Systemic effects of intranasal steroids: an endocrinologist's perspective

Systemic Adverse Events Associated with Locally Administered Corticosteroids

Topical corticosteroids are a mainstay in the treatment of many pediatric disorders. While they have proven beneficial therapeutic effects and are generally considered safe, systemic adverse events may occur. This study presents four cases of children who experienced systemic adverse events after using inhaled and intranasal topical corticosteroids, as well as topical corticosteroids in other forms. A comprehensive literature review was performed to explore the existing evidence on this topic. The aim of this study is to raise awareness among healthcare providers about the possibility of systemic adverse events associated with the use of locally administered corticosteroids in pediatric patients. This information underscores the importance of careful monitoring, individualized treatment plans, and further research to better understand and mitigate the risks associated with corticosteroids, even those not given systemically.

Clinical Efficacy of Topical Nasal Pomegranate Fruit Extract for Chronic Rhinitis and Chronic Rhinosinusitis

Objective: To evaluate the clinical efficacy of topical nasal Pomegranate Fruit Extract (PFE) for Chronic Rhinitis (CR), Chronic Rhinosinusitis with Nasal Polyposis (CRSwNP), and Chronic Rhinosinusitis without Nasal Polyposis (CRSsNP). Methods: Prospective, double-blinded, randomized study including 111 consecutive patients, between April 2012 and January 2017, afflicted by CRSwNP, CRSsNP, and CR. Patients from each group were randomly assigned to either PFE treatment or placebo twice daily for 30 days. Therapeutic efficacy was assessed by Ear Nose and Throat, blood and tomographic examinations, and the SNOT-20 questionnaire. Results: CR patients treated with PFE suffered significantly less from thick nasal discharge, difficulty falling asleep, reduced productivity, reduced concentration, and sadness (P = .004, P = .02, P = .03, P = .007 and P = .02, respectively). Conclusions: Topical nasal PFE was found to have some benefits for CR patients, however, not for CRS with or without Nasal Polyposis.

Postoperative mometasone irrigations improve quality of life in skull base tumor patients

Objectives

The use of topical corticosteroids to manage postoperative sinonasal symptoms after endoscopic skull base surgery (ESBS) has not been well studied. We quantified long-term impact of postoperative steroid irrigations (SIs) on quality of life of patients after ESBS.

Methods

Retrospective review of patients at the University of Pennsylvania undergoing ESBS from 2010 to 2019. Data on patient demographics and postoperative treatment with nasal saline irrigation twice daily with and without dissolved steroids (mometasone or budesonide) was collected. Preoperative, and 1-, 3-, 6-, 12-, 18-, and 24-month postoperative Sino-Nasal Outcome Test (SNOT-22) scores were assessed.

Results

A total of 727 patients were assessed (53.4% males), with 479 patients in the no SI group and 248 patients in the SI group. Preoperative SNOT-22 scores did not differ significantly (P = 0.19). 1-, 3-, 6-, 12-, 18-, and 24-month post-op SNOT-22 scores did not significantly differ between groups. However, mometasone irrigations resulted in significantly lower postoperative 2-year SNOT-22 scores compared to budesonide (P < 0.01) and saline (P = 0.03).

Conclusions

Though corticosteroid irrigations are routine in managing inflammatory sinus disease, their role in postoperative management after ESBS for tumors is unclear. Our findings suggest that mometasone irrigation may be effective at improving postoperative quality of life in patients after ESBS.

Chronic intranasal corticosteroid treatment induces degeneration of olfactory sensory neurons in normal and allergic rhinitis mice

BACKGROUND

Nasal eosinophilic inflammation is the therapeutic target for olfactory dysfunction in allergic rhinitis (AR). Intranasal corticosteroids are commonly considered to offer targetable benefit given their immunosuppressive property. However, experimental evidence suggests that continuous corticosteroid exposure may directly cause olfactory damage by disrupting the turnover of olfactory sensory neurons (OSNs). This potentially deleterious effect of corticosteroids calls into question their long-term topical use for treating olfactory loss related to AR. The aim of this study was to assess the impacts of chronic intranasal corticosteroid treatment on olfactory function and OSN population in mice under normal and pathological conditions.

METHODS

BALB/c mice were intranasally treated with fluticasone propionate (FP, 0.3 mg/kg) for up to 8 weeks. Additional mice were used to establish an ovalbumin-induced mouse model of AR, followed by nasal challenge with ovalbumin for 8 weeks in the presence or absence of intranasal FP treatment. The authors examined olfactory function, OSN existence, neuronal turnover, and nasal inflammation using behavioral test, histological analyses, Western blotting, and enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay.

RESULTS

Intranasal treatment with FP for 8 weeks (FP-wk8) reduced odor sensitivity in normal mice. This reduction was concomitant with loss of OSNs and the axons projecting to the olfactory bulb, primarily resulting from increased neuronal apoptosis. In FP-wk8 AR mice, intranasal FP treatment attenuated olfactory impairment and eosinophilic inflammation but failed to reconstitute OSN population and axonal projections.

CONCLUSION

These results suggest that chronic intranasal corticosteroid treatment contributes to OSN degeneration that may reduce the therapeutic effectiveness for AR-related olfactory loss.

Comparison of the Effects of Azelastine and Fluticasone Nasal Sprays in the Treatment of Allergic Rhinitis

Allergic rhinitis is a highly prevalent, allergen-induced disease. Intranasal corticosteroids are currently the first-line therapy for these patients. It is uncertain whether intranasal antihistamines have comparable efficacy. This study compares effects of Azelastine and Fluticasone nasal spray in patients with allergic rhinitis. Prospective comparative study including 240 patients with allergic rhinitis was conducted with 120 each in fluticasone and azelastine group. Nasal sprays were given for period of three months along with an oral antihistamine. Follow up was done after three months. Pre and post treatment symptom assessment were done using Total nasal symptom score. The median TNSS in pre and post treatment of group A (fluticasone) is 10(4) and 1(3) which shows statistical significance with p value < 0.001. Median TNSS in pre and post treatment of group B (azelastine) is 9(4) and 1(2) which shows statistical significance with p value < 0.001. The median TNSS in pre and post treatment value between Group A and B shows no statistically significant difference between two groups with p value 0.56 and 0.06 respectively. Intranasal azelastine and fluticasone had comparable efficacy in symptom control in patients with allergic rhinitis. Azelastine due to its lesser side effects, can be safely used in children, patients with glaucoma and cataract. Azelastine may be considered as a safer replacement to fluticasone for long term use in patients with allergic rhinitis. A larger multicentric study with a bigger sample size may be required to confirm the efficacy and safety profile of azelastine nasal spray.

Interventions for the prevention of persistent post-COVID-19 olfactory dysfunction

BACKGROUND

Loss of olfactory function is well recognised as a symptom of COVID-19 infection, and the pandemic has resulted in a large number of individuals with abnormalities in their sense of smell. For many, the condition is temporary and resolves within two to four weeks. However, in a significant minority the symptoms persist. At present, it is not known whether early intervention with any form of treatment (such as medication or olfactory training) can promote recovery and prevent persisting olfactory disturbance. This is an update of the 2021 review with four studies added.

