Systemic bioactivity of intranasal triamcinolone and mometasone in perennial allergic rhinitis

Hypothalamic-pituitary-adrenal axis suppression and intranasal corticosteroid use: A systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Intranasal corticosteroids (INCS) are used in the management of sinonasal conditions. Use of exogenous steroids can be associated with hypothalamic-pituitary-adrenal axis dysfunction and adrenal insufficiency (AI). We aimed to estimate the rate of AI after INCS use in a meta-analysis, stratified by steroid type and treatment duration.

METHODS

Ovid Medline, Embase Classic, PubMed, Web of Science, and CINAHL databases were searched following Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines to identify studies investigating INCS use and AI. AI was defined as morning serum cortisol <550 nmol/L and <80 nmol/L with and without adrenocorticotropic hormone stimulation. INCS were classified as first (beclomethasone dipropionate, triamcinolone acetonide, beclomethasone, budesonide, dexamethasone) and second (ciclesonide, mometasone furoate, and fluticasone propionate) generation. Duration of treatment was classified as short (<1 month), medium (1-12 months), and long-term (>12 months) time periods.

RESULTS

This search identified 3668 articles. A total of 39 studies (1678 patients) were included in the final analysis. The pooled percentage of AI for routinely utilized first- and second-generation INCS was 0.70% (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.29-1.12%). Stratified by type, AI was observed in 0.78% (95% CI, 0.25-1.30%) of first-generation and 0.58% (95% CI, -0.1% to 1.26%) of second-generation steroids. AI was seen in 0.48% (95% CI, -0.01% to 0.96%) of short-term, 1.13% (95% CI, 0.2-2.1%) of medium-term, and 1.67% (95% CI, 0.37-2.9%) of long-term use of INCS.

CONCLUSION

Overall, the use of INCS carries a low risk for AI. Although modest, this risk may differ depending on the length of duration and type of INCS used. Informing patients of these risks is of importance for the treatment of chronic sinonasal conditions.

Adverse Effects of Nonsystemic Steroids (Inhaled, Intranasal, and Cutaneous): a Review of the Literature and Suggested Monitoring Tool

Inhaled, intranasal, and cutaneous steroids are prescribed by physicians for a plethora of disease processes including asthma and rhinitis. While the high efficacy of this class of medication is well known, the wide range of adverse effects, both local and systemic, is not well elucidated. It is imperative to monitor total steroid burden in its varied forms as well as tracking for possible side effects that may be caused by a high cumulative dose of steroids. This review article highlights the adverse effects of different steroid modalities as well as suggests a monitoring tool to determine steroid totality and side effects.

Allergic rhinitis: pharmacotherapy in pregnancy and old age

INTRODUCTION

Allergic rhinitis (AR) affects 20-30% of women in reproductive age and may worsen during pregnancy. About 10% of the elderly suffer from AR, and it could be under-diagnosed in these patients. Many drugs are currently available, however AR treatment during pregnancy and old age represents a challenging issue.

AREAS COVERED

A review of the literature on the topic has been performed. Expert commentary: In pregnancy, drug avoidance should be carefully balanced with the need for AR optimal control. Topical drugs are suggested as a first approach. The safety and tolerability profile of second-generation antihistamines is well supported. If allergen immunotherapy (AIT) is ongoing and well tolerated, there is no reason for stopping it. AIT initiation in pregnancy is not recommended. For elderly patients, no specific concerns have been highlighted regarding topical treatments, except from nasal decongestionants. Second generation antihistamines are generally well tolerated. Old age should not preclude AIT.

Optimal Duration of Allergic Rhinitis Clinical Trials

OBJECTIVE: Guidelines have been published by the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) and the European Agency for the Evaluation of Medicinal Products (EMEA) for the conduct of seasonal allergic rhinitis (SAR) and perennial allergic rhinitis (PAR) studies. These guidelines have differences regarding the duration of such trials: the FDA suggests 2 weeks for SAR and 4 weeks for PAR but the EMEA suggests 2 to 4 weeks for SAR and 6 to 12 weeks for PAR trials. In the interest of global harmonization, it would be desirable to have a uniform duration of such trials so that investigators, internationally, would be able to readily compare results for various types of treatments based on a single standard. Therefore, we performed an evidence-based review to answer the clinical question, What is the optimal duration for SAR and PAR clinical trials?

METHODS: We performed a MEDLINE search of the published literature from 1995 to the present. We used appropriate search terms, such as allergic rhinitis, seasonal allergic rhinitis, perennial allergic rhinitis, SAR, and PAR, to identify pertinent articles. These articles were reviewed and graded according to the evidence quality.

RESULTS: After an initial screening of more than 300 articles, 138 articles were analyzed thoroughly. No study specifically addressed the question of the optimal duration of SAR or PAR clinical trials.

