Effect of short-course glucocorticoid application on patients with chronic rhinosinusitis with nasal polyps

Budenoside aqueous nasal spray: an updated review in managing chronic rhinosinusitis with nasal polyps

Chronic rhinosinusitis with nasal polyps (CRSwNP) is a frequent medical condition. Type 2 inflammation signs CRSwNP in western countries. Type 2 inflammation leads to nasal airflow limitation. Budesonide aqueous nasal spray (BANS) is an intranasal corticosteroid (INCS); it has been launched in the early 1980s. BANS is indicated for treating allergic rhinitis, nonallergic rhinitis, and nasal polyps (both as treatment and prevention after surgery). Consolidated evidence documented its efficacy in treating CRSwNP. In addition, BANS is safe with negligible local and systemic side effects. Recent guidelines for patients with CRSwNP recommend using INCS as the first line in many situations. In particular, patients may assess the perception of symptoms' severity using the Visual Analog Scale (VAS). A score >5/10 means uncontrolled symptoms in both diseases and requires adequate treatment. BANS could appropriately be used in patients with uncontrolled symptoms and/or moderate/severe nasal obstruction. In addition, BANS may adequately integrate surgery and biologics for CRSwNP management. In conclusion, BANS represents a valuable option in managing patients with type 2-mediated CRSwNP.

The role of budesonide intrapolyp injection in the management of type 2 chronic rhinosinusitis with nasal polyps: a randomised clinical trial

PROBLEM

To assess the efficacy of budesonide intrapolyp injection in chronic rhinosinusitis with nasal polyps.

METHOD

Ninety patients were divided into three groups; group A was given oral prednisolone, group B was given budesonide intrapolyp injection weekly for five consecutive weeks and group C was given budesonide as nasal irrigation for one month. Patients were assessed using Sino-Nasal Outcome Test 22 score, total nasal polyp score, serum immunoglobulin E, absolute eosinophilic count, and morning cortisol level before treatment, one week and three months after completing their treatment.

RESULTS

Total nasal polyp score decreased significantly in all groups compared to those at baseline. Reduction in the oral and injection groups was greater than the wash group (p2 = 0.004), (p3 < 0.001), and the same trend concerning Sino-Nasal Outcome Test 22 score (p2 < 0.001), (p3 < 0.001).

CONCLUSION

Budesonide is an effective agent used in intrapolyp injection with no documented systemic or visual side effects that has comparable results with oral steroids.

Delivering Therapy to the Olfactory Cleft: A Comparison of the Various Methods of Administering Topical Nasal Medications

Background and objective Chronic rhinosinusitis (CRS) is an inflammatory condition affecting the nasal mucosa, and it causes olfactory dysfunction (OD) in up to 78.2% of patients. Corticosteroids are the mainstay of treatment to shrink nasal polyposis, reduce inflammation, and improve olfactory function. While many delivery methods for topical nasal corticosteroids exist, there is scarce data on the efficacy of the various medication delivery methods to the olfactory cleft (OC). In light of this, this study aimed to compare the following delivery methods to the OC: conventional nasal spray (NS), nasal drops in the Kaiteki position (KP), and exhalation delivery system (EDS). Methods We evaluated 16 sinonasal cavities from eight cadaver specimens in this study. Each sinonasal cavity was administered fluorescein dye solution via NS, KP, and EDS. Following administration, nasal endoscopy was employed to capture staining patterns in the OC. OC staining was rated with scores ranging from 0 (no staining) to 3 (heavy staining) after each administration of dye solution. Mean OC staining ratings were calculated and compared using the Kruskal-Wallis rank sum test and the Wilcoxon signed-rank test. Results The mean OC staining score for the different delivery methods was as follows - NS: 1.095 ± 1.008, EDS: 0.670 ± 0.674, and KP: 2.038 ± 1.097. Nasal drops in the KP had a significantly higher staining score compared to NS (p=0.041) and EDS (p=0.003). However, there was no significant difference in staining scores between NS and EDS. Conclusions Nasal drops in the KP are more effective at reaching the OC than NS or EDS and should be considered as a first-line modality for administering topical medications when treating OD.

