Evaluation of the improvement of quality of life with Azithromycin in the treatment of eosinophilic nasal polyposis

Heterogeneity in the definition of chronic rhinosinusitis disease control: a systematic review of the scientific literature

PURPOSE

Disease control is conceptually recognized to be an important outcome measure for chronic rhinosinusitis (CRS). However, inconsistent usage is a significant factor in disadoption of important concepts and it is presently unclear how consistently the construct of CRS 'control' is being defined/applied. The objective of this study was to determine the heterogeneity of CRS disease control definitions in the scientific literature.

METHODS

Systematic review of PubMed and Web of Science databases from inception through December 31, 2022. Included studies used CRS disease control as an explicitly stated outcome measure. The definitions of CRS disease control were collected.

RESULTS

Thirty-one studies were identified with more than half published in 2021 or later. Definitions of CRS control were variable, although 48.4% of studies used the EPOS (2012 or 2020) criteria to define control, 14 other unique definitions of CRS disease control were also implemented. Most studies included the burden CRS symptoms (80.6%), need for antibiotics or systemic corticosteroids (77.4%) or nasal endoscopy findings (61.3%) as criteria in their definitions of CRS disease control. However, the specific combination of these criteria and prior time periods over which they were assessed were highly variable.

CONCLUSION

CRS disease control is not consistently defined in the scientific literature. Although many studies conceptually treated 'control' as the goal of CRS treatment, 15 different criteria were used to define CRS disease control, representing significant heterogeneity. Scientific derivation of criteria and collaborative consensus building are needed for the development of a widely-accepted and -applied definition of CRS disease control.

Chronic Rhinosinusitis With Nasal Polyps: Quality of Life in the Biologics Era

Chronic rhinosinusitis (CRS) affects up to 12% of the general population and is traditionally divided into two main phenotypic subsets, based on the presence of nasal polyps (CRSwNP) or their absence. It is well-established that many patients with CRSwNP report poor quality of life (QoL), which is further compromised by comorbidities (eg, asthma, bronchiectasis, aspirin-exacerbated respiratory disease). Chronic rhinosinusitis CRS with nasal polyps is managed with a combination of medical therapy and surgical interventions, and biologics are emerging as a promising new treatment option for patients with inadequate response to the standard of care. A range of patient-reported outcome measures have been used to assess QoL for patients with CRSwNP in clinical trials, including disease-specific questionnaires (eg, Sino-Nasal Outcome Test-22) and generic ones (eg, Short Form-36). Significantly impaired QoL has been identified as a criterion for the indication to use biologics in patients with CRSwNP. This review summarizes clinical evidence (2010-2021) on QoL outcomes with currently available treatments for CRSwNP and assesses the improvement in QoL after biologic treatments, especially for patients with comorbidities reported in interventional studies (randomized controlled trials and real-world experience).

Prospective evaluation of clarithromycin in recurrent chronic rhinosinusitis with nasal polyps

Introduction

The antiinflammatory effects of macrolides, especially clarithromycin, have been described in patients with chronic rhinosinusitis without polyps and also other chronic inflammatory airway diseases. There is no consensus in the literature regarding the effectiveness of clarithromycin in patients with chronic rhinosinusitis with sinonasal polyposis and the national literature does not report any prospective studies on the efficacy of clarithromycin in chronic rhinosinusitis in our population.

Objective

To evaluate the effect of clarithromycin in the adjunctive treatment of recurrent chronic rhinosinusitis with sinonasal polyposis refractory to clinical and surgical treatment.

Methods

Open prospective study with 52 patients with chronic rhinosinusitis and recurrent sinonasal polyposis. All subjects received nasal lavage with 20 mL 0.9% SS and fluticasone nasal spray, 200 mcg / day, 12/12 h for 12 weeks; and clarithromycin 250 mg 8/8 h for 2 weeks and, thereafter, 12/12 h for 10 weeks. The patients were assessed by SNOT 20, NOSE and Lund-Kennedy scales before, immediately after treatment and 12 weeks after treatment. The patients were also evaluated before treatment with paranasal cavity computed tomography (Lund-Mackay) and serum IgG, IgM, IgA, IgE and eosinophil levels. The outcomes evaluated were: SNOT-20, NOSE and Lund-Kennedy.

