Personalized therapies for the treatment of allergic rhinitis

Potential causal association between aspirin use and the reduced risk of hayfever or allergic rhinitis: a Mendelian randomization study

Background

The evidence from observational studies on the association between the use of aspirin and the risk of hayfever or allergic rhinitis is conflicting, with a dearth of high-quality randomized controlled trials.

Objective

This study aims to investigate the causal relationship between aspirin use and the risk of hayfever or allergic rhinitis.

Methods

We conducted a two-sample Mendelian randomization (MR) analysis using the inverse-variance weighted (IVW), weighted median, and MR-Egger regression methods. We utilized publicly available summary statistics datasets from genome-wide association studies (GWAS) meta-analyses on aspirin use in individuals of European descent (n = 337,159) as the exposure variable, and a GWAS on doctor-diagnosed hayfever or allergic rhinitis in individuals from the UK Biobank (n = 83,529) as the outcome variable.

Results

We identified 7 single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) at genome-wide significance from the GWASs associated with aspirin use as instrumental variables (P<5×10-8; linkage disequilibrium r2 <0.1). The IVW method provided evidence supporting a causal association between aspirin use and reduced risk of hayfever or allergic rhinitis (β = -0.349, SE = 0.1356, P = 0.01008). MR-Egger regression indicated no causal association between aspirin use and hayfever or allergic rhinitis (β = -0.3742, SE = 0.3809, P = 0.371), but the weighted median approach yielded evidence of a causal association (β = -0.4155, SE = 0.1657, P = 0.01216). Cochran's Q test and the funnel plot indicated no evidence of heterogeneity and asymmetry, indicating no directional pleiotropy.

Conclusion

The findings of the MR analysis support a potential causal relationship between aspirin use and the reduced risk of hayfever or allergic rhinitis.

Nasal irrigation with various solutions for adults with allergic rhinitis: A protocol for systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

BACKGROUND

Nasal douching or irrigation has been recommended for adjunctive therapy of sinonasal diseases including allergic rhinitis (AR) for many years. Previous study reported large-volume high-pressure device as an effective standard application, but the solutions was remains controversy. This study systematically review the clinical efficacy of nasal irrigation with various solutions for adults with AR from medical literature.

METHODS

This research systematically asses clinical trial about nasal irrigation with various solutions for adults with AR from medical literature. The sources were PubMed, ProQuest, Scopus, Cochrane Register of Controlled Trials databases, and gray literature from google scholar and RAMA repository limited to English and Bahasa Indonesia language articles, published from January 2017 to July 2022. Only randomized controlled trials involving the human subjects studies will be included. The inclusion criteria research must be related to nasal irrigation for AR, and should be full texted available. Literature management, screening, data extraction will use Rayyan.ai tools. The quality assessment of qualified paper and risk of bias will be assessing independent conducted by 2 reviewer with risk of bias 2. We will use Review Manager (RevMan) [Computer program] Version 5.4. The Cochrane Collaboration, 2020 tools to produce the systematic review and meta-analysis.

RESULTS

After completion of the study process, the data analysis and review will be reported. The results will be publicized through a peer-review journal publication.

CONCLUSION

The results of the systematic review will summarize the efficacy of various nasal irrigation for adults with AR, so it can be used as clinician recommendation.

Pharmacological Management of Allergic Rhinitis: A Consensus Statement from the Malaysian Society of Allergy and Immunology

The goal of allergic rhinitis (AR) management is to achieve satisfactory symptom control to ensure good quality of life. Most patients with AR are currently treated with pharmacotherapy. However, knowledge gaps on the use of pharmacotherapy still exist among physicians, particularly in the primary care setting, despite the availability of guideline recommendations. Furthermore, it is common for physicians in the secondary care setting to express uncertainty regarding the use of new combination therapies like intranasal corticosteroid plus antihistamine combinations. Inadequate treatment leads to significant reduction of quality of life that affects daily activities at home, work, and school. With these concerns in mind, a practical consensus statement was developed to complement existing guidelines on the rational use of pharmacotherapy in both the primary and secondary care settings.

Oral application of Chinese herbal medicine for allergic rhinitis: A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

Chinese herbal medicine (CHM) has long been used for allergic rhinitis (AR). This systematic review aimed to investigate the clinical effects and safety of oral CHM for AR by comparing it to Western medications (WM). Nineteen databases were searched up to May 27, 2020. Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) assessing the effects of CHM on the primary or secondary outcomes comparing to WM, in any age of the patients, were included. The pooled results were expressed as mean difference, standardized mean difference, or odds ratio with 95% confidence intervals. Eighteen RCTs were included and 17 of them were evaluated in the meta-analysis. CHM may improve total nasal symptom scores, individual symptom scores (rhinorrhea, nasal congestion, sneezing, and nasal itching), quality of life, and recurrence rate, compared to antihistamines (loratadine and chlorpheniramine). Only mild and transient adverse events of CHM were reported. However, there were no significant differences in some subgroup analyses in total nasal symptom scores, rhinorrhea, nasal obstruction, sneezing, nasal itching, and SF-36. Due to the small number of included studies, poor quality of trial design, and substantial heterogeneities, the potential of CHM for AR should be validated in large, multicenter, and well-designed RCTs in the future.

Current and emerging biologic therapies for allergic rhinitis and chronic rhinosinusitis

Introduction: Allergic rhinitis and chronic rhinosinusitis, with and without nasal polyps, are the most common chronic inflammatory diseases of the upper airways. They both cause relevant respiratory symptoms and a substantial detriment to patients' quality of life, mainly in uncontrolled and severe patients.Areas covered: This review aims to present the most recent evidence on current and emerging biologic therapies for allergic rhinitis and chronic rhinosinusitis and discuss their potential implementation in clinical practice. To select relevant literature for inclusion in this review, we conducted a literature search using the PubMed database, using terms 'biologics OR biological agents', 'allergic rhinitis' and 'chronic rhinosinusitis'. The literature review was performed for publication years 2009-2019, restricting the articles to humans and English language publications.Expert opinion: Biological therapies represent a potential step forward in providing individualized care for all patients with uncontrolled severe upper airway diseases. Biologics recently showed promising results for the treatment of severe uncontrolled allergic rhinitis and chronic rhinosinusitis with nasal polyps with or without associated asthma. Endotyping inflammatory pathways and identifying related biomarkers remain the major challenge for positioning biologics in the care pathway of chronic respiratory diseases.