Management paradigms for chronic rhinosinusitis in individuals with asthma: An evidence-based review with recommendations

BACKGROUND

Despite the significant morbidity associated with chronic rhinosinusitis (CRS) in individuals with asthma (CRSwA), there is a paucity of codified, evidence-based management strategies for CRS in this population.

METHODS

Using PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane Review Databases, a systematic review was performed covering management strategies for CRSwA. A total of 5903 articles were screened, and 70 were included for full-text analysis. After application of exclusion criteria, 53 articles comprised the qualitative synthesis. The level of evidence was graded and benefit-harm assessments, as well as value judgment and recommendations, were provided RESULTS: Strong evidence confirms the benefit of oral and topical medications on sinonasal-specific outcomes in individuals with CRSwA; there is low-grade evidence demonstrating that these agents improve lung function and/or asthma control. Moderate to strong evidence suggests that endoscopic sinus surgery (ESS) improves both sinonasal- and asthma-specific quality of life. Although there is insufficient to low evidence to indicate that ESS improves pulmonary function in this population, data indicate a positive impact of this intervention on asthma control. Biologic medications strongly improve both subjective and objective sinonasal- and asthma-specific outcomes.

CONCLUSION

Evidence supports managing CRS in individuals with CRSwA in a stepwise fashion, starting with traditional nonbiologic oral and topical medication, and escalating to second-line treatments, such as ESS and biologics. Optimal treatment of individuals who have CRSwA often requires concurrent, directed management of asthma, as not all CRS interventions impact asthma status.

Liu D, A. Müller C, A. Stuck B, Welge-Lüssen A, Hähner A. Olfactory Dysfunction: Etiology, Diagnosis, and Treatment

BACKGROUND

Disorders of the sense of smell have received greater attention because of the frequency with which they occur as a symptom of SARS-CoV-2 infection. Olfactory dysfunction can lead to profound reduction in quality of life and may arise from many different causes.

METHODS

A selective literature review was conducted with consideration of the current version of the guideline issued by the Association of the Scientific Medical Societies in Germany.

RESULTS

The cornerstones of diagnosis are the relevant medical history and psychophysical testing of olfactory function using standardized validated tests. Modern treatment strategies are oriented on the cause of the dysfunction. While treatment of the underlying inflammation takes precedence in patients with sinunasal dysosmia, olfactory training is the primary treatment option for other forms of the disorder. The prognosis is determined not only by the cause of the olfactory dysfunction and the patient's age, but also by the olfactory performance as measured at the time of diagnosis.

CONCLUSION

Options for the treatment of olfactory dysfunction are available but limited, depending on the cause. It is therefore important to carry out a detailed diagnostic work-up and keep the patient informed of the expected course and prognosis.

Considerations for shared decision-making in treatment of chronic rhinosinusitis with nasal polyps

Shared decision-making is an approach where physicians and patients work together to determine a personalized treatment course. Such an approach is integral to patient-centered care in chronic rhinosinusitis with nasal polyps (CRSwNP). CRSwNP is a chronic inflammatory condition of the sinonasal cavity that can severely impact physical health, smell, and quality of life (QOL). Traditional standard-of-care treatment options include topical (i.e. sprays) and oral corticosteroids and endoscopic sinus surgery, but more recently, novel corticosteroid delivery methods (i.e. high volume irrigations, recently-approved exhalation breath-powered delivering devices, and drug-eluting steroid implants) and 3 new FDA approved biologics directed against type II immunomodulators have become available. The availability of these therapeutics offers exciting new opportunities in CRSwNP management but requires personalized and shared-decision making as each modality has variable impacts on CRSwNP and related comorbid conditions. Studies have published treatment algorithms, but the practical use of these lean guidelines is heavily influenced by the lens of the treating physician, the most common being otolaryngologists and allergy immunologists. Clinical equipoise occurs when there is no basis for one intervention to be regarded as “better” than another. While most guidelines, in general, support the use of topical corticosteroids with or without oral corticosteroids followed by ESS for the majority of unoperated CRSwNP patients, there are situations of clinical equipoise that arise particularly in CRSwNP who have failed surgery or those with severe comorbid conditions. In the shared decision-making process, clinicians and patients must consider symptomatology, goals, comfort, compliance, treatment efficacy, and treatment cost when determining the initial choice of therapy and escalation of therapy with the potential use of multiple modalities for recalcitrant CRSwNP. A summary of salient considerations that might constitute shared decision-making is presented in this summary.

