Update on nonallergic rhinitis

The epithelial barrier theory and its associated diseases

The prevalence of many chronic noncommunicable diseases has been steadily rising over the past six decades. During this time, over 350,000 new chemical substances have been introduced to the lives of humans. In recent years, the epithelial barrier theory came to light explaining the growing prevalence and exacerbations of these diseases worldwide. It attributes their onset to a functionally impaired epithelial barrier triggered by the toxicity of the exposed substances, associated with microbial dysbiosis, immune system activation, and inflammation. Diseases encompassed by the epithelial barrier theory share common features such as an increased prevalence after the 1960s or 2000s that cannot (solely) be accounted for by the emergence of improved diagnostic methods. Other common traits include epithelial barrier defects, microbial dysbiosis with loss of commensals and colonization of opportunistic pathogens, and circulating inflammatory cells and cytokines. In addition, practically unrelated diseases that fulfill these criteria have started to emerge as multimorbidities during the last decades. Here, we provide a comprehensive overview of diseases encompassed by the epithelial barrier theory and discuss evidence and similarities for their epidemiology, genetic susceptibility, epithelial barrier dysfunction, microbial dysbiosis, and tissue inflammation.

Allergic Rhinitis: A Review

Importance

Allergic rhinitis affects an estimated 15% of the US population (approximately 50 million individuals) and is associated with the presence of asthma, eczema, chronic or recurrent sinusitis, cough, and both tension and migraine headaches.

Observations

Allergic rhinitis occurs when disruption of the epithelial barrier allows allergens to penetrate the mucosal epithelium of nasal passages, inducing a T-helper type 2 inflammatory response and production of allergen-specific IgE. Allergic rhinitis typically presents with symptoms of nasal congestion, rhinorrhea, postnasal drainage, sneezing, and itching of the eyes, nose, and throat. In an international study, the most common symptoms of allergic rhinitis were rhinorrhea (90.38%) and nasal congestion (94.23%). Patients with nonallergic rhinitis present primarily with nasal congestion and postnasal drainage frequently associated with sinus pressure, ear plugging, muffled sounds and pain, and eustachian tube dysfunction that is less responsive to nasal corticosteroids. Patients with seasonal allergic rhinitis typically have physical examination findings of edematous and pale turbinates. Patients with perennial allergic rhinitis typically have erythematous and inflamed turbinates with serous secretions that appear similar to other forms of chronic rhinitis at physical examination. Patients with nonallergic rhinitis have negative test results for specific IgE aeroallergens. Intermittent allergic rhinitis is defined as symptoms occurring less than 4 consecutive days/week or less than 4 consecutive weeks/year. Persistent allergic rhinitis is defined as symptoms occurring more often than 4 consecutive days/week and for more than 4 consecutive weeks/year. Patients with allergic rhinitis should avoid inciting allergens. In addition, first-line treatment for mild intermittent or mild persistent allergic rhinitis may include a second-generation H1 antihistamine (eg, cetirizine, fexofenadine, desloratadine, loratadine) or an intranasal antihistamine (eg, azelastine, olopatadine), whereas patients with persistent moderate to severe allergic rhinitis should be treated initially with an intranasal corticosteroid (eg, fluticasone, triamcinolone, budesonide, mometasone) either alone or in combination with an intranasal antihistamine. In contrast, first-line therapy for patients with nonallergic rhinitis consists of an intranasal antihistamine as monotherapy or in combination with an intranasal corticosteroid.

Conclusions and Relevance

Allergic rhinitis is associated with symptoms of nasal congestion, sneezing, and itching of the eyes, nose, and throat. Patients with allergic rhinitis should be instructed to avoid inciting allergens. Therapies include second-generation H1 antihistamines (eg, cetirizine, fexofenadine, desloratadine, loratadine), intranasal antihistamines (eg, azelastine, olopatadine), and intranasal corticosteroids (eg, fluticasone, triamcinolone, budesonide, mometasone) and should be selected based on the severity and frequency of symptoms and patient preference.

International Consensus Statement on Obstructive Sleep Apnea

BACKGROUND

Evaluation and interpretation of the literature on obstructive sleep apnea (OSA) allows for consolidation and determination of the key factors important for clinical management of the adult OSA patient. Toward this goal, an international collaborative of multidisciplinary experts in sleep apnea evaluation and treatment have produced the International Consensus statement on Obstructive Sleep Apnea (ICS:OSA).

METHODS

Using previously defined methodology, focal topics in OSA were assigned as literature review (LR), evidence-based review (EBR), or evidence-based review with recommendations (EBR-R) formats. Each topic incorporated the available and relevant evidence which was summarized and graded on study quality. Each topic and section underwent iterative review and the ICS:OSA was created and reviewed by all authors for consensus.

RESULTS

The ICS:OSA addresses OSA syndrome definitions, pathophysiology, epidemiology, risk factors for disease, screening methods, diagnostic testing types, multiple treatment modalities, and effects of OSA treatment on multiple OSA-associated comorbidities. Specific focus on outcomes with positive airway pressure (PAP) and surgical treatments were evaluated.

CONCLUSION

This review of the literature consolidates the available knowledge and identifies the limitations of the current evidence on OSA. This effort aims to create a resource for OSA evidence-based practice and identify future research needs. Knowledge gaps and research opportunities include improving the metrics of OSA disease, determining the optimal OSA screening paradigms, developing strategies for PAP adherence and longitudinal care, enhancing selection of PAP alternatives and surgery, understanding health risk outcomes, and translating evidence into individualized approaches to therapy.

Associations between environmental characteristics, high-resolution indoor microbiome, metabolome and allergic and non-allergic rhinitis symptoms for junior high school students

Rhinitis is one of the most prevalent chronic diseases globally. Microbiome exposure affects the occurrence of rhinitis. However, previous studies did not differentiate allergic rhinitis (AR) and non-allergic rhinitis (NAR) in the microbial association analysis. In this study, we investigate 347 students in 8 junior high schools, Terengganu, Malaysia, who were categorized as healthy (70.9%), AR (13.8%) and NAR (15.3%) based on a self-administered questionnaire and skin prick tests of pollen, pet, mould and house dust mite allergens. Classroom microbial and metabolite exposure in vacuumed dust was characterized by PacBio long-read amplicon sequencing, quantitative PCR and LC-MS-based untargeted metabolomics. Our findings indicate a similar microbial association pattern between AR and NAR. The richness in Gammaproteobacteria was negatively associated with AR and NAR symptoms, whereas total fungal richness was positively associated with AR and NAR symptoms (p < 0.05). Brasilonema bromeliae and Aeromonas enteropelogenes were negatively associated with AR and NAR, and Deinococcus was positively associated with AR and NAR (p < 0.01). Pipecolic acid was protectively associated with AR and NAR symptoms (OR = 0.06 and 0.13, p = 0.009 and 0.045). A neural network analysis showed that B. bromeliae was co-occurring with pipecolic acid, suggesting that the protective role of this species may be mediated by releasing pipecolic acid. Indoor relative humidity and the weight of vacuum dust were associated with AR and NAR, respectively (p < 0.05), but the health effects were mediated by two protective bacterial species, Aliinostoc morphoplasticum and Ilumatobacter fluminis. Overall, our study reported a similar microbial association pattern between AR and NAR and also revealed the complex interactions between microbial species, environmental characteristics, and rhinitis symptoms.

