1
|
Ellis AK, Cook V, Keith PK, Mace SR, Moote W, O'Keefe A, Quirt J, Rosenfield L, Small P, Watson W. Focused allergic rhinitis practice parameter for Canada. ALLERGY, ASTHMA, AND CLINICAL IMMUNOLOGY : OFFICIAL JOURNAL OF THE CANADIAN SOCIETY OF ALLERGY AND CLINICAL IMMUNOLOGY 2024; 20:45. [PMID: 39118164 PMCID: PMC11311964 DOI: 10.1186/s13223-024-00899-3] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 08/23/2023] [Accepted: 05/21/2024] [Indexed: 08/10/2024]
Abstract
Allergic rhinitis (AR) is a prevalent disease in Canada that affects both children and adults. Several guidelines for the management of AR have been published by professional allergy societies worldwide. However, there are regional differences in the clinical management of AR, and regulatory approval of some AR pharmacotherapies varies among countries. Thus, six research questions specific to the treatment of AR in Canada were identified for this focused practice parameter. Reviews of the literature published since 2016 were conducted to obtain evidence-based support for the responses of the Work Group to each research question. In response to research question 1 "In patients with symptoms indicative of AR, is serum-specific IgE sufficient to identify candidates for immunotherapy or is a skin prick test mandatory?" the Work Group concluded that either sIgE testing or skin prick test are acceptable for diagnosing AR and guiding immunotherapy. In response to research question 2 "When taking into account the preferences of the patient and the prescriber (stakeholder engagement) should second-generation oral antihistamine (OAH) or intranasal corticosteroid (INCS) be first line?" the Work Group concluded that existing guidelines generally agree on the use of INCS as a first-line therapy used for AR, however, patient and provider preferences and considerations can easily shift the first choice to a second-generation OAH. In response to research question 3 "Is a combination intranasal antihistamine (INAH)/INCS formulation superior to INCS plus OAH? Do they become equivalent after prolonged use?" the Work Group concluded that that the combination INAH/INCS is superior to an INCS plus OAH. However, there was insufficient evidence to answer the second question. In response to research question 4 "Do leukotriene receptor antagonists (LTRA) have a greater benefit than OAH in AR for some symptoms to justify a therapeutic trial in those who cannot tolerate INCS?" the Work Group concluded that LTRAs have inferior, or at best equivalent, daytime or overall symptom control compared with OAH, but LTRAs may improve nighttime symptom control and provide benefits in patients with AR and concomitant asthma. In response to research question 5 "Should sublingual immunotherapy (SLIT) tablets be considered first-line immunotherapeutic options over subcutaneous immunotherapy (SCIT) based on the evidence of efficacy?" the Work Group concluded that the choice of SLIT or SCIT cannot be made on efficacy alone, and differences in other factors outweigh any differences in efficacy. In response to research question 6 "Based on efficacy data, should ALL patients seen by an allergist be offered SLIT or SCIT as a treatment option?" the Work Group concluded that the efficacy data suggests that SLIT or SCIT should be used broadly in patients with AR, but other clinical concerns also need to be taken into consideration.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Anne K Ellis
- Division of Allergy & Immunology, Department of Medicine, Queen's University, Kingston, ON, Canada.
| | - Victoria Cook
- Community Allergy Clinic, Victoria, BC, and Department of Pediatrics, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, BC, Canada
| | - Paul K Keith
- Division of Clinical Immunology and Allergy, Department of Medicine, McMaster University, Hamilton, ON, Canada
| | - Sean R Mace
- Mace Allergy and Clinical Immunology, Toronto, ON, Canada
| | | | - Andrew O'Keefe
- Department of Pediatrics, Memorial University, St. John's, NL, Canada
| | - Jaclyn Quirt
- Division of Clinical Immunology and Allergy, Department of Medicine, McMaster University, Hamilton, ON, Canada
| | - Lana Rosenfield
- Department of Internal Medicine, University of Manitoba, Winnipeg, MB, Canada
| | - Peter Small
- Jewish General Hospital, Montreal, QC, Canada
| | - Wade Watson
- Department of Pediatrics, Dalhousie University, Halifax, NS, Canada
| |
Collapse
|
2
|
The add-on effect of an intranasal antihistamine with an intranasal corticosteroid in Japanese cedar pollinosis. Auris Nasus Larynx 2023; 50:81-86. [PMID: 35768286 DOI: 10.1016/j.anl.2022.05.007] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 02/01/2022] [Revised: 04/12/2022] [Accepted: 05/09/2022] [Indexed: 01/28/2023]
Abstract
OBJECTIVE Combination intranasal drugs with a corticosteroid and antihistamine are available in several countries with better effect than treatments with single agents. However, it remains unclear whether this effect is also seen in Japanese cedar pollinosis (JCP), the most prevalent seasonal allergic rhinitis in Japan. We investigated the effect of an add-on intranasal antihistamine with an intranasal corticosteroid in JCP during the pollen dispersal period. (UMIN000025508) METHODS: We performed a double-blinded, randomized, placebo-controlled trial from March 1 to 14, 2017. Patients (n = 20 per group) received either a mometasone furoate nasal spray (MFNS) plus a levocabastine nasal spray (levocabastine group) or MFNS plus a placebo nasal spray (placebo group). The primary endpoint was the difference in the total nasal symptom score (TNSS) after treatment between the two groups. Differences in the total ocular symptom score, total symptom score, total medication score, total symptom-medication score, and five individual symptoms as well as safety were the secondary endpoints. RESULTS The change in the TNSS from baseline was significantly greater in the levocabastine group than in the placebo group. A significant reduction in the TNSS was observed more than 6 days earlier in the levocabastine group than in the placebo group. Such add-on effects were also seen in the secondary endpoints. Both treatments were well-tolerated. CONCLUSION The intranasal antihistamine provided better control of not only nasal symptoms, but also of ocular symptoms, and decreased the need for rescue medications when added to intranasal corticosteroid treatment in JCP patients.
