Efficacy and safety of beclomethasone dipropionate nasal aerosol in pediatric patients with seasonal allergic rhinitis

Pharmacology, particle deposition and drug administration techniques of intranasal corticosteroids for treating allergic rhinitis

This review presents an overview of the available literature regarding intranasal corticosteroids (INCs) for the treatment of allergic rhinitis (AR). Various treatment options exist for AR including INCs, antihistamines and leucotriene antagonists. INCs are considered to be the most effective therapy for moderate-to-severe AR, as they are effective against nasal and ocular symptoms and improve quality of life. Their safety has been widely observed. INCs are effective and safe for short-term use. Local adverse events are observed but generally well-tolerated. The occurrence of (serious) systemic adverse events is unlikely but cannot be ruled out. There is a lack of long-term safety data. INC may cause serious eye complications. The risk of INCs on the hypothalamic-pituitary-adrenal axis, on bone mineral density reduction or osteoporosis and on growth in children, should be considered during treatment. Pharmacological characteristics of INCs (e.g. the mode of action and pharmacokinetics) are well known and described. We sought to gain insight into whether specific properties affect the efficacy and safety of INCs, including nasal particle deposition, which the administration technique affects. However, advances are lacking regarding the improved understanding of the effect of particle deposition on efficacy and safety and the effect of the administration technique. This review emphasizes the gaps in knowledge regarding this subject. Advances in research and health care are necessary to improve care for patients with AR.

The Genotoxic Effect of Nasal Steroids on Human Nasal Septal Mucosa and Cartilage Cells In Vitro

OBJECTIVE

To determine whether budesonide (Bud) and triamcinolone acetate (TA) cause DNA fractures in the nasal mucosa and septal cartilage cells through examinations using the comet assay technique.

STUDY DESIGN

Prospective, controlled experimental study.

SETTING

University hospital.

METHODS

Septal mucosal epithelial and cartilage tissue samples were taken from 9 patients. Cell cultures were prepared from these samples. Then, budesonide and triamcinolone acetate active ingredients at 2 different doses of 0.2 and 10 µM were separately applied to the cell cultures formed from both tissues of each patient, except the control cell culture, for 7 days in one group and 14 days in one group. After the applications, genotoxic damage was scored with the comet assay technique and the groups were compared.

RESULTS

In both the budesonide and triamcinolone acetate groups, the comet scores at low and high doses, on the 7th and 14th days were found to be significantly higher in both cartilage and epithelial tissue than in the control group.

CONCLUSION

The study results showed that budesonide and triamcinolone acetate lead to a significantly high rate of genotoxic damage in both epithelial tissue and cartilage tissue.

Pediatric tuina for allergic rhinitis in children: A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

AIM

To evaluate the clinical efficacy of pediatric tuina for allergic rhinitis treatment in children.

METHODS

Three English, four Chinese, one Japanese, and two Korean databases were searched for relevant literature published till February 2021, and eligible randomized controlled trials (RCTs) were included for analysis. Data were screened and extracted independently using predesigned forms. The methodological quality evaluation was performed using the tool of Cochrane bias risk assessment, and meta-analysis was performed through Review Manager 5.3.

RESULTS

A total of 12 RCTs, which included 716 children, were selected for meta-analysis. Compared with Chinese herbal medicine, acupuncture, Western medicine, and other therapies, pediatric tuina alone or in combination with other treatments had a higher clinical effectiveness (relative risk = 1.16, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 1.08-1.25) in treating children with allergic rhinitis. Pediatric tuina also effectively improved the following signs and symptoms of allergic rhinitis in children: nasal congestion (mean difference [MD] = -0.44, 95% CI = -0.70 to -0.19), runny nose (MD = -0.39, 95% CI = -0.55 to -0.23), sneezing (MD = -0.23, 95% CI = -0.38 to -0.08), and turbinate swelling (MD = -0.26, 95% CI = -0.48 to -0.04); all differences were statistically significant.

