These tools will no longer be maintained as of December 31, 2024. Archived website can be found here. PubMed4Hh GitHub repository can be found here. Contact NLM Customer Service if you have questions.


Pubmed for Handhelds

PUBMED FOR HANDHELDS

Journal Abstract Search

335 related items for PubMed ID: 12462286

  • 1. A comparison of the efficacy and tolerability of olopatadine hydrochloride 0.1% ophthalmic solution and cromolyn sodium 2% ophthalmic solution in seasonal allergic conjunctivitis.
    Katelaris CH, Ciprandi G, Missotten L, Turner FD, Bertin D, Berdeaux G, International Olopatadine Study Group.
    Clin Ther; 2002 Oct; 24(10):1561-75. PubMed ID: 12462286
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 2. A randomized, double-blind, parallel-group comparison of olopatadine 0.1% ophthalmic solution versus placebo for controlling the signs and symptoms of seasonal allergic conjunctivitis and rhinoconjunctivitis.
    Abelson MB, Turner D.
    Clin Ther; 2003 Mar; 25(3):931-47. PubMed ID: 12852709
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 3. Loteprednol etabonate suspension 0.2% administered QID compared with olopatadine solution 0.1% administered BID in the treatment of seasonal allergic conjunctivitis: a multicenter, randomized, investigator-masked, parallel group study in Chinese patients.
    Gong L, Sun X, Qu J, Wang L, Zhang M, Zhang H, Wang L, Gu Y, Elion-Mboussa A, Roy L, Zhu B.
    Clin Ther; 2012 Jun; 34(6):1259-1272.e1. PubMed ID: 22627057
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 4. Randomized, double-masked comparison of olopatadine ophthalmic solution, mometasone furoate monohydrate nasal spray, and fexofenadine hydrochloride tablets using the conjunctival and nasal allergen challenge models.
    Spangler DL, Abelson MB, Ober A, Gotnes PJ.
    Clin Ther; 2003 Aug; 25(8):2245-67. PubMed ID: 14512132
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 5. 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.
    Berdy GJ, Stoppel JO, Epstein AB.
    Clin Ther; 2002 Jun; 24(6):918-29. PubMed ID: 12117082
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 6.
    ; . PubMed ID:
    [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 7. Clinical efficacy of olopatadine hydrochloride ophthalmic solution 0.2% compared with placebo in patients with allergic conjunctivitis or rhinoconjunctivitis: a randomized, double-masked environmental study.
    Abelson MB, Gomes PJ, Vogelson CT, Pasquine TA, Gross RD, Turner FD, Wells DT, Bergamini MV, Robertson SM.
    Clin Ther; 2004 Aug; 26(8):1237-48. PubMed ID: 15476905
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 8. A comparison of the clinical efficacy of pheniramine maleate/naphazoline hydrochloride ophthalmic solution and olopatadine hydrochloride ophthalmic solution in the conjunctival allergen challenge model.
    Greiner JV, Udell IJ.
    Clin Ther; 2005 May; 27(5):568-77. PubMed ID: 15978305
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 9. Evaluation of the efficacy of olopatadine hydrochloride 0.1% ophthalmic solution and azelastine hydrochloride 0.05% ophthalmic solution in the conjunctival allergen challenge model.
    Spangler DL, Bensch G, Berdy GJ.
    Clin Ther; 2001 Aug; 23(8):1272-80. PubMed ID: 11558863
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 10. Combined analysis of two studies using the conjunctival allergen challenge model to evaluate olopatadine hydrochloride, a new ophthalmic antiallergic agent with dual activity.
    Abelson MB, Spitalny L.
    Am J Ophthalmol; 1998 Jun; 125(6):797-804. PubMed ID: 9645717
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 11. Efficacy of olopatadine ophthalmic solution 0.2% in reducing signs and symptoms of allergic conjunctivitis.
    Abelson MB, Gomes PJ, Pasquine T, Edwards MR, Gross RD, Robertson SM.
    Allergy Asthma Proc; 2007 Jun; 28(4):427-33. PubMed ID: 17883910
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 12. Clinical efficacy of olopatadine vs epinastine ophthalmic solution in the conjunctival allergen challenge model.
    Lanier BQ, Finegold I, D'Arienzo P, Granet D, Epstein AB, Ledgerwood GL.
    Curr Med Res Opin; 2004 Aug; 20(8):1227-33. PubMed ID: 15324525
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 13. Comparison of the effects of ketotifen fumarate 0.025% and olopatadine HCl 0.1% ophthalmic solutions in seasonal allergic conjunctivities: a 30-day, randomized, double-masked, artificial tear substitute-controlled trial.
    Avunduk AM, Tekelioglu Y, Turk A, Akyol N.
    Clin Ther; 2005 Sep; 27(9):1392-402. PubMed ID: 16291412
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 14. Comparison of the efficacy of combined fluticasone propionate and olopatadine versus combined fluticasone propionate and fexofenadine for the treatment of allergic rhinoconjunctivitis induced by conjunctival allergen challenge.
    Lanier BQ, Abelson MB, Berger WE, Granet DB, D'Arienzo PA, Spangler DL, Kägi MK.
    Clin Ther; 2002 Jul; 24(7):1161-74. PubMed ID: 12182260
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 15. [A multicenter, double-masked, randomized evaluation of olopatadine 0.2% using the conjunctival allergen challenge model in Japanese patients with allergic conjunctivitis].
    Ohno S, Olopatadine Study Group.
    Nippon Ganka Gakkai Zasshi; 2012 Dec; 116(12):1123-9. PubMed ID: 23379201
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 16. Comparative evaluation of olopatadine ophthalmic solution (0.1%) versus ketorolac ophthalmic solution (0.5%) using the provocative antigen challenge model.
    Deschenes J, Discepola M, Abelson M.
    Acta Ophthalmol Scand Suppl; 1999 Dec; (228):47-52. PubMed ID: 10337433
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 17. Evaluation of comfort using olopatadine hydrochloride 0.1% ophthalmic solution in the treatment of allergic conjunctivitis in contact lens wearers compared to placebo using the conjunctival allergen-challenge model.
    Brodsky M, Berger WE, Butrus S, Epstein AB, Irkec M.
    Eye Contact Lens; 2003 Apr; 29(2):113-6. PubMed ID: 12695716
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 18. Comparison of preservative-free ketotifen fumarate and preserved olopatadine hydrochloride eye drops in the treatment of moderate to severe seasonal allergic conjunctivitis.
    Mortemousque B, Bourcier T, Khairallah M, Messaoud R, Brignole-Baudouin F, Renault D, Rebika H, Brémond-Gignac D, Ketotifen Study Group.
    J Fr Ophtalmol; 2014 Jan; 37(1):1-8. PubMed ID: 24388379
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 19. A comparison of olopatadine 0.2% ophthalmic solution versus fluticasone furoate nasal spray for the treatment of allergic conjunctivitis.
    Rosenwasser LJ, Mahr T, Abelson MB, Gomes PJ, Kennedy K.
    Allergy Asthma Proc; 2008 Jan; 29(6):644-53. PubMed ID: 19063816
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 20. 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.
    Butrus S, Greiner JV, Discepola M, Finegold I.
    Clin Ther; 2000 Dec; 22(12):1462-72. PubMed ID: 11192137
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

    Page: [Next] [New Search]
    of 17.