment of quality of life in adolescents with allergic rhinoconjunctivitis: development and testing of a questionnaire for clinical trials. J Allergy Clin Immunol 1994, 93:413–423. Results of this study suggest that adolescent patients experience impaired quality of life because of systemic symptoms, activity limitations, and emotional and practical problems and that this impairment may not be the same for adolescents as for adults.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  4. De Freitas D, Sato EH, Rizzo L: T Lymphocytes. In Allergic Diseases of the Eye. Edited by Abelson MB. Philadelphia: WB Saunders; 2001:37.

    Google Scholar 

  5. Irani AM, Schwartz LB: Mast cell heterogeneity. Clin Exp Allergy 1989, 19:143–155. Discussion of two types of human mast cells; includes discussion of difference between human conjunctival mast cells and mast cells in the lungs.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  6. Dart JK, Buckley RJ, Monnickendan M, Prasad J: Perennial allergic conjunctivitis: definition, clinical characteristics, and prevalence. A comparison with seasonal allergic conjunctivitis. Trans Ophthalmol Soc UK 1986, 105:513–520.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Udell IJ, Gleich GJ, Allansmith MR, et al.: Eosinophil granule major basic protein and Charcot-Leyden crystal protein in human tears. Am J Ophthalmol 1981, 92:824–828.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  8. Abelson MB, Leonardi AA, Smith LM, et al.: Histaminase activity in patients with vernal keratoconjunctivitis. Ophthalmology 1995, 102:1958–1963. Discussing the.nding that enzymatic degradation of histamine was significantly decreased in patients with VKC compared with control subjects in both tears and plasma, suggesting that this dysfunction may be a primary factor in the pathophysiology of VKC.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  9. Abelson MB, Butrus SI, Weston JH, Rosner B: Tolerance and absence of rebound vasodilation following topical ocular decongestant usage. Ophthalmology 1984, 91:1364–1367.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  10. Lanier BQ, Abelson MB, Berger WE, et al.: Comparison of the efficacy of combined.uticasone propionate and olopatadine versus combined .uticasone propionate and fexofenadine for the treatment of allergic rhinoconjunctivitis induced by conjunctival allergen challenge. Clin Ther 2002, 24:1161–1174. In this study, concomitant topical use of .uticasone and olopatadine was more effective than concomitant use of .uticasone plus fexofenadine for treatment of allergic rhinoconjunctivitis.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  11. Ousler GW, Wilcox KA, Gupta G, Abelson MB: An evaluation of the ocular drying effects of two systemic antihistamines: loratadine and cetirizine hydrochloride. Ann Allergy Asthma Immunol 2004, 93:460–464.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  12. Kjellman NI, Andersson B: Terfenadine reduces skin and conjunctival reactivity in grass pollen allergic children. Clin Allergy 1986, 16:441–449.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  13. Ciprandi G, Buscaglia S, Marchesi E, et al.: Protective effect of loratadine on late phase reaction induced by conjunctival provocation test. Int Arch Allergy Immunol 1993, 100:185–189.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  14. Santos CI, Huang AJ, Abelson MB, et al.: Efficacy of lodoxamide 0.1% ophthalmic solution in resolving corneal epitheliopathy associated with vernal keratoconjunctivitis. Am J Ophthalmol 1994, 117:488–497.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  15. Abelson MB, Berdy GJ, Mundorf T, et al.: Pemirolast study group. Pemirolast potassium 0.1% ophthalmic solution is an effective treatment for allergic conjunctivitis: a pooled analysis of two prospective, randomized, doublemasked, placebo-controlled, phase III studies. J Ocul Pharmacol Ther 2002, 18:475–488.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  16. Verin PH, Dicker ID, Mortemousque B: Nedocromil sodium eye drops are more effective than sodium cromoglycate eye drops for the long-term management of vernal keratoconjunctivitis. Clin Exp Allergy 1999, 29:529–536.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  17. Sharif NA, Xu SX, Miller ST, et al.: Characterization of the ocular antiallergic and antihistaminic effects of olopatadine (AL-4943A), a novel drug for treating ocular allergic diseases. J Pharmacol Exp Ther 1996, 278:1252–1261.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  18. Yanni JM, Stephens DJ, Miller ST, et al.: The in vitro and in vivo ocular pharmacology of olopatadine (AL-4943A), an effective anti-allergic/antihistaminic agent. J Ocul Pharmacol Ther 1996, 12:389–400. Details the in vitro and in vivo pharmacologic profile of olopatadine.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  19. Yanni JM, Miller ST, Gamache DA, et al.: Comparative effects of topical ocular anti-allergy drugs on human conjunctival mast cells. Ann. Allergy Asthma Immunol 79, 541–545, 1997. Discusses the efficicacy of olopatadine, a combination antihistamine/ mast cell stabilizer, at stabilizing mast cells and binding to H1 receptors

