Requirements for medications commonly used in the treatment of allergic rhinitis. European Academy of Allergy and Clinical Immunology (EAACI), Allergic Rhinitis and its Impact on Asthma (ARIA)

Bilastine for the treatment of allergic rhinoconjunctivitis and urticaria: results from an international Delphi study

Background

Second-generation oral H1-antihistamines, including bilastine, represent the emerging treatments of allergic rhinitis (including rhinoconjunctivitis) and chronic urticaria in both adults and children. This study analyses available evidence supporting the use of bilastine amongst second-generation antihistamines for the symptomatic treatment of allergic rhinitis and urticaria in adults and children.

Methods

Consensus amongst experts from 17 countries on the ideal treatment of rhinitis and urticaria, and the specific role of bilastine was measured by means of a modified Delphi process. A total of 12 statements were voted on by the experts using a five-point Likert scale (1 = strongly disagree; 2 = disagree; 3 = undecided; 4 = agree; 5 = strongly agree). The definition of consensus was set at a minimum of 80% concordance for 4+5 scores (agree or strongly agree).

Results

All proposed statements reached consensus, with a concordance of ≥98% for five statements and ≥96% for seven.

Conclusions

The wide consensus obtained for the proposed statements suggests a prominent role for bilastine in the management of allergic rhinitis and urticaria.

Pollen Allergy Screening with Allergen-Specific and Total Immunoglobulin E Titers

Background

Allergic rhinitis is a typical type I hypersensitivity reaction, commonly caused by inhalant allergens. Accurate identification of the causative antigen is important for rapid diagnosis and treatment initiation.

Objective

This study examined the efficiency of serum-based allergen-specific immunoglobulin E and total immunoglobulin E antibody titers in screening for pollen allergy. We also examined the effect of cross-reactive carbohydrate determinants on specific immunoglobulin E titers in screening for pollen allergy, one of the causes of false positivity in specific immunoglobulin E measurements.

Methods

A questionnaire was used to evaluate the symptoms of pollinosis among participants who underwent a medical examination. One hundred and thirty-two participants reported pollen allergy symptoms and 127 reported an absence of symptoms. Specific immunoglobulin E levels were measured using the AlaSTAT 3g Allergy method. Seventeen components, including four types of cross-reactive carbohydrate determinant-specific immunoglobulin E antibodies, were measured and evaluated comparatively.

Results

The sensitivity and specificity of the tests in predicting the presence or absence of pollen allergy were analyzed. The values of the areas under the curves for immunoglobulin E antibody levels against cedar, cypress, orchard grass, and ragweed pollen were 0.87, 0.82, 0.63, and 0.56, respectively. A cross-reactive carbohydrate determinant-related false-positive effect on the pollen specific immunoglobulin E titer was noted in pollen screening.

Conclusion

Cedar pollen-specific immunoglobulin E titers showed sufficient accuracy for use in pollen allergy screening. The study of cross-reactive carbohydrate determinants suggested that subjects who tested positive for pollen often had false-positive results due to the impact of cross-reactive carbohydrate determinants.

Aeroallergen Sensitization and Clinical Characteristics of Subjects with Chronic Rhinitis in Chiang Mai, Thailand: A Twenty-Year Retrospective Study

Background

The prevalence of common aeroallergen sensitization in subjects with AR and clinical comparison between AR and Non-AR (NAR) subjects in Thailand remains limited. The primary objective of this study was to illustrate the prevalence of the common aeroallergen sensitization in AR subjects and the differences in clinical characteristics between AR and NAR subjects.

Methods

Data were retrospectively collected from all subjects with chronic rhinitis who have visited the Chest and Allergy Clinic in three settings in Chiang Mai, Thailand between January 1998 and December 2018. Clinical characteristics and the result of skin prick test (SPT) to common aeroallergen were collected.

Results

A total of 2164 subjects with chronic rhinitis were enrolled, SPT was performed in 1001 (46.3%); 655 (65.4%) and 346 (34.6%) were AR and NAR, respectively. Mite mixed was the most frequent aeroallergen sensitization in subjects with AR both without asthma and with asthma (86.4% and 85.6%) followed by cockroach mixed (54.4% and 58.9%), grass pollen (38.9% and 40.4%), animal dander (15.5% and 19.9%), and mold mixed (5.7% and 11.0%). Polysensitization was higher in younger adults compared to middle aged adult and older adult (72.5%, 67.4%, and 58.7%, respectively, p=0.041). The AR subjects had lower age, earlier age of disease onset, and longer duration of disease (32.6±16.3 vs 40.2±15.4 years, 24 (10–36) vs 34 years (22–45), 3 (1–10) vs 2 years (0–5), respectively, p<0.001). The AR subjects also had more asthma, conjunctivitis, and family history of chronic rhinitis (22.3% vs 15.6%, 25.3% vs 4.3%, and 58.0% vs 43.3%, respectively, p<0.05).

Conclusion

The most common aeroallergen for AR (with and without asthma) was mite mixed followed by cockroach mixed and grass pollen. Polysensitization was significant higher in younger adult than middle aged and older adult. AR was significantly associated with asthma, conjunctivitis and family history of chronic rhinitis compared to NAR.

Bilastine: a lifetime companion for the treatment of allergies

Objective: Bilastine is a potent and highly selective H₁-antihistamine approved for the treatment of allergic rhinoconjunctivitis and urticaria. This article summarizes available data on the use of bilastine in the treatment of allergic disorders in different age groups, including younger and older adults, and school-age children and adolescents.Methods: A PubMed literature search ("bilastine") was conducted on 25 February 2019. Additional literature known to the authors and identified from the reference lists of cited publications was included.Results: Bilastine is administered orally at a dose of 20 mg once daily in adults and adolescents aged ≥12 years and 10 mg once daily in children aged 6 to <12 years. Clinical trials have demonstrated its efficacy at improving nasal and ocular symptoms in patients with allergic rhinitis, and wheals and itching in patients with urticaria. It has a rapid onset of action and long duration of action. Bilastine does not undergo significant metabolism and does not interact with the CYP450 system, which limits its potential for drug-drug interactions. No dosage adjustments are required in patients with renal or hepatic impairment, or in the elderly. Bilastine is generally well tolerated, even when administered at above-standard doses. It does not exhibit anticholinergic effects or cardiotoxic effects, shows no central nervous system penetration and has minimal sedative properties. It has been shown to improve health-related quality of life.Conclusions: Bilastine is a suitable option for the treatment of patients with allergic rhinoconjunctivitis or urticaria across age groups from school-age children to elderly patients.

Guidance to 2018 good practice: ARIA digitally-enabled, integrated, person-centred care for rhinitis and asthma

Aims

Mobile Airways Sentinel NetworK (MASK) belongs to the Fondation Partenariale MACVIA-LR of Montpellier, France and aims to provide an active and healthy life to rhinitis sufferers and to those with asthma multimorbidity across the life cycle, whatever their gender or socio-economic status, in order to reduce health and social inequities incurred by the disease and to improve the digital transformation of health and care. The ultimate goal is to change the management strategy in chronic diseases.

Methods

MASK implements ICT technologies for individualized and predictive medicine to develop novel care pathways by a multi-disciplinary group centred around the patients.

Stakeholders

Include patients, health care professionals (pharmacists and physicians), authorities, patient’s associations, private and public sectors.