CONCLUSIONS

The present study provided favorable evidence for the treatment of allergic rhinitis in children with pediatric tuina. However, owing to the impact of research quality, this evidence needs to be validated via strictly designed clinical trials.

Safety of Intranasal Steroids: an Updated Perspective

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Intranasal corticosteroid sprays have been available as over-the-counter (OTC) medications since 2013. As such, clinicians need to be up-to-date with the risks and the safety of INS, as patients may have concerns and detailed questions. The following is a review of the recent medical literature regarding the safety profile, adverse reactions, and special populations using INS.

RECENT FINDINGS

The latest research on intranasal steroid sprays (INS) continue to confirm that INS rarely have significant local side effects, such as severe and persistent epistaxis. Recent studies looking at systemic side effects such as hypothalamic pituitary axis suppression, growth effects, and ocular effects do not indicate any new concerns nor have found significant differences from the past literature. The use of combination INS and topical antihistamine medications did not reveal any new safety issues. Use of INS with topical decongestants found some limited effects of tachyphylaxis and rebound congestion. Studies continue to support the use of newer INS for children and continued monitoring of growth in this population. The HIV population should avoid use of INS with the prescription of ritonavir, given demonstration of adrenal suppression. This updated perspective has found that newer generation INS should be used at the lowest effective dose for the selected population, that clinicians can inform patients using the OTC INS preparations that there are very few safety concerns, and that regular follow-up visits can provide further reassurance with physical examinations and address patient's questions. Future research regarding the safety of INS should study newer preparations when developed and if used in combination with other topical agents.

Intranasal Corticosteroid Therapy: Systematic Review and Meta-analysis of Reported Safety and Adverse Effects in Children

OBJECTIVES

To address concerns related to the safety profile of both Food and Drug Administration (FDA)-approved and non-FDA-approved intranasal corticosteroid (INCS) use in the pediatric population.

DATA SOURCE

Systematic review of MEDLINE, PubMed, and EMBASE databases using comprehensive search strategy, including all INCS formulations and adverse events. The study design was developed using Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. Additional sources were identified from study references of relevant articles.

REVIEW METHODS

A structured literature search was conducted. Extracted data included age, population size, study design, drug (dosage, route, and frequency), presence of hypothalamic-pituitary-adrenal (HPA) axis suppression, ocular symptoms, and growth velocity adverse events.

RESULTS

A total of 33 studies met inclusion criteria. The studies included use of INCS as nasal sprays and drops. There were no persistent abnormalities noted in cortisol level or intraocular pressure change. Growth velocity reduction was reported in 3 of 10 randomized trials. Meta-analysis of epistaxis and headache showed no significant difference in the incidence of headache or epistaxis when FDA-approved INCSs were compared to placebo, with a relative risk of 1.12 (95% CI, 0.77-1.63; P = .56) and 0.84 (95% CI, 0.60-1.18; P = .32), respectively. Meta-analysis was not performed for growth velocity, HPA axis suppression, and ocular change.

CONCLUSIONS

INCSs in FDA-approved routes of administration are generally safe to use in the pediatric population. Use of non-FDA-approved INCS drops may increase risk of iatrogenic Cushing's syndrome. Growth velocity reduction, HPA axis suppression, and visual changes due to INCS are uncommon.

Effects of double-dose intranasal corticosteroid for allergic rhinitis: a systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

When a standard dose of intranasal corticosteroid (INCS) fails to control symptoms of allergic rhinitis (AR), a double dose of INCS is optional. This systematic review aimed to assess the effects of double-dose INCS.

METHODS

Literature searches were performed using MEDLINE and EMBASE. Randomized controlled trials that studied the effects of double-dose INCS vs standard-dose INCS for treating patients with AR were included. Data from the included studies were extracted and collected for meta-analyses. The outcomes were nasal symptoms, ocular symptoms, and adverse events.