The Role of Nasal Cytology and Serum Atopic Biomarkers in Paediatric Rhinitis

A Nasal Provocation Test allows the differentiation of allergic and non-allergic rhinitis, but it is difficult and expensive. Therefore, nasal cytology is taking hold as an alternative. We carried out a cross-sectional study, including 29 patients with persistent rhinitis according to ARIA definition and negative skin prick tests. Nasal symptoms were scored from 0 to 5 using a visual analogue scale, and patients underwent blood tests to investigate blood cell count (particularly eosinophilia and basophilia), to analyze serum total and specific IgE and eosinophil cationic protein (ECP), and to perform nasal cytology. We performed a univariate logistical analysis to evaluate the association between total serum IgE, serum eosinophilia, basophils, and ECP and the presence of eosinophils in the nasal mucosa, and a multivariate logistic model in order to weight the single variable on the presence of eosinophils to level of the nasal mucosa. A statistically significant association between serum total IgE levels and the severity of nasal eosinophilic inflammation was found (confidence interval C.I. 1.08-4.65, odds ratio OR 2.24, p value 0.03). For this reason, we imagine a therapeutic trial with nasal steroids and oral antihistamines in patients with suspected LAR and increased total IgE levels, reserving nasal cytology and NPT to non-responders to the first-line therapy.

Respiratory comorbidities in severe asthma: focus on the pediatric age

INTRODUCTION

Asthma comorbidities are a frequent cause of adverse outcomes, such as poor asthma control, frequent asthma attacks, reduced quality of life, and higher healthcare costs. Comorbidities are well-known treatable traits whose proper management can help achieve optimal asthma control. Although multimorbidity is frequent among asthmatics, comorbidities are still a potential cause of misdiagnosis and under or over treatments, and little is known about their impact on severe pediatric asthma.

AREAS COVERED

We provided a comprehensive, 5-year updated review focusing on the main respiratory comorbidities in severe asthma, particularly in epidemiology, pathogenesis, and current and future therapies.

EXPERT OPINION

Respiratory comorbidities have unique characteristics in childhood. Their management must be multidisciplinary, age-specific, and integrated. Further longitudinal studies are needed to understand better the mutual interrelation and synergistic effect between asthma and its respiratory comorbidities, the identification of common, treatable risk factors leading to potential asthma prevention, the effectiveness of actual and future target-therapies, and the correlation between long-lasting respiratory comorbidities and poor lung function trajectories.

Clinical Evidence of Type 2 Inflammation in Non-allergic Rhinitis with Eosinophilia Syndrome: a Systematic Review

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Non-allergic rhinitis (NAR) includes different subtypes, among which NAR with eosinophilia syndrome (NARES) is the most important because of severity of symptoms and the high risk of comorbidities. Its pathophysiology is still object of debate, but a crucial role of chronic eosinophilic inflammation has been recognized. The aim of this review is to critically analyze the current evidence regarding the hypothesis that NARES may be considered a type 2 inflammatory disorder.

RECENT FINDINGS

The definition and diagnostic criteria for NARES are not universally shared and adopted, thus generating difficulties in reproducing the results. At present, there is extreme heterogeneity in sampling methods and disagreement in the cut-off of local eosinophilic count to determine a diagnosis of NARES. The PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses) standard was applied to identify English-language experimental and clinical articles regarding NARES. The search was performed in April 2021. Twenty-six articles were included. Our data suggest a particular heterogeneity regarding sampling and specific cut-offs adopted for diagnosis of NARES and consensus should be reached. We suggest that eosinophil count should be reported as an absolute value for at least 10 observed rich fields in order to increase the level of standardization. Consensus among authors on this topic should be reached with particular attention to the cut-off for diagnosis. In the future, this limitation may be overcome by the identification of repeatable biomarkers to refine diagnosis and prognosis of NARES. Furthermore, our data strongly suggest that NARES have numerous similarities with clinical features of the most common type 2 diseases such as eosinophilic asthma and chronic rhinosinusitis with nasal polyps (CRSwNP): late onset, association with type 2 comorbidities, selective eosinophilic tissue infiltration, remarkable response to oral and intranasal corticosteroids, and progression in a type 2 CRSwNP.

[Impact of reslizumab on the course of chronic rhinosinusitis in patients with eosinophilic asthma]

Chronic rhinosinusitis (CRS) with polyps is associated with eosinophilic inflammation, in which the key mediator is interleukin - 5 (IL-5) and is often combined with asthma.

RESEARCH OBJECTIVES

To evaluate the therapeutic potential of reslizumab-humanized anti-IL-5 monoclonal antibody for the treatment of CRS with polyps in patients with severe asthma.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

We investigated the cases of 9 patients with severe asthma treated with intravenous reslizumab at a dose of 3 mg per 1 kg of weight with regularity once in 4 weeks. The presence of CRS with polyps was revealed in 7 of 9 patients, SCT scanning of the paranasal sinuses indicated changes in all the patients, 2 patients had symptoms of chronic non-allergic rhinitis (NARES).The treatment effectiveness control was carried out after 6 months from the beginning of the treatment by the dynamics of nasal symptoms (SNOT-22), endoscopic image of the nose, total polyp score (TPS), changes in the SCT of the paranasal sinuses on the Lund-Mackay scale, rhinocytogram, the content of eosinophilic cationic protein in the blood, the level of systemic eosinophilia. The effectiveness of asthma control was assessed by the reduction of the frequency of asthma exacerbations, the need for systemic corticosteroids, spirometry data and Asthma Control Test (ACT) results. Along with a marked improvement in asthma control, 8 out of 9 patients displayed clinical, endoscopic, radiological signs of weakening of nasal symptoms. More significant improvement in asthma control was achieved in patients having CRS with polyps. In the group of patients having CRS with polyps, it was possible to detect anamnestic presence of NARES symptoms in the early stages of the disease. This indicates that NARES can be a precursor to the development of eosinophilic, non-IgE-induced asthma and nasal polyps.

CONCLUSION

Treatment with reslizumab in patients with eosinophilic asthma and concomitant CRS with polyps and chronic non-allergic rhinitis (NARES) leads not only to improved control of asthma symptoms, but also to a significant regression of nasal symptoms.