OBJECTIVES

1) To evaluate the benefits and harms of any intervention versus no treatment for people with acute olfactory dysfunction due to COVID-19 infection.  2) To keep the evidence up-to-date, using a living systematic review approach.  SEARCH METHODS: The Cochrane ENT Information Specialist searched the Cochrane ENT Register; Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL); Ovid MEDLINE; Ovid Embase; Web of Science; ClinicalTrials.gov; ICTRP and additional sources for published and unpublished trials. The date of the latest search was 20 October 2021.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs) in people with COVID-19 related olfactory disturbance, which had been present for less than four weeks. We included any intervention compared to no treatment or placebo.  DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: We used standard Cochrane methods. Our primary outcomes were the presence of normal olfactory function, serious adverse effects and change in sense of smell. Secondary outcomes were the prevalence of parosmia, change in sense of taste, disease-related quality of life and other adverse effects (including nosebleeds/bloody discharge). We used GRADE to assess the certainty of the evidence for each outcome.  MAIN RESULTS: We included five studies with 691 participants. The studies evaluated the following interventions: intranasal corticosteroid sprays, intranasal corticosteroid drops, intranasal hypertonic saline and zinc sulphate.  Intranasal corticosteroid spray compared to no intervention/placebo We included three studies with 288 participants who had olfactory dysfunction for less than four weeks following COVID-19. Presence of normal olfactory function The evidence is very uncertain about the effect of intranasal corticosteroid spray on both self-rated recovery of olfactory function and recovery of olfactory function using psychophysical tests at up to four weeks follow-up (self-rated: risk ratio (RR) 1.19, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.85 to 1.68; 1 study; 100 participants; psychophysical testing: RR 2.3, 95% CI 1.16 to 4.63; 1 study; 77 participants; very low-certainty evidence).  Change in sense of smell The evidence is also very uncertain about the effect of intranasal corticosteroid spray on self-rated change in the sense of smell (at less than 4 weeks: mean difference (MD) 0.5 points lower, 95% CI 1.38 lower to 0.38 higher; 1 study; 77 participants; at > 4 weeks to 3 months: MD 2.4 points higher, 95% CI 1.32 higher to 3.48 higher; 1 study; 100 participants; very low-certainty evidence, rated on a scale of 1 to 10, higher scores mean better olfactory function). Intranasal corticosteroids may make little or no difference to the change in sense of smell when assessed with psychophysical testing (MD 0.2 points, 95% CI 2.06 points lower to 2.06 points higher; 1 study; 77 participants; low-certainty evidence, 0- to 24-point scale, higher scores mean better olfactory function).  Serious adverse effects The authors of one study reported no adverse effects, but their intention to collect these data was not pre-specified so we are uncertain if these were systematically sought and identified. The remaining two studies did not report on adverse effects.  Intranasal corticosteroid drops compared to no intervention/placebo We included one study with 248 participants who had olfactory dysfunction for ≤ 15 days following COVID-19. Presence of normal olfactory function Intranasal corticosteroid drops may make little or no difference to self-rated recovery at > 4 weeks to 3 months (RR 1.00, 95% CI 0.89 to 1.11; 1 study; 248 participants; low-certainty evidence). No other outcomes were assessed by this study.  Data on the use of hypertonic saline nasal irrigation and the use of zinc sulphate to prevent persistent olfactory dysfunction are included in the full text of the review.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

There is very limited evidence available on the efficacy and harms of treatments for preventing persistent olfactory dysfunction following COVID-19 infection. However, we have identified a number of ongoing trials in this area. As this is a living systematic review we will update the data regularly, as new results become available.

Safety of intranasal corticosteroids for allergic rhinitis in children

INTRODUCTION

Allergic rhinitis (AR) is a common chronic inflammatory disease of the nasal mucosa, affecting about 10-40% of children worldwide. Intranasal corticosteroids (INCSs) are the first line anti-inflammatory drug in the treatment of pediatric AR. The systemic and local adverse effects of INCSs in children with AR should be assessed.

AREAS COVERED

Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) reporting local and systemic adverse effects of INCSs in pediatric populations with AR were searched out of PubMed and Embase.

EXPERT OPINION

Overall, INCSs displayed a favorable safety profile and high local-systemic balance of bioavailability with a low incidence of adverse events in the treatment of AR children. Nevertheless, the use of INCSs should be designed depending on one patient's response and adverse effects. The benefits and risks of INCSs should be assessed to ensure the clinical efficacy and avoid the insidious events.

Chinese expert recommendation on transnasal corticosteroid nebulization for the treatment of chronic rhinosinusitis 2021

Corticosteroids are efficacious in treating chronic rhinosinusitis (CRS), but concerns on the potential side effects remain, especially for long-term usage of systemic corticosteroids. Accumulated evidence shows that transnasal nebulization may be a reasonable solution in balancing both efficacy and safety. However, no consensus or guideline has been formulated on the use of steroid transnasal nebulization in treating CRS. The consensus is achieved through literature review and exchange of Chinese experts in Group of Otorhinolaryngology and Ophthalmology, Chinese Society of Allergy (CSA). This document covers the development, equipment, pharmacological mechanism, and evidence-based efficacy and safety, as well as the special concern of the application of steroid transnasal nebulization during the coronavirus disease (COVID-19) pandemic. The expert consensus clarifies the application of steroid transnasal nebulization in treating CRS and common comorbidities during the perioperative and postoperative periods.

Corticosteroid Use in Otolaryngology: Current Considerations During the COVID-19 Era

OBJECTIVE

To offer pragmatic, evidence-informed advice on administering corticosteroids in otolaryngology during the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic, considering therapeutic efficacy, potential adverse effects, susceptibility to COVID-19, and potential effects on efficacy of vaccination against SARS-CoV-2, which causes COVID-19.

DATA SOURCES

PubMed, Cochrane Library, EMBASE, CINAHL, and guideline databases.

REVIEW METHODS

Guideline search strategies, supplemented by database searches on sudden sensorineural hearing loss (SSNHL), idiopathic facial nerve paralysis (Bell's palsy), sinonasal polyposis, laryngotracheal disorders, head and neck oncology, and pediatric otolaryngology, prioritizing systematic reviews, randomized controlled trials, and COVID-19-specific findings.

CONCLUSIONS

Systemic corticosteroids (SCSs) reduce long-term morbidity in individuals with SSNHL and Bell's palsy, reduce acute laryngotracheal edema, and have benefit in perioperative management for some procedures. Topical or locally injected corticosteroids are preferable for most other otolaryngologic indications. SCSs have not shown long-term benefit for sinonasal disorders. SCSs are not a contraindication to vaccination with COVID-19 vaccines approved by the US Food and Drug Administration. The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention noted that these vaccines are safe for immunocompromised patients.

IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE

SCS use for SSNHL, Bell's palsy, laryngotracheal edema, and perioperative care should follow prepandemic standards. Local or topical corticosteroids are preferable for most other otolaryngologic indications. Whether SCSs attenuate response to vaccination against COVID-19 or increase susceptibility to SARS-CoV-2 infection is unknown. Immunosuppression may lower vaccine efficacy, so immunocompromised patients should adhere to recommended infection control practices. COVID-19 vaccination with Pfizer-BioNTech, Moderna, or Johnson & Johnson vaccines is safe for immunocompromised patients.

Intranasal Corticosteroids: Topical Potency, Systemic Activity and Therapeutic Index

Intranasal corticosteroid (INCS) therapy is the preferred treatment option for allergic rhinitis (AR). Although all INCSs for the treatment of AR are considered safe and effective, differences in potency, molecular structure features and physicochemical and pharmacokinetic properties could result in differences in clinical efficacy and safety. Higher glucocorticoid receptor (GR) binding affinity of INCS is associated with higher lipophilicity, nasal tissue retention and topical potency. Higher topical potency is also accompanied by low oral bioavailability and high systemic clearance conferring low systemic exposure, reduced potential for systemic adverse effects and an improved therapeutic index. It has been shown that adverse events related to systemic exposure of INCSs in children are low. Although INCSs mostly produce low systemic effects, use of an INCS with low systemic exposure in patients on multiple corticosteroid (CS) therapies could help reduce the total systemic burden of CS therapy. Despite differences in topical potency, physicochemical and pharmacokinetic properties between INCSs, clinical studies of INCSs in the treatment of AR generally show no clinically important differences between these compounds, and poor correlation between INCS topical potency and clinical response. However, the lack of head-to-head comparisons of INCSs in clinical studies conducted in more severe AR patients should be noted. This narrative review provides an assessment of the therapeutic relevance of topical potency and the physicochemical and pharmacokinetic properties of INCSs and describes for the first time the relationship between topical potency and therapeutic index using pharmacological features of INCSs. It concludes that higher GR binding affinity and topical potency can potentially improve the therapeutic index of an INCS. Therefore, both efficacy and systemic exposure profiles should be considered when comparing INCS regimens in terms of therapeutic equivalence, to aid clinical decision-making and avoid the assumption that all INCS formulations are the same when considering treatment options.

Effects of intrapolyp steroid injection on intraocular pressure and recurrent polyp treatment

Purpose

To examine the effects of intrapolyp triamcinolone acetonide (TA) injections on intraocular pressure (IOP) and recurrence of nasal polyps after endoscopic sinus surgery.

Patients and methods

This was a prospective, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled study. Patients were randomized into either the TA injection group (Group I, 20 mg/ml, 2 mL) or the placebo normal saline injection group (group II, 2 mL). There were a total of five study visits: one baseline visit and one at 2, 4, 8, and 12 w after the injection. The primary safe outcome was the change in IOP between two groups at 4 w. The secondary safe outcome was the IOP at each visit and proportion of patients having IOP above 21 mmHg at 4 and 8 w. Changes in the nasal polyp size were measured between two groups at each visit.

Results

A total of 43 consenting participants completed this study (22 in group I and 21 in group II). The mean IOP elevation in both eyes was not significantly different between the groups (p > 0.05) and was not over 2 mmHg at the 4-w mark. There was also no significant difference in the proportion of patients having IOP above 21 mmHg at 4 and 8 w between the groups (p > 0.05). However, there was a significant difference in the change in polyp size until 8 w between both groups (p < 0.01).

Conclusions

Intrapolyp TA injection is a safe and effective method for the management of recurrent polyps after endoscopic sinus surgery.

Interventions for the prevention of persistent post-COVID-19 olfactory dysfunction

BACKGROUND

Loss of olfactory function is well recognised as a cardinal symptom of COVID-19 infection, and the ongoing pandemic has resulted in a large number of affected individuals with abnormalities in their sense of smell. For many, the condition is temporary and resolves within two to four weeks. However, in a significant minority the symptoms persist. At present, it is not known whether early intervention with any form of treatment (such as medication or olfactory training) can promote recovery and prevent persisting olfactory disturbance.  OBJECTIVES: To assess the effects (benefits and harms) of interventions that have been used, or proposed, to prevent persisting olfactory dysfunction due to COVID-19 infection. A secondary objective is to keep the evidence up-to-date, using a living systematic review approach.  SEARCH METHODS: The Cochrane ENT Information Specialist searched the Cochrane COVID-19 Study Register; Cochrane ENT Register; CENTRAL; Ovid MEDLINE; Ovid Embase; Web of Science; ClinicalTrials.gov; ICTRP and additional sources for published and unpublished studies. The date of the search was 16 December 2020.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised controlled trials including participants who had symptoms of olfactory disturbance following COVID-19 infection. Individuals who had symptoms for less than four weeks were included in this review. Studies compared any intervention with no treatment or placebo.  DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: We used standard Cochrane methodological procedures. Our primary outcomes were the presence of normal olfactory function, serious adverse effects and change in sense of smell. Secondary outcomes were the prevalence of parosmia, change in sense of taste, disease-related quality of life and other adverse effects (including nosebleeds/bloody discharge). We used GRADE to assess the certainty of the evidence for each outcome.  MAIN RESULTS: We included one study of 100 participants, which compared an intranasal steroid spray to no intervention. Participants in both groups were also advised to undertake olfactory training for the duration of the trial. Data were identified for only two of the prespecified outcomes for this review, and no data were available for the primary outcome of serious adverse effects. Intranasal corticosteroids compared to no intervention (all using olfactory training) Presence of normal olfactory function after three weeks of treatment was self-assessed by the participants, using a visual analogue scale (range 0 to 10, higher scores = better). A score of 10 represented "completely normal smell sensation". The evidence is very uncertain about the effect of intranasal corticosteroids on self-rated recovery of sense of smell (estimated absolute effect 619 per 1000 compared to 520 per 1000, risk ratio (RR) 1.19, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.85 to 1.68; 1 study; 100 participants; very low-certainty evidence).  Change in sense of smell was not reported, but the self-rated score for sense of smell was reported at the endpoint of the study with the same visual analogue scale (after three weeks of treatment). The median scores at endpoint were 10 (interquartile range (IQR) 9 to 10) for the group receiving intranasal corticosteroids, and 10 (IQR 5 to 10) for the group receiving no intervention (1 study; 100 participants; very low-certainty evidence).

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

There is very limited evidence regarding the efficacy of different interventions at preventing persistent olfactory dysfunction following COVID-19 infection. However, we have identified a small number of additional ongoing studies in this area. As this is a living systematic review, the evidence will be updated regularly to incorporate new data from these, and other relevant studies, as they become available.  For this (first) version of the living review, we identified a single study of intranasal corticosteroids to include in this review, which provided data for only two of our prespecified outcomes. The evidence was of very low certainty, therefore we were unable to determine whether intranasal corticosteroids may have a beneficial or harmful effect.

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.