RESULTS

Twelve studies (4166 patients) met the inclusion criteria. There were 5 pediatric studies (1868 patients), 5 adult studies (1414 patients), and 2 studies with mixed populations (884 patients). The meta-analysis results in adult patients favored the effects of double-dose INCS on: total nasal symptom score (standardized mean difference [SMD] -0.25; 95% confidence interval [CI], -0.41 to -0.08; 4 studies; 568 patients) and total ocular symptom score (SMD -0.27; 95% CI, -0.52 to -0.03; 1 study; 259 patients). The meta-analysis results in pediatric patients did not show the difference between groups on total nasal symptom score (SMD -0.16; 95% CI, -0.40 to 0.07; 3 studies; 801 patients). The meta-analysis of ocular symptom score in pediatric patients had insufficient data. There were no differences between groups on adverse events.

CONCLUSION

Double-dose INCS showed better improvement in nasal and ocular symptoms in adult patients with AR when compared to the standard dose. These beneficial effects were not seen in the pediatric population. Adverse events between groups were not different.

Treatment of allergic children - Where is the progress (for the practicing allergist)?

For any kind of therapeutic intervention in allergic diseases such as environmental control, pharmacological, or immunomodulating treatment including educational programs, children are addressed separately from adults. Health authorities like the Food and Drug Administration in the United States of America or the European Medicine Agency in Europe request a specific 'Pediatric investigational plan' with studies addressing dose-response relationship, safety, and efficacy for infants, children, and adolescents. During the last 2 years, promising advances have been reported for the treatment of a variety of allergic and immunologic disorders. This review summarizes the progress in the treatment of pediatric asthma and allergic diseases, based on publications of approximately the last 2.5 years (end of 2013 until May 2016) in and beyond this journal. Meanwhile, it highlights areas with promising novel therapeutic approaches, which are likely to change treatment for allergic children in the near future.

MP-AzeFlu is more effective than fluticasone propionate for the treatment of allergic rhinitis in children

The objective was to evaluate the efficacy of MP-AzeFlu (Dymista(®) ) vs fluticasone propionate (FP), (both 1 spray/nostril bid), in children with allergic rhinitis (AR). MP-AzeFlu combines azelastine hydrochloride, FP and a novel formulation in a single spray. Children were randomized in a 3 : 1 ratio to MP-AzeFlu or FP in this open-label, 3-month study. Efficacy was assessed in children aged ≥ 6 to <12 years (MP-AzeFlu: n = 264; FP: n = 89), using a 4-point symptom severity rating scale from 0 to 3 (0 = no symptoms; 3 = severe symptoms). Over the 3-month period, MP-AzeFlu-treated children experienced significantly greater symptom relief than FP-treated children (Diff: -0.14; 95% CI: -0.28, -0.01; P = 0.04), noted from the first day (particularly the first 7 days) and sustained for 90 days. More MP-AzeFlu children achieved symptom-free or mild symptom severity status, and did so up to 16 days faster than FP. MP-AzeFlu provides significantly greater, more rapid and clinically relevant symptom relief than FP in children with AR.

Beclomethasone dipropionate hydrofluoroalkane for the treatment of allergic rhinitis

Allergic rhinitis (AR) is a common respiratory disease, and its prevalence is increasing all over the world, both in adults and in children. Patients experience symptoms that may negatively impact on physical, social and psychological well-being. Hence, if left untreated, allergic rhinitis may significantly affect quality of life. Under current guidelines, intranasal corticosteroids are considered the most effective drugs and they are recommended as first-line therapy. Among the several corticosteroid intranasal sprays available, beclomethasone dipropionate is one of the most prescribed. Recently, new intranasal hydrofluoroalkane-propelled formulations with little or no impact on the ozone layer have been developed for the treatment of AR. The use of these devices might improve patients' adherence to treatment, avoiding some of the most common side effects associated with aqueous formulations. This review provides the most recent evidence for the efficacy and safety of beclomethasone dipropionate hydrofluoroalkane nasal aerosol in the treatment of allergic rhinitis.

