Comparison of the combinations of fexofenadine-pseudoephedrine and loratadine-montelukast in the treatment of seasonal allergic rhinitis

Effect of antihistamine-containing syrup on salivary metabolites: an in vitro and in vivo study

This study tested the null hypothesis that antihistamine-containing syrup does not change salivary metabolites in vitro and in vivo. For the in vitro experiments, saliva from 10 volunteers was mixed with a syrup or pill suspension of loratadine (1 mg/ml Claritin®, Schering-Plough, Rio de Janeiro, Brazil). For the in vivo experiment, 10 volunteers performed a mouth rinse with 10 mL of antihistamine syrup (Claritin®; Schering-Plough, Rio de Janeiro, Brazil) for 20 seconds and then discarded the rinse water. After 20 seconds, 5 mL of unstimulated whole saliva was spit into a plastic tube kept on ice. The protein profile of in vitro and in vivo experiments was analyzed using 12% sodium dodecyl sulfate-polyacrylamide gel electrophoresis. The samples were also analyzed by nuclear magnetic resonance (NMR) spectroscopy, followed by Principal Component Analysis and Wilcoxon test (p < 0.05). There were differences in salivary metabolites after syrup interaction. The salivary concentrations of acetate, n-caproate, arginine, glutamate, and lysine among other metabolites were reduced with the syrup in both in vivo and in vitro experiments (p < 0.05), but no differences were observed when the pill suspension was used (p > 0.05). Similar changes in metabolite profiles were observed in both in vitro and in vivo experiments. Electrophoresis revealed no difference in the salivary protein pattern. The null hypothesis was rejected because the intake of syrup medicine changes the salivary composition and influences oral homeostasis and susceptibility to oral diseases.

International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis

BACKGROUND

Critical examination of the quality and validity of available allergic rhinitis (AR) literature is necessary to improve understanding and to appropriately translate this knowledge to clinical care of the AR patient. To evaluate the existing AR literature, international multidisciplinary experts with an interest in AR have produced the International Consensus statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis (ICAR:AR).

METHODS

Using previously described methodology, specific topics were developed relating to AR. Each topic was assigned a literature review, evidence-based review (EBR), or evidence-based review with recommendations (EBRR) format as dictated by available evidence and purpose within the ICAR:AR document. Following iterative reviews of each topic, the ICAR:AR document was synthesized and reviewed by all authors for consensus.

RESULTS

The ICAR:AR document addresses over 100 individual topics related to AR, including diagnosis, pathophysiology, epidemiology, disease burden, risk factors for the development of AR, allergy testing modalities, treatment, and other conditions/comorbidities associated with AR.

CONCLUSION

This critical review of the AR literature has identified several strengths; providers can be confident that treatment decisions are supported by rigorous studies. However, there are also substantial gaps in the AR literature. These knowledge gaps should be viewed as opportunities for improvement, as often the things that we teach and the medicine that we practice are not based on the best quality evidence. This document aims to highlight the strengths and weaknesses of the AR literature to identify areas for future AR research and improved understanding.

Controlled Allergen Challenge Facilities and Their Unique Contributions to Allergic Rhinitis Research

The aim of this study is to review advances in basic and clinical allergic rhinitis (AR) research over the past decade that have been conducted using controlled allergen challenge facility (CACF) models of allergen challenge. Databases, including PubMed, Medline, and Web of Science were searched for articles employing an ambient pollen exposure in a controlled facility to study AR, published between 2004 and the present date, using the terms as follows: CACF, Environmental Exposure Unit (EEU), Vienna Challenge Chamber (VCC), Fraunhofer Institute Environmental Challenge Chamber, Atlanta Allergen Exposure Unit, Biogenics Research Chamber, Allergen BioCube, Chiba and Osaka Environmental Challenge Chamber, exposure unit, challenge chamber, or environmental exposure chamber. Articles were then selected for relevance to the goals of the present review, including important contributions toward clinical and/or basic science allergy research. CACFs offer sensitive, specific, and reproducible methodology for allergen challenge. They have been employed since the 1980s and offer distinct advantages over traditional in-season multicentre trials when evaluating new treatments for AR. They have provided clinically applicable efficacy and pharmacologic information about important allergy medications, including antihistamines, decongestants, antileukotrienes, immunotherapies, and nasal steroids. CACF models have also contributed to basic science and novel/experimental therapy research. To date, no direct studies have been conducted comparing outcomes from one CACF to another. Over the past decade, CACF models have played an essential role in investigating the pathophysiology of AR and evaluating new therapies. The future opportunities for this model continue to expand.