Diagnosis and treatment of non-allergic rhinitis: focus on immunologic mechanisms

INTRODUCTION

Non-allergic rhinitis (NAR) is a heterogeneous nasal disease with high global prevalence. NAR can be subclassified as nonallergic rhinitis with eosinophilia syndrome (NARES), vasomotor rhinitis (VMR), and local allergic rhinitis (LAR). Although the precise factors involved in the etiology of NAR are not clear, there is evidence that immunological factors play an important role in the pathogenesis of NAR. This review provides a comprehensive overview of the immunological and neurogenic mechanisms involved in the diagnosis and treatment of NAR.

AREAS COVERED

This review provides a comprehensive overview of the immunological basis of diagnostic and treatment strategies for NARES, VMR, and LAR. In particular, recently documented molecular and immunological mechanisms of NAR are discussed, which may help to better understand the mechanisms underlying the pathologies of the different endotypes of NAR.

EXPERT OPINION

An increasing number of studies investigating the pathogenesis of NAR suggest that the immunological mechanisms underlying the different subtypes of NAR vary greatly, and are still not fully understood to accurately diagnose these subtypes. Thus, further studies should focus on making diagnosis and treatment of NAR more precise, safe, and effective. A better understanding of the immunological mechanisms involved in NAR should help in the discovery of new diagnostic and treatment strategies.

Rhinitis 2020: A practice parameter update

This comprehensive practice parameter for allergic rhinitis (AR) and nonallergic rhinitis (NAR) provides updated guidance on diagnosis, assessment, selection of monotherapy and combination pharmacologic options, and allergen immunotherapy for AR. Newer information about local AR is reviewed. Cough is emphasized as a common symptom in both AR and NAR. Food allergy testing is not recommended in the routine evaluation of rhinitis. Intranasal corticosteroids (INCS) remain the preferred monotherapy for persistent AR, but additional studies support the additive benefit of combination treatment with INCS and intranasal antihistamines in both AR and NAR. Either intranasal antihistamines or INCS may be offered as first-line monotherapy for NAR. Montelukast should only be used for AR if there has been an inadequate response or intolerance to alternative therapies. Depot parenteral corticosteroids are not recommended for treatment of AR due to potential risks. While intranasal decongestants generally should be limited to short-term use to prevent rebound congestion, in limited circumstances, patients receiving regimens that include an INCS may be offered, in addition, an intranasal decongestant for up to 4 weeks. Neither acupuncture nor herbal products have adequate studies to support their use for AR. Oral decongestants should be avoided during the first trimester of pregnancy. Recommendations for use of subcutaneous and sublingual tablet allergen immunotherapy in AR are provided. Algorithms based on a combination of evidence and expert opinion are provided to guide in the selection of pharmacologic options for intermittent and persistent AR and NAR.

Allergic and Mixed Rhinitis: Diagnosis and Natural Evolution

Chronic rhinitis (CR) is divided into two main categories: allergic rhinitis (AR) and nonallergic rhinitis (NAR). These conditions are more recognizable to an experienced clinician, as they can be more clearly demarcated diagnostically. However, an additional 30% to 50% of patients with CR might have an overlap of NAR and AR, referred to as mixed rhinitis (MR). Progress in elucidating the pathophysiologic mechanisms behind MR and NAR has been made in the past several years, and there are now several guidelines published to assist the clinician in accurately diagnosing AR, NAR, and MR. Clinical history and subjective symptoms can provide clues for differentiating AR from MR and NAR, but allergy testing is recommended to confirm these conditions. Progress in accurately diagnosing patients with CR will be made as studies incorporate subjective (i.e., validated questionnaires such as the irritant index questionnaire (IIQ), medication responsiveness, and quality-of-life tools) and objective (i.e., nasal cytologic testing, nasal provocation, and biomarkers) methods characterizing rhinitis subtypes.

The Comparison of Nasaleze and Mometasone Nasal Spray to Control the Symptoms of Allergic Rhinitis

BACKGROUND

Nasal corticosteroids are the main drug class for the treatment of allergic rhinitis, and their long-term continuous use can be problematic. The current study aimed to compare the use of Nasaleze and mometasone nasal spray in patients with allergic rhinitis.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

In this study, 64 patients were studied in two groups of 32 patients. Nasaleze was used for the first group and mometasone for the second group for 4 weeks. The severity of sneezing, runny nose, tearing, nasal congestion, itchy eyes, and scratchy throat were evaluated at the onset of the study, and also 14 and 28 days after treatment in the form of a single-blind study. Statistical analysis was performed using SPSS Software (SPSS Inc., Chicago, IL, USA, Version 20).

RESULTS

The severity of allergic rhinitis symptoms had a significant difference in both groups of Nasaleze and mometasone at three times. Furthermore, in the Nasaleze group, the intensity of tearing significantly reduced 14 and 28 days after treatment compared to the mometasone group. In addition, the mean pretreatment score of allergic had no significant difference in the two groups neither14 days nor 28 days after the treatment.

CONCLUSION

The efficacy of Nasaleze nasal spray is very similar to that of mometasone nasal spray to control the symptoms of allergic rhinitis. Therefore, Nasaleze nasal spray can be a suitable alternative for nasal corticosteroids in children older than 18 months, pregnant and lactating women.

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.

[Possibilities of azelastine in the treatment of chronic rhinitis]

There is considered modern classification of rhinitis and the accents in diagnostic and therapeutic approaches to patients with this disease are indicated, as well as the possibilities of using topical intranasal antihistamines in the treatment of allergic, vasomotor and medicamentous rhinitis.

Rhinology-specific priority setting for quality improvement: a modified Delphi study from the Quality Improvement Committee of the American Rhinologic Society

BACKGROUND

Improving the quality of healthcare is a complex and resource intensive process. To optimize the allocation of scarce resources, quality improvement (QI) should focus on high-value diseases that will produce the largest improvement in health system performance. Given the breadth and multidisciplinary nature of sinonasal disease management, the purpose of this study was to transparently develop a prioritized list of sinonasal diseases for QI from the perspective of the specialty of rhinology and the American Rhinologic Society (ARS).

METHODS

The RAND modified Delphi methodology was used to rank the priority of nine sinonasal disease categories from 1 (lowest priority) to 9 (highest priority). Two rounds of ranking along with a teleconference meeting was performed by a panel of 9 experts from the ARS Quality Improvement Committee.

RESULTS

The final QI-prioritized list of sinonasal diseases are as follows: chronic rhinosinusitis (CRS) (mean score = 8.9), recurrent acute rhinosinusitis (RARS) (mean score = 7.9), sinonasal neoplasms (mean score = 7.0), anatomic nasal obstruction (mean score = 5.9), refractory epistaxis (mean score = 5.2), complicated acute rhinosinusitis (mean score = 5.2), chronic nonallergic rhinitis (mean score = 4.4), orbital disease (mean score = 4.3), uncomplicated acute rhinosinusitis (mean score = 4.1), and allergy/allergic rhinitis (mean score = 3.7).