Intranasal Allopregnanolone Confers Rapid Seizure Protection: Evidence for Direct Nose-to-Brain Delivery

Allopregnanolone, a positive modulator of GABAA receptors with antiseizure activity, has potential in the treatment of seizure emergencies. Instillation of allopregnanolone in 40% sulfobutylether-β-cyclodextrin into the nose in mice rapidly elevated the seizure threshold in the timed intravenous pentylenetetrazol (ED50, 5.6 mg/kg), picrotoxin (ED50, 5.9 mg/kg), and bicuculline seizure tests. The effect peaked at 15 min, decayed over 1 h, and was still evident in some experiments at 6 h. Intranasal allopregnanolone also delayed the onset of seizures in the maximal PTZ test. At an allopregnanolone dose (16 mg/kg) that conferred comparable effects on seizure threshold as the benzodiazepines midazolam and diazepam (both at doses of 1 mg/kg), allopregnanolone caused minimal sedation or motor toxicity in the horizontal screen test whereas both benzodiazepines produced marked behavioral impairment. In addition, intranasal allopregnanolone failed to cause loss-of-righting reflex in most animals, but when the same dose was administered intramuscularly, all animals became impaired. Intranasal allopregnanolone (10 mg/kg) caused a rapid increase in brain allopregnanolone with a Tmax of ~5 min after initiation of the intranasal delivery. High levels of allopregnanolone were recovered in the olfactory bulb (Cmax, 16,000 ng/mg) whereas much lower levels (Cmax, 670 ng/mg) were present in the remainder of the brain. We conclude that the unique ability of intranasal allopregnanolone to protect against seizures without inducing behavioral adverse effects is due in part to direct nose-to-brain delivery, with preferential transport to brain regions relevant to seizures. Benzodiazepines are commonly administered intranasally for acute seizure therapy, including for the treatment of acute repetitive seizures, but are not transported from nose-to-brain. Intranasal allopregnanolone acts with greater speed, has less propensity for adverse effects, and has the ability to overcome benzodiazepine refractoriness. This is the first study demonstrating rapid functional central nervous system activity of a nose-to-brain-delivered steroid. Intranasal delivery circumvents the poor oral bioavailability of allopregnanolone providing a route of administration permitting its evaluation as a treatment for diverse neuropsychiatric indications.

[Rhinitis medicamentosa]

One type of non-allergic non-infectious rhinitis is represented by a heterogeneous group of rhinitis medicamentosa, which can be divided into several pathogenetic types. The most common rebound nasal congestion associated with the use of topical decongestants. Excessive use of intranasal decongestants leads to a decrease in the number of alpha-adrenoreceptors on the surface of cell membranes and uncoupling their connection with the G-protein and the development of tachyphylaxis. To prevent the development of rebound nasal congestion caused by topical decongestants, it is important to limit the frequency of their use. In most cases, the duration of the use of vasoconstrictor drugs should be limited to 5-7 days, according to Patient information leaflets for the drugs. However, in patients who have had a history of episodes of rebound nasal congestion, which develops including the previously indicated periods, the duration of decongestant therapy should be limited to 3 days. Rhinitis associated with local inflammation is caused by the intake of acetylsalicylic acid (ASA) or other non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs. Currently, the so-called "aspirin triad" is well known - a combination of bronchial asthma, rhinosinusitis (often polyposis) and intolerance to ASA. Neurogenic rhinitis develops due to the use of drugs that violate vascular tone, for example, antihypertensive drugs or type 5 phosphodiesterase inhibitors. Drug-induced rhinitis has a significant impact on the patient's quality of life: nasal congestion, rhinorrhea, secondary night apnea, insomnia as a result of nasal breathing disturbances, headaches, irritability, weakness after sleepless nights disturb patients to a large extent. Timely diagnosis and withdrawal of a provocative drug, the use of topical corticosteroids in case of severe rhinitis are the basis of the treatment of rhinitis medicamentosa. In severe cases, there is a need, including surgical treatment, such as, for example, submucosal laser destruction of the lower nasal concha.

[Complications and side effects of conservative treatment of rhinological diseases]

BACKGROUND

The spectrum of rhinological diseases is wide, as is that of their drug-based treatment. Only 1272 compounds coded R01 (nasal preparations) are listed in the ATC group (Anatomical Therapeutic Chemical Classification). Conservative therapy of rhinological diseases additionally includes systemic (often oral) application of corticosteroids, antibiotics and immunomodulators.

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this paper is to outline possible complications of medication (subdivided into classes of ingredients) commonly used to treat rhinological diseases in hospitals. Useful therapeutic and preventive measures will be presented.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Based on the expert information in the current pharmacological drug index (ATC) for the R01 group as well as literature research in the PubMed, Cochrane Library and MEDLINE databases, medication used for the treatment of rhinological diseases was analysed in terms of side effects and their frequency.

RESULTS

Common side effects of intranasally applied medication are local irritations, burning, dryness and epistaxis. Orally or intravenously applied rhinological medication can affect the organs and lead to side effects such as cardiac dysrhythmia or alterations of the blood count. It is recommended that the therapeutic be selected on an individual basis and that the patient be thoroughly informed about possible side effects.

CONCLUSION

Particularly when treating children or pregnant or breastfeeding women, the indications of all nasal preparations should be checked carefully. The huge variety of rhinologicals enables an optimal individual selection on the basis of consideration of known side effects.

BSACI guideline for the diagnosis and management of allergic and non-allergic rhinitis (Revised Edition 2017; First edition 2007)

This is an updated guideline for the diagnosis and management of allergic and non-allergic rhinitis, first published in 2007. It was produced by the Standards of Care Committee of the British Society of Allergy and Clinical Immunology, using accredited methods. Allergic rhinitis is common and affects 10-15% of children and 26% of adults in the UK, it affects quality of life, school and work attendance, and is a risk factor for development of asthma. Allergic rhinitis is diagnosed by history and examination, supported by specific allergy tests. Topical nasal corticosteroids are the treatment of choice for moderate to severe disease. Combination therapy with intranasal corticosteroid plus intranasal antihistamine is more effective than either alone and provides second line treatment for those with rhinitis poorly controlled on monotherapy. Immunotherapy is highly effective when the specific allergen is the responsible driver for the symptoms. Treatment of rhinitis is associated with benefits for asthma. Non-allergic rhinitis also is a risk factor for the development of asthma and may be eosinophilic and steroid-responsive or neurogenic and non- inflammatory. Non-allergic rhinitis may be a presenting complaint for systemic disorders such as granulomatous or eosinophilic polyangiitis, and sarcoidoisis. Infective rhinitis can be caused by viruses, and less commonly by bacteria, fungi and protozoa.

Effect of withdrawal of fusafungine from the market on prescribing of antibiotics and other alternative treatments in Germany: a pharmacovigilance impact study

PURPOSE

Knowledge on unintended consequences of product withdrawals is limited. Fusafungine, indicated for treatment of upper respiratory airways disease (URAD), was withdrawn in the EU on May 28, 2016. Given concerns about possible substitution with antibiotics, this study aimed to assess the impact of the withdrawal of fusafungine on prescribing of antibiotics and other treatments.