Clinical characteristics of central compartment atopic disease in Southern China

BACKGROUND

Central compartment atopic disease (CCAD) is a newly reported subset of chronic rhinosinusitis. It was considered associated with inhalant antigen. However, CCAD in Chinese population is not fully studied yet.

DESIGN

Prospective cohort study.

OBJECTIVE

This study aimed to describe the clinical manifestations of CCAD and compared the following two subtypes: sinonasal polyps and concomitant polypoid disease in the central compartment (CRSwNP/CC) and CRSwNP not otherwise specified (CRSwNP NOS). Also, we compared the clinical manifestations of atopy CCAD and non-atopy CCAD.

METHODS

We consecutively enrolled CRSwNP patients without prior sinus surgery, and assessed the nasal endoscopy and computed tomography of the paranasal sinuses. Allergy was confirmed by skin or serum testing. Eosinophilic CRSwNP (ECRS) was considered as tissue eosinophils to total inflammatory cells >10%.

RESULTS

We enrolled a total of 116 patients, including 39 with CCAD, 38 with CRSwNP/CC and 39 with CRSwNP NOS. Atopy was detected in 37.1% of the CCAD group, an incidence showing no significant difference from those in the other two groups (37.1% in the CRSwNP/CC group, 31.0% in the CRSwNP NOS group; p = 0.846). However, the incidence of ECRS in the CCAD group was the highest among the different groups (97.4% in the CCAD group vs. 67.6% in the CRSwNP/CC group vs. 35.1% in the CRSwNP NOS group; p = 0.000). In addition, the incidence of asthma in the CCAD group (33.3%) was significantly higher than that in the CRSwNP NOS group (10.3%), but quite similar to CRSwNP/CC (34.2%). In the subgroup analysis of CCAD, only total serum IgE and sIgE demonstrated significant differences between atopy CCAD and non-atopy CCAD.

CONCLUSION

CCAD in Southern China may associate with asthma and significant eosinophilia, with a lower incidence of systemic allergy based on skin and serum testing.

A Decade of Clinical Advances in Chronic Rhinosinusitis: 2012-2022

The field of chronic rhinosinusitis (CRS) is constantly evolving. In the past 10 years, key advancements in basic and translational research as well as clinical studies have improved our understanding and management of CRS. Notably, treatment options have expanded to include novel therapeutic drugs, devices, and surgical techniques. Assessments of patient symptoms and their impact on quality of life have become more standardized. Progress has also been made in both determining the true prevalence of CRS and recognizing comorbidities that can impact CRS severity. Practice guidelines have also shifted from expert opinion to more data-driven analyses. This review highlights major clinical advancements made in the field of CRS over the past 10 years as well as identifies current gaps in knowledge that can form the basis for new areas of study over the next decade.

Sinonasal Outcomes Using Oral Corticosteroids in Patients with Chronic Rhinosinusitis with Nasal Polyps and Positive Sinonasal Cultures

Introduction Patients with chronic rhinosinusitis with nasal polyps (CRSwNP) and positive sinonasal bacterial cultures may be recalcitrant to topical therapy alone due to the additional local inflammatory burden associated with bacterial infection/colonization.

Objective To evaluate sinonasal outcomes in CRSwNP patients with a positive perioperative bacterial culture, who were treated with postoperative intranasal corticosteroids (INCS) alone versus INCS in combination with a short-term course of oral corticosteroids (OCS).