No hypothalamic-pituitary-adrenal function effect with beclomethasone dipropionate nasal aerosol, based on 24-hour serum cortisol in pediatric allergic rhinitis

BACKGROUND

Intranasal corticosteroids are the mainstay of allergic rhinitis (AR) treatment. Their potential to suppress the hypothalamic-pituitary-adrenal axis should be evaluated, especially after long-term daily use in children.

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the effects of treatment with non-aqueous beclomethasone dipropionate (BDP) nasal aerosol on hypothalamic-pituitary-adrenal axis function in children with perennial AR.

METHODS

In this double-blinded, placebo-controlled, parallel-group study, patients (6-11 years old) with perennial AR were randomized (2:1) to BDP nasal aerosol at 80 μg/day (n = 67) or placebo (n = 32). The primary end point was change from baseline in 24-hour serum cortisol (SC) weighted mean for BDP nasal aerosol and placebo after 6 weeks of treatment, which was analyzed in the per-protocol population.

RESULTS

The per-protocol population included 97 patients (BDP nasal aerosol, n = 66; placebo, n = 31). Baseline geometric mean SC weighted mean values were similar in the 80-μg/day BDP nasal aerosol and placebo groups (5.97 and 6.47 μg/dL, respectively). After 6 weeks' treatment, geometric mean values were 6.19 and 7.13 μg/dL, respectively, with no decrease from baseline in either group. Geometric mean SC ratio of BDP nasal aerosol at 80 μg/day to placebo was 0.91 (95% confidence interval 0.81-1.03), indicating predefined noninferiority. SC concentration-time profiles were similar for the placebo and 80-μg/day BDP nasal aerosol groups at baseline and week 6. BDP nasal aerosol at 80 μg/day was generally well tolerated.

CONCLUSION

In pediatric patients with perennial AR, 24-hour SC profiles were comparable for BDP nasal aerosol and placebo, indicating that once-daily BDP nasal aerosol treatment did not significantly affect hypothalamic-pituitary-adrenal axis function.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov; NCT01697956.

Gpr97 Is Dispensable for Inflammation in OVA-Induced Asthmatic Mice

BACKGROUND

Asthma is a complex inflammatory disorder involving the activation and invasion of various immune cells. GPR97 is highly expressed in some immunocytes, including mast cells and eosinophils, which play critical roles in asthma development. However, the role of Gpr97 in regulating airway inflammation in asthma has rarely been reported. In this study, we investigated the potential role of Gpr97 in the development of allergic asthma in mice.

METHODS

Relevant airway asthmatic mouse models were constructed with both wild-type and Gpr97-/- mice sensitized to 250 μg ovalbumin (OVA). The levels of interleukin IL-4, IL-6 and IFN-γ, which are involved in OVA-induced asthma, in the bronchoalveolar lavage fluid (BALF) and the IgE level in the serum were examined by enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA). The invasion of mast cells and eosinophils into lung tissues was assessed by immunohistochemical and eosinophil peroxidase activity assays, respectively. Goblet cell hyperplasia and mucus production were morphologically evaluated with periodic acid-Schiff (PAS) staining.

RESULTS

In our study, no obvious alteration in the inflammatory response or airway remodeling was found in the Gpr97-deficient mice with OVA-induced asthma. Neither the secretion of cytokines, including IL-4, IL-6 and IFN-γ, nor inflammatory cell recruitment was altered in the Gpr97-deficient mice. Moreover, Gpr97 deficiency did not affect airway remodeling or mucus production in the asthma mouse model.

CONCLUSION

Our findings imply that Gpr97 might not be required for the development of airway inflammation in OVA-induced allergic asthma in mice.