METHODS

The study was conducted using data from general practitioner (GP) and ear, nose and throat (ENT) practices in IMS® Disease Analyzer Germany. The quarterly prevalence of fusafungine prescribing was analysed for consultations involving the most common URAD between May 29, 2013 and May 28, 2017 in regular fusafungine-prescribing practices. Trends in the quarterly prevalence of antibiotics (AB), other nasal or throat preparations (N&T) and tyrothricin were analyzed. Practices with no fusafungine prescribing during the study served as controls. Changes in prescribing trend were evaluated using interrupted time series regression analysis.

RESULTS

In fusafungine-prescribing practices, withdrawal of fusafungine was associated with an immediate increase in prescribing of other N&Ts among patients consulting for URAD (+ 6.4%, 95% CI 2.3-10.5% in GP practices and + 9.0%, 95% CI 5.5-12.5% in ENT practices). There was no increase in antibiotic prescribing. In ENT practices; a small transient increase in tyrothricin prescribing occurred. No changes were seen in non-fusafungine-prescribing practices.

CONCLUSIONS

Withdrawal of fusafungine was not associated with increased prescribing of antibiotics but was associated with increased prescribing of other N&Ts. The unintended impact of substitution to other treatments should be considered routinely when products are withdrawn or restricted in other ways.

Risks and management of long-term corticosteroid use in chronic rhinosinusitis

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

The purpose of this review is to provide an update on the use and risks of long-term corticosteroids in the management of chronic rhinosinusitis (CRS).

RECENT FINDINGS

Long-term use of systemic corticosteroids is not indicated in the management of CRS due to the associated side effects and potential complications. Therefore, recent research has focused on the safety and efficacy of topical corticosteroid, particularly second-generation corticosteroids, and their modes of administration. Second-generation corticosteroids are more potent and have less systemic bioavailability than their first-generation counterparts. However, caution must be taken with concomitant use of more than two types of corticosteroids (topical, systemic, inhaled etc.) and also with their dosage and frequency of administration to avoid adrenal suppression, growth suppression in children, elevated intraocular pressure or epistaxis. Research is ongoing into therapies that may reduce corticosteroid resistance which has been demonstrated in some nasal polyps.

SUMMARY

Corticosteroids play an essential role in the management of CRS; however, use must be tailored to the patient-specific disease and requires ongoing review and regular reevaluation by their physician.

Associations Between Systemic and Local Corticosteroid Use With Metabolic Syndrome and Body Mass Index

CONTEXT

Use of systemic corticosteroids (CSs) may induce adverse cardiometabolic alterations, potentially leading to obesity and metabolic syndrome (MetS). Although evidence is accumulating that local CSs have considerable systemic effects, their effects on cardiometabolic factors in the general population remain unclear.

OBJECTIVE

To investigate the association between overall CS use and specific CS types with MetS, body mass index (BMI), and other cardiometabolic traits.

DESIGN

Cross-sectional cohort study.

SETTING

General population from the northern Netherlands.

PARTICIPANTS

A total of 140,879 adult participants in the population-based Lifelines Cohort Study.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

BMI, waist circumference, systolic and diastolic blood pressure, fasting metabolic serum parameters, and a comprehensive set of potential confounding factors.

RESULTS

In women, overall, systemic, and local CS use was associated with higher odds of having MetS. Among local female users, only nasal (odds ratio [OR], 1.20 [95% confidence interval (CI), 1.06 to 1.36]) and inhaled CSs [OR, 1.35 (95% CI, 1.24 to 1.49)] users were more likely to have MetS. In men, no association was found between overall and specific CS use and presence of MetS. Use of local-only CSs in women, specifically inhaled CSs in both sexes, was associated with higher BMI.

CONCLUSIONS

Use of local CSs, particularly inhaled types, as well as systemic CSs, was associated with higher likelihood of having MetS, higher BMI, and other adverse cardiometabolic traits, especially among women. Because the inhaled agents are the main group of prescribed CSs, this might be a substantial risk to public health in case of a yet-to-be-proven causal relationship.

Intranasal Steroid Use for Otitis Media with Effusion: Ongoing Opportunities for Quality Improvement

Objectives Our objectives were (1) to assess patterns of intranasal steroid administration when otitis media with effusion (OME) has been diagnosed in children, (2) to investigate whether usage varies according to visit setting, and (3) to determine if practice gaps are such that quality improvement could be tracked. Study Design Cross-sectional analysis of an administrative database. Subjects and Methods National Ambulatory and Hospital Ambulatory Medical Care Surveys, 2005 to 2012; univariate, multivariate, and stratified analyses of intranasal steroid usage were performed. The primary outcome was intranasal steroid administration, and the primary predictor was a diagnosis of OME. The impact of location of service was also analyzed. Results Data representing 1,943,177,903 visits demonstrated that intranasal steroids were administered in 10.0% of visits in which OME was diagnosed, in comparison to 3.5% of visits in which OME was not diagnosed (univariate odds ratio, 3.07; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.85-5.08; P < .001). After adjusting for age, sex, race/ethnicity, and other confounding conditions, multivariate analysis demonstrated that OME remained associated with an increase in intranasal steroid usage (odds ratio, 3.58; 95% CI, 1.60-8.01; P = .002). This practice pattern was more prevalent in the ambulatory office setting (risk difference 6.6%, P < .001) and less seen in a hospital-based office or emergency department. Conclusion Despite randomized controlled trials showing a lack of efficacy for isolated OME, nasal steroids continue to be used in treating children with OME in the United States. Related quality improvement opportunities to prevent usage of an ineffective treatment exist.

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.

Use of intranasal corticosteroids in adenotonsillar hypertrophy

Objectives:

This review examined the efficacy of intranasal corticosteroids for improving adenotonsillar hypertrophy.

Method:

The related literature was searched using PubMed and Proquest Central databases.

Results:

Adenotonsillar hypertrophy causes mouth breathing, nasal congestion, hyponasal speech, snoring, obstructive sleep apnoea, chronic sinusitis and recurrent otitis media. Adenoidal hypertrophy results in the obstruction of nasal passages and Eustachian tubes, and blocks the clearance of nasal mucus. Adenotonsillar hypertrophy and obstructive sleep apnoea are associated with increased expression of various mediators of inflammatory responses in the tonsils, and respond to anti-inflammatory agents such as corticosteroids. Topical nasal steroids most likely affect the anatomical component by decreasing inspiratory upper airway resistance at the nasal, adenoidal or tonsillar levels. Corticosteroids, by their lympholytic or anti-inflammatory effects, might reduce adenotonsillar hypertrophy. Intranasal corticosteroids reduce cellular proliferation and the production of pro-inflammatory cytokines in a tonsil and adenoid mixed-cell culture system.

Conclusion:

Intranasal corticosteroids have been used in adenoidal hypertrophy and adenotonsillar hypertrophy patients, decreasing rates of surgery for adenotonsillar hypertrophy.