Quality of sleep in allergic children and their parents

BACKGROUND

Quality of sleep is essential for physical and mental health and influences the perception of the patient's well-being during the day. In patients with chronic allergic diseases sleep disorders may increase the severity of the condition, complicate the management and impair their quality of life. When children are concerned, their parents are also affected by the problem. We evaluated the presence of disrupted sleep in parents of children with atopic disorders, and its relationship with clinical features and the presence of disturbed sleep in children.

METHODS

Parents of children suffering from allergic diseases were recruited from the Pediatric Allergy Units of Parma University. Evaluation of sleep in parents was based on the Pittsburg Sleep Quality Index (PSQI), while in children it was based on the Sleep Disturbance Scale for Children (SDSC).

RESULTS

Of the 102 parents invited, 92 filled in the questionnaire. Only the questionnaires with more than a 95% completion rate were considered for analysis. PSQI mean score in parents was 6.6 (SD 2.6); 75.6% of them had a PSQI ≥ 5, indicating that most parents had a sleep quality perceived as bad. The PSQI ≥ 5 was more common in parents of children with asthma and rhinitis. In children, SDSC mean score was 42.1 (SD: 9.4); 62.3% had a total score ≥ 39. The quality of sleep in parents and children was significantly correlated (p<0.001).

CONCLUSION

These findings make it apparent that an alteration of sleep in children can also affect the parents. Such effect further weighs the burden of respiratory allergy and needs to be considered in future studies.

Ragweed-induced allergic rhinoconjunctivitis: current and emerging treatment options

Ragweed (Ambrosia spp.) is an annually flowering plant whose pollen bears high allergenic potential. Ragweed-induced allergic rhinoconjunctivitis has long been seen as a major immunologic condition in Northern America with high exposure and sensitization rates in the general population. The invasive occurrence of ragweed (A. artemisiifolia) poses an increasing challenge to public health in Europe and Asia as well. Possible explanations for its worldwide spread are climate change and urbanization, as well as pollen transport over long distances by globalized traffic and winds. Due to the increasing disease burden worldwide, and to the lack of a current and comprehensive overview, this study aims to review the current and emerging treatment options for ragweed-induced rhinoconjunctivitis. Sound clinical evidence is present for the symptomatic treatment of ragweed-induced allergic rhinoconjunctivitis with oral third-generation H1-antihistamines and leukotriene antagonists. The topical application of glucocorticoids has also been efficient in randomized controlled clinical trials. Combined approaches employing multiple agents are common. The mainstay of causal treatment to date, especially in Northern America, is subcutaneous immunotherapy with the focus on the major allergen, Amb a 1. Beyond this, growing evidence from several geographical regions documents the benefit of sublingual immunotherapy. Future treatment options promise more specific symptomatic treatment and fewer side effects during causal therapy. Novel antihistamines for symptomatic treatment are aimed at the histamine H3-receptor. New adjuvants with toll-like receptor 4 activity or the application of the monoclonal anti-immunoglobulin E antibody, omalizumab, are supposed to enhance conventional immunotherapy. An approach targeting toll-like receptor 9 by synthetic cytosine phosphate–guanosine oligodeoxynucleotides promises a new treatment paradigm that aims to modulate the immune response, but it has yet to be proven in clinical trials.

Add-on histamine receptor-3 antagonist for allergic rhinitis: a double blind randomized crossover trial using the environmental exposure unit

BACKGROUND

Oral antihistamines that target the histamine receptor-1, such as fexofenadine, offer suboptimal relief of allergic rhinitis-associated nasal congestion. Combinations with oral sympathomimetics, such as pseudoephedrine, relieve congestion but produce side effects. Previous animal and human studies with histamine receptor-3 antagonists, such as PF-03654764, demonstrate promise.

METHODS

Herein we employ the Environmental Exposure Unit (EEU) to conduct the first randomized controlled trial of PF-03654764 in allergic rhinitis. 64 participants were randomized in a double-blind, placebo-controlled 4-period crossover study. Participants were exposed to ragweed pollen for 6 hours post-dose in the EEU. The primary objective was to compare the effect of PF-03654764 + fexofenadine to pseudoephedrine + fexofenadine on the subjective measures of congestion and Total Nasal Symptom Score (TNSS). The objectives of our post-hoc analyses were to compare all treatments to placebo and determine the onset of action (OA). This trial was registered at ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT01033396).

RESULTS

PF-03654764 + fexofenadine was not superior to pseudoephedrine + fexofenadine. In post-hoc analyses, PF-03654764 + fexofenadine significantly reduced TNSS, relative to placebo, and OA was 60 minutes. Pseudoephedrine + fexofenadine significantly reduced congestion and TNSS, relative to placebo, with OA of 60 and 30 minutes, respectively. Although this study was not powered for a statistical analysis of safety, it was noted that all PF-03654764-treated groups experienced an elevated incidence of adverse events.