Results

MASK is deployed in 23 countries and 17 languages. 26,000 users have registered.

EU grants (2018)

MASK is participating in EU projects (POLLAR: impact of air POLLution in Asthma and Rhinitis, EIT Health, DigitalHealthEurope, Euriphi and Vigour).

Lessons learnt

(i) Adherence to treatment is the major problem of allergic disease, (ii) Self-management strategies should be considerably expanded (behavioural), (iii) Change management is essential in allergic diseases, (iv) Education strategies should be reconsidered using a patient-centred approach and (v) Lessons learnt for allergic diseases can be expanded to chronic diseases.

Efficacy of Chinese herbal medicine in treatment of allergic rhinitis in children: a meta-analysis of 19 randomized controlled trials

This study aimed to systematically evaluate the effect of Chinese herbal medicine (CHM) for treating allergic rhinitis in children. We reviewed relevant studies retrieved from the following databases: MEDLINE (PubMed), Embase, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, Chinese National Knowledge Infrastructure, the Cqvip Database, and the Wanfang Database. The analysis was conducted by Cochrane software Revman 5.3. Nineteen randomized, controlled trials were included. Meta-analysis showed that CHM had advantages in the efficacy rate (odds ratio [OR] 3.32; 95% confidence interval [CI], 2.32–4.76), recurrence rate (OR 0.30; 95% CI, 0.18–0.49), scores of symptoms, such as sneezing (mean difference [MD] −1.24; 95% CI, −2.33 to −0.14), running nose (MD −1.32; 95% CI, −2.58 to −0.05), and nasal congestion (MD −0.70; 95% CI, −1.05 to −0.36), but not nasal itching (MD −1.37; 95% CI, −3.96 to 1.22), compared with controls. CHM could also effectively decrease immunoglobulin E levels (MD −46.01, 95% CI, −57.53 to −34.48). The current evidence suggests that CHM is more effective in treating allergic rhinitis in children compared with controls. CHM may also decrease the recurrence and level of immunoglobulin E, and improve symptoms such as sneezing, running nose, and nasal congestion, compared with controls.

Nasal Obstruction is the Key Symptom in Hay Fever Patients

BACKGROUND: Allergic rhinitis is characterized by a Th2-dependent inflammation. Nasal obstruction largely depends on allergic inflammation.

OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to evaluate the possible role of the symptom nasal obstruction in assessing patients with hay fever.

METHODS: Fifty patients (mean age, 23.7 ± 4.9 years) with hay fever were evaluated both during and outside pollen season. All of them had moderate-severe grade of nasal obstruction. Total symptom score (TSS), rhinomanometry, nasal lavage, nasal scraping, spirometry, and methacholine bronchial challenge were performed in all subjects.

RESULTS: During the pollen season, patients with severe nasal obstruction showed significantly higher values of TSS, IL-4, IL-5, IL-8, nasal eosinophils and neutrophils, and significantly lower values of nasal airflow, IFNγ, FEV1, FVC, and FEF 25-75 in comparison with patients with moderate nasal obstruction. Twenty (83%) patients with severe nasal obstruction showed bronchial hyperreactivity (BHR), whereas only 6 (25%) patients with moderate nasal obstruction had BHR. Outside the pollen season overlapping results were observed.

CONCLUSIONS: This study provides evidence about the key role played by nasal obstruction in assessing patients with allergic rhinitis.

Detection of Allergen Specific Antibodies From Nasal Secretion of Allergic Rhinitis Patients

Purpose

Allergic rhinitis (AR) is a common and increasing disease in which Dermatophagoides (D.) farinae is one of the most common causative allergens. The aims of this study were to confirm the presence of locally produced antibodies to D. farinae in nasal secretions between nasal provocation test (NPT)-positive and -negative groups of AR patients, to evaluate their relationships with the levels of inflammatory mediators, and to determine adaptive and innate immune responses in nasal mucosa.

Methods

Sixty AR patients sensitive to house dust mites confirmed by skin prick test or serum specific IgE to D. farinae underwent NPT for D. farinae. Nasal packs were placed in both nasal cavities of the patients for 5 minutes to obtain nasal secretions after NPT. The levels of total IgE, specific IgE to D. farinae, eosinophil cationic protein (ECP), and tryptase in nasal secretions were detected by using ImmunoCAP. The levels of specific IgE, IgA, and secretory IgA antibodies to D. farinae in nasal secretions were measured by using ELISA. The levels of IL-8, VEGF, IL-25, and IL-33 were also measured by using ELISA.

Results

High levels of total IgE, specific IgE, specific IgA, and secretory IgA to D. farinae, as well as inflammatory mediators, such as ECP, IL-8, VEGF and tryptase, were detected in nasal secretions, although the differences were not statistically significant between the NPT-positive and NPT-negative groups. Levels of all immunoglobulins measured in this study significantly correlated with ECP, IL-8, and VEGF (P<0.05), but not with tryptase (P>0.05). IL-33 and IL-25 were also detected, and IL-25 level significantly correlated with IL-8 (r=0.625, P<0.001).

Conclusions

These findings confirmed the presence of locally produced specific antibodies, including D. farinae-specific IgE and IgA, in nasal secretions collected from D. farinae-sensitive AR patients in both the NPT-positive and NPT-negative groups, and close correlations were noted between antibodies and nasal inflammatory mediators, including such as ECP, IL-8 and VEGF, indicating that locally produced antibodies may be involved in the nasal inflammation of AR.

Role of bilastine in the management of allergic rhinitis and urticaria: an Asia-Pacific consensus statement

The prevalence of allergic diseases is increasing globally, most particularly in middle- to low-income countries. This article examines the burden of allergic rhinitis and chronic urticaria in the Asia-Pacific region, unmet clinical needs, and the potential role of bilastine in the management of these conditions. An International Advisory Group meeting was convened in association with the Asian Pacific Society of Respirology Annual Congress in November 2014, followed by a literature review, and consensus-based outcomes from the meeting and literature review are described. Regional estimates of the prevalence of allergic rhinitis range from 10% to 50%, while little is known regarding the burden of urticaria in the Asia-Pacific region. A survey of allergy patients in the region identified fast, complete, and long-lasting symptom relief as the medication attributes most important to patients. International treatment guidelines for allergic rhinitis and urticaria advocate the first-line use of second-generation, no-sedating H1-antihistamines, such as bilastine, over their first-generation counterparts and a range of these agents are available to Asia-Pacific patients. The newer agents possess many of the properties of an "ideal" antihistamine (once daily administration, rapid and complete symptom relief, limited potential for drug-drug interactions, minimal side effects). The burgeoning prevalence of allergic diseases in the Asia-Pacific region and the uncontrolled symptoms that these patients experience demand a new antihistamine that offers the highest number of positive features according to the international guidelines.

Risk factors for chronic rhinosinusitis

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

To review the recent literature on risk factors for chronic rhinosinusitis (CRS) with an emphasis on genetic, comorbid diseases and environmental factors associated with CRS. Through identifying potential risk factors for CRS, we aim to glean insights into the underlying pathogenic mechanisms essential for developing effective therapeutic strategies.