Resveratrol solid lipid microparticles as dry powder formulation for nasal delivery, characterization and in vitro deposition study

This study focuses on development and in vitro characterisation of a nasal delivery system based on uncoated or chitosan-coated solid lipid microparticles (SLMs) containing resveratrol, a natural anti-inflammatory molecule, as an effective alternative to the conventional steroidal drugs. The physico-chemical characteristics of the SLMs loaded with resveratrol were evaluated in terms of morphology, size, thermal behaviour and moisture sorption. The SLMs appeared as aggregates larger than 20 μm. In vitro nasal deposition was evaluated using a USP specification Apparatus E 7-stage cascade impactor equipped with a standard or a modified nasal deposition apparatus. More than 95% of resveratrol was recovered onto the nasal deposition chamber and stage 1 of impactor, suggesting that the SLMs mostly deposited in the nasal cavity. Additionally, the SLMs were not toxic on RPMI 2650 nasal cell line up to a concentration of approximately 40 μM of resveratrol.

Steroid transnasal nebulization in the treatment of chronic rhinosinusitis

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Chronic rhinosinusitis (CRS) is a challenging disease entity, affecting 8-15% of the general population. Topical steroids have been recommended as an integral part of the strategy for management of CRS. This review focuses on steroid transnasal nebulization as an alternative treatment option for CRS treatment.

RECENT FINDINGS

Modern inhalation devices comprise nebulizers, pressurized metered-dose inhalers and dry powder inhalers. Transnasal nebulization with pulsating flow can enhance sinus ventilation and increase drug deposition with longer residence time. Short-term steroid transnasal nebulization provides an effective and safe treatment option for CRS patients, as evidenced by significant clinically relevant improvements and lack of serious side-effects. The underlying mechanisms involve a combination of reduction in inflammatory cells, suppression of inflammatory cell-associated cytokines and chemotactic factors, and regulation of tissue remodeling. Efficacy of transnasal nebulization outweighs commonly used nasal sprays and nasal irrigation as delivery options for topical steroids; however, long-term safety with nebulized steroids needs to be investigated further.

SUMMARY

Steroid transnasal nebulization offers an alternative or a complementary treatment option to nasal sprays and nasal irrigation for management of patients with CRS. Long-term dose-dependent studies with nebulized steroids will be needed to fully appreciate the benefits of this treatment modality.

Management of Allergic Rhinitisand Sinusitis

Allergic rhinitis and sinusitis are chronic conditions of the airway and cause significant morbidity. Both can require pharmacotherapy with nonprescription products to relieve symptoms or with prescription products to treat the underlying pathophysiology. Because these diseases are prevalent conditions, the pharmacist is in the unique position of being the first health professional contact for many patients. The pharmacist can assist the patient in selection of nonprescription antihistamines, decongestants, and nasal saline sprays as well as provide instruction on the use of steam therapy, aromatic vapors, and warm compresses for the relief of symptoms. Equally important, the pharmacist can encourage patients to seek care from a physician when treatment with intranasal corticosteroids, antibiotics, and nonsedating antihistamines are needed.

Ciclesonide: A Pro-Soft Drug Approach for Mitigation of Side Effects of Inhaled Corticosteroids

Inhaled corticosteroids are used as one of the first-line drug therapy in patients with asthma. However, their long-term use is associated with various oropharyngeal and systemic side and adverse effects. Design of pro-soft drug is one of the strategies, which was adopted in the design of ciclesonide for mitigation of side effects usually observed with the use of inhaled corticosteroids. Ciclesonide, a pro-soft drug, is converted to an active metabolite desisobutyryl-ciclesonide in the lungs. The anti-inflammatory effect of desisobutyryl-ciclesonide is much higher than ciclesonide, and therefore, the local effect of the metabolite is higher with lower systemic side effects. Ciclesonide has favorable pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic properties as inhaled corticosteroid including low oral bioavailability, high plasma protein binding and rapid systemic clearance, high pulmonary deposition and distribution and long pulmonary residence duration. These advantageous properties make ciclesonide a very effective treatment option with low side effects. Various clinical studies support safety and efficacy of ciclesonide use in mild, moderate, and severe asthma patients.

Efficacy and safety of beclomethasone dipropionate nasal aerosol in children with perennial allergic rhinitis

BACKGROUND

Beclomethasone dipropionate (BDP) nasal aerosol (non-aqueous) is approved for management of seasonal and perennial allergic rhinitis (PAR) in adolescents and adults.

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the efficacy and safety of BDP nasal aerosol at 80 μg/day in children with PAR.

METHODS

This 12-week, phase 3, double-blinded, placebo-controlled, parallel-group study randomized 547 children (4-11 years old) with PAR to once-daily BDP nasal aerosol at 80 μg/day or placebo. The primary end point was change from baseline in average morning and evening reflective total nasal symptom score (rTNSS) during the first 6 weeks of treatment in patients 6 to 11 years old. Changes from baseline in average morning and evening instantaneous TNSS (iTNSS) in children 6 to 11 years old and average rTNSS and iTNSS in children 4 to 11 years old were assessed during the first 6 weeks of treatment.

RESULTS

Improvements were significantly greater with BDP nasal aerosol than with placebo during the first 6 weeks of treatment in children 6 to 11 years old in average morning and evening rTNSS and iTNSS (mean treatment difference -0.66 [P = .002] and -0.58 [P = .004], respectively). Improvements in average morning and evening rTNSS and iTNSS also were significantly greater in patients 4 to 11 years receiving BDP nasal aerosol than with placebo during the first 6 weeks of treatment (P = .002 and P = .004, respectively). Similar improvements were seen during 12 weeks of treatment. The safety profile of BDP nasal aerosol was comparable to that of placebo.

CONCLUSION

The BDP nasal aerosol at 80 μg/day in children 4 to 11 years old was well tolerated and effective in controlling nasal symptoms of PAR.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

www.clinicaltrials.gov, identifier NCT01783548.

Current understanding of nasal morphology and physiology as a drug delivery target

The nasal cavity is both a target for locally and systemically acting medications. An adequate treatment for rhinosinusitis continues to be an unmet need. With the recent approval of intranasal medications for the treatment of pain, the nasal cavity continues to be a viable route for rapid uptake into the systemic circulation. Despite the opportunities, there is still a void in the knowledge of how therapeutic entities interact with the nasal epithelium. In addition, new opportunities in mucosal immunity via nasal vaccination as well as the elusive nose to brain uptake continue to drive innovation. To facilitate understanding of the issues involved that facilitate drug delivery in the nose, a review of nasal morphology and physiology is presented.

Current recommendations and emerging options for the treatment of allergic rhinitis

Allergic rhinitis (AR) is one of the most common diseases and represents a global health problem, currently affecting up to 30% of the general population, with a continuously increasing prevalence and significant comorbidities and complications. The aim of this review is to provide an update on AR treatment, with a focus on current therapies defined by AR and its impact on asthma guidelines and with a particular emphasis on new and future therapeutic perspectives.