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  20. Yanni JM, Sharif NA, Gamache DA, et al.: A current appreciation of sites for pharmacological intervention in allergic conjunctivitis: effects of new topical ocular drugs. Acta Ophthalmol Scand Suppl 1999, 228:33–37.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Cook EB, Stahl JL, Barney NP, Graziano FM: Olopatadine inhibits NFalpha release from human conjunctival mast cells. Ann Allergy Asthma Immunol 2000, 84:504–508. Details olopatadine’s ability to inhibit mast cell release of TNF-α and subsequent recruitment of migrating inflammatory cells.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  22. Leonardi A, Abelson MB:. Double-masked, randomized, placebo-controlled clinical study of the mast cell-stabilizing effects of treatment with olopatadine in the conjunctival allergen challenge model in humans. Clin Ther 2003, 25:2539–2552. Discusses the effect of olopatadine on inhibition of mediator release correlated with the reduction of itching and redness.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  23. Katelaris CH, Cipriandi G, Missotten L, et al.: A comparison of the efficacy and tolerability of olopatadine hydrochloride 0.1% ophthalmic solution and cromolyn sodium 2% ophthalmic solution in seasonal allergic conjunctivitis. Clin Ther 2002, 24:1561–1575.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  24. Butrus S, Greiner JV, Discepola M, Finegold I: Comparison of the clinical efficacy and comfort of olopatadine hydrochloride 0.1% ophthalmic solution and nedocromil sodium 2% ophthalmic solution in the human conjunctival allergen challenge model. Clin Ther 2000, 22:1462–1472.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  25. Ciprandi G, Turner D, Gross R: Double-masked, randomized, parallel-group study comparing olopatadine 0.1% ophthalmic solution with cromolyn sodium 2% and levocabastine 0.05% ophthalmic preparations in children with seasonal allergic conjunctivitis. Curr Ther Res Clin Exp 2004, 65:186–199. Demonstrated comfort with olopatadine use in pediatric allergy patients; an important consideration for encouraging compliance.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  26. Berdy GJ, Stoppel JO, Epstein AB: Comparison of the clinical efficacy and tolerability of olopatadine hydrochloride 0.1% ophthalmic solution and loteprednol etabonate 0.2% ophthalmic suspension in the conjunctival allergen challenge model. Clin Ther 2002, 24:918–929.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  27. Deschenes J, Discepola M, Abelson MB: Comparative evaluation of olopatadine ophthalmic solution (0.1%) versus ketorolac ophthalmic solution (0.5%) using the provocative antigen challenge model. Acta Ophthalmol Scand Suppl 1999, 228:47–52.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  28. Berdy GJ, Spangler DL, Bensch G, et al.: A comparison of the relative efficacy and clinical performance of olopatadine hydrochloride 0.1% ophthalmic solution and ketotifen fumarate 0.025% ophthalmic solution in the conjunctival antigen challenge model. Clin Ther 2000, 22:826–833.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  29. Spangler DL, Bensch G, Berdy GJ: Evaluation of the efficacy of olopatadine hydrochloride 0.1% ophthalmic solution and azelastine hydrochloride 0.05% ophthalmic solution in the conjunctival allergen challenge model. Clin Ther 2001, 23:1272–1280.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  30. Lanier R, Finegold I, D’Arienzo P, et al.: Clinical efficacy of olopatadine vs. epinastine ophthalmic solution in the conjunctival allergen challenge model. Curr Med Res Opin 2004, 20:P1-P7.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  31. Artal MN, Luna JD, Discepola M: A forced choice comfort study of olopatadine hydrochloride 0.1% versus ketotifen fumarate 0.05%. Acta Ophthalmol Scand Suppl 2000, 230:64–65.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  32. Leonardi A, Zafirakis P: Efficacy and comfort of olopatadine versus ketotifen ophthalmic solutions: a double-masked, environmental study of patient preference. Curr Med Res Opin 2004, 20:1167–1173.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  33. Berger W, Abelson MB, Gomes PJ, et al.: Effects of adjuvant therapy with 0.1% olopatadine hydrochloride ophthalmic solution on quality of life in patients with allergic rhinitis using systemic or nasal therapy. Ann Allergy Asthma Immunol 2005, 95:361–371.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  34. Novartis: Zaditor Prescribing Information. http://www. pharma.us.novartis.com/product/pi/pdf/zaditor.pdf. Accessed January 18, 2005.