CONCLUSION

The three most important disease categories for QI from the perspective of the specialty of rhinology were CRS, RARS, and sinonasal neoplasms. Future studies need to define and validate quality metrics for each of these important disease categories in order to facilitate appropriate measurement and improvement initiatives.

Combination therapy in allergic rhinitis: What works and what does not work

Allergic rhinitis and other rhinitis subtypes are increasingly becoming some of the most prevalent and expensive medical conditions that affect the U.S.

POPULATION

Both direct health care costs and indirect costs significantly impact the health care system due to delays in diagnosis, lack of treatment, ineffective treatment, poor medication adherence, and associated comorbidities. Many patients who have AR turn to over-the-counter medications for relief but often find themselves dissatisfied with the results. Determining the correct diagnosis, followed by initiation of the most-effective treatment(s), is essential to provide patients with better symptomatic management and quality of life. Although there are many options, currently available combination therapies, e.g., azelastine with fluticasone and intranasal corticosteroids with nasal decongestants, offer distinct advantages for the management of complex rhinitis phenotypes. Further research is required to investigate the pathomechanisms and biomarkers for mixed rhinitis and nonallergic vasomotor rhinitis subtypes that will lead to novel targeted therapies for these conditions.

Non-allergic rhinitis in children: Epidemiological aspects, pathological features, diagnostic methodology and clinical management

Chronic rhinitis is a very common disease, as the prevalence in the general population resulted to be 40%. Allergic rhinitis has been considered to be the most frequent form of chronic rhinitis, as non-allergic rhinitis has been estimated to account for 25%. However, several evidences suggested that non-allergic rhinitis have been underrated, especially in children. In pediatrics, the diagnostic definition of non-allergic rhinitis has been often limited to the exclusion of an allergic sensitization. Actually, local allergic rhinitis has been often misdiagnosed as well as mixed rhinitis has not been recognized in most cases. Nasal cytology is a diagnostic procedure being suitable for routine clinical practice with children and could be a very useful tool to characterize and diagnose non-allergic rhinitis, providing important clues for epidemiological analysis and clinical management.

Hyeonggaeyeongyo-Tang for Treatment of Allergic and Nonallergic Rhinitis: A Prospective, Nonrandomized, Pre-Post Study

Hyeonggaeyeongyo-tang (HYT) is an ancient formula of oriental medicine traditionally used to treat rhinitis; however, clinical evidence has not yet been established. The aim of this study was to investigate the short-term and long-term efficacy and safety of HYT for chronic rhinitis. Adult subjects with chronic rhinitis symptoms were recruited. The subjects received HYT for 4 weeks and had follow-up period of 8 weeks. Any medicines used to treat nasal symptoms were not permitted during the study. The skin prick test was performed to distinguish the subjects with allergic rhinitis from those with nonallergic rhinitis. After treatment, the total nasal symptoms score and the Rhinoconjunctivitis Quality of Life Questionnaire score significantly improved in the whole subject group, in the allergic rhinitis group, and in the nonallergic rhinitis group, with no adverse events. This improvement lasted during a follow-up period of 8 weeks. Total IgE and eosinophil levels showed no significant difference after treatment in the allergic rhinitis group. HYT improved nasal symptoms and quality of life in patients with allergic rhinitis and nonallergic rhinitis. This is the first clinical study to evaluate the use of HYT to treat patients with rhinitis. This trial has been registered with the ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier NCT02477293.

The proportion of local allergic rhinitis to Dermatophagoides pteronyssinus in children

BACKGROUND

Local allergic rhinitis (LAR) is diagnosed by the positive response to nasal allergen provocation test (NAPT) to aeroallergen and/or local synthesis of specific IgE (sIgE). This entity is found in half of the adults with non-allergic rhinitis (NAR). In children, very few data of the prevalence and characteristics of LAR were reported.

METHODS

Children 8-18 years with NAR were recruited. A NAPT with Dermatophagoides pteronyssinus extract (NAPT-Dp) at 200, 600, and 2000 AU/ml, respectively, at 15-min interval was performed. The immediate response was assessed using the clinical symptom score, peak nasal inspiratory flow (PNIF), and acoustic rhinometry (ARM). The nasal tryptase and sIgE-Dp were measured at baseline and 15 min and 1 h after a positive NAPT-Dp. Two allergic rhinitis (AR) patients were used as positive controls.

RESULTS

Fifty-four NAR children (61.1% boys) with the mean ± SD age of 11.1 ± 2.1 years were enrolled. The median duration of disease was 6.3 years. The most frequent comorbidity was asthma (38.9%). Eighty-seven percent of patients had mild persistent severity. NAPT-Dp was positive in 2/54 (3.7%) of NAR children who had increased symptom score and decreased minimal cross-sectional area (MCA) on ARM as well as PNIF. However, there was no change in the nasal tryptase and sIgE-Dp. The control AR patients had positive NAPT-Dp and increased nasal tryptase at 15 min without the change of sIgE-Dp.

CONCLUSION

LAR is an uncommon condition in children. Further investigation in a large population of children with NAR is needed.

Capsaicin: Current Understanding of Its Mechanisms and Therapy of Pain and Other Pre-Clinical and Clinical Uses

In this review, we discuss the importance of capsaicin to the current understanding of neuronal modulation of pain and explore the mechanisms of capsaicin-induced pain. We will focus on the analgesic effects of capsaicin and its clinical applicability in treating pain. Furthermore, we will draw attention to the rationale for other clinical therapeutic uses and implications of capsaicin in diseases such as obesity, diabetes, cardiovascular conditions, cancer, airway diseases, itch, gastric, and urological disorders.

Nonallergic Rhinitis: Diagnosis

Nonallergic rhinitis (NAR) is one of the most common conditions in medicine, affecting the quality of life of millions of patients throughout the United States. Despite its ubiquitous nature, NAR remains a poorly managed and often difficult to treat condition. NAR is often suboptimally managed by clinicians with poor clinical outcomes. Establishing the correct diagnosis requires a keen understanding of the unique underlying mechanisms involved in NAR, which is still evolving. Ultimately epidemiologic studies that better define NAR prevalence and its economic burden on society are needed to convince funding agencies of the need for research to elucidate mechanisms and specific treatment approaches for this condition.

Recent pharmacological developments in the treatment of perennial and persistent allergic rhinitis

INTRODUCTION

Allergic rhinitis (AR) has a major negative impact on patients' quality of life (QoL) and carries a high socio economic burden. This is particularly the case for patients who experience symptoms for extended periods of time (i.e. those with perennial (PAR) or persistent AR (PER), depending on the classification system used). This review covers available pharmacological advances and recent developments in the treatment of PAR or PER.