CONCLUSIONS

PF-03654764 + fexofenadine failed to provide superior relief of allergic rhinitis-associated nasal symptoms upon exposure to ragweed pollen compared to fexofenadine + pseudoephedrine. However, in post-hoc analyses, PF-03654764 + fexofenadine improved TNSS compared to placebo. Side effects in the PF-03654764-treated groups were clinically significant compared to the controls.

Sleep impairment and daytime sleepiness in patients with allergic rhinitis: the role of congestion and inflammation

OBJECTIVE

To investigate the association of rhinitis with stress, fatigue, decrease productivity, inflammation, and sleep disordered breathing.

DATA SOURCES

Medical literature obtained from OVID and PubMed searches in February 2013 using the search terms "sleep," "rhinitis," "allergic rhinitis," "somnolence," and "fatigue".

STUDY SELECTIONS

Studies were selected based on the US Preventive Services Task Force levels 1, 2, and 3.

RESULTS

Allergic rhinitis is a disease that severely affects patients' quality of life and is increasing in prevalence worldwide. Nasal congestion is reported as the most common and bothersome symptom; it is often associated with sleep-disordered breathing, a likely cause of sleep impairment in rhinitis-affected individuals. The end result is a reduced quality of life and productivity and an increase in daytime sleepiness, fatigue, and stress. Current treatment modalities include intranasal corticosteroids, which have been found to reduce nasal congestion. Clinical trials on intranasal corticosteroids have provided data on sleep-related end points, and these studies report that the improved nasal congestion is associated with improved quality of life with better sleep and reduced daytime fatigue. Alternate therapies, including montelukast, also decrease nasal congestion and positively influence sleep, but to a lesser extent.

CONCLUSION

This review examines nasal congestion and cytokine changes and the associated sleep impairment in allergic rhinitis patients and the effect on daytime performance. It elaborates the adverse effects of disturbed sleep on quality of life and how therapies directed at reducing nasal congestion can relieve such effects.

Congestion and sleep impairment in allergic rhinitis

Allergic rhinitis is a prevalent disease in developed nations, and its prevalence has been increasing throughout the world. Nasal congestion is the most common and bothersome symptoms of rhinitis. Congestion is associated with sleep-disordered breathing and is thought to be a key cause of sleep impairment in individuals with rhinitis. The end result is a decrease in quality of life and productivity and an increase in daytime sleepiness. Treatment with intranasal corticosteroids has been shown to reduce nasal congestion. Data on sleep-related end points from clinical trials of intranasal corticosteroids indicate that this reduction is associated with improved sleep, reduced daytime fatigue, and improved quality of life. Other therapies, such as montelukast, also have a positive influence on congestion and sleep. This review examines nasal congestion and the associated sleep impairment of allergic rhinitis patients. It explores the adverse effects of disturbed sleep on quality of life and how these conditions can be reduced by therapies that decrease congestion.

Treatment of congestion in upper respiratory diseases

Congestion, as a symptom of upper respiratory tract diseases including seasonal and perennial allergic rhinitis, acute and chronic rhinosinusitis, and nasal polyposis, is principally caused by mucosal inflammation. Though effective pharmacotherapy options exist, no agent is universally efficacious; therapeutic decisions must account for individual patient preferences. Oral H₁-antihistamines, though effective for the common symptoms of allergic rhinitis, have modest decongestant action, as do leukotriene receptor antagonists. Intranasal antihistamines appear to improve congestion better than oral forms. Topical decongestants reduce congestion associated with allergic rhinitis, but local adverse effects make them unsuitable for long-term use. Oral decongestants show some efficacy against congestion in allergic rhinitis and the common cold, and can be combined with oral antihistamines. Intranasal corticosteroids have broad anti-inflammatory activities, are the most potent long-term pharmacologic treatment of congestion associated with allergic rhinitis, and show some congestion relief in rhinosinusitis and nasal polyposis. Immunotherapy and surgery may be used in some cases refractory to pharmacotherapy. Steps in congestion management include (1) diagnosis of the cause(s), (2) patient education and monitoring, (3) avoidance of environmental triggers where possible, (4) pharmacotherapy, and (5) immunotherapy (for patients with allergic rhinitis) or surgery for patients whose condition is otherwise uncontrolled.

Montelukast: Pharmacology, Safety, Tolerability and Efficacy

Allergic rhinitis and asthma are common disorders effecting large percentages of the population of Western countries. There are multiple treatment options available for allergic rhinitis and asthma and stepwise approaches to therapy have been recommended. Montelukast is a cysteinyl leukotriene receptor antagonist that has been found to be effective both in the treatment of allergic rhinitis and asthma. This paper will describe the pharmacology, safety, efficacy and tolerability of montelukast. It will examine the comparative efficacy of montelukast to other medications for the treatment of allergic rhinitis and asthma, as well as discuss the recent studies of combination therapy.