RECENT FINDINGS

Recent findings demonstrate that genetics and comorbid medical conditions including airway diseases, gastroesophageal reflux disease, inflammatory and autoimmune diseases, and various demographic and environmental factors are associated with having a CRS diagnosis. Limitations of current studies include variable application of disease definitions, lack of prospective longitudinal studies and a disproportionate focus on tertiary care populations.

SUMMARY

CRS has a broad spectrum of associations ranging from genetics to comorbid diseases and environmental factors. These predisposing factors may provide valuable information for possible designing of therapeutic and preventive interventions. However, to better understand whether these associations cause CRS, further studies are needed to independently replicate findings, establish temporal relationships between exposure and disease onset, evaluate the influence of exposure dose on disease severity, and to understand the biological effects of these risk factors in the context of CRS.

Barrier-enforcing measures as treatment principle in allergic rhinitis: a systematic review

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES

Barrier-enforcing measures have been suggested as treatment options for allergic rhinitis. This review identifies and describes the literature on the subject.

METHODS

Relevant publications were searched for in the PubMed database (search entries: 'allergic rhinitis' and 'treatment'). The evaluation comprised condition (seasonal or perennial allergic rhinitis), type of intervention, duration of treatment, study design, peer review status or not, number of test subjects, type of allergen exposure, and outcome in terms of effects or not on nasal symptoms of allergic rhinitis.

RESULTS

Fifteen studies were either identified in the PubMed database search or from the reference lists of identified publications. Seven were placebo-controlled, randomized, and peer-reviewed, and symptom-reducing effects were reported by all of these reports. Limitations of this review reflect that the remainder of the studies had inferior designs, particularly lack of placebo control.

CONCLUSIONS

Barrier-enforcing measures as achieved by nasal administrations of cellulose powder and microemulsions, respectively, have symptom-reducing effects in allergic rhinitis.

Rupatadine: efficacy and safety of a non-sedating antihistamine with PAF-antagonist effects

Rupatadine is a modern non-sedating H1-antihistamine that also haswith additional antagonist effects on platelet-activating factor (PAF). Under the tradenames Rupafin® and Urtimed®, Rrupatadine is approvedregistered in Germany for the treatment of allergic rhinitis and urticaria infor adults and children aged over 12 years. In this review, the available literature available to date onregarding the pharmacological profile and clinical application of Rrupatadine is reviewed and compared to other conventional histamines. In conclusionFinally, the side effects, safety and interaction profileincompatibility of Rrupatadine are discussed. Due to CYP p450 metabolism, Rrupatadine should not be given together with Eerythromycin, Kketoconazole or grapefruit juice. Rupatadine has been found to be effective and safe Iin a variety of randomized clinical trials both in both seasonal and perennial allergic rhinitis, as well as inbut also chronic urticaria Rupatadine has been found as effective and safe.

Suppression of cytokine release by fluticasone furoate vs. mometasone furoate in human nasal tissue ex-vivo

BACKGROUND

Topical glucocorticosteroids are the first line therapy for airway inflammation. Modern compounds with higher efficacy have been developed, but head-to-head comparison studies are sparse.

OBJECTIVE

To compare the activity of two intranasal glucocorticoids, fluticasone furoate (FF) and mometasone furoate (MF) with respect to the inhibition of T helper (Th)1, Th2 and Th17 cytokine release in airway mucosa.

METHODS

We used an ex-vivo human nasal mucosal tissue model and employed pre- and post- Staphylococcus aureus enterotoxin B (SEB)-challenge incubations with various time intervals and drug concentrations to mimic typical clinical situations of preventive or therapeutic use.

RESULTS

At a fixed concentration of 10-10 M, FF had significantly higher suppressive effects on interferon (IFN)-γ, interleukin (IL)-2 and IL-17 release, but not IL-5 or tumor necrosis factor (TNF)-α, vs. MF. While the maximal suppressive activity was maintained when FF was added before or after tissue stimulation, the cytokine suppression capacity of MF appeared to be compromised when SEB-induced cell activation preceded the addition of the drug. In a pre-challenge incubation setting with removal of excess drug concentrations, MF approached inhibition of IL-5 and TNF-α after 6 and 24 hours while FF maximally blocked the release of these cytokines right after pre-incubation. Furthermore, FF suppressed a wider range of T helper cytokines compared to MF.

CONCLUSION

The study demonstrates the potential of our human mucosal model and shows marked differences in the ability to suppress the release of various cytokines in pre- and post-challenge settings between FF and MF mimicking typical clinical situations of preventive or therapeutic use.

Bronchial asthma control after argon plasma coagulation turbinectomy in patients with chronic rhinitis

Bronchial asthma is frequently accompanied by chronic rhinitis. It has been observed that effective treatment of rhinitis may reduce asthma symptoms. The aim of the study was the evaluation of the control of bronchial asthma symptoms in patients with chronic rhinitis after argon plasma coagulation turbinectomy (APCt). The effect of APCt was assessed in 47 adults with drug-resistant chronic rhinitis and bronchial asthma 3-month post-procedure. Changes of asthma symptoms were scored using Asthma Control Test (ACT). Subjective improvement of nasal congestion 3 months after APCt was observed in 87% and of rhinorrhoea in 75% patients. Rhinomanometry showed 219 ± 19 cm³/s increase of flow and 0.75 ± 0.06 Pa/cm³/s reduction of resistance. The prevalence of patients with insufficient bronchial asthma control decreased from 79 to 4%. The decrease was associated with diminished frequency of eosinophils >20% in nasal cytology from 83% pre-procedure to 28% in the follow-up. The percentage of eosinophils >20% in cytology before APCt increased the chance for asthma control improvement by 22.8 times. Reduction in symptoms of drug-resistant rhinitis after APCt is followed by significant improvement of asthma control. The most beneficial therapeutic effects of APCt are noted in patients with a high rate of eosinophils in nasal cytology.

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.

Role of skin prick test in allergic disorders: a prospective study in kashmiri population in light of review

Background:

Skin prick test (SPT) is the most effective diagnostic test to detect IgE mediated type I allergic reactions like allergic rhinitis, atopic asthma, acute urticaria, food allergy etc. SPTs are done to know allergic sensitivity and applied for devising immunotherapy as the therapeutic modality.

Materials and Methods:

This prospective study was conducted in the department of Immunology and Molecular medicine at SKIMS. A total of 400 patients suffering from allergic rhinitis, asthma and urticaria were recruited in this study. SPT was performed with panel of allergens including house dust mite, pollens, fungi, dusts, cockroach, sheep wool and dog epithelia. Allergen immunotherapy was given to allergic rhinitis and asthmatic patients as therapeutic modality.

Results:

In our study, age of patients ranged from 6 to 65 years. Majority of patients were in the age group of 20-30 years (72%) with Male to female ratio of 1:1.5. Of the 400 patients, 248 (62%) had urticaria, 108 (27%) patients had allergic rhinitis and 44 (11%) patients had asthma. SPT reaction was positive in 38 (86.4%) with allergic asthma, 74 (68.5%) patients with allergic rhinitis and 4 (1.6%) patient with urticaria, respectively. Allergen immunotherapy was effective in 58% patients with allergic rhinitis and 42% allergic asthma.

Conclusion:

Identifiable aeroallergen could be detected in 86.4% allergic asthma and 68.5% allergic rhinitis patients by SPT alone. Pollens were the most prevalent causative allergen. There was significant relief in the severity of symptoms, medication intake with the help of allergen immunotherapy.