Systemic effects and safety of triamcinolone-impregnated nasal packing after endoscopic sinus surgery: a randomized, double-blinded, placebo-controlled study

BACKGROUND

Steroid-infused absorbable nasal dressings after endoscopic sinus surgery (ESS) have been used to improve wound healing and to reduce the recurrence of polyps. However, their systemic effects are not well known. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the systemic effects and safety of steroid-impregnated absorbable nasal packing after ESS.

METHODS

Patients who underwent bilateral ESS for chronic rhinosinusitis were recruited and randomized into two groups. Ten patients in the triamcinolone (TA) group received a TA (20 mg)-soaked bioabsorbable dressing in both nasal cavities while 10 patients in the control group took saline-impregnated dressing in both nasal cavities. Nasal dressings were not removed until postoperative day 10. Serum cortisol, 12-hour urine cortisol, serum adrenal-corticotropic hormone (ACTH), and serum osteocalcin were measured preoperatively and on postoperative days 2 and 10. Serum cortisol levels were checked 1 day after surgery additionally, while urine cortisol levels were not checked at postoperative day 10.

RESULTS

All 20 patients completed this study. The serum cortisol levels were significantly suppressed at postoperative days 1 and 2 in the TA group. Serum ACTH and 12-hour urine cortisol levels were lower 2 days after surgery in the TA group, although these changes were not statistically significant. There were no differences in all other parameters between the TA and control groups on postoperative day 10.

CONCLUSIONS

TA-impregnated nasal dressings suppress serum cortisol levels during the early postoperative period. This systemic effect was recovered gradually and normalized 10 days after the operation.

Inhaled corticosteroids in children: effects on bone mineral density and growth

Potent, topically active corticosteroids with minimum systemic activity have fewer adverse effects than do systemic corticosteroids, and can control both asthma and allergic rhinitis when given in recommended doses. However, study findings show that children with asthma receiving budesonide and beclometasone dipropionate have decreased linear growth, and that children who receive long-term inhaled corticosteroid therapy for asthma have height deficits 1-2 years after treatment initiation that persist into adulthood. The effects of inhaled corticosteroids on growth seem to be dependent on both dose and duration; the degree of systemic effects is dependent on pharmacokinetic properties (ie, absorption, distribution, and elimination), whereas the effective dose delivered is dependent on the delivery system and potency of the molecule. The effects of corticosteroids on bone mineral density in children seem to be more amenable to intervention; long-term therapy with inhaled corticosteroid therapy is safer than frequent bursts of oral corticosteroids on bone mineral accretion in this regard. Importantly, adequate nutrition (particularly sufficient intake of calcium and vitamin D) should prevent or blunt the effects of corticosteroids on bone mineral density. The potential adverse effects of inhaled corticosteroids need to be weighed against the large and well established benefit of these drugs to control persistent asthma. To minimise any adverse effects, treatment with inhaled corticosteroids should always aim to reach the lowest effective dose that gives the patient good asthma control.

Long-term, randomized safety study of MP29-02 (a novel intranasal formulation of azelastine hydrochloride and fluticasone propionate in an advanced delivery system) in subjects with chronic rhinitis

BACKGROUND

MP29-02 is a novel intranasal formulation of azelastine hydrochloride and fluticasone propionate (FP) in an advanced delivery system for the treatment of seasonal allergic rhinitis.

OBJECTIVE

The objective of this study was to evaluate the long-term safety of MP29-02 in subjects with chronic allergic (perennial) or nonallergic (vasomotor) rhinitis.

METHODS

This was a 1-year, randomized, open-label, active-controlled, parallel-group study in subjects with chronic allergic or nonallergic rhinitis. A total of 612 subjects were randomized in a 2:1 ratio to (1) MP29-02, one spray per nostril twice daily (total daily doses of azelastine hydrochloride and FP were 548 mcg and 200 mcg, respectively); or (2) FP, 2 sprays per nostril once daily (total daily dose 200 mcg). Safety and tolerability assessments were made at months 1, 3, 6, 9, and 12.

RESULTS

The incidence of treatment-related adverse events was low with both MP29-02 (9.4%) and FP (11.1%), with no evidence of late-occurring adverse events. Nasal examinations showed no evidence of nasal mucosal ulcerations or septal perforations with MP29-02, and the overall incidence of adverse findings was reduced as the study progressed. There were no unusual or unexpected ocular examination findings and no clinically important laboratory findings or clinically important differences between groups in fasting AM serum cortisol levels after 12 months of treatment.

CONCLUSIONS

MP29-02 was well tolerated. There were no safety findings that would preclude the long-term use of MP29-02 in the treatment of allergic rhinitis.

An overview of the pediatric medications for the symptomatic treatment of allergic rhinitis, cough, and cold

Upper respiratory infections and allergic rhinitis are common diseases in children. In recent years, U.S. Food and Drug Administration has been promoting pediatric drug development with marketing exclusivity incentives and requirements. The assessment of clinical pharmacology, efficacy, and safety data has facilitated pediatric drug development and provided appropriate labeling for pediatric use. Regulatory decision making involves multiple evaluation processes, including drug exposure comparison between adult and pediatric population, formulation bridging, dose selection, and evaluation of efficacy and safety in pediatric patients. This article reviews the pediatric drugs indicated for cough, cold, and allergic rhinitis, focusing on the utility of clinical pharmacology, safety, and efficacy data in determining the pediatric dosing regimen and the approaches taken for regulatory decision making.

Simultaneous Bilateral Quadriceps Tendon Rupture following Long-Term Low-Dose Nasal Corticosteroid Application

Simultaneous bilateral quadriceps tendon rupture is a very rare injury, which was previously only described in slightly more than 100 cases in the English literature. Occurrence after minor trauma is predominantly associated with certain medical conditions including chronic diseases and long-term use of certain drugs. We report the case of a 61-year-old healthy patient who sustained a simultaneous bilateral quadriceps tendon rupture following minor trauma. Medical history was completely clear except of a long-term nasal corticosteroid medication due to allergic rhinitis.

New therapeutic options for allergic rhinitis: back to the future with intranasal corticosteroid aerosols

BACKGROUND

Under current guidelines, intranasal corticosteroids (INSs) are considered the most effective first-line therapy to improve allergic rhinitis (AR) symptoms and burden of disease. In the late 1980s-1990s, chlorofluorocarbon (CFC)-propelled corticosteroid aerosol nasal sprays formed the standard of care for the treatment of AR. Because of environmental concerns, CFC aerosols were gradually phased out, and aqueous INS formulations of nasal sprays became the standard of care. Although many aqueous INS sprays are available, specific product-related factors can reduce patient adherence to an INS and subsequently reduce treatment efficacy. The purpose of this paper was to review the evolution of AR therapeutics and drug devices and how it may have an effect on patient adherence/compliance and patient satisfaction with current available therapies and show the unmet need to improve INS delivery systems.

METHODS

Although aqueous INSs are effective and well tolerated, use in some patients may be compromised because of patient sensory perception and device preference. A historical review of the evolution of intranasal delivery of INSs was undertaken to provide further insight into improving treatment options for patients with AR.