Efficacy of loratadine-montelukast on nasal congestion in patients with seasonal allergic rhinitis in an environmental exposure unit

BACKGROUND

Nasal congestion is considered to be one of the most bothersome symptoms of allergic rhinitis (AR) and often the most difficult to treat. Oral therapies providing safe, effective, and reliable relief of AR symptoms, including nasal congestion, are limited.

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the efficacy of a single dose of loratadine-montelukast (10 mg/10 mg) vs placebo and phenylephrine (10 mg) in relieving nasal congestion over 6 hours after ragweed pollen exposure in the environmental exposure unit at the Kingston General Hospital.

METHODS

After a screening visit and up to 6 priming visits, patients who met minimum symptom requirements during ragweed pollen exposure were randomized to receive loratadine-montelukast, phenylephrine, or placebo. Patients evaluated nasal congestion and other symptoms of AR and measured peak nasal inspiratory flow before dosing and at 20-minute intervals during the subsequent 8 hours of pollen exposure.

RESULTS

During the first 6 hours after treatment (primary end point), loratadine-montelukast treatment resulted in greater improvement in the mean nasal congestion score vs placebo (P = .007) and phenylephrine (P < .001). Loratadine-montelukast was more effective than placebo (P < or = .02) and phenylephrine (P < or = .002) in relieving total symptoms, nasal symptoms, and nonnasal symptoms and in improving peak nasal inspiratory flow. There were no statistically significant differences between phenylephrine and placebo for any measures. Fewer patients in the loratadine-montelukast group (3.9%) reported adverse events than in the phenylephrine (7.9%) and placebo (7.1%) groups; most adverse events were mild or moderate.

CONCLUSIONS

Loratadine-montelukast was more effective than placebo and phenylephrine in relieving nasal congestion and other nasal and nonnasal symptoms resulting from ragweed pollen exposure. There was no statistically significant difference between phenylephrine and placebo.

ARIA-suggested drugs for allergic rhinitis: what impact on quality of life? A GA2LEN review

Allergic diseases constitute a global health problem, as they have an increasing economic and social impact and, especially, they can deeply interfere with the patients' daily life, being a cause of physical and emotional discomfort. This is why the health-related quality-of-life (HRQoL) has become increasingly important in health care research; in fact, the assessment of the impact the disease and its treatment have on patients, provides a more comprehensive approach in outcome evaluation. Numerous validated questionnaires are available and many studies have been performed evaluating HRQoL in people affected by allergic rhinitis (AR), thus testifying a great interest in this topic. The aims of the present review are: to examine the scientific literature of the last 3 years dealing with the impact of AR treatments suggested by allergic rhinitis and its impact on asthma guidelines on patients' QoL, and to identify the unexplored or not-fully-investigated areas concerning this issue.

Use of intranasal corticosteroids in the management of congestion and sleep disturbance in pediatric patients with allergic rhinitis

Allergic rhinitis affects a large number of children and exerts a considerable socioeconomic impact. It is underdiagnosed and inadequately treated, which predisposes children to potentially serious comorbidities. Allergic rhinitis symptoms may create nighttime breathing problems and sleep disturbances and have a negative effect on a child's ability to learn in the classroom. Although antihistamines have shown efficacy in relieving many symptoms, they have little effect on nasal congestion. This article summarizes the advantages of intranasal corticosteroids, including their effectiveness against congestion and excellent safety profile. Intranasal corticosteroids with minimal systemic bioavailability provide topical drug delivery that minimizes the potential for systemic side-effects.

Sleep impairment in allergic rhinitis, rhinosinusitis, and nasal polyposis

Sleep impairment is a significant problem for patients with inflammatory disorders of the upper respiratory tract, such as allergic rhinitis, rhinosinusitis, and nasal polyposis. Nasal congestion, one of the most common and bothersome symptoms of these conditions, is associated with sleep-disordered breathing and is thought to be a key cause of sleep impairment. This review examines sleep impairment associated with allergic rhinitis, rhinosinusitis, and nasal polyposis. It explores the adverse effects of disturbed sleep on patients' quality of life and how these inflammatory nasal conditions can be reduced by therapies that address the underlying problems affecting sleep. Treatment with intranasal corticosteroids has been shown to reduce nasal congestion in inflammatory disorders of the upper respiratory tract. Data on sleep-related end points from clinical trials of intranasal corticosteroids indicate that this reduction is associated with improved sleep, reduced daytime fatigue, and improved quality of life. Further research using measures of sleep as primary end points is warranted, based on the potential of these agents to improve sleep and quality of life in patients with allergic rhinitis, acute rhinosinusitis, and nasal polyposis. Such trials will help to identify the most effective therapies for sleep impairment in these 3 nasal conditions.