Intranasal spray medications for maintenance therapy of allergic rhinitis

BACKGROUND

Intranasal sprays are recommended as targeted therapy for allergic rhinitis (AR) by providing direct delivery of medication to the nasal mucosa, reducing the potential for systemic adverse effects, decreasing burden of disease, and improving quality of life.

OBJECTIVE

To review currently available intranasal sprays indicated for maintenance therapy of AR in the United States: intranasal antihistamines (INAH); intranasal corticosteroids (INCS); and MP-AzeFlu, a single formulation nasal spray of the INAH, azelastine hydrochloride, and the INCS, fluticasone propionate.

METHODS

MEDLINE searches were conducted to identify placebo-controlled studies of commercially available prescription nasal sprays at U.S.-approved doses and indications, and published after an earlier systematic review of AR treatment. Inclusion criteria were ≥20 subjects; duration of ≥2 weeks for seasonal (or episodic) AR, ≥4 weeks for perennial (or persistent) AR, and reporting a total nasal symptom score as a primary or secondary outcome.

RESULTS

Twenty studies met the inclusion criteria: 4 pediatric, 16 adult/adolescent. There were 4 perennial AR studies (381 children, 1607 adults) and 16 seasonal AR trials (3081 children, 6548 adults). In these studies, 2451 subjects (481 children, 1970 adults) received an INCS, 3001 (1116 children, 1885 adults) received an INAH, and 346 adult subjects received MP-AzeFlu. All active treatments were well tolerated and effective as measured by the reduction in nasal symptoms. Head-to-head comparisons were only available for MP-AzeFlu versus the individual active agent components. MP-AzeFlu provided significantly greater symptom relief than either azelastine or fluticasone propionate alone and with an onset starting at 30 minutes after the dose.

CONCLUSION

The most recent addition to intranasal sprays for the maintenance therapy of AR is MP-AzeFlu, a single formulation nasal spray of azelastine hydrochloride and fluticasone propionate in an advanced delivery system. Analysis of clinical data showed this to be the first new intranasal medication that provides greater clinical benefit than an INCS in treating AR.

Efficacy and safety of beclomethasone dipropionate nasal aerosol in children with perennial allergic rhinitis

BACKGROUND

Beclomethasone dipropionate (BDP) nasal aerosol (non-aqueous) is approved for management of seasonal and perennial allergic rhinitis (PAR) in adolescents and adults.

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the efficacy and safety of BDP nasal aerosol at 80 μg/day in children with PAR.

METHODS

This 12-week, phase 3, double-blinded, placebo-controlled, parallel-group study randomized 547 children (4-11 years old) with PAR to once-daily BDP nasal aerosol at 80 μg/day or placebo. The primary end point was change from baseline in average morning and evening reflective total nasal symptom score (rTNSS) during the first 6 weeks of treatment in patients 6 to 11 years old. Changes from baseline in average morning and evening instantaneous TNSS (iTNSS) in children 6 to 11 years old and average rTNSS and iTNSS in children 4 to 11 years old were assessed during the first 6 weeks of treatment.

RESULTS

Improvements were significantly greater with BDP nasal aerosol than with placebo during the first 6 weeks of treatment in children 6 to 11 years old in average morning and evening rTNSS and iTNSS (mean treatment difference -0.66 [P = .002] and -0.58 [P = .004], respectively). Improvements in average morning and evening rTNSS and iTNSS also were significantly greater in patients 4 to 11 years receiving BDP nasal aerosol than with placebo during the first 6 weeks of treatment (P = .002 and P = .004, respectively). Similar improvements were seen during 12 weeks of treatment. The safety profile of BDP nasal aerosol was comparable to that of placebo.

CONCLUSION

The BDP nasal aerosol at 80 μg/day in children 4 to 11 years old was well tolerated and effective in controlling nasal symptoms of PAR.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

www.clinicaltrials.gov, identifier NCT01783548.