Antihistamines used in addition to topical nasal steroids for intermittent and persistent allergic rhinitis in children

Treatment of Allergic Rhinitis with Acupuncture Based on Pathophysiological

Allergic rhinitis is a prevalent allergic diseases and has a profound impact on physical well-being. In recent years, more and more people have changed to allergic diseases, such as allergic rhinitis, allergic asthma, allergic dermatitis and so on. In the incidence of allergic rhinitis, covering all ages. The common clinical treatment of allergic rhinitis are drugs and immunotherapy, but these therapies have certain limitations. Therefore, an effective and economical treatment for AR is urgently needed. Acupuncture are widely used in the clinical treatment of various diseases, but the effect of acupuncture in the treatment of allergic rhinitis (AR) is significant, and the mechanism of acupuncture in the treatment of AR is also a hot spot. Acupuncture is one of the traditional treatment methods of traditional Chinese medicine, which achieves therapeutic effect by pressing a needle or other means at a specific location on the skin to produce a special sensation. Among them, acupuncture, as a popular treatment method, has attracted more and more attention. In this review, we provide an overview of the current understanding of acupuncture and AR, as well as current studies investigating the efficacy and safety of acupuncture for AR.

Serum vitamin D3 deficiency can affect the efficacy of sublingual immunotherapy in children with allergic rhinitis: a retrospective cohort study

Background

Sublingual immunotherapy (SLIT) is effective and convenient for many allergic patients but it is still ineffective for many children with allergic rhinitis (AR). In previous studies, most of the patients with poor efficacy of SLIT used the method of individualized adjustment of drug dosage. Currently, there are few reports on the relationship between serum vitamin D₃ level and the efficacy of SLIT.

Methods

In this study, 153 patients with AR who received SLIT were selected as the study objects. All patients collected serum for vitamin D₃ test before treatment. The clinical characteristics of the patients were collected, and all patients were regularly followed up for at least 6 months. The improvement rates were assessed according to the combined symptom medication score (CSMS). A receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve was drawn, and the optimal cut-off point was determined according to the Youden index. Univariate and multivariate logistic regression were used to analyze the relationship between serum vitamin D₃ and SLIT efficacy. The odds ratios (ORs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were computed by logistic regression.

Results

Of 153 AR patients, 101 patients entered the final statistical analysis. According to CSMS, 29.7% of patients in low response (LR) group. The mean vitamin D₃ level was (20.42±7.48) ng/mL. The optimal cutoff point for vitamin D₃ was 22.25 ng/mL. Univariate logistic regression analysis of SLIT efficacy showed that whether the patient also had a food allergy (P<0.001) or asthma (P=0.011), whether they used acarid products (P=0.002), and whether vitamin D₃ is sufficient (P=0.001) were significantly related to the efficacy of SLIT. Multivariate logistic regression analysis showed that after adjusting for whether the patient also had asthma and whether they had used acarid products, whether the patient also had a food allergy (OR: 12.13, 95% CI: 3.57-41.18, P<0.001) and whether vitamin D₃ is sufficient (OR: 22.21, 95% CI: 4.04-122.30, P<0.001) were independent factors affecting the efficacy of SLIT.

Conclusions

Serum Vitamin D₃ deficiency can affect the efficacy of SLIT in children with AR. This study provided a new therapeutic approach for SLIT patients with poor efficacy.

Reshaping the Management of Allergic Rhinitis in Primary Care: Lessons from the COVID-19 Pandemic

The COVID-19 pandemic presented unique challenges to the delivery of healthcare for patients with allergic rhinitis (AR) following its disruption and impact on the healthcare system with profound implications. Reliance on self-care for AR symptom management was substantial during the pandemic with many patients encouraged to only seek in-person medical care when necessary. The advantage of digital technology becomes apparent when patients and healthcare providers had to change and adapt their method of interaction from the regular physical face-to-face consultation to telehealth and mobile health in the provision of care. Despite the pandemic and the ever-evolving post pandemic situation, optimal management of AR remains paramount for both patients and healthcare professionals. A reshaping of the delivery of care is essential to accomplish this goal. In this paper, we present what we have learned about AR management during the COVID-19 pandemic, the role of digital technology in revolutionizing AR healthcare, screening assessment in the identification and differentiation of common upper respiratory conditions, and a framework to facilitate the management of AR in primary care.