Objective monitoring of nasal patency and nasal physiology in rhinitis

Nasal obstruction can be monitored objectively by measurement of nasal airflow, as evaluated by nasal peak flow, or as airways resistance/conductance as evaluated by rhinomanometry. Peak flow can be measured during inspiration or expiration. Of these measurements, nasal inspiratory peak flow is the best validated technique for home monitoring in clinical trials. The equipment is portable, relatively inexpensive, and simple to use. One disadvantage, however, is that nasal inspiratory peak flow is influenced by lower airway as well as upper airway function. Rhinomanometry is a more sensitive technique that is specific for nasal measurements. The equipment, however, requires an operator, is more expensive, and is not portable. Thus, it is applicable only for clinic visit measures in clinical trials. Measurements require patient cooperation and coordination, and not all can achieve repeatable results. Thus, this objective measure is best suited to laboratory challenge studies involving smaller numbers of selected volunteers. A nonphysiological measure of nasal patency is acoustic rhinometry. This sonic echo technique measures internal nasal luminal volume and the minimum cross-sectional area. The derivation of these measures from the reflected sound waves requires complex mathematical transformation and makes several theoretical assumptions. Despite this, however, such measures correlate well with the nasal physiological measures, and the nasal volume measures have been shown to relate well to results obtained by imaging techniques such as computed tomography scanning or magnetic resonance imaging. Like rhinomanometry, acoustic rhinometry is not suitable for home monitoring and can be applied only to clinic visit measures or for laboratory nasal challenge monitoring. It has advantages in being easy to use, in requiring little patient cooperation, and in providing repeatable results. In addition to nasal obstruction, allergic rhinitis is recognized to be associated with impaired mucociliary clearance and altered nasal responsiveness. Measures exist for the monitoring of these aspects of nasal dysfunction. Although measures of mucociliary clearance are simple to perform, they have a poor record of reproducibility. Their incorporation into clinical trials is thus questionable, although positive outcomes from therapeutic intervention have been reported. Measures of nasal responsiveness are at present largely confined to research studies investigating disease mechanisms in allergic and nonallergic rhinitis. The techniques are insufficiently standardized to be applied to multicenter clinical trials but could be used in limited-center studies to gain insight into the regulatory effects of different therapeutic modalities.

Therapeutic options for reducing sleep impairment in allergic rhinitis, rhinosinusitis, and nasal polyposis

BACKGROUND

Patients with inflammatory disorders of the upper airways, such as allergic rhinitis, rhinosinusitis, and nasal polyposis, often have significant sleep disturbances. Poor sleep can lead to fatigue, daytime somnolence, impaired daytime functioning as reflected in lower levels of productivity at work or school, and a reduced quality of life. Although the exact mechanisms by which these inflammatory nasal conditions disturb sleep is not fully understood, congestion appears to be a key factor and is generally the most common and bothersome symptom for patients with these conditions. Successful therapy should improve patients' sleep and well-being without introducing any negative effects on sleep. SCOPE OF LITERATURE SEARCH: Literature searches of Medline, Embase, and abstracts from medical/scientific conferences were conducted for the period of 1995 through mid-2006 for primary and review articles and conference presentations about sleep disturbance related to allergic rhinitis, rhinosinusitis, and nasal polyposis. These searches also sought to identify articles examining how treatments for those diseases improved sleep and, consequently, patients' quality of life. Surveys of the impact of congestion on patients' quality of life and their sleep also were consulted. Clinical studies were selected for discussion if they were randomized, double-blind, and placebo-controlled. Limitations of this review include the absence of any direct comparisons of the effectiveness of different drugs on improving sleep and shortcomings in the statistical methods of the patient surveys.

FINDINGS

Intranasal corticosteroids (INSs) are the most effective medication for reducing congestion in patients with inflammatory nasal conditions. There is a growing amount of evidence that a reduction in congestion with INSs is associated with improved sleep, reduced daytime sleepiness, and enhanced patient quality of life.

CONCLUSION

Relief of sleep impairment associated with inflammatory disorders of the nose and sinuses can be addressed with INS therapy.

Assessing outcomes from the sleep disturbance associated with rhinitis

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

The purpose of this review is to identify which aspects of allergic rhinitis limit the quality of life in patients, to present information on how rhinitis affects sleep, and to review instruments available to assess the impact that rhinitis has on sleep.

RECENT FINDINGS

Subjective and objective instruments reveal patients with allergic rhinitis frequently suffer from sleep-disordered breathing, poor sleep quality, daytime somnolence, and fatigue. Sleep disturbances associated with allergic rhinitis can lead to decreased cognitive and psychomotor abilities, impaired work performance, decreased productivity, impaired learning, difficulty concentrating, and memory deficits.