Allergic Rhinitis and its Impact on Asthma (ARIA): achievements in 10 years and future needs

Allergic rhinitis (AR) and asthma represent global health problems for all age groups. Asthma and rhinitis frequently coexist in the same subjects. Allergic Rhinitis and its Impact on Asthma (ARIA) was initiated during a World Health Organization workshop in 1999 (published in 2001). ARIA has reclassified AR as mild/moderate-severe and intermittent/persistent. This classification closely reflects patients' needs and underlines the close relationship between rhinitis and asthma. Patients, clinicians, and other health care professionals are confronted with various treatment choices for the management of AR. This contributes to considerable variation in clinical practice, and worldwide, patients, clinicians, and other health care professionals are faced with uncertainty about the relative merits and downsides of the various treatment options. In its 2010 Revision, ARIA developed clinical practice guidelines for the management of AR and asthma comorbidities based on the Grading of Recommendation, Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) system. ARIA is disseminated and implemented in more than 50 countries of the world. Ten years after the publication of the ARIA World Health Organization workshop report, it is important to make a summary of its achievements and identify the still unmet clinical, research, and implementation needs to strengthen the 2011 European Union Priority on allergy and asthma in children.

Diagnosis and treatment of allergic rhinitis in children: results of the PETRA study

BACKGROUND

Good control of allergic rhinitis (AR) in children is desirable because it is associated with diseases such as asthma. The aim of this analysis of the PETRA study was to characterise its diagnosis and treatment in Spanish children.

METHODS

Data were analysed for paediatric patients (age 5-17 years, inclusive) included in the PETRA study, which included consecutive patients with allergic rhinitis attending respiratory specialists throughout Spain. Demographic information, disease characteristics (duration, severity according to the Allergic Rhinitis and its Impact on Asthma [ARIA] classification), diagnostic procedures, treatments and physicians' attitudes to treatment were recorded.

RESULTS

Of the original sample of 1043 patients, 260 children were included (mean age, 11.7 years; 56.2% boys; 61.9% allergic to house dust mites (HDM) and 38.1% allergic to grass pollen). By ARIA classification, 180/260 (69.4%) had persistent AR and 176/280 (63%) had moderate disease. Asthma was reported in 89/161 (55%) with HDM allergy and 44/99 (45%) with grass pollen allergy. Symptomatic treatment was prescribed in 98.5%, although disease control had been no better than poor in 57.3%. Allergen specific immunotherapy was administered to 56.9%, and was used more often for HDM AR. When asked why specific immunotherapy was not prescribed, two-thirds of the investigators preferred a wait-and-see approach, prescribing immunotherapy if symptoms worsened or asthma developed.

CONCLUSIONS

Paediatric patients treated by specialists for allergic rhinitis have moderate or severe disease. Symptomatic treatment was extensively prescribed but often did not achieve good disease control. Many specialists preferred a wait-and-see approach before prescribing immunotherapy.

Establishing the place in therapy of bilastine in the treatment of allergic rhinitis according to ARIA: evidence review

BACKGROUND

The ARIA (Allergic Rhinitis and its Impact on Asthma) guidelines development group examined the properties of oral H(1)-antihistamines and made proposals about an 'optimal' drug. Several criteria should be met by oral H(1)-antihistamines in terms of their pharmacological, and clinical efficacy and safety profiles.

OBJECTIVE

Bilastine, a new H(1)-antihistamine, has been approved in 28 European countries for the symptomatic treatment of allergic rhinoconjunctivitis and urticaria in adults and children older than 12 years. To determine its potential place in therapy in the treatment of allergic rhinitis, this manuscript examines whether bilastine meets the criteria defined in the European Academy of Allergy and Clinical Immunology (EAACI)/ARIA proposals for oral H(1)-antihistamines.

METHODS

The optimal properties of oral H(1)-antihistamines and current ARIA recommendations for their use in allergic rhinitis are presented, as well as relevant pharmacological and clinical data for bilastine obtained from the published literature that specifically address the defined criteria.

RESULTS

Bilastine is a potent inhibitor of the histamine H(1) receptor. Data from preclinical studies have confirmed its selectivity for the histamine H(1) receptor over other receptors, and demonstrated antihistaminic properties in vitro and in vivo. Bilastine does not interfere with the cytochrome P450 system and is devoid of cardiac side effects. Studies in healthy volunteers and patients have shown that bilastine does not affect driving ability, cardiac conduction or alertness. In large pivotal randomized, placebo-controlled trials (RCTs), bilastine had a favourable safety profile. Bilastine 20 mg once daily improved all nasal and ocular symptoms of allergic rhinitis with greater efficacy than placebo and comparable to that of cetirizine and desloratadine. Moreover, bilastine was shown to improve quality of life, an important outcome of RCTs in allergic diseases. There were no significant changes in laboratory tests, electrocardiograms or vital signs. A potential limitation of this assessment of bilastine is that it is a literature-based review and the findings are dependent upon the quality of the published evidence.

CONCLUSIONS

Bilastine meets current EAACI/ARIA criteria for medications used in the treatment of allergic rhinitis.

Allergic rhinitis: an update on disease, present treatments and future prospects

Allergic rhinitis (AR) is an inflammation of nasal mucosa mediated by IgE-associated processes occurring independently, or concurrently with asthma. AR is characterized by sensitization-formation and expression of antigen specific IgE, followed by inflammation in two phases. The early phase response involves cross linking of IgE molecules leading to degranulation of mast cells and release of preformed mediators such as histamine and tryptase, or newly synthesized mediators such as prostaglandins and leukotrienes. The late phase response is predominated by the presence of eosinophils, lymphocytes, cytokines, and adhesion molecules. Newer insights reveal that the whole phenomenon of immunological inflammation is intricately knit with neural pathways, which strongly influence the process. Furthermore, AR can impact psychological health and vice versa. Classical pharmacotherapy of AR includes use of oral or topical antihistamines, oral antileukotrienes, topical corticosteroids, mast cell stabilizers, decongestants, and an anticholinergic agent. Among immunomodulatory treatments, immunotherapy is gaining widespread use, while antibody treatment is restricted mainly to resistant cases. Several small molecules with improved safety profile, or targeting novel mechanisms are in the clinical research. Newer antihistamines and corticosteroids with improved safety profile and antagonists of the prostaglandin D(2) (CRTH2) receptors are likely to be available for clinical use in the near future. Lack of properly validated animal models and complexities associated with clinical evaluation are some of the challenges facing the researchers in AR. Comprehensive understanding of immunological and neurological processes in AR would facilitate the future quest for more effective and safer management of this disease.

Allergic rhinitis (AR) in geriatric patients

Allergic rhinitis (AR) can be defined as an inflammatory disease of the nose and the paranasal sinuses, characterized by a specific IgE-mediated hypersensitivity reaction. The aim of this study was to evaluate the correlation between the symptoms of AR and the prick test results in geriatric patients presenting with symptoms of AR by comparing these with those of a young control group. Thirty-two geriatric patients (Group 1) were analyzed retrospectively, and 37 patients (Group 2) were selected as the control group. Diagnosis of AR was made based upon the physical examination findings, nasal endoscopic examination findings and the skin prick test results. While the skin prick test positivity was 50% in Group 1, this rate was found as 75.7% in Group 2. The difference was found to be statistically significant (p=0.044). A statistically significant difference was found between the two groups in terms of susceptibility to mugwort pollen and fish (p=0.048, p=0.033). In conclusion, in geriatric patients presenting with AR symptoms, systemic treatment should not be initiated before performing skin prick test, due to the adverse effects of the drugs.