Allergen Immunotherapy for Local Respiratory Allergy

PURPOSE OF REVIESW

Local respiratory allergy (LRA) is an eosinophilic phenotype of chronic airway disease. Three entities have been described within the LRA spectrum: local allergic rhinitis (LAR) and local allergic asthma (LAA) in non-atopic patients, and dual allergic rhinitis (DAR) in atopic patients (coexistence of LAR and allergic rhinitis). In this article, we aim to review the current evidence on the therapeutic options for LRA.

RECENT FINDINGS

No controlled study has assessed the effect of standard therapy (oral antihistamines, intranasal or inhaled corticosteroids, bronchodilators) in LRA subjects. Three randomized clinical trials and one observational study demonstrated that allergen immunotherapy (AIT) is able to control nasal and ocular symptoms, decrease the need for rescue medication, and improve quality of life in LAR individuals. Nasal or inhaled steroids can be expected to improve eosinophilic inflammation in LRA patients but cannot change the natural course of the disease. Moreover, the long-term and disease-modifying effects of AIT in LRA subjects need to be investigated.

How to Diagnose and Treat Local Allergic Rhinitis: A Challenge for Clinicians

Chronic rhinitis is a very common disease that can be divided in various phenotypes. Historically, the condition has been classified into the allergic rhinitis (AR) and non-allergic non-infectious rhinitis (NAR) forms, based on the results of the classical biomarkers of atopy: skin prick test and serum allergen-specific IgE However, this classification does not reflect the complexity of the rhinitis syndrome, as illustrated by the existence of non-atopic rhinitis patients who display a nasal reactivity to environmental allergens. This new phenotype has been termed local allergic rhinitis (LAR) and can be only recognized if an additional test such as the nasal allergen challenge (NAC) is integrated in the diagnostic algorithm for chronic rhinitis. Recent data shows that the NAC is a very safe and reliable technique ready for the clinical practice. LAR is a differentiated rhinitis phenotype which often commences during childhood and quickly progresses towards a clinical worsening and the association of comorbidities in other mucosal organs. Recent evidence supports the existence of a bronchial counterpart of LAR (local allergic asthma), which highlights the pathophysiological links between the upper and lower airways and reinforces the united airways concept. Importantly, several controlled studies have demonstrated the ability of allergen immunotherapy to control LAR symptoms while the therapy is being administered. This review emphasizes the need to implement the NAC in the clinical practice in order to facilitate the recognition of LAR patients, allowing for an early prescription of specific therapies with disease-modifying potential.

Respiratory allergies: a general overview of remedies, delivery systems, and the need to progress

The spread of respiratory allergies is increasing in parallel with the alarm of the scientific community. Evidently, our knowledge of the onset mechanisms of these diseases and, as a consequence, of the available remedies is inadequate. This review provides a brief, general description of current therapeutic resources and the state of research with regard to both drugs and medical devices in order to highlight their limits and the urgent need for progress. Increasing the amount of basic biochemical research will improve our knowledge of such onset mechanisms and the potential efficacy of therapeutic preparations.

Analysis of comorbidities and therapeutic approach for allergic rhinitis in a pediatric population in Spain

BACKGROUND

Allergic rhinitis (AR) is the most common chronic disease in children. The main objective of this study was to analyze the comorbidities and therapeutic approaches for AR in a Spanish pediatric population.

METHODS

Children aged 6 to 12 years with AR were included in an observational, cross-sectional, multicenter study.

RESULTS

1,275 children were recruited from 271 centers. AR was intermittent in 59.5% of cases, persistent in 40.5%, seasonal in 60.7%, and perennial in 39.3% of patients. The most frequent comorbidities were conjunctivitis (53.6%), asthma (49.5%), atopic dermatitis (40%), rhinosinusitis(26.1%), otitis media (23.8%), and adenoid hypertrophy (17.3%). Overall, patients with persistent, moderate or severe, AR were more likely to present comobidities, except for food allergy and urticaria. The most common drugs used for treatment of AR were oral antihistamines(76%), nasal corticosteroids(49%) and a combination of both (45%). Antihistamines and nasal corticosteroids were used on demand (<18 days) in 38 and 41% of patients, respectively; for 18-30 days in 22 and 27%; for 1-3 months in 31 and 29%; and for more than 3 months in 8 and 3%, respectively. Eye drops were used in 32% and specific immunotherapy in 21% of patients.