Collapse
|
3
|
Okano M, Fujieda S, Gotoh M, Kurono Y, Matsubara A, Ohta N, Kamijo A, Yamada T, Nakamaru Y, Asako M, Sakurai D, Terada T, Yonekura S, Sakashita M, Okubo K. Executive summary: Japanese guidelines for allergic rhinitis 2020. Allergol Int 2023; 72:41-53. [PMID: 36509676 DOI: 10.1016/j.alit.2022.11.003] [Citation(s) in RCA: 10] [Impact Index Per Article: 10.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 10/26/2022] [Accepted: 11/08/2022] [Indexed: 12/13/2022] Open
Abstract
The Practical Guideline for the Management of Allergic Rhinitis, the fist guideline for allergic rhinitis in Japan, was prepared after a symposium held by the Japanese Society of Allergology in 1993. The current 9th edition was published in 2020 and is widely used today. The most recent collection of evidence from the literature was supplemented to the revised guideline to incorporate evidence-based medicine. The revised guideline includes updated epidemiology of allergic rhinitis in Japan, a figure representing the mechanisms of allergic rhinitis in both the onset and sensitization phases with the introduction of regulatory T cells and type 2 innate lymphoid cells, practical assessment for diagnosis, new pharmacotherapy agents such as anti-IgE mAb and a new drug delivery system for antihistamines, sublingual immunotherapy for children, dual sublingual immunotherapy for house dust mites and Japanese cedar pollen extract, new classification for surgery for allergic rhinitis, and treatment and prescriptions for older adults. An evidence-based step-by-step strategy for treatment is also described.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Mitsuhiro Okano
- Department of Otorhinolaryngology, International University of Health and Welfare School of Medicine, Narita, Japan.
| | - Shigeharu Fujieda
- Division of Otorhinolaryngology Head and Neck Surgery, Department of Sensory and Locomotor Medicine, University of Fukui, Fukui, Japan
| | - Minoru Gotoh
- Department of Otorhinolaryngology, Nippon Medical School, Tokyo, Japan
| | - Yuichi Kurono
- Department of Otolaryngology, Head and Neck Surgery, Kagoshima University Graduate School of Medical and Dental Sciences, Kagoshima, Japan
| | - Atsushi Matsubara
- Department of Otorhinolaryngology, Hirosaki University Graduate School of Medicine, Hirosaki, Japan
| | - Nobuo Ohta
- Department of Otorhinolaryngology, Tohoku Medical and Pharmaceutical University, Sendai, Japan
| | | | - Takechiyo Yamada
- Department of Otorhinolaryngology, Head and Neck Surgery, Akita University, Graduate School of Medicine, Akita, Japan
| | - Yuji Nakamaru
- Department of Otolaryngology-Head and Neck Surgery, Faculty of Medicine and Graduate School of Medicine, Hokkaido University, Sapporo, Japan
| | - Mikiya Asako
- Department of Otolaryngology, Head and Neck Surgery, Kansai Medical University, Osaka, Japan
| | - Daiju Sakurai
- Department of Otorhinolaryngology, Head and Neck Surgery, Interdisciplinary Graduate School of Medicine, University of Yamanashi, Yamanashi, Japan
| | - Tetsuya Terada
- Department of Otorhinolaryngology-Head and Neck Surgery, Osaka Medical and Pharmaceutical University, Osaka, Japan
| | - Shuji Yonekura
- Department of Otolaryngology Head and Neck Surgery, Graduate School of Medicine, Chiba University, Chiba, Japan
| | - Masafumi Sakashita
- Division of Otorhinolaryngology Head and Neck Surgery, Department of Sensory and Locomotor Medicine, University of Fukui, Fukui, Japan
| | - Kimihiro Okubo
- Department of Otorhinolaryngology, Nippon Medical School, Tokyo, Japan
| |
Collapse
|
4
|
Granger V, Taillé C, Roach D, Letuvé S, Dupin C, Hamidi F, Noël B, Neukirch C, Aubier M, Pretolani M, Chollet‐Martin S, de Chaisemartin L. Circulating neutrophil and eosinophil extracellular traps are markers of severe asthma. Allergy 2020; 75:699-702. [PMID: 31549729 DOI: 10.1111/all.14059] [Citation(s) in RCA: 19] [Impact Index Per Article: 4.8] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 12/30/2022]