CONCLUSIONS: We conclude that the current FDA (draft) guidelines calling for a study length of 2 weeks for the assessment of drug efficacy for SAR and 4 weeks for the study of drug efficacy in PAR are appropriate and that longer study periods are not likely to add meaningfully to the assessment of drug efficacy.

Choosing wisely: practical considerations on treatment efficacy and safety of asthma in the elderly

The prevalence of asthma in the most advanced ages is similar to that of younger ages. However, the concept that older individuals may suffer from allergic asthma has been largely denied in the past, and a common belief attributes to asthma the definition of "rare" disease. Indeed, asthma in the elderly is often underdiagnosed or diagnosed as COPD, thus leading to undertreatment of improper treatment. This is also due to the heterogeneity of clinical and functional presentations of geriatric asthma, including the partial loss of reversibility and the lower occurrence of the allergic component in this age range. The older asthmatic patients are also characterized the coexistence of comorbid conditions that, in conjunction with age-associated structural and functional changes of the lung, may contribute to complicate the management of asthma. The current review addresses the main issues related to the management of allergic asthma in the geriatric age. In particular, the paper aims at revising current pharmacological and non pharmacological treatments for allergic asthmatics of advanced ages, primarily focusing on their safety and efficacy, although most behaviors are an arbitrary extrapolation of what has been tested in young ages. In fact, age has always represented an exclusion criterion for eligibility to clinical trials. Experimental studies and real life observations specifically testing the efficacy and safety of therapeutic approaches in allergic asthma in the elderly are urgently needed.

Impact of study design on the evaluation of inhaled and intranasal corticosteroids' effect on hypothalamic-pituitary-adrenal axis function

In part I of this review, an overview of the designs of hypothalamic-pituitary-adrenal (HPA) axis studies in the setting of inhaled corticosteroids (ICS) or intranasal corticosteroids (INS) use was discussed. Part II provides detailed discussion on the HPA axis evaluation results for each common ICS and INS, and how these results are possibly affected by the factors of study design. Significant adrenal suppression at conventional ICS/INS doses appears to be rare in clinical settings. The magnitude of cortisol suppression varies widely among different study designs. Factors potentially impacting this variability include: the choice of dose, dosing duration, assay sensitivity, statistical methodology, study population, and compliance. All of these factors have the potential to affect the extent of HPA axis effects detected and should be considered when designing or interpreting the results of a HPA axis study.

Impact of study design on the evaluation of inhaled and intranasal corticosteroids' effect on hypothalamic-pituitary-adrenal axis function, part I: general overview of HPA axis study design

Inhaled and intranasal corticosteroids (ICS and INS) are among the mainstays of the treatment for asthma and allergic rhinitis, respectively, and also carry the potential to suppress the hypothalamic-pituitary-adrenal (HPA) axis. Several important factors affect the interpretability of trials investigating the impact of ICS and INS on the HPA axis. This paper reviews 106 published clinical trials, peer-reviewed articles, and New Drug Application reviews of approved ICS and INS, using MEDLINE and Drugs@FDA database. The trials included in this review evaluated the potential impact on HPA axis function of eight approved single-ingredient ICS and INS (beclomethasone dipropionate, budesonide, ciclesonide, flunisolide, fluticasone furoate, flucticasone propionate, mometasone furoate, and triamcinolone acetonide) and combination products containing these ingredients. The most commonly utilized design was blinded, placebo controlled, and short term (<6 weeks) for adult trials and blinded, placebo controlled, and long term (≥6 weeks) for pediatric trials. Factors potentially affecting trial results include the choice of dose, dosing duration, assay sensitivity, statistical methodology, and the study population evaluated (patients or healthy volunteers). All of these factors have the potential to affect the level of adrenal suppression detected. In conclusion, to be informative, a HPA axis study should be well designed and carefully implemented to minimize variability in results and improve the overall interpretability of data obtained.

Mometasone furoate: a review of its intranasal use in allergic rhinitis

Mometasone furoate (Nasonex) is a high-potency intranasal corticosteroid available for the treatment and/or prophylaxis of the nasal symptoms of seasonal allergic rhinitis (SAR) and perennial allergic rhinitis (PAR). In the EU, it is approved for use in patients aged > or =6 years and, in the US, it is approved as a treatment in patients aged > or =2 years and as prophylaxis in those > or =12 years of age.Extensive experience in both clinical trials and the clinical practice setting has firmly established the efficacy and good tolerability profile of intranasal mometasone furoate in children and adults with PAR or SAR. Thus, intranasal mometasone furoate is a useful first-line option for the treatment and prophylactic management of these conditions, including in children as young as 2 years of age in some countries and 6 years of age in others.