AREAS COVERED

Pharmacological AR treatment is used to reduce symptom burden and help restore patients' normal daily routine. Traditionally, non-sedating antihistamines and intranasal corticosteroids (INS) were the two drug classes recommended for use first line. These, along with antileukotrienes, decongestants, mast cell stabilizers and anticholinergics, constituted the bulk of the AR treatment arsenal. MP-AzeFlu (Dymista®, Meda, Solna, Sweden) is the most recent addition to that arsenal. It is a novel intranasal formulation of azelastine hydrochloride (AZE) and fluticasone propionate (FP) delivered in a single spray and has surpassed available therapies in terms of symptom control and treatment response. Other relatively new treatments for PAR or PER include H3 antihistamines, toll-like receptor (TLR) agonists, cellulose powders and micro-emulsions, novel biomolecular formulations and omalizumab. Each of these new additions is reviewed here.

EXPERT OPINION

A new AR drug class has recently been introduced (i.e. RO1AD58). Currently MP-AzeFlu is the only treatment option within this drug class. It can be estimated that combination treatments like MP-AzeFlu will become the mainstay of PAR and PER therapy since use will result in better compliance, improved efficacy over INS and a faster response together with good levels of tolerability. The challenge is to find other equally, or more effective, combination treatments, as has been the therapeutic standard in bronchial asthma for decades. The potential of biologics, as well as TLR-agonists and other new treatment options needs to be further evaluated.

Rhinitis Subtypes, Endotypes, and Definitions

Rhinitis is often seen as posing a small burden. However, rhinitis is a complex disease that is underpinned by a plethora of different mechanisms and causes. Rhinitis is frequently associated with other comorbid conditions but, by itself, is a source of considerable morbidity for patients and creates a significant financial burden on health systems worldwide. This article approaches this condition from both a phenotypic and mechanistic standpoint, focusing on the complexity of characterizing these subtypes. Developing a clearer demarcation of the currently obscure rhinitis phenotypes and endotypes will substantially improve their future prevention and treatment.

Nonallergic Rhinitis: Treatment

Chronic nonallergic rhinitis (NAR) is a syndrome rather than a specific disease. A lack of understanding of the pathogenesis of this condition has led to imprecise terminology with several alternate names for the condition, including vasomotor rhinitis, nonallergic rhinopathy, and idiopathic rhinitis. The therapy for NAR is best based on the underlying pathology, which typically exists in a form whereby an abnormality of the autonomic nervous system is dominant or a form in which inflammation seems to be the cause of symptoms. In general the most effective therapy is the combination of an intranasal antihistamine and an intranasal corticosteroid.

The hidden burden of adult allergic rhinitis: UK healthcare resource utilisation survey

Background

The affliction of allergic rhinitis (AR) has been trivialised in the past. Recent initiatives by the European Academy of Allergy & Clinical Immunology and by the EU parliament seek to rectify that situation. The aim of this study was to provide a comprehensive picture of the burden and unmet need of AR patients.

Methods

This was a cross-sectional, online, questionnaire-based study (June–July 2011) including symptomatic seasonal AR (SAR) patients (≥18 years) from a panel. SAR episode pattern, severity, medication/co-medication usage, residual symptoms on treatment, number of healthcare visits, absenteeism and presenteeism were collected.

Results

One thousand patients were recruited (mild: n = 254; moderate/severe: n = 746). Patients with moderate/severe disease had significantly more symptomatic episodes/year (8.0 vs 6.0/year; p = 0.025) with longer episode-duration (12.5 vs 9.8 days; p = 0.0041) and more commonly used ≥2 AR therapies (70.5 vs 56.1 %; OR 1.87; p = 0.0001), looking for better and faster nasal and ocular symptom relief. The reported symptom burden was high irrespective of treatment, and significantly (p < 0.0001) higher in the moderate/severe group. Patients with moderate/severe AR were more likely to visit their GP (1.61 vs 1.19 times/year; OR: 1.49; p = 0.0061); due to dissatisfaction with therapy in 35.4 % of cases. Patients reported SAR-related absenteeism from work on 4.1 days/year (total cost to UK: £1.25 billion/year) and noted presenteeism for a mean of 37.7 days/year (vs 21.0 days/year; OR 1.71; p = 0.0048). Asthma co-morbid patients reported the need to increase their reliever- (1 in 2 patients) and controller-medication (1 in 5 patients) if they did not take their rhinitis medication.

Conclusions

This study differentiated between patients with mild and moderate/severe AR, demonstrating a burden of poorly controlled symptoms and high co-medication use. The deficiency in obtaining symptom control with what are currently considered firstline treatments suggests the need for a novel therapeutic approach.

Electronic supplementary material

The online version of this article (doi:10.1186/s13601-015-0083-6) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

360 degree perspective on allergic rhinitis management in Italy: a survey of GPs, pharmacists and patients

BACKGROUND

General practitioners (GPs), community pharmacists and allergic rhinitis (AR) patients in Italy were surveyed in order to gain insight from all three perspectives into the diagnosis, management and burden of AR in Italy.

METHODS

General practitioners and pharmacists (n = 100 for each) were surveyed by telephone; questions related to overall practice and to last AR patient seen. Patients (n = 552) completed a questionnaire after visiting specialist allergy centres. Questions related to diagnosis and treatment, degree of everyday limitation from AR, and satisfaction with treatment. The data were analysed descriptively.

RESULTS

Allergic rhinitis was managed mainly by GPs, who reported making the diagnosis themselves in 68 % of cases; rhinorrhea (64 %), sneezing (57 %) and congestion (49 %) were the symptoms most frequently taken into account. Limitation from AR on everyday life was rated 6.2 out of 10 by GPs. Pharmacists most often considered eye tearing (54 %) in their diagnosis. Almost half of GPs (49 %) and 87 % of pharmacists were unaware of the Allergic Rhinitis and its Impact on Asthma (ARIA) guidelines. The most commonly reported prescribed treatments by GPs were branded mometasone furoate, desloratadine, ebastine and generic mometasone; 21 % prescribed homeopathic products occasionally. On average, GPs remembered that their last patient case had moderate/severe disease, was prescribed anti-histamine monotherapy (37 % of cases), and did not change prescription (78 %). Pharmacists recommended an antihistamine for 56 % of clients who asked for advice, and a nasal decongestant for 21 %. Patients rated limitation from AR on everyday life as 5.7/10. 55 % reported using multiple therapies, and 43 % were not satisfied or weakly satisfied with their current treatment. Patients' main expectation for the future was to succeed in managing their AR symptoms (45 %), while 22 % hoped for a definitive cure. Many patients (61 %) were concerned their health would deteriorate.