Affiliation(s)
- Vanessa Granger
- Hôpital Bichat UF Auto‐immunité et Hypersensibilités APHP HUPNVS Paris France
- Inflammation Chimiokines et Immunopathologie Faculté de Pharmacie INSERM UMR996 Université Paris‐Sud Université Paris‐Saclay Châtenay‐Malabry France
| | - Camille Taillé
- Hôpital Bichat Service de Pneumologie A APHP HUPNVS Paris France
- Labex Inflamex DHU FIRE INSERM UMR 1152 Université de Paris Paris France
| | - Dwayne Roach
- Département de Microbiologie Institut Pasteur Unité de Biologie Moléculaire du gène chez les Extrêmophiles Paris France
| | - Séverine Letuvé
- Labex Inflamex DHU FIRE INSERM UMR 1152 Université de Paris Paris France
| | - Clairelyne Dupin
- Hôpital Bichat Service de Pneumologie A APHP HUPNVS Paris France
| | - Fatima Hamidi
- Labex Inflamex DHU FIRE INSERM UMR 1152 Université de Paris Paris France
| | - Benoît Noël
- Inflammation Chimiokines et Immunopathologie Faculté de Pharmacie INSERM UMR996 Université Paris‐Sud Université Paris‐Saclay Châtenay‐Malabry France
| | - Catherine Neukirch
- Hôpital Bichat Service de Pneumologie A APHP HUPNVS Paris France
- Labex Inflamex DHU FIRE INSERM UMR 1152 Université de Paris Paris France
| | - Michel Aubier
- Labex Inflamex DHU FIRE INSERM UMR 1152 Université de Paris Paris France
| | - Marina Pretolani
- Labex Inflamex DHU FIRE INSERM UMR 1152 Université de Paris Paris France
| | - Sylvie Chollet‐Martin
- Hôpital Bichat UF Auto‐immunité et Hypersensibilités APHP HUPNVS Paris France
- Inflammation Chimiokines et Immunopathologie Faculté de Pharmacie INSERM UMR996 Université Paris‐Sud Université Paris‐Saclay Châtenay‐Malabry France
| | - Luc de Chaisemartin
- Hôpital Bichat UF Auto‐immunité et Hypersensibilités APHP HUPNVS Paris France
- Inflammation Chimiokines et Immunopathologie Faculté de Pharmacie INSERM UMR996 Université Paris‐Sud Université Paris‐Saclay Châtenay‐Malabry France
| |
Collapse
|
5
|
Determining an Appropriate Time to Start Prophylactic Treatment with Intranasal Corticosteroids in Japanese Cedar Pollinosis. Med Sci (Basel) 2019; 7:medsci7010011. [PMID: 30650652 PMCID: PMC6359498 DOI: 10.3390/medsci7010011] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 09/30/2018] [Revised: 12/10/2018] [Accepted: 12/13/2018] [Indexed: 11/17/2022] Open
Abstract
Prophylactic treatment with intranasal corticosteroids is effective for pollen-induced seasonal allergic rhinitis. However, the appropriate time to start this treatment remains unclear. We performed a double-blinded, randomized, placebo-controlled trial. Starting on 1 February 2014, patients with Japanese cedar pollinosis received either fluticasone furoate nasal spray (FFNS) for 8 weeks (Group A: n = 24), placebo nasal spray for 2 weeks followed by FFNS for 6 weeks (Group B: n = 23), or placebo for 4 weeks followed by FFNS for 4 weeks (Group C: n = 23). The primary endpoint was comparison of the total naso-ocular symptom score (TSS). Secondary endpoints including the increment cost effective ratio (ICER) were also determined. Continuous pollen dispersion began on the 24th of February. Therefore, Group A and Group B received 3-weeks and 1-week of prophylactic treatment, respectively, whereas Group C received post-onset treatment. During the peak pollen-dispersal period, significant differences in TSS were seen between the groups, particularly between Group A and C. The ICER of Group B vs. Group C was lower than that of Group A vs. Group C. These results suggest that long-term prophylactic treatment with FFNS is clinically the most potent treatment, whereas short-term prophylactic treatment is cost effective for pollen-induced allergic rhinitis.
Collapse
|