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

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

Mometasone Furoate Nasal Spray

The development of corticosteroids that are delivered directly to the nasal mucosa has alleviated much of the concern about the systemic adverse effects associated with oral corticosteroid therapy. However, given the high potency of these drugs and their widespread use in the treatment of allergic rhinitis, it is important to ensure that intranasal corticosteroids have a favourable benefit-risk ratio. One agent that typifies the systemic safety found in the majority of intranasal corticosteroids is mometasone furoate nasal spray, a potent and effective treatment for seasonal and perennial allergic rhinitis and nasal polyposis. Mometasone furoate does not reach high systemic concentrations or cause clinically significant adverse effects. Results from pharmacokinetic studies in adults and children suggest that systemic exposure to mometasone furoate after intranasal administration is negligible. This is probably because of the inherently low aqueous solubility of mometasone furoate, which allows only a small fraction of the drug to cross the nasal mucosa and enter the bloodstream, and because a large amount of the administered drug is swallowed and undergoes extensive first-pass metabolism. There is no clinical evidence that mometasone furoate nasal spray suppresses the function of the hypothalamus-pituitary-adrenal axis when the drug is administered at clinically relevant doses (100-200 microg/day); consequently, mometasone furoate nasal spray has not been associated with growth inhibition in children. The safety and tolerability of mometasone furoate nasal spray have been rigorously assessed in clinical trials involving approximately 4,500 patients, with epistaxis, headache and pharyngitis being the most common adverse effects associated with treatment in adolescents and adults. The clinical effectiveness of mometasone furoate nasal spray, coupled with its agreeable safety and tolerability profile, confirms its favourable benefit-risk ratio.

Therapeutic modulation of allergic airways disease with leukotriene receptor antagonists

Although asthma is one of the most common chronic respiratory conditions, it often remains unrecognized and undertreated, while patients are often reluctant to comply with regular inhaled anti-inflammatory and bronchodilator therapy. Allergic rhinitis co-exists with asthma in as many as 40% of patients, and can be regarded as a continuum of the same inflammatory disease process. Corticosteroids are the 'gold standard' first-line treatment for both conditions, and have a significant impact upon underlying inflammation, symptoms and long-term outcome. Cysteinyl leukotrienes are potent airway inflammatory mediators, suggesting that treatment antagonizing their effects could play a role in disease management. In recent years, leukotriene receptor antagonists have provided a further therapeutic option in the management of allergic airways disease. These drugs are orally active, can be administered once daily, and provide a systemic approach to the management of patients with asthma and allergic rhinitis. We review the pharmacology of leukotriene receptor antagonists, their potential role in clinical practice in patients with allergic airways disease, and likely areas for further research.

Safety and tolerability profiles of intranasal antihistamines and intranasal corticosteroids in the treatment of allergic rhinitis

Intranasal corticosteroids and intranasal antihistamines are efficacious topical therapies in the treatment of allergic rhinitis. This review addresses their relative roles in the management of this disease, focusing on their safety and tolerability profiles. The intranasal route of administration delivers drug directly to the target organ, thereby minimising the potential for the systemic adverse effects that may be evident with oral therapy. Furthermore, the topical route of delivery enables the use of lower doses of medication. Such therapies, predominantly available as aqueous formulations following the ban of chlorofluorocarbon propellants, have minimal local adverse effects. Intranasal application of therapy can induce sneezing in the hyper-reactive nose, and transient local irritation has been described with certain formulations. Intranasal administration of corticosteroids is associated with minor nose bleeding in a small proportion of recipients. This effect has been attributed to the vasoconstrictor activity of the corticosteroid molecules, and is considered to account for the very rare occurrence of nasal septal perforation. Nasal biopsy studies do not show any detrimental structural effects within the nasal mucosa with long-term administration of intranasal corticosteroids. Much attention has focused on the systemic safety of intranasal application. When administered at standard recommended therapeutic dosage, the intranasal antihistamines do not cause significant sedation or impairment of psychomotor function, effects that would be evident when these agents are administered orally at a therapeutically relevant dosage. The systemic bioavailability of intranasal corticosteroids varies from <1% to up to 40-50% and influences the risk of systemic adverse effects. Because the dose delivered topically is small, this is not a major consideration, and extensive studies have not identified significant effects on the hypothalamic-pituitary-adrenal axis with continued treatment. A small effect on growth has been reported in one study in children receiving a standard dosage over 1 year, however. This has not been found in prospective studies with the intranasal corticosteroids that have low systemic bioavailability and therefore the judicious choice of intranasal formulation, particularly if there is concurrent corticosteroid inhalation for asthma, is prudent. There is no evidence that such considerations are relevant to shorter-term use, such as in intermittent or seasonal disease. Intranasal therapy, which represents a major mode of drug delivery in allergic rhinitis, thus has a very favourable benefit/risk ratio and is the preferred route of administration for corticosteroids in the treatment of this disease, as well as an important option for antihistaminic therapy, particularly if rapid symptom relief is required.