SUMMARY

Objective and subjective instruments are available to measure the extent of compromise in quality of life in affected patients. Subjective measurements available to evaluate allergic rhinitis include general and disease specific quality of life questionnaires, including rhinitis specific and sleep specific questionnaires. Objective measurements available include evaluation of nasal patency and physiology in rhinitis, nasal inspiratory peak flow, acoustic rhinometry, rhinomanometry, polysomnography, the Multiple Sleep Latency Test, the Maintenance of Wakefulness Test, and learning and performance testing. The continued utilization of these and other available instruments is vital for further assessment on the effect of allergic rhinitis on sleep.

Montelukast in the treatment of allergic rhinitis: an evidence-based review

Cysteinyl-leukotrienes (CysLTs) are endogenous mediators of inflammation and play an important role in allergic airway disease by stimulating bronchoconstriction, mucus production, mucosal oedema and inflammation, airway infiltration by eosinophils, and dendritic cell maturation that prepares for future allergic response. Montelukast inhibits these actions by blocking type 1 CysLT receptors found on immunocytes, smooth muscle and endothelium in the respiratory mucosa. Initially developed as a treatment for asthma, montelukast has more recently found use in the treatment of allergic rhinitis (AR). We conducted a systematic review of studies that have evaluated montelukast in the treatment of seasonal AR (SAR) and perennial AR (PAR), with and without concomitant asthma. Primary consideration was given to large, randomised, placebo-controlled, double-blind clinical trials in which AR endpoints were assessed and the use of concurrent treatments for AR was excluded. Eight such studies were found in the literature. The primary endpoint in these was daytime nasal symptom severity represented by a composite score derived from individual self-ratings of nasal congestion, rhinorrhoea, nasal pruritus and sneezing. Secondary endpoints have included these individual nasal symptom scores, additional scores for eye, ear and throat symptoms, the impact of rhinitis on quality of sleep, global evaluations of outcome by patients and physicians, and measures of the severity of concomitant asthma. A general outcome was that patients treated with montelukast had significantly greater improvements in their symptoms of SAR and PAR than did patients who were given a placebo. As monotherapy, montelukast exhibited efficacy similar to that of loratadine, but less than that of the intranasally administered corticosteroid fluticasone propionate. The use of montelukast in combination with antihistamines such as loratadine or cetirizine has generally resulted in greater efficacy than when these agents were used alone, and in some studies has produced results comparable with intranasally applied corticosteroids. In patients with AR comorbid with asthma, montelukast treatment has resulted in significant improvements in both, compared with placebo. Montelukast is well tolerated and has a favourable safety profile; adverse events have occurred at similar frequencies in patients taking either montelukast or placebo. Montelukast provides an effective and well tolerated oral treatment for allergic airway inflammation in patients with SAR or PAR without asthma, and in patients in whom AR is comorbid with asthma.

The role of antileukotriene drugs in management of rhinitis and rhinosinusitis

Antileukotriene drugs have been studied for more than 15 years. In this review we examine the role of leukotrienes in rhinitis and rhinosinusitis, and explore the clinical literature supporting the use of anti-leukotriene agents in these diseases. Although these medications clearly are efficacious in rhinitis, it is unclear where in the armamentarium they should be used. The evidence for use in sinusitis has not been well studied except in sinusitis-associated aspirin-exacerbated respiratory disease. In this circumstance there is information that allows use of antileukotriene agents to be considered efficacious. We provide our rationale for use and await future clinical studies to answer this important question.

Allergic rhinitis and its effect on sleep, fatigue, and daytime somnolence

OBJECTIVE

To examine the adverse effects of sleep impairment on the quality of life of patients with the disorder and how these effects can be treated with therapies targeted at the underlying problems that influence sleep.

DATA SOURCES

Medline and Ovid search for sleep and rhinitis.

STUDY SELECTION

All literature on this topic were reviewed, and, if significant, were incorporated into this review.

RESULTS

Intranasal corticosteroids used as treatment for allergic rhinitis have been shown to reduce the nasal congestion characteristic of the disorder. Data on sleep-related end points from clinical trials on intranasal corticosteroids also reveal that the treatment's effectiveness in alleviating nasal congestion leads to better sleep, reduced daytime somnolence, and improved quality of life.

CONCLUSION

Further research, specifically using sleep measurements as primary end points, is needed to definitively show that intranasal corticosteroids reduce nasal congestion, thereby improving sleep and, consequently, quality of life in patients with allergic rhinitis. These future trials will serve to identify the most effective therapies that target the adverse effects of sleep impairment in this disorder.