Results

Most patients were women, aged 47 (15) years (median / interquartile range), and 61.5% (32/52) had asthma. All patients completed the follow-up after 12 weeks and 42.3% (22/52) after 24 weeks. Treatment resulted in a quantitative decrease in the SNOT-20 [2.3 (1.6) vs. 1.4 (1.6); Δ = −0.9 (1.1); p < 0.01]; NOSE [65 (64) vs. 20 (63); Δ = −28 (38), p < 0.01] and Lund-Kennedy [11 (05) vs. 07 (05); Δ = −2 (05); p < 0.01] scores. SNOT-20 showed a qualitative improvement (>0.8) in 54% (28/52, p < 0.04) of patients, a group that showed lower IgE level [108 (147) vs. 289 (355), p < 0.01]. The group of patients who completed follow-up 12 weeks after the end of treatment (n = 22) showed no worsening of outcomes.

Conclusion

Long-term adjuvant use of low-dose clarithromycin for chronic rhinosinusitis patients with recurrent sinonasal polyposis refractory to clinical and surgical treatment has resulted in improved quality of life and nasal endoscopy findings, especially in patients with normal IgE levels. This improvement persisted in the patient group evaluated 12 weeks after the end of the treatment.

Macrolide antibiotics in the treatment of chronic rhinosinusitis: evidence from a meta-analysis

Background

The purpose of this study was to systematically assess the subjective and objective outcomes of macrolide therapy for chronic rhinosinusitis (CRS).

Methods

PubMed, Embase and Cochrane databases were searched for clinical trials detailing the effects of macrolide therapy in patients with CRS and published up to December 2017. Sino-Nasal Outcome Test (SNOT), endoscopic scores and computed tomography scans (CT) scores were assessed by mean difference (MD) or standardized mean difference (SMD) with 95% confidence interval. Subgroup analyses were performed to evaluate the source of heterogeneity according to study design and geographic locations. I² metric was used to assess the heterogeneity.

Results

Seven randomised clinical trials (RCTs) and four cohort trials meeting pre-determined selection criteria were enrolled in this meta-analysis. Assessment of the findings for SNOT after 12 weeks' macrolide treatment demonstrated a significant improvement in subgroup of trials in Asian patients (SMD =-0.51; 95% CI: -0.96, -0.02; P=0.04), but not in non-Asians (SMD =-0.01; 95% CI: -0.65, 0.63; P=0.98). At 12 or 24 weeks' visit no significant difference in SNOT was noted compared with control group, either in RCTs or cohort trials subgroups. However, findings for endoscopic scores were found to be significantly improved compared to placebo in the subgroup of non-RCT studies after 8 weeks (SMD =-0.77; 95% CI: -1.07, -0.46; P<0.00001) and 12 weeks (SMD=-1.40; 95% CI: -1.97, -0.82; P<0.00001) of macrolide therapy. Similarly, findings for CT scores showed significant improvements in CT scores compared to baseline after 12 weeks' treatment (MD=-5.81; 95% CI: -8.10, -3.52; P<0.00001) in cohort trials.

Conclusions

Macrolide therapy can significantly improve endoscopic and CT scores in CRS patients, compared to baseline. Further well-designed studies are needed to confirm the efficacy and safety of macrolides in CRS treatment.

The Role of Macrolides in Chronic Rhinosinusitis (CRSsNP and CRSwNP)

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

We assess the literature on the pharmacokinetics, indications, important considerations, and effectiveness of long-term, low-dose macrolide antibiotics in chronic rhinosinusitis (CRS).

RECENT FINDINGS

The key to effective implementation of macrolide therapy in CRS is appropriate patient selection. Macrolides have demonstrated the most benefit in Th1-mediated non-eosinophilic CRS when used for durations of at least 3 months. Macrolide antibiotics have demonstrated great benefit when used for their anti-inflammatory or immunomodulatory properties, which include the blockage of pro-inflammatory cytokines, such as interleukin (IL)-8 and tumor necrosis factor-α (TNF-α). They have been used in CRS patients not responding to traditional corticosteroid-based treatment regimens, but appear to be most effective specifically in Th1-mediated non-eosinophilic CRS in long durations and low doses. Further research is needed to better identify characteristics known to correlate with macrolide response so early directed therapy can be implemented.