CONCLUSIONS

Allergic rhinitis is largely managed by GPs in Italy, with pharmacists also playing a role, yet awareness of the ARIA guidelines among these groups is low. Patient satisfaction with treatment is moderate or low. New more effective treatments are needed to improve AR management in Italy. Allergy education programs need to be better targeted to GPs and pharmacists, and communication with patients regarding symptom control must be improved.

Neural Abnormalities in Nonallergic Rhinitis

Sensory nerve endings within the airway epithelial cells and the solitary chemoreceptor cells, synapsing with sensory nerves, respond to airborne irritants. Transient receptor potential (TRP) channels (A1 and V1 subtypes, specifically) on these nerve endings initiate local antidromic reflexes resulting in the release of neuropeptides such as substance P and calcitonin G-related peptides. These neuropeptides dilate epithelial submucosal blood vessels and may therefore increase transudation across these vessels resulting in submucosal edema, congestion, and rhinitis. Altered expression or activity of these TRP channels can therefore influence responsiveness to irritants. Besides these pathogenic mechanisms, additional mechanisms such as dysautonomia resulting in diminished sympathetic activity and comparative parasympathetic overactivity have also been suggested as a probable mechanism. Therapeutic effectiveness for this condition has been demonstrated through desensitization of TRPV1 channels with typical agonists such as capsaicin. Other agents effective in treating nonallergic rhinitis (NAR) such as azelastine have been demonstrated to exhibit TRPV1 channel activity through the modulation of Ca(2+) signaling on sensory neurons and in nasal epithelial cells. Roles of antimuscarinic agents such as tiotropium in NAR have been suggested by associations of muscarinic cholinergic receptors with TRPV1. The associations between these channels have also been suggested as mechanisms of airway hyperreactivity in asthma. The concept of the united airway disease hypothesis suggests a significant association between rhinitis and asthma. This concept is supported by the development of late-onset asthma in about 10-40 % of NAR patients who also exhibit a greater severity in their asthma. The factors and mechanisms associating NAR with nonallergic asthma are currently unknown. Nonetheless, free immunoglobulin light chains and microRNA alteration as mediators of these inflammatory conditions may play key roles in this association.

Clinical Efficacy of Nasal Steroids on Nonallergic Rhinitis and the Associated Inflammatory Cell Phenotypes

Background

Although good response to nasal steroid therapy has been documented in allergic rhinitis (AR), the efficacy of this treatment in non-AR, and the associated inflammatory cell phenotypes has not been fully investigated.

Objective

To compare the response to steroids in non-AR versus AR and to assess the impact of inflammatory cell phenotypes on non-AR treatment outcomes.

Methods

A total of 149 patients with rhinitis were divided into non-AR and AR groups by using the allergy skin-prick test. Based on nasal cytology, the non-AR group was further divided into inflammatory non-AR (INAR) and noninflammatory non-AR (NINAR) groups, and the INAR groups were further subdivided into four phenotypes according to inflammatory cell type: non-AR with eosinophils (NARES), non-AR with mast cells (NARMA), non-AR with neutrophils (NARNE), and NARES and mast cells (NARESMA). All the patients were treated over 28 days with 220 μg of nasal triamcinolone acetonide once daily. Nasal symptom score, peak inspiratory flow index, and nasal mucociliary clearance time (NMCCT) were used to evaluate treatment outcomes.

Results

The initial screening found 67 patients with non-AR and 82 patients with AR. At 28 days after nasal steroid treatment, all nasal symptom score, peak inspiratory flow indexes, and NMCCTs were significantly improved within each group; however, the non-AR group recorded significantly lower levels of improvement in blocked nose, rhinorrhea, sneezing, nasal itching, peak flows, and NMCCTs than the AR group. The NINAR group overall indicated lower levels of improvement than the INAR group. Among the INAR subgroups, the NARESMA, NARES, and NARMA phenotypes had similar outcome improvements, all better than the NARNE phenotype.

Conclusion

Although both patients with non-AR and those with AR had good steroid response, the patients with non-AR had less improvement than the patients with AR. Patients with NINAR had the worst treatment outcome among the non-AR phenotypes.

Nasal endoscopic findings and nasal symptoms in patients with asthma: a clinical study from a rhinological perspective

OBJECTIVE

Allergic rhinitis (AR), non-allergic rhinitis (NAR), chronic rhinosinusitis with nasal polyps (CRSwNP), and chronic rhinosinusitis without nasal polyps (CRSsNP) occur frequently in asthmatic patients. We evaluated nasal symptoms and nasal endoscopic findings in patients with asthma and correlated them to asthma severity.

METHODS

Subjects (n=150) with asthma completed questionnaires designed to provide information related to asthma and nasal disease. Patients were divided into four groups based on asthma severity. Pulmonary function tests, skin-prick tests (SPTs) and nasal endoscopy were performed on every patient. Clinical findings were compared in asthma patients by rhinologists.

RESULTS

The total incidence of AR, NAR, CRSwNP and CRSsNP in these patients with asthma was 76%. By using Fisher's Exact Test, there was no statistical significance between asthma severity and the incidence of AR, NAR, CRSwNP and CRSsNP (P=0.311). There was a significant difference in the total nasal symptoms score among subjects with different grades of asthma (P=0.002). However, there were no significant differences in the total Lund-Kennedy endoscopic score (LKS) (P=0.736). The nasal endoscopic scores were significantly correlated at a high degree with the nasal symptoms score (P=0.000). A significant correlation was found between the nasal endoscopic score and the duration of asthma in the patients with different grades of asthma (P<0.05).

CONCLUSIONS

The relationship between rhinitis and asthma is complex. Nasal airways should become part of standard clinical assessment and follow-up in patients with asthma.

Characterizing rhinitis subtypes

BACKGROUND

Allergic rhinitis (AR) is estimated to affect 20-25% of the United States population and thus accounts for a significant portion of our annual total health care expenditure, especially when one includes all of the concomitant disorders associated with rhinitis such as asthma and sinusitis. Given the prevalence of chronic rhinitis, the significant comorbidities associated with this condition, its overall health burden, and dissatisfaction by allergy sufferers with treatment outcomes, it is essential that the allergist and otolaryngologist develop a consensus approach for the evaluation, diagnosis, and treatment of chronic rhinitis subtypes.

METHODS

This study was designed to achieve this end point. Investigators have taken several clinical, physiological, and mechanistic approaches toward better characterizing rhinitis subtypes. An accurate diagnosis directed at differentiating AR, nonallergic rhinitis, and mixed rhinitis is essential to ensure that treatment(s) prescribed will lead to more favorable clinical outcomes.

RESULTS

An accurate history taking into account age of symptom onset, family history, quantification of inciting allergic and/or nonallergic triggers, and seasonality followed by aeroallergen skin testing to assess atopic status has been shown to be the most useful approach for clearly differentiating rhinitis subtypes.