Montelukast in allergic rhinitis: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Allergic rhinitis is common. This systematic review outlines the evidence regarding montelukast in allergic rhinitis and provides a meta-analysis of its efficacy. The evidence suggests that montelukast does reduce nasal symptom score by 3.4% (95% CI: 2.5% to 4.2%) when compared with placebo. Montelukast is not as effective as topical nasal steroids or antihistamines and should therefore be regarded as second line therapy. When used, montelukast should be used in combination with an antihistamine.

The role of antileukotriene therapy in seasonal allergic rhinitis: a systematic review of randomized trials

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the effect of oral leukotriene receptor antagonists as monotherapy or combined with other drugs in the treatment of seasonal allergic rhinitis.

DATA SOURCES

The MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL (Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health), and Cochrane databases; review articles; and references of included trials.

STUDY SELECTION

Published (1966-2005) randomized controlled trials with nasal and eye symptoms and quality-of-life scores as primary outcomes.

RESULTS

Seventeen studies including 6,231 adults with seasonal allergic rhinitis were selected. Oral leukotriene antagonists significantly reduced daytime nasal symptoms (standardized mean difference [SMD], -0.24; 95% confidence interval [CI], -0.33 to -0.16), nighttime nasal symptoms (SMD, -0.23; 95% CI, -0.30 to -0.16), and eye symptoms and significantly improved quality of life compared with placebo. There were no significant differences between oral leukotriene antagonists and oral histamine H1 antagonists on nasal and eye symptoms and quality-of-life overall score. We also found that leukotriene receptor antagonists were inferior to intranasal corticosteroids for decreasing daytime (SMD, 0.41; 95% CI, 0.27 to 0.56) and nighttime nasal symptoms. The combination of leukotriene receptor antagonists plus histamine H1 antagonists produced greater relief of eye symptoms compared with histamine H1 antagonists alone. Finally, intranasal corticosteroids significantly reduced nasal congestion compared with leukotriene receptor antagonists plus histamine H1 antagonists.

CONCLUSIONS

Leukotriene receptor antagonists were better than placebo, equivalent to oral histamine H1 antagonists, and inferior to intranasal corticosteroids for treating seasonal allergic rhinitis. Alternatively, leukotriene receptor antagonists plus histamine H1 antagonists were more effective than histamine H1 antagonists alone but inferior to intranasal corticosteroids.

Efficacy of montelukast during the allergy season in patients with chronic asthma and seasonal aeroallergen sensitivity

BACKGROUND

Montelukast has proven efficacy in the treatment of chronic asthma and seasonal allergic rhinitis, but it has not been evaluated in the subpopulation of asthmatic patients with seasonal asthma symptoms.

OBJECTIVE

To determine the effectiveness of montelukast treatment in improving the control of asthma symptoms during the allergy season in patients with active asthma and seasonal aeroallergen sensitivity.

METHODS

Adults with a history of chronic asthma who are also symptomatic during the allergy season and with skin test sensitivity to seasonal aeroallergens were enrolled in a randomized, parallel-group, multicenter study with a 1-week, single-blind, placebo run-in period followed by 3 weeks of double-blind treatment during the spring of 2004. After the run-in period, eligible patients were randomly assigned to receive either oral montelukast (10 mg) or placebo. Daytime and nighttime asthma symptom scores, beta-agonist use, and morning and evening peak expiratory flow rates were recorded daily using an electronic diary. The primary end point was mean change from baseline to week 3 in the daytime asthma symptom score.

RESULTS

Of 455 randomized patients, 433 completed the study. Compared with placebo, treatment with montelukast resulted in a significant improvement from baseline in the daytime asthma symptom score (-0.54 vs -0.34; P = .002) and in beta-agonist use, nighttime symptoms, and peak expiratory flow rates. Few patients in the montelukast and placebo groups discontinued study participation because of asthma (1.3% and 3.0%, respectively).

CONCLUSION

In patients with chronic asthma and seasonal aeroallergen sensitivity, montelukast treatment provided significant asthma control during the allergy season compared with placebo.

The role of leukotrienes in allergic rhinitis

OBJECTIVE

To review the role of cysteinyl leukotrienes (cysLTs) in allergic rhinitis and the scientific rationale for therapy with leukotriene receptor antagonists (LTRAs).

DATA SOURCES

Relevant basic science and clinical articles were identified by a search of the PubMed database for articles published from 1984 to 2004 using the following keywords: allergic rhinitis; nose; immune response; allergen challenge; leukotrienes C, D, and E; cysteinyl leukotriene; cysteinyl leukotriene receptor; cytokine; leukocyte; montelukast; zafirlukast; and pranlukast.

STUDY SELECTION

The authors' expert opinion was used to select studies for inclusion in this review.