  35. Abelson MB: A review of olopatadine for the treatment of ocular allergy. Expert Opin Pharmacother 2004, 5:1979–1994.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  36. Aguilar A: Comparative study of clinical efficacy and tolerance in seasonal allergic conjunctivitis management with 0.1% olopatadine hydrochloride versus 0.05% ketotifen fumarate. Acta Ophthalmol Scand Suppl 2000, 230:52–55.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  37. Sabbah A, Marzetto M: Azelastine eye drops in the treatment of seasonal allergic conjunctivitis or rhinoconjunctivitis in young children. Curr Med Res Opin 1998, 14:161–170.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  38. Allergan: Elestat Prescribing Information. http://www. elestat.com/practitioners/faqs.html#gi1. Accessed January 29, 2006.

  39. Amon U, Gibbs BF, Buss G, Nitschke M: In vitro investigations with the histamine H1 receptor antagonist, epinastine (WAL 801 CL), on isolated human allergic effector cells. Inflamm Res 2000, 49:112–116.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  40. Eakins KE: Prostaglandin and inflammatory reactions in the eye. Methods Find Exp Clin Pharmacol 1980, 2:17.

    Google Scholar 

  41. Abelson MB, Butrus SI, Weston JH:. Aspirin therapy in vernal conjunctivitis. Am J Ophthalmol 1983, 95:502–505.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  42. Akpek EK, Dart JK, Watson S, et al.: A randomized trial of topical cyclosporin 0.05% in topical steroid-resistant atopic keratoconjunctivitis. Ophthalmology 2004, 111:476–482.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  43. Cetinkaya A, Akova YA, Dursun D, Pelit A: Topical cyclosporine in the management of shield ulcers. Cornea 2004, 23:194–200.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  44. Sperr WR, Agis H, Semper H, et al.: Inhibition of allergeninduced histamine release from human basophils by cyclosporine A and FK-506. Int Arch Allergy Immunol 1997, 114:68–73.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  45. Spiegelberg HL, Orozco EM, Roman M, Raz E: DNA immunization: a novel approach to allergen-specific immunotherapy. Allergy 1997, 52:964–970.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. ORA Clinical Research and Development, 863 Turnpike Street, 01845, North Andover, MA, USA

    Mark B. Abelson MD

Authors
  1. Mark B. Abelson MD
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. David Granet MD
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Mark B. Abelson MD.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Abelson, M.B., Granet, D. Ocular allergy in pediatric practice. Curr Allergy Asthma Rep 6, 306–311 (2006). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11882-006-0064-x

Download citation

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11882-006-0064-x

Keywords

Search

Navigation