CONCLUSION

Other cellular, cytokine, genetic, and physiological markers have thus far been proven to be less useful. Ultimately, treatment response to medications will be most effective when they are individualized to the patient's diagnosis.

Nonallergic rhinitis

Rhinitis is normally defined by the symptoms of nasal congestion, postnasal drainage, rhinorrhea, and sneezing. It has been associated with various pathologic changes, but can occur in the absence of any inflammation. Thus, the diagnosis is based on the clinical presentation. There are no clear-cut criteria to distinguish when rhinitis becomes chronic, but in its chronic form, it can be complex. Chronic forms of rhinitis that occur in the absence of any detectable specific IgE against relevant aeroallergens in its broadest sense can be called chronic nonallergic rhinitis. This review will concentrate on chronic nonallergic rhinitis in its various forms, discussing the epidemiology, underlying mechanisms, and its therapy.

Rhinitis symptoms and asthma among parents of preschool children in relation to the home environment in Chongqing, China

Risk factors for rhinitis and asthma in the home environment were studied by a questionnaire survey. Parents of 4530 1-8 year old children (one parent per child) from randomly selected kindergartens in Chongqing, China participated. 70.4% were females; 47.1% had rhinitis symptoms in the last three months (current rhinitis, CR); 1.6% reported a history of allergic asthma (AA); 2.7% reported a history of allergic rhinitis (AR); 16.4% were current smokers; 50.8% males and 2.4% females were current smokers. Stuffy odor, unpleasant odor, tobacco smoke odor and dry air were associated with CR (adjustment for gender, current smoking and other perceptions of odor or humidity). Associations between home environment and CR, AR, and AA were studied by multiple logistic regression analyses, adjusting for gender, current smoking and other significant home factors. Living near a main road or highway was a risk factor for both CR (OR(95%CI): 1.31(1.13,1.52)) and AR (OR(95%CI): 2.44(1.48,4.03)). Other risk factors for CR included living in rural areas (OR(95%CI): 1.43(1.10,1.85)), new furniture (OR(95%CI): 1.28(1.11,1.49)), water damage (OR(95%CI): 1.68(1.29,2.18)), cockroaches (OR(95%CI): 1.46(1.23,1.73)), and keeping pets (OR(95%CI): 1.24(1.04,1.49)). Other risk factors for AR included redecoration (OR(95%CI): 2.14(1.34,3.41)), mold spots (OR(95%CI): 2.23(1.06,4.68)), window pane condensation (OR(95%CI): 2.04(1.28,3.26)). Water damage was the only home factor associated with AA (2.56(1.34,4.86)). Frequently put bedding to sunshine was protective for CR (OR(95%CI): 0.79(0.68,0.92); cleaning every day was protective for AR (OR(95%CI): 0.40(0.22,0.71)). In conclusion, parents' CR and AR were related to a number of factors of the home environment.

Influence of estradiol administration on estrogen receptors of nasal mucosa: an experimental study on guinea pigs

INTRODUCTION

Some clinical trials revealed a correlation between increased serum estrogen and nasal symptoms or inflammatory changes in nasal mucosa. Estrogen receptors tend to be controlled by a negative feedback, to avoid a deleterious stimulus over several body functions while in hyperestrogenic periods. This study proposes a hypothesis where mechanisms regulating expression of estradiol receptors in nasal mucosa are absent in some patients, and their concentration remains steady even in periods of high serum hormonal concentration, potentially leading to local estrogenic symptoms in nasal mucosa.

STUDY DESIGN

This was an experimental prospective study.

AIM

To determine whether estrogen levels induce the reduction of the number of estrogen receptors in the nasal mucosa.

METHODS

In the present study, 30 adult male guinea pigs were subjected to a biopsy of the middle nasal turbinate and received 0.5 mL of estradiol cypionate intraperitoneally for 30 consecutive days. Afterwards, samples from contralateral middle turbinate were obtained. Immunohistochemical analysis of estrogen receptors were performed pre- and post-treatment.

RESULTS

The post-treatment group showed reduction of receptor expression when compared to the pre-treatment group. (p = 5.2726-5).

CONCLUSION

A reduction in the expression of the nasal estrogen receptor was observed after 30 days of estradiol administration.

Rhinology

Osteomas are the most common benign sinonasal lesion with the frontal sinus the most common location. On sinus MRI, dried secretions show as hyperintense on T1, hypointense on T2, and polyps show hypointense on T1, hyperintense on T2. Rhinoscleroma is caused by Klebsiella rhinoscleromatis with histopathology showing Mikulicz cells (macrophages containing pathogen) and Russell bodies (plasma cells).

The development of allergic rhinitis in children previously diagnosed as nonallergic rhinitis

BACKGROUND

Nonallergic rhinitis (NAR) is characterized by nasal symptoms similar to allergic rhinitis (AR) without an IgE-mediated immune response. Limited data are available on the natural history of NAR in its progression toward AR, particularly in children. This study evaluates the development of AR in children who were previously diagnosed with NAR.

METHODS

Children with the diagnosis of NAR during the period of 2005-2007 were reevaluated in 2010. Nasal symptoms, disease severity, comorbidities, rescue medication scores (RMSs), and skin-prick test to aeroallergens were assessed.

RESULTS

We recruited 175 children with an early diagnosis of NAR. The median age was 5.7 years, 62.9% were boys and 45.7% had family history of atopy. At reevaluation, 41% of children with previously diagnosed NAR developed sensitization to aeroallergens and were reclassified as having AR. The most frequent aeroallergen sensitization was Dermatophagoides pteronyssinus (59.7%), followed by Dermatophagoides farinae (54.2%) and American cockroach (38.9%). Children who developed AR had more nasal/eye symptoms, higher severity, and RMSs than children who did not develop AR. The predictors of developing AR were persistent nasal symptoms (adjusted odds ratio [OR], 8.9; 95% CI, 3.2-24.6), nasal itching (adjusted OR, 3.4; 95% CI, 1.2-9.5), triggered by house dust (adjusted OR, 4.3; 95% CI, 1.6-11.9) and animal danders (adjusted OR, 15.8; 95% CI, 3.3-76.1), and family history of atopy (adjusted OR, 6.0; 95% CI, 2.3-15.9).

CONCLUSION

Children with NAR who had family history of atopy, persistent nasal symptoms, and symptoms triggered by aeroallergens should be reevaluated periodically for the development of AR. This study was part of the clinical trial NCT01068808 registered in www.clinicaltrials.gov.

Phenotyping of allergic rhinitis

Allergic rhinitis (AR) is characterized by immune-mediated inflammation of the nasal mucosal lining. Although this chronic disease is not fatal, it is associated with many debilitating symptoms. Like many other chronic diseases, AR has a wide range of clinical aspects, and comorbidities such as asthma, rhinosinusitis, dermatitis, and conjunctivitis may accompany the disease to different degrees. These comorbidities and features determine the clinical phenotypes of AR. Different phenotypes and other characteristics of AR are discussed in this review. It is important for clinicians to be aware of these variable clinical phenotypes of AR to diagnose and treat the disease properly.