Treatment options for the management of exercise-induced asthma and bronchoconstriction

Treatment for exercise-induced bronchospasm and exercise-induced asthma includes both pharmacologic and nonpharmacologic options. Pharmacologic agents that have been proven to be effective for treating these conditions include short- and long-acting β2-adrenoceptor agonists, mast cell-stabilizing agents, anticholinergics, leukotriene receptor antagonists, and inhaled corticosteroids (ICS). When selecting the most appropriate medication, factors to consider include the effectiveness of each, the duration of action, frequency of administration, potential side effects, and tolerance level. Long-acting β2-adrenoceptor agonists should not be used without ICS. Nonpharmacologic treatments include physical conditioning, incorporating a warm-up before and a cool-down period after exercise, performing nasal breathing, avoiding cold weather or environmental allergens, using a face mask or other aid to warm and humidify inhaled air, and modifying dietary intake. The data to support nonpharmacologic treatments are limited; however, they are routinely recommended because of the low risk associated with their use. This article highlights the advantages and limitations of each treatment option.

Clinical utility and patient adherence with ebastine for allergic rhinitis

Allergic rhinitis (AR) is a high prevalence disease, affecting 10%-20% of the general population. AR is sustained by an IgE-mediated reaction, and by a complex inflammatory network of cells, mediators, and cytokines, becoming chronic when exposure to allergen persists. A Th2-biased immune response is the basis for the allergic inflammation. Histamine plays a relevant role in symptom occurrence. Therefore, antihistamine use represents a cornerstone in AR management. Ebastine, a novel antihistamine, is effective overall in controlling symptoms, and its safety profile is good. Recently, a new formulation has been developed, ie, a fast-dissolving tablet. Several studies have demonstrated its favorable characteristics. In conclusion, ebastine is an effective and well tolerated antihistamine that may be prescribed for the treatment of AR. The fast-dissolving tablet formulation provides a new option which may be particularly convenient for the patient.

Non-clinical pharmacology, pharmacokinetics, and safety findings for the antihistamine bepotastine besilate

SCOPE

The purpose of this review is to examine published non-clinical literature on the antihistamine bepotastine besilate, including pharmacokinetic and pharmacologic properties.

METHODS

Standard literature searches using diverse databases were used to find articles on bepotastine besilate published between 1997 and 2009. Articles primarily described non-clinical data utilized for the development of an oral formulation of bepotastine besilate and were published in Japanese. No publications of non-clinical data for an ophthalmic formulation were found in the database searches.

FINDINGS

Bepotastine besilate is a second-generation antihistamine drug possessing selective histamine H(1) receptor antagonist activity. Bepotastine has negligible affinity for receptors associated with undesirable adverse effects, including histamine H(3), α(1)-, α(2)-, and β-adrenergic, serotonin (5-HT(2)), muscarinic, and benzodiazepine receptors. Bepotastine possesses additional anti-allergic activity including stabilization of mast cell function, inhibition of eosinophilic infiltration, inhibition of IL-5 production, and inhibition of LTB(4) and LTD(4) activity. Bepotastine in vivo dose-dependently inhibited the acceleration of histamine-induced vascular permeability and inhibited homologous passive cutaneous anaphylaxis in guinea pig studies. In mouse models of itching, oral bepotastine inhibited the frequency and duration of scratching behavior. Multiple in vivo animal toxicology studies have demonstrated bepotastine to be safe with no significant effects on respiratory, circulatory, central nervous, digestive, or urinary systems. The concentration of bepotastine after intravenous administration of bepotastine besilate (3 mg/kg) in rats was lower in the brain than in plasma, predicting reduced sedation effects compared to older antihistamines.

CONCLUSION

Non-clinical in vitro and in vivo studies have demonstrated bepotastine is a histamine H(1) receptor antagonist with favorable pharmacokinetic, pharmacologic, safety, and antihistamine properties as well as operating on other pathways leading to allergic inflammation beyond those directly involving the histamine H(1) receptor.

Intranasal Mometasone Furoate for Treatment of Allergic Rhinitis

Allergic rhinitis (AR) is a chronic nasal disease that affects the upper respiratory tract. This disorder is characterized by inflammation of the mucous membranes and it manifests with several nasal symptoms accompanied sometimes by non-nasal symptoms. Best therapy aims to prevent and improve the AR-clinical picture. Steroids have an important role in the treatment of AR. The development of steroids administrated directly on nasal mucosa has much reduced the systemic adverse affects associated with oral steroids therapy. Mometasone furoate aqueous nasal spray is a synthetic steroid assessed for intranasal use in the therapy of adults and children affected by AR. Such topical nasal steroid is an effective molecule improving clinical picture of AR and it is also approved as prophylactic therapy. In this article, apart from a careful description of its successful clinical use the authors review pharmacokinetic/pharmacodynamic profile, mechanism of action, safety, and efficacy of such steroid molecule.

The pathophysiology, diagnosis and treatment of allergic rhinitis

Treatment of AR requires a stepwise approach depending on the severity and duration of symptoms. Treatment options for AR consist of allergen avoidance, pharmacotherapy, immunotherapy and surgery. For the mechanisms of AR, anti-IgE antibody and specific antibody to cytokines such as IL-4 or IL-5 that correlate with allergic inflammation have recently emerged. SLIT is currently widely used due to its efficacy, safety and convenience, which replaces subcutaneous immunotherapy. Although allergen avoidance and immunotherapy are theoretically ideal, antihistamines and intranasal corticosteroids will play the main role in the management of AR until an innovative treatment develops. However, patients' main symptom, the duration and severity of AR, patients' compliance, safety of medication and cost-effectiveness should be considered when treatment options are chosen. In conclusion, physicians should be aware of etiology, pathophysiology, symptoms, signs and diseases related to AR in order to make a correct diagnosis and choose a proper treatment option for each patient.

Suppression of histamine- and allergen-induced skin reactions: comparison of first- and second-generation antihistamines

BACKGROUND

Nonsedating antihistamines (nsAHs) are recommended as first-line therapeutics for the treatment of mast cell-driven disorders, including allergic rhinitis and urticaria. However, their superiority over first-generation AHs (fgAHs) has recently been called into question, mainly because of the lack of supporting head-to-head therapeutic studies.

OBJECTIVE

To compare the effects of 3 modem nsAHs with those of the fgAH hydroxyzine on histamine- and allergen-induced skin reactions in a controlled, double-blind, clinical trial.

METHODS

Skin prick tests with histamine and Dermatophagoides pteronyssinus extract were performed before and 4 hours after treatment with hydroxyzine, 25 mg; desloratadine, 5 mg; epinastine, 20 mg; fexofenadine, 120 mg; or placebo. Wheal and erythema development was evaluated by digital photography and planimetric analyses.