CONCLUSION

Comorbidities are frequent in children with AR, supporting the notion of allergy as a systemic disease. Severity and duration of AR were significantly associated with presence of most of comorbidities. The most common drugs used for AR treatment were oral antihistamines, followed by nasal corticosteroids and a combination of both used on demand.

Helminth therapy (worms) for allergic rhinitis

BACKGROUND

Allergic rhinitis is a disorder of the nasal membranes and surrounding tissues, and a worldwide cause of illness and disability. Helminths are complex tissue-dwelling or lumen-dwelling organisms that inhabit larger organisms and are frequently asymptomatic. Helminths modulate the natural immune responses of their human hosts, and may prevent or cure immune-mediated or allergic diseases (e.g. allergic rhinitis) in the host. Non-randomised studies support this hypothesis.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the safety and effectiveness of helminth therapy in people with allergic rhinitis.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Ear, Nose and Throat Disorders Group Trials Register; the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL); PubMed; EMBASE; CINAHL; Web of Science; BIOSIS Previews; Cambridge Scientific Abstracts; ICTRP and additional sources for published and unpublished trials. The date of the search was 24 June 2011.

SELECTION CRITERIA

All randomised controlled trials where the intervention was any helminth species or combination of helminth species, administered to people with allergic rhinitis in any dose, by any route and for any duration of exposure. We accepted both intermittent and persistent allergic rhinitis patients.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We independently extracted data and assessed eligibility and risk of bias using a standardised data collection form. We resolved any disagreement through discussion. We combined dichotomous data using risk ratio (RR) and continuous data using mean difference (MD), presenting both with 95% confidence intervals (CI).

MAIN RESULTS

We found five reports of two single-centre, placebo-controlled, double-blinded studies (130 participants). Participants in both studies were a mix of adults with either intermittent or persistent allergic rhinitis. Both studies had a low risk of bias. One study, with 12 weeks' follow-up, used a single percutaneous application of 10 Necator americanus (i.e. human hookworm) larvae. The other study, with 24 weeks' follow-up, used three-weekly oral dosing with 2500 Trichuris suis (i.e. pig whipworm) eggs in aqueous suspension. Of 17 outcomes evaluated in this review, eight were positive (i.e. favoured helminths). Participants taking helminths had no reduction in allergic rhinitis symptoms, percentage of well days (i.e. days with minimal symptoms and no use of medication for allergic rhinitis), lung function measures and quality of life scores. Total use of medication for allergic rhinitis (eye drops, nasal sprays, tablets) did not change; however, in the helminth group there was a statistically significant reduction in the percentage of days during the grass pollen season when participants needed to take tablets as rescue medication for their allergic rhinitis symptoms (MD -14.0%, 95% CI -26.6 to -1.40); in a typical 60-day pollen season this 14% reduction translates into 19 days when tablets would be needed in the helminth group versus 27 days when tablets would be needed in the placebo group. Participants taking helminths percutaneously (i.e. as hookworm larvae) had local skin itching and redness in the first few days after administration. Participants taking helminths were more likely to report any gastrointestinal adverse event (RR 1.79, 95% CI 1.31 to 2.45), moderate or severe abdominal pain (RR 7.67, 95% CI 1.87 to 31.57), moderate or severe flatulence (RR 2.01, 95% CI 1.06 to 3.81) and moderate or severe diarrhoea (RR 1.99, 95% CI 1.18 to 3.37). There was no difference between the helminth and placebo groups in the incidence of serious adverse events, and in study withdrawals.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

There is currently insufficient evidence on the efficacy, tolerability and likely costs of helminth therapy to support its use in the routine management of allergic rhinitis. Administered to humans in carefully measured doses, helminths appear to be safe. More preclinical studies should be performed, before larger and extended duration trials of helminths for allergic rhinitis are carried out. Future studies should collect and report comparative data on the costs of helminth therapy versus conventional pharmacotherapy.