Thirty minute-exposure to aged cigarette smoke increases nasal congestion in nonsmokers

The aim of this study was to assess the effects of short exposures to experimentally aged cigarette smoke on the nose and upper airways. This crossover study compared the effects of 30-min exposures to (1) experimentally aged cigarette smoke at 1 mg/m³ particulate matter (PM)/14 ppm carbon monoxide (CO) and (2) conditioned filtered air on urinary metabolites of nicotine and tobacco-specific nitrosamines. Subjective nasal symptoms were assessed by questionnaire, objective nasal congestion was assessed by anterior rhinomanometry and nasal nitric oxide (NO) concentrations were determined. Experimentally aged cigarette smoke is a validated model for secondhand smoke (SHS). Twenty-six healthy nonsmokers (10 normal, 7 atopic/nonrhinitic, 7 atopic rhinitic, 2 nonatopic/rhinitic) were studied. A 30-min exposure to SHS increased nasal resistance in healthy nonsmokers. The rise in nasal resistance was most pronounced in rhinitic subjects. Significant increases were not noted when atopic subjects were considered independent of rhinitis status. Secondhand smoke exposure also elevated subjective nasal symptoms and urinary concentrations of metabolites of nicotine (cotinine and trans-3´-hydroxycotinine) and tobacco-specific nitrosamines [(4-(methylnitrosamino)-1-(3-pyridyl)-1-butanol (NNAL)] in all subgroups of subjects. Exposure-related, subjective nasal symptoms were significantly higher in rhinitic than in normal subjects. Significant changes in nasal NO concentrations were not detected. Data indicate a 30-min exposure to secondhand smoke at 1 mg/m³ PM increases subjective upper respiratory symptoms, increases urinary cotinine and NNAL, and produces objective nasal airflow obstruction in human subjects.

Qualitative Development of the Rhinitis Control Assessment Test (RCAT), an Instrument for Evaluating Rhinitis Symptom Control

BACKGROUND

: Effective management of allergic rhinitis requires ongoing monitoring of its control. This article describes the qualitative phase of development of a patient-completed instrument, the Rhinitis Control Assessment Test (RCAT), designed to assist patients and providers in the detection of problems with rhinitis symptom control.

OBJECTIVE

: To identify concepts to be measured and to develop initial questionnaire items to be tested further in the next phase of development.

METHODS

: A literature review and input from patient focus groups were utilized to generate concepts to be measured in the draft questionnaire. The draft items were subjected to cognitive testing to ensure that the items were understood by patients and to eliminate ambiguity as well as to select an optimal recall period and meaningful response scales. Patients aged ≥18 years self-reporting a rhinitis diagnosis who had experienced rhinitis symptoms in the past 12 months were eligible for participation in the focus groups (n = 39) and the cognitive interviews (n = 23).

RESULTS

: This qualitative process yielded a draft instrument with 26 items assessing five constructs of rhinitis symptom control: frequency and bothersomeness of nasal and non-nasal symptoms, symptom impact, activity interference, symptom control, and medication use. A five-point Likert response scale and a 1-week recall period for each item were adopted based on patient input.

CONCLUSION

: The qualitative phase of development of the RCAT produced constructs and items for an instrument that is anticipated to facilitate accurate assessment of rhinitis control and improve the quality of care for patients with allergic rhinitis.

Allergic rhinitis and non-allergic rhinitis in children in the tropics: prevalence and risk associations

BACKGROUND

The age-related comparative prevalence of allergic rhinitis (AR) and non-allergic rhinitis (NAR) in children is poorly defined. We aimed to characterize AR and NAR in children.

METHODS

This study enrolled children with chronic rhinitis who presented to a tertiary paediatric center for a diagnostic skin prick test (SPT). Parents completed a medical history questionnaire for their child, including disease activity for asthma and rhinitis. Sociodemographic data was obtained and all participants underwent a common inhalant SPT panel. A positive SPT indicated AR.

RESULTS

From March 2001 to March 2009, 6,660 children (64% male) were enrolled (aged 6 months to 19 years, mean 7.82 years). Only 3.7% (249) of the children were <2 years old, and almost 30% of these had AR. Most children with AR (73%) presented after age 6. Males were more likely to have AR (vs. NAR) (OR 1.5; CI 1.39-1.77). Antihistamine and salbutamol use did not differ between children with AR and NAR. Children with AR were more likely to require adjunct therapy with inhaled corticosteroids (51.2% vs. 43.2%, P < 0.001), have drug hypersensitivity (especially antipyretic drugs) (2.5% vs. 1.3%, P = 0.384) or an asthma admission (9.1% vs. 6.0%, P < 0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

AR is more common in male children, is relatively rare below the age of 2 years, and accounts for two-thirds of all childhood chronic rhinitis and 73.3% of all chronic rhinitis in school-aged children (≥6 years old). Children with AR have more severe rhinitis symptoms and more often suffer from asthma-related events and admissions.

Prevalence and clinical relevance of local allergic rhinitis

BACKGROUND

Evidence demonstrates the existence of local allergic rhinitis (LAR) in nonatopic patients, although its prevalence in the rhinitis population remains unknown. The aim, therefore, of this study was to evaluate the prevalence, clinical characteristics, and severity of LAR in a Spanish rhinitis population, compared with patients having classical allergic rhinitis (AR) with systemic atopy or nonallergic rhinitis (NAR).

METHODS

A group of 452 adult rhinitis patients were randomly selected from a total of 3860 who attended our allergy service over 1 year. A clinical questionnaire, skin prick test (SPT), spirometry, and serum total and specific IgE (sIgE) were evaluated. A nasal allergen provocation test with multiple aeroallergens (NAPT-M), including Dermatophagoides pteronyssinus, pollens, alternaria, and dog epithelia, was performed in patients with negative SPT and serum sIgE.

RESULTS

A total of 428 patients completed the study; 24 were excluded because of nasal hyper-reactivity. LAR was diagnosed in 25.7%, AR in 63.1%, and NAR in 11.2%. The LAR and AR patients had a similar clinical profile: a nonsmoking woman with severe, persistent perennial rhinitis frequently associated with conjunctivitis and asthma. More than 36% of LAR patients reported rhinitis onset in childhood. NAPT-M detected aeroallergen polysensitization in 37.3% of the LAR patients. Dermatophagoides pteronyssinus was the main sensitizing aeroallergen in LAR and AR (60% vs 54%, P > 0.05).

CONCLUSIONS

Local allergic rhinitis is a prevalent entity in patients evaluated with rhinitis. Persistent and severe symptoms associated with conjunctivitis and/or asthma and polysensitization were likely to be detected in LAR and AR.