RESULTS

CysLTs are synthesized via 5-lipoxygenase metabolism of arachidonic acid by mast cells and basophils during the early-phase response to antigen and by eosinophils and macrophages during the late phase. The cysLT levels in nasal secretions are elevated after short-term allergen instillation and in allergy season in patients with allergic rhinitis. These lipid mediators act locally and systemically by interacting with receptors, particularly the cysLT1 receptor, on target cells. Evidence derived from topical application of cysLTs in the nose and from the effects of LTRAs indicates that cysLTs contribute to nasal mucous secretion, congestion, and inflammation. CysLTs promote allergic inflammation by enhancing immune responses and the production, adhesion, migration, and survival of inflammatory cells such as eosinophils. They also increase the generation of an array of other proinflammatory mediators, such as cytokines, which in turn increase the production of and receptors for cysLTs. Clinical trials have demonstrated that LTRAs have significant but modest efficacy as single agents but additive efficacy when used with other classes of agents.

CONCLUSIONS

CysLTs fulfill the criteria for relevant mediators of allergic rhinitis via their diverse effects on immune, inflammatory, and local structural components of disease. By blocking the cysLT1 receptor responsible for most of these effects, LTRAs represent a useful approach to treatment of this important and prevalent disorder.

Latest developments in the management of allergic rhinitis

Allergic rhinitis (AR) is the most common chronic atopic disease, and it is associated with considerable costs and comorbidities. The management of AR includes environmental control measures, pharmacotherapy, and immunotherapy. This article discusses several developments and findings that have recently emerged in these three areas. The effectiveness of traditional methods of mitigating allergen exposure, such as the use of impermeable dust mite-proof bedding covers, has been rendered debatable. Exposure to environmental factors, such as household pets, is known to provoke exacerbation of allergic disease but now is proposed to have protective effects in certain settings. Changes in the choices of pharmacotherapy continue to occur as antileukotrienes and derivatives of certain antihistamines are added to the armamentarium against AR. However, a critical review of the clinical trials involving these drugs suggests that the changes are not necessarily incremental. Innovative methods of immunomodulation are currently being developed, with the objective of optimizing efficacy and safety. These include alternative routes or forms of delivering immunotherapy and other novel approaches in altering the pathobiology of AR.

Efficacy and tolerability of newer antihistamines in the treatment of allergic conjunctivitis

Treatment for allergic conjunctivitis has markedly expanded in recent years, providing opportunities for more focused therapy, but often leaving both physicians and patients confused over the variety of options. As monotherapy, oral antihistamines are an excellent choice when attempting to control multiple early-phase, and some late-phase, allergic symptoms in the eyes, nose and pharynx. Unfortunately, despite their efficacy in relief of allergic symptoms, systemic antihistamines may result in unwanted adverse effects, such as drowsiness and dry mouth. Newer second-generation antihistamines (cetirizine, fexofenadine, loratadine and desloratadine) are preferred over older first-generation antihistamines in order to avoid the sedative and anticholinergic effects that are associated with first-generation agents. When the allergic symptom or complaint, such as ocular pruritus, is isolated, focused therapy with topical (ophthalmic) antihistamines is often efficacious and clearly superior to systemic antihistamines, either as monotherapy or in conjunction with an oral or intranasal agent. Topical antihistaminic agents not only provide faster and superior relief than systemic antihistamines, but they may also possess a longer duration of action than other classes including vasoconstrictors, pure mast cell stabilisers, NSAIDs and corticosteroids. Many antihistamines have anti-inflammatory properties as well. Some of this anti-inflammatory effect seen with 'pure' antihistamines (levocabastine and emedastine) may be directly attributed to the blocking of the histamine receptor that has been shown to downregulate intercellular adhesion molecule-1 expression and, in turn, limit chemotaxis of inflammatory cells. Some topical multiple-action histamine H(1)-receptor antagonists (olopatadine, ketotifen, azelastine and epinastine) have been shown to prevent activation of neutrophils, eosinophils and macrophages, or inhibit release of leukotrienes, platelet-activating factors and other inflammatory mediators. Topical vasoconstrictor agents provide rapid relief, especially for redness; however, the relief is often short-lived, and overuse of vasoconstrictors may lead to rebound hyperaemia and irritation. Another class of topical agents, mast cell stabilisers (sodium cromoglicate [cromolyn sodium], nedocromil and lodoxamide), may be considered; however, they generally have a much slower onset of action. The efficacy of mast cell stabilisers may be attributed to anti-inflammatory properties in addition to mast cell stabilisation. In the class of topical NSAIDs, ketorolac has been promoted for ocular itching but has been found to be inferior for relief of allergic conjunctivitis when compared with olopatadine and emedastine. Lastly, topical corticosteroids may be considered for severe seasonal ocular allergy symptoms, although long-term use should be avoided because of risks of ocular adverse effects, including glaucoma and cataract formation.