RESULTS

The nsAHs prevented the development of positive reactions to histamine in only 10% to 20% of all individuals tested (n = 75). In contrast, more than 50% of all hydroxyzine-treated individuals showed negative test reactions to histamine (ie, wheals <7 mm2 in area or <3 mm in diameter). Similar differences, although less pronounced, were detected when comparing the effects of nsAHs with hydroxyzine on D pteronyssinus prick testing in a limited number of D pteronyssinus-sensitized individuals.

CONCLUSIONS

These results indicate that hydroxyzine is more effective than nsAHs when given as recommended in suppressing histamine-induced or allergic skin reactions. Our results suggest that higher doses of nsAHs than those currently recommended are required for the treatment of skin responses to obtain antihistaminic and antiallergic effects that are equivalent to those of fgAHs.

A multicentre study assessing the prevalence of sensitizations in patients with asthma and/or rhinitis in China

BACKGROUND

The prevalence of sensitization in patients with asthma and rhinitis in mainland China remains unclear.

OBJECTIVE

Our aim was to estimate the prevalence of allergy in patients with respiratory allergic diseases such as asthma and/or rhinitis attending respiratory clinics within mainland China. The study also investigated regional and annual differences in the prevalence and pattern of sensitization among the patients in China.

METHOD

A cross-sectional survey was performed in 6304 patients suffering from asthma and/or rhinitis in 17 cities from 4 regions of China. Patients completed a standardized questionnaire asking for the presence of respiratory and allergic symptoms. They also underwent skin prick tests with 13 common aeroallergens.

RESULTS

Among the 6304 patients, 4545 (72.1%) had at least one positive skin prick reaction. The overall prevalence of positive skin prick responses was 59.0% for Dermatophagoides farinae, 57.6% for Dermatophagoides pteronyssinus, 40.7% for Blomia tropicalis, 16.1% for American cockroach, 14.0% for dog, 11.5% for Blatella germanica, 11.3% for Artemisia vulgaris, 10.3% for cat, 6.5% for Ambrosia artemisifolia, 6.3% for mixed mould I, 4.4% for mixed mould IV, 3.5% for mixed grass pollen and 2.2% for mixed tree pollen. Sensitizations to common allergens varied widely between geographical areas and demonstrated unique pattern in patients by stratification with age groups, with asthma and/or rhinitis. Severity of rhinitis and asthma was significantly correlated with skin index of reactivity to Artemisia vulgaris, Ambrosia artemisifolia and to D. pteronyssinus, D. farinae and Blomia tropicalis respectively (P < 0.001). Positive reactivity to the tested allergens and concomitant reactivity to multiple allergens including to house dust mites and Blomia tropicalis was markedly increased in patients with both asthma and rhinitis.

CONCLUSION

House dust mites were the most prevalent allergens in patients with asthma and/or rhinitis in China. There were significant differences in patterns of sensitizations in patients from different geographical areas, age groups as well as asthma and/or rhinitis.

HPA axis safety of fluticasone furoate nasal spray once daily in children with perennial allergic rhinitis

The effects of intranasal corticosteroids (INSs) on the hypothalamic-pituitary-adrenal (HPA) axis should be assessed for any to be marketed INS. The objective of this study was to assess the effects of fluticasone furoate nasal spray (FFNS) on cortisol production (as a measure of HPA axis function) following 6 wk of treatment with FFNS 110 microg once daily (QD) compared with placebo in pediatric patients with perennial allergic rhinitis (PAR). In this double-blind, parallel-group study, patients (n = 112) aged 2-11 yr with a 1-yr history of PAR (6 months for patients aged 2-3 yr) were randomized in a 1:1 ratio to either placebo or FFNS. Serum cortisol (SC) concentrations and urinary cortisol (UC) excretion were measured over a 24-h period at the randomization (baseline) and final treatment (week 6) visits for HPA axis evaluation in a domiciled environment (overnight in the clinic). Plasma samples were collected for FFNS at several time points over the 24 h after the final dose for pharmacokinetic analyses. FFNS was non-inferior to placebo with respect to change from baseline (expressed as a ratio) in 24-h SC weighted mean. The lower limit of the two-sided 95% confidence interval (CI) for the treatment ratio was greater than the pre-specified non-inferiority margin of 0.8 (treatment ratio = 0.97, 95% CI 0.88-1.07). UC excretion over 24 h at baseline and end of treatment was similar between treatment groups; no patients had 24-h excretion levels below normal range after 6 wk of treatment. Plasma concentrations of FFNS were generally non-quantifiable (<10 pg/ml). Results of the current study indicate that FFNS 110 microg QD has no significant effect on HPA axis function in 2- to 11-yr-old pediatric patients with PAR.

Safety and tolerability of fluticasone furoate nasal spray once daily in paediatric patients aged 6-11 years with allergic rhinitis: subanalysis of three randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, multicentre studies

BACKGROUND

Fluticasone furoate is a novel enhanced-affinity corticosteroid that has demonstrated favourable safety and tolerability in paediatric patients. Three pivotal phase III studies were conducted in children as young as 2 years of age; however, because the European Medicines Agency has recently approved fluticasone furoate for use in children aged>or=6 years, a subanalysis has been conducted to support safety and tolerability in the 6- to 11-year age group.

METHODS

All three trials included in the subanalysis were randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, parallel-group studies: a 2-week US study in patients with seasonal allergic rhinitis (SAR), a 12-week global study in patients with perennial allergic rhinitis (PAR) and a 6-week US hypothalamic-pituitary-adrenal (HPA) axis safety study in patients with PAR. Randomized patients received once-daily treatment with either fluticasone furoate nasal spray (FFNS) 55 microg (n=297; 2-week SAR and 12-week PAR studies only), FFNS 110 microg (n=321) or vehicle placebo nasal spray (n=330). Safety assessments included clinical adverse event (AE) monitoring, clinical laboratory tests, detailed nasal examinations, monitoring of vital signs, and 12-lead ECGs. Ophthalmic examinations (12-week PAR study only) were conducted by an ophthalmologist or optometrist before randomization and at final treatment visit. Twenty-four-hour urinary cortisol (UC) excretions (6- and 12-week PAR studies) and serum cortisol (SC) concentrations (6-week PAR study only) were assessed at specified timepoints over 24 hours as a measure of HPA axis function. In the 6-week HPA axis safety study in patients with PAR, 24-hour UC and SC samples were collected in a domiciled (clinical) setting.

RESULTS

No unexpected safety results were observed in patients aged 6-11 years enrolled in the three studies. Across all three trials, AEs considered by the investigator to be drug related were observed in 10%, 7% and 8% of patients in the FFNS 55 microg, FFNS 110 microg and placebo groups, respectively. The most common AEs were headache (8%, 9% and 8% in the FFNS 55 microg, FFNS 110 microg and placebo groups, respectively), nasopharyngitis (5%, 6% and 5%, respectively), pharyngolaryngeal pain (5%, 3% and 4%, respectively), epistaxis (4% in both active treatment groups and 4% in the placebo group) and pyrexia (3% in both active treatment groups and 2% in the placebo group). Findings from nasal examinations were similar across the treatment and placebo groups. Ophthalmic examinations found no differences between the treatment groups for mean change from baseline in intraocular pressure (assessed in the 12-week PAR study only), and no posterior subcapsular cataracts were reported in patients in either FFNS-treatment group. In the 6-week HPA axis study, 24-hour SC geometric mean concentrations were similar for FFNS and placebo groups. The lower limit of two-sided 95% confidence interval (CI) for the treatment ratio was greater than the prespecified noninferiority margin of 0.8 (treatment ratio=0.92, 95% CI 0.80, 1.05).