Methods This is a retrospective chart review of CRSwNP patients. A total of 59 patients met inclusion criteria, including positive perioperative bacterial culture and treatment with INCS with or without concomitant use of OCS. Two cohorts were formed based on the chosen postoperative medical treatment; 32 patients underwent postoperative INCS alone, while 27 underwent INCS plus a ≤ 2-week course of OCS. The 22-item sinonasal outcome test (SNOT-22) scores and Lund-Kennedy scores (LKS) were assessed preoperatively, and at 2-week, 4-week, and 4 to 6 months after endoscopic sinus surgery (ESS).

Results There were no statistically significant differences in postoperative sinonasal symptoms or endoscopic scores between the cohorts treated with INCS plus OCS versus those prescribed INCS alone (p > 0.05). Our regression model failed to demonstrate a relationship between the use of OCS and better sinonasal outcomes at 2-week, 4-week, and 4 to 6 months after ESS (p > 0.05).

Conclusion Our study suggests that in a cohort of CRSwNP patients with recent bacterial infections, the postoperative use of combined OCS and INCS did not result in a statistical improvement of endoscopic and symptomatic outcomes over INCS irrigation alone. However, both treatment groups had a clinically significant improvement based on the Minimal Clinically Important Difference.

International consensus statement on allergy and rhinology: Olfaction

BACKGROUND

The literature regarding clinical olfaction, olfactory loss, and olfactory dysfunction has expanded rapidly over the past two decades, with an exponential rise in the past year. There is substantial variability in the quality of this literature and a need to consolidate and critically review the evidence. It is with that aim that we have gathered experts from around the world to produce this International Consensus on Allergy and Rhinology: Olfaction (ICAR:O).

METHODS

Using previously described methodology, specific topics were developed relating to olfaction. Each topic was assigned a literature review, evidence-based review, or evidence-based review with recommendations format as dictated by available evidence and scope within the ICAR:O document. Following iterative reviews of each topic, the ICAR:O document was integrated and reviewed by all authors for final consensus.

RESULTS

The ICAR:O document reviews nearly 100 separate topics within the realm of olfaction, including diagnosis, epidemiology, disease burden, diagnosis, testing, etiology, treatment, and associated pathologies.

CONCLUSION

This critical review of the existing clinical olfaction literature provides much needed insight and clarity into the evaluation, diagnosis, and treatment of patients with olfactory dysfunction, while also clearly delineating gaps in our knowledge and evidence base that we should investigate further.

Advances in chronic rhinosinusitis in 2020 and 2021

Major progress has been achieved in the understanding and clinical practice of chronic rhinosinusitis, with or without nasal polyps. These advances resulted in a better understanding of the pathophysiology, the distribution into subgroups, and consequently in a better management perspective using classical approaches and biologics. Pathomechanisms, endotypes and biomarkers, and finally innovative therapeutic approaches are themes especially for the more severe forms of chronic rhinosinusitis, those with uncontrolled severe nasal polyps. Biologicals against key type 2 cytokines are gaining ground in the long-term treatment approaches of often recurrent nasal polyps, and should be integrated in care pathways making use of classical and innovative treatment pathways. These areas of interest show a fast development and will profoundly change our disease management within a decade.

Mepolizumab for chronic rhinosinusitis with nasal polyps (SYNAPSE): a randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled, phase 3 trial

BACKGROUND

Chronic rhinosinusitis with nasal polyps affects approximately 2-4% of the general population, and long-term use of systemic corticosteroids is associated with adverse effects. The aim of this study was to assess the efficacy and safety of mepolizumab in adults with recurrent, refractory severe bilateral chronic rhinosinusitis with nasal polyps.