RESULTS

Although the various approved INSs appear to be equivalent in terms of reducing AR disease burden, the method in which an INS is delivered to a patient has significant bearing on the overall success of each specific drug product.

CONCLUSION

Hydrofluoroalkane-propelled INS drug products offer a back-to-the-future delivery approach that may be further tailored to the individual patient's needs. Past experiences and the development of new devices are paving the way toward further therapy choices, ultimately affording health care providers access to the most effective treatments for patients with AR.

Effect of intranasal steroids on glucose and hemoglobin A1c levels in diabetic patients

BACKGROUND

Intranasal steroids are widely used for the treatment of inflammatory diseases of the nose and sinuses such as rhinosinusitis, allergic rhinitis, and nonallergic rhinitis. Along with the general otherwise healthy population, many diabetic patients use intranasal steroids as well. This study was designed to evaluate the adverse effects of long-term treatment with intranasal corticosteroid preparations in diabetic patients.

METHODS

The study group included all diabetic patients treated with intranasal steroids for at least 3 months at primary care clinics in Clalit Health Services Central District in Israel in 2002-2007. The central database had been reviewed for demographic data, medical history, medications, and laboratory test results.

RESULTS

A total of 1768 diabetic patients were treated with topical nasal steroid sprays during the study period. Data on hemoglobin A1c (HbA1c) levels both before and during steroid treatment was available for 245 patients, and data on fasting serum glucose levels at both time points was available for 163 patients. On statistical analysis, there was no change in either measure from baseline to 3 months after starting treatment (p = 0.104 and p = 0.101, respectively). Treatment with triamcinolone acetonide was associated with a significantly greater increase in fasting serum glucose levels than other preparations (p = 0.006).

CONCLUSION

Intranasal corticosteroids seem to have no adverse effects on HbA1c and serum glucose levels in diabetic patients. Their long-term use appears to be safe, provided that the patients are carefully monitored, especially those receiving triamcinolone acetonide.

Intranasal Loteprednol Etabonate in Healthy Male Subjects: Pharmacokinetics and Effects on Endogenous Cortisol

Loteprednol etabonate (LE) is a glucocorticoid soft drug that is currently in development for intranasal use. The main objectives of this study were to examine the pharmacokinetics and potential effects on systemic cortisol of two intranasal suspension formulations of LE and to compare these findings with placebo and fluticasone propionate (FP, Flonase) control treatments. In this randomized, double-blind (except for FP), parallel-group study (n = 8/group), all subjects received for 14 days once daily in the morning two puffs of the following nasal spray formulations into each nostril: LE 0.1% (400 microg/day), LE 0.2% (800 microg/day), FP 0.05% (200 microg/day), and placebo. Drug trough levels were determined on days 1, 5, 12, 13, and 14, and a full pharmacokinetic profile was established on day 14, and 24-hour serum cortisol profiles were assessed prior to treatment (i.e., at baseline) and after the last dose. All subjects completed the protocol without treatment-emergent adverse findings. All formulations were rapidly absorbed (t(max) less than 1 h). The rather short mean terminal half-lives of 2.2 +/- 1.5 hours and 1.8 +/- 1.0 hours for LE 400 microg and LE 800 microg, respectively, and 4.2 +/- 1.8 hours for the 200-microg FP treatment explained the lack of any accumulation. Mean peak concentrations (C(max)) were 139 +/- 57 pg/mL with LE 400 microg and 164 +/- 54 pg/mL with LE 800 microg and thus fairly independent from dose. The 200-microg FP treatment resulted in a C(max) of only 15.5 +/- 5.9 pg/mL. Mean measured AUC(0-t) values (193 +/- 87 pg/h/mL(-1), 300 +/- 183 pg/h/mL(-1), and 40 +/- 34 pg/h/mL(-1) for LE 400 microg, LE 800 microg, and FP 200 microg, respectively) showed high variability and suggested nonlinear pharmacokinetics for the LE formulations, indicative of a less complete systemic uptake of LE from the 0.2% concentration. None of the treatments (LE 400 microg, LE 800 microg, and FP 200 microg) showed evidence for serum cortisol suppression when compared with placebo, respectively. The uptake and systemic exposure appears less complete from the 0.2% LE concentration, which principally favors this formulation for further clinical development.

Safety of mometasone furoate nasal spray in the treatment of nasal polyps in children

BACKGROUND

Mometasone furoate nasal spray (MFNS) improves nasal symptoms and reduces polyp size in adults with nasal polyposis. This 4-month, multinational, randomized, double-blind study was conducted to assess the safety of MFNS in pediatric subjects aged 6-17 yr.

METHODS

Subjects aged 6-11 yr with bilateral nasal polyps received MFNS 100 μg once or twice daily or placebo; those aged 12-17 yr received MFNS 200 μg once or twice daily or placebo. End-points included change in 24-h urinary free cortisol (primary), change in 24-h urinary free cortisol corrected for creatinine (key secondary), and adverse events. Efficacy parameters included polyp size, nasal symptoms, and investigator-evaluated therapeutic response, although the study was not powered for statistical analysis of efficacy.

RESULTS

Least squares baseline mean urinary free cortisol level (nmol/24 h) for both age groups combined (N = 127) was 49.5 in the MFNS once-daily group, 39.6 in the MFNS twice-daily group, and 49.8 in the placebo group. Change in 24-h urinary free cortisol did not significantly differ among MFNS- and placebo-treated subjects. Least squares mean 24-h urinary free cortisol levels corrected for creatinine also showed no significant differences among MFNS- and placebo-treated subjects. No safety issues emerged.

CONCLUSIONS

Results of this study confirm the safety profile of MFNS in pediatric patients with bilateral nasal polyps over 4 months, even at double the recommended pediatric dosage for allergic rhinitis.

Mometasone implant for chronic rhinosinusitis

The Propel mometasone-eluting stent (Intersect ENT, Palo Alto, CA) is the first Food and Drug Administration-approved device for delivering steroid medication into the ethmoid cavity following surgery. The implant is composed of a biodegradable polymer in a lattice pattern that expands in a spring-like fashion to conform to the walls of a dissected ethmoid cavity and contains a total of 370 μg of mometasone furoate designed for gradual release over 30 days. The purpose of this article is to review the mode of action and the evidence supporting the efficacy of this novel technology. Three recently published clinical trials have demonstrated that the mometasone-eluting stent produced statistically significant reductions in inflammation, polyp formation, and postoperative adhesions. In addition, the implant has been found to significantly reduce the need for postoperative administration of oral steroids and to decrease the frequency of postoperative lysis of adhesions. Minimal adverse effects were reported in these trials and included infection, crusting, and granulation tissue formation. Although the placement of steroid-impregnated packing, stents, sponges, and gels has previously been used in the postoperative sinus cavities, the Propel mometasone-eluting stent introduces a new mechanism for localized and controlled delivery of topical therapy directly to the nasal mucosa for chronic rhinosinusitis.