CONCLUSIONS

FFNS has a favourable safety and tolerability profile in patients aged 6-11 years with PAR or SAR.

Levocetirizine modulates lymphocyte activation in patients with allergic rhinitis

Levocetirizine, a second generation non-sedating antihistamine that blocks the H(1) histamine receptor, may exhibit immunoregulatory properties that augment its primary pharmacological mechanism. To investigate this possibility, 13 Kuwaiti seasonal allergic rhinitis (SAR) patients were treated with levocetirizine for four weeks in comparison with a 7-member placebo-treated control group, followed by clinical evaluation and flow cytometric analysis of peripheral venous blood for inflammatory cell and lymphocyte subpopulation profiles. Relative to the controls, levocetirizine-treated patients exhibited an expected reduction in early phase allergic symptoms, including sneezing (P<0.001), nasal itching (P<0.01), nasal congestion, and running nose (P<0.001); reduced percentages of eosinophils (P<0.05); and three subpopulations of activated T lymphocytes: CD4+CD29+, CD4+CD212+, and CD4+CD54+ (P<0.05). Levocetirizine treatment also correlated with a significant increase in the percentage of CD4+CD25+ T cells (P<0.001). The ability of levocetirizine to reduce percentage representation of cell phenotypes known to contribute to inflammatory tissue damage (eosinophils, CD4+CD29+, CD4+CD212+, and CD4+CD54+) and expand percentages of CD4+CD25+, which may include protective immunoregulatory (Treg) cells, indicates that the drug has pharmacological potential beyond the immediate effects of H(1) histamine-receptor inhibition. Although the present data does not define a therapeutic mechanism, the results reported here establish important trends that may be used to guide future mechanistic examination of immunoregulatory capacity of H(1) inhibitors.

Eosinophil progenitors in airway diseases: clinical implications

Asthma, allergic rhinitis, nasal polyposis, chronic rhinosinusitis, and related forms of upper and lower airway diseases are often characterized by eosinophilic and basophilic inflammation, involving systemic processes. Eosinophil/basophil (Eo/B) lineage-committed progenitor cells in cord blood, peripheral blood, bone marrow, lung tissue, and sputum are up-regulated in the above conditions, and respond to allergen and other stimuli with increased differentiative and migratory capacity. A considerable body of evidence now exists showing that activation of such Eo/B-selective hemopoietic processes is not only associated with the onset and maintenance of allergic inflammation in atopic adults, but also with the development of the allergic diathesis. Moreover, eosinophilopoietic processes within hemopoietic compartments and, importantly, at mucosal tissue sites during an allergic inflammatory response provide novel targets for the treatment of allergy as a systemic process and disease.

Ebastine in allergic rhinitis and chronic idiopathic urticaria

Histamine is a key mediator in the development of allergy symptoms, and oral H(1)-antihistamines are among the most widely used treatments for symptomatic relief in conditions such as allergic rhinitis and chronic urticaria. Ebastine is a second-generation antihistamine which has been shown to be an effective treatment for both seasonal and perennial allergic rhinitis. In controlled clinical trials in adult and adolescent patients with allergic rhinitis, ebastine 10 mg once-daily improved symptoms to a significantly greater extent than placebo and to a similar extent as loratadine 10 mg and cetirizine 10 mg (both once-daily), while ebastine 20 mg proved to be more effective than these two comparator antihistamines. In addition, ebastine was significantly more effective than placebo at relieving the symptoms of chronic idiopathic urticaria. Ebastine provides efficacy throughout the 24-h dosing interval with once-daily administration and clinical benefit is seen from the first day of treatment. Small studies have found beneficial effects for ebastine in patients with other disorders, including cold urticaria, dermographic urticaria, atopic asthma, mosquito bites and (in combination with pseudoephedrine) the common cold. In addition to the regular ebastine tablet, a fast-dissolving tablet (FDT) formulation, which disintegrates in the mouth without the aid of a drink, is also available. It has been shown to be bioequivalent to the regular tablet, and to be significantly more effective than desloratadine at reducing histamine-induced cutaneous wheals. A number of patient surveys demonstrated that the majority of individuals who tried the fast-dissolving formulation reported it to be convenient for use, fast-acting and preferred it to their previous antihistamine medication. Perhaps most importantly, a large proportion of patients indicated that they would prefer to use this new formulation in the future. Ebastine has a rapid onset of action and it can be administered once-daily, with or without food. Dose modifications are not needed in elderly patients, or in those with renal or mild to moderate hepatic impairment. Ebastine is generally well-tolerated, and clinical studies showed that at usual therapeutic doses of 10 and 20 mg once-daily, it had no clinically relevant adverse effects on cognitive function and psychomotor performance or on cardiovascular function. In conclusion, ebastine is an effective and generally well-tolerated treatment for allergic rhinitis and chronic idiopathic urticaria. In addition to the regular tablet formulation, ebastine is available as a FDT, providing a treatment option that is particularly convenient for patients.

Relative receptor affinity comparisons among inhaled/intranasal corticosteroids: perspectives on clinical relevance

Background

Methods

Results

Conclusion

Role of sphingosine 1-phosphate receptor expression in eosinophils of patients with allergic rhinitis, and effect of topical nasal steroid treatment on this receptor expression

Objective:

Recent research has indicated that sphingosine 1-phosphate plays a role in allergy. This study examined the effect of allergen challenge on the expression of sphingosine 1-phosphate receptors on the eosinophils of allergic rhinitis patients, and the effect of steroid treatment on this expression.

Study design:

A prospective, non-randomised study.

Methods:

The study had three parts. Firstly, sphingosine 1-phosphate receptor expression on the eosinophils of allergic rhinitis patients and control patients was determined. Secondly, sphingosine 1-phosphate receptor expression was quantified pre- and post-allergen challenge, before and after a short course of fluticasone propionate; all patients underwent symptom scoring and peak nasal inspiratory flow measurement pre- and post-allergen challenge, both before and after steroid or saline treatment. Thirdly, the effect of sphingosine 1-phosphate on eosinophil migration was examined.

Results:

The eosinophils of both allergic rhinitis patients and controls expressed sphingosine 1-phosphate1, 3, 4, and 5. Eosinophils from all allergic rhinitis patients demonstrated up-regulation in sphingosine 1-phosphate expression after allergen challenge. These changes were statistically very significant for sphingosine 1-phosphate1, 4, and 5, and moderately significant for sphingosine 1-phosphate3. Sphingosine 1-phosphate receptor expression up-regulation was abolished in the steroid-treated group after allergen challenge; however, the saline-treated group showed no change in sphingosine 1-phosphate receptor expression after allergen challenge. Peak nasal inspiratory flow scores were significantly diminished after allergen challenge prior to treatment, but not after a course of topical nasal steroids. Sphingosine 1-phosphate induced eosinophil chemotaxis was increased following allergen challenge in allergic rhinitis subjects.