METHODS

SYNAPSE was a randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled, parallel-group, phase 3 trial done at 93 centres, mainly hospitals, in 11 countries. Eligible patients were aged 18 years or older with recurrent, refractory, severe, bilateral nasal polyp symptoms (nasal obstruction symptom visual analogue scale [VAS] score of >5), were eligible for repeat nasal surgery (overall symptoms VAS score >7 and endoscopic nasal polyps score of ≥5, with a minimum score of 2 in each nasal cavity) despite standard of care treatment, and had to have at least one nasal surgery in the past 10 years. Patients were randomly assigned (1:1), using permuted block design, to receive either 100 mg mepolizumab subcutaneously or placebo once every 4 weeks, in addition to standard of care (mometasone furoate intranasal spray for at least 8 weeks before screening and during the study, saline nasal irrigations, systemic corticosteroids or antibiotics, or both), as required, for 52 weeks. Site staff, the central study team, and patients were masked to study treatment and absolute blood eosinophil counts. The coprimary endpoints were change from baseline in total endoscopic nasal polyp score at week 52 and in mean nasal obstruction VAS score during weeks 49-52, assessed in the intention-to-treat population (ITT). This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT03085797.

FINDINGS

From May 25, 2017, to Dec 12, 2018, 854 patients were screened for eligibility. 414 patients were randomly assigned with 407 included in the ITT population; 206 received mepolizumab and 201 received placebo. Total endoscopic nasal polyp score significantly improved at week 52 from baseline with mepolizumab versus placebo (adjusted difference in medians -0·73, 95% CI -1·11 to -0·34; p<0·0001) and nasal obstruction VAS score during weeks 49-52 also significantly improved (-3·14, -4·09 to -2·18; p<0·0001). Adverse events considered related to study treatment were reported in 30 (15%) of 206 patients receiving mepolizumab and 19 (9%) of 201 receiving placebo. On-treatment serious adverse events occurred in 12 (6%) patients receiving mepolizumab and 13 (6%) receiving placebo; none were considered related to treatment in those receiving mepolizumab. One death was reported in the placebo group (myocardial infarction; death occurred 99 days after the last dose) and was considered unrelated to the treatment.

INTERPRETATION

Mepolizumab treatment improved nasal polyp size and nasal obstruction compared with placebo, with no new safety indications, in patients with recurrent, refractory severe chronic rhinosinusitis with nasal polyps. These findings suggest that mepolizumab provides an effective add-on treatment option to standard of care in this population.

FUNDING

GlaxoSmithKline.

Prognostic and pharmacologic value of cystatin SN for chronic rhinosinusitis with nasal polyps

BACKGROUND

Integrated care pathways improve the management of patients with chronic rhinosinusitis with nasal polyps (CRSwNP). The application of integrated care pathways requires development of endotype-based biomarkers to stratify patients. The value of cytokines and markers induced by cytokines for the management of CRSwNP is largely unknown.

OBJECTIVES

Our aim was to determine the prognostic and pharmacologic value of type 2, non-type 2 cytokines, and markers associated with type 2 inflammation, including CCL26, periostin, and cystatin SN, in nasal secretions for CRSwNP.

METHODS

This retrospective study assigned 151 patients with CRSwNP to the discovery and validation phases. Concentrations of cytokines, CCL26, periostin, and cystatin SN in nasal secretions were determined by using Luminex and ELISA. Predictive significance was assessed with receiver-operating characteristic curves. Survival analysis was performed by using Kaplan-Meier curves and Cox regression models.

RESULTS

Cystatin SN was an independent predictor of the uncontrolled status of CRSwNP over a 2-year follow-up after adjustment for other risk factors (hazard ratio = 1.168 and 1.132 in the discovery and validation phases, respectively; both P < .001). Patients with high cystatin SN concentrations presented with a faster onset and higher rate of uncontrolled status than did those with low levels (P < .001). Enhanced medical treatment for patients with high cystatin SN levels postponed the uncontrolled status in the discovery (P = .016) and validation (P = .002) phases but did not completely abolish it by the end of the follow-up.

CONCLUSION

Cystatin SN levels in nasal secretions hold strong prognostic value and can facilitate medical instructions for managing CRSwNP.