Conclusions:

Local intranasal steroid therapy acts directly to block allergen-induced up-regulation of sphingosine 1-phosphate receptors on the peripheral eosinophils of allergic rhinitis patients, and this is coincident with post-challenge peak nasal inspiratory flow measurement improvements. These observations support the idea that such an increase in sphingosine 1-phosphate receptor expression is clinically relevant in allergic rhinitis, with potential consequences for eosinophil migration and survival.

Identification and management of undiagnosed and undertreated allergic rhinitis in adults and children

Allergic rhinitis (AR) is a common health problem that affects adults, adolescents and children and is often undiagnosed or inadequately treated. Because AR is not a life-threatening disease, many patients do not seek medical treatment for their symptoms, and others self-medicate with over-the-counter medications, often sedating antihistamines. However, untreated or inadequately treated AR can substantially impair overall quality of life (QOL) by causing fatigue, headache, cognitive impairment and other problems. The risk for comorbid conditions, such as asthma, otitis media, and lymphoid hypertrophy with obstructive sleep apnea, can increase, and the symptoms of AR can worsen if AR is not adequately treated. Among the symptoms of AR, nasal congestion has been described by patients as the most bothersome because it disrupts sleep, resulting in diminished daytime performance. A new congestion screening tool, the Congestion Quantifier, has been developed to aid in the diagnosis and treatment of AR and to help guide treatment decisions. Intranasal corticosteroids (INSs) are recommended as effective pharmaceutical treatments for controlling the symptoms of AR. Randomized, controlled trials in children and adults have demonstrated that INSs relieve rhinitis symptoms, thereby improving QOL in individuals with seasonal or perennial AR. Most INSs are approved for use in children >or=6 years of age, but mometasone furoate and fluticasone furoate are approved for use in children as young as 2 years of age and fluticasone propionate for children >or=4 years old. Long-term benefits have also been seen with the use of immunotherapy, although some patients, especially children, resist the injections used in subcutaneous immunotherapy. Recent studies with sublingual immunotherapy have indicated that it might be an effective and well-tolerated alternative to immunotherapy injections.

Nasal treatment with a microemulsion reduces allergen challenge-induced symptoms and signs of allergic rhinitis

CONCLUSIONS

Intranasal microemulsion treatment can attenuate allergen challenge-induced nasal symptoms and plasma exudation in allergic rhinitis. We hypothesize that the mechanism of action involves modification of the allergen-mucosa interaction. The present observation suggests a novel principle for prevention in allergic rhinitis.

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate a specific microemulsion as a treatment for allergic rhinitis in an acute allergen challenge model.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Patients with allergic rhinitis were examined out of the pollen season. Treatment with a single dose of a specific microemulsion was given in a single-blind, placebo-controlled, and crossover design using a nasal pool device. Nasal allergen challenges were carried out and symptoms of allergic rhinitis were scored. Furthermore, nasal lavages were performed and levels of the plasma protein alpha 2-macroglobulin were measured as an index of exudative inflammation.

RESULTS

The allergen challenges produced significant increases in nasal symptoms (p=0.007) and in nasal lavage fluid levels of alpha 2-macroglobulin (p=0.008). The challenge-induced symptoms as well as the plasma exudation were attenuated by treatment with the microemulsion (p=0.016 and 0.012, respectively, compared with placebo).

Clinical benefits of combination treatment with mometasone furoate nasal spray and loratadine vs monotherapy with mometasone furoate in the treatment of seasonal allergic rhinitis

BACKGROUND

Intranasal corticosteroids and nonsedating antihistamines are the drug classes most often prescribed to treat allergic rhinitis (AR). Treatment guidelines recommend a combination of these agents for moderate-to-severe AR. However, clinical studies have found that combining an antihistamine with an intranasal corticosteroid provides few or no advantages over monotherapy with an intranasal corticosteroid.

OBJECTIVE

To compare the efficacy of mometasone furoate nasal spray (NS) plus loratadine with that of monotherapy with the individual agents in patients 12 years and older with at least a 2-year history of seasonal AR.

METHODS

In a multicenter, randomized, double-blind, parallel-group, placebo-controlled clinical study, 702 patients were randomized to receive mometasone furoate NS, 200 microg, plus loratadine, 10 mg (n = 169); mometasone furoate NS, 200 microg (n = 176); loratadine, 10 mg (n = 181); or placebo (n = 176) once daily for 15 days. Primary efficacy variables were total nasal symptom score (TNSS) and total symptom score (TSS) as recorded on diary cards.

RESULTS

No statistically significant differences were observed between mometasone furoate NS plus loratadine and mometasone furoate NS monotherapy for the primary efficacy variables. For TNSS and TSS, all 3 active drug therapies were more effective than placebo (P < or = .02). Both mometasone furoate NS treatment regimens were more effective than loratadine or placebo for TNSS (P < .01 for both) and TSS (P < or = .03 for both), whereas loratadine was more effective than placebo for TNSS only (P = .02).

CONCLUSIONS

Combination therapy with mometasone furoate NS and loratadine provided benefits similar to monotherapy with mometasone furoate NS for the symptoms of seasonal AR. Therefore, mometasone furoate NS monotherapy was shown to be an effective treatment for seasonal AR.

Rupatadine in allergic rhinitis and chronic urticaria

Histamine is the primary mediator involved the pathophysiology of allergic rhinitis and chronic urticaria, and this explains the prominent role that histamine H(1)-receptor antagonists have in the treatment of these disorders. However, histamine is clearly not the only mediator involved in the inflammatory cascade. There is an emerging view that drugs which can inhibit a broader range of inflammatory processes may prove to be more effective in providing symptomatic relief in both allergic rhinitis and chronic urticaria. This is an important consideration of the Allergic Rhinitis and its Impact on Asthma (ARIA) initiative which provides a scientific basis for defining what are the desirable properties of an 'ideal' antihistamine. In this review of rupatadine, a newer dual inhibitor of histamine H(1)- and PAF-receptors, we evaluate the evidence for a mechanism of action which includes anti-inflammatory effects in addition to a powerful inhibition of H(1)- and PAF-receptors. We assess this in relation to the clinical efficacy (particularly the speed of onset of action) and safety of rupatadine, and importantly its longer term utility in everyday life. In clinical trials, rupatadine has been shown to be an effective and well-tolerated treatment for allergic rhinitis and chronic idiopathic urticaria (CIU). It has a fast onset of action, producing rapid symptomatic relief, and it also has an extended duration of clinical activity which allows once-daily administration. In comparative clinical trials rupatadine was shown to be at least as effective as drugs such as loratadine, cetirizine, desloratadine and ebastine in reducing allergic symptoms in adult/adolescent patients with seasonal, perennial or persistent allergic rhinitis. Importantly, rupatadine demonstrated no adverse cardiovascular effects in preclinical or extensive clinical testing, nor negative significant effects on cognition or psychomotor performance (including a practical driving study). It improved the overall well-being of patients with allergic rhinitis or CIU based on findings from quality of life questionnaires and patient global rating scores in clinical trials. Thus, rupatadine is a recently introduced dual inhibitor of histamine H(1)- and PAF-receptors, which has been shown to be an effective and generally well-tolerated treatment for allergic rhinitis and chronic urticaria. It possesses a broader profile of anti-inflammatory properties inhibiting both inflammatory cells and a range of mediators involved in the early- and late-phase inflammatory response, but the clinical relevance of these effects remain to be clarified.