Combined mediator blockade or topical steroid for treating the unified allergic airway

Comorbid allergic rhinitis and asthma: important clinical considerations

INTRODUCTION

The numerous links between allergic rhinitis and asthma have been extensively explored in the last two decades, gaining great concern within the scientific community. These two conditions frequently coexist in the same patient and share numerous pathogenetic and pathophysiological mechanisms.

AREAS COVERED

We reviewed major pathophysiological, epidemiological, and clinical links between allergic rhinitis and asthma. We also provided a comprehensive discussion of allergic rhinitis treatment according to current guidelines, with a particular focus on the relevance of allergic rhinitis therapies in patients with comorbid asthma.

EXPERT OPINION

We believe that there are several unmet needs for our patients, however, there are promising advances forecasted for the future. Although allergic rhinitis is a recognized risk factor for asthma, a proper asthma detection and prevention plan in allergic rhinitis patients is not available. Allergen immunotherapy (AIT) represents a promising preventive strategy and may deserve an earlier positioning in allergic rhinitis management. A multidisciplinary approach should characterize the journey of patients with respiratory allergies, with an adequate referral to specialized Allergy/Asthma centers. Molecular Allergy Diagnosis may provide support for optimal AIT use. Finally, a possible evolution of biological treatment can be envisaged, mainly if biosimilars decrease such therapies' costs.

The Functional Diversity of Nitric Oxide Synthase Isoforms in Human Nose and Paranasal Sinuses: Contrasting Pathophysiological Aspects in Nasal Allergy and Chronic Rhinosinusitis

The human paranasal sinuses are the major source of intrinsic nitric oxide (NO) production in the human airway. NO plays several roles in the maintenance of physiological homeostasis and the regulation of airway inflammation through the expression of three NO synthase (NOS) isoforms. Measuring NO levels can contribute to the diagnosis and assessment of allergic rhinitis (AR) and chronic rhinosinusitis (CRS). In symptomatic AR patients, pro-inflammatory cytokines upregulate the expression of inducible NOS (iNOS) in the inferior turbinate. Excessive amounts of NO cause oxidative damage to cellular components, leading to the deposition of cytotoxic substances. CRS phenotype and endotype classifications have provided insights into modern treatment strategies. Analyses of the production of sinus NO and its metabolites revealed pathobiological diversity that can be exploited for useful biomarkers. Measuring nasal NO based on different NOS activities is a potent tool for specific interventions targeting molecular pathways underlying CRS endotype-specific inflammation. We provide a comprehensive review of the functional diversity of NOS isoforms in the human sinonasal system in relation to these two major nasal disorders' pathologies. The regulatory mechanisms of NOS expression associated with the substrate bioavailability indicate the involvement of both type 1 and type 2 immune responses.

Current perspective on eicosanoids in asthma and allergic diseases: EAACI Task Force consensus report, part I

Eicosanoids are biologically active lipid mediators, comprising prostaglandins, leukotrienes, thromboxanes, and lipoxins, involved in several pathophysiological processes relevant to asthma, allergies, and allied diseases. Prostaglandins and leukotrienes are the most studied eicosanoids and established inducers of airway pathophysiology including bronchoconstriction and airway inflammation. Drugs inhibiting the synthesis of lipid mediators or their effects, such as leukotriene synthesis inhibitors, leukotriene receptors antagonists, and more recently prostaglandin D₂ receptor antagonists, have been shown to modulate features of asthma and allergic diseases. This review, produced by an European Academy of Allergy and Clinical Immunology (EAACI) task force, highlights our current understanding of eicosanoid biology and its role in mediating human pathology, with a focus on new findings relevant for clinical practice, development of novel therapeutics, and future research opportunities.

Rhinitis 2020: A practice parameter update

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

Clinical application of nasal nitric oxide measurement in pediatric airway diseases

Nitric oxide plays an important role in several physiological and pathophysiological processes in the respiratory tract. Different ways to measure nasal nitric oxide levels in children are currently available. The possibility of obtaining nasal nitric oxide measurement from relatively young children, combined with the availability of portable devices that can be used even in the office setting, opens new perspectives for nasal nitric oxide analysis in the pediatric daily practice. This review presents a synopsis about the current clinical applications of nasal nitric oxide measurement in the pediatric clinical practice. A total of 3,775 articles on the topic were identified, of which 883 duplicates were removed, and 2,803 were excluded based on review of titles and abstracts. Eighty-nine full text articles were assessed for eligibility and 32 additional articles were obtained from the reference lists of the retrieved studies. Since very low nasal nitric oxide levels are found in the majority of patients with primary ciliary dyskinesia, most publications support a central role for nasal nitric oxide to screen the disease, and indicate that it is a very helpful first-line tool in the real-life work-up in all age groups. Decreased nasal nitric oxide concentration is also typical of cystic fibrosis, even though nasal nitric oxide is not as low as in primary ciliary dyskinesia. In other upper airway disorders such as allergic rhinitis, rhinosinusitis, nasal polyposis, and adenoidal hypertrophy, clinical utility of nasal nitric oxide is still critically questioned and remains to be established. Since nNO determination is flow dependent, a general consensus from the major investigators in this area is highly desirable so that future studies will be performed with the same flow rate. A shared nNO methodology will enable to overcome the challenges that lie ahead in incorporating nNO measurement into the mainstream clinical setting of pediatric airway diseases.

Investigational drugs for the treatment of allergic rhinitis

INTRODUCTION

Allergic rhinitis is characterized by paroxysms of sneezing, rhinorrhea and nasal obstruction. Its prevalence is increasing in industrialized countries worldwide and imposes a significant economic burden as a result of reduced school performance, work productivity and medical expenses. Allergic rhinitis impairs the quality of life of those affected, and current treatment regimens are inadequate for those whose symptoms are severe or refractory to standard drug therapies. They mainly include symptom control with intranasal glucocorticoids, oral and intranasal antihistamines.

AREAS COVERED

This article provides a review of the most current literature on research that has focused on improving the efficacy of current treatment regimens and developing new drugs. It also provides the reader with an improved understanding of the pathogenesis of allergic rhinitis, including the inflammatory mediators and cell types involved, which has led to novel treatment options that are under investigation. These new drugs aim to alter the immunologic response to allergens in order to achieve greater clinical efficacy.

EXPERT OPINION

It is our opinion that despite developments in new therapies, a multidrug approach is vital for successful treatment of allergic rhinitis. Furthermore, immunotherapy in the form of sublingual immunotherapy is a promising additional therapeutic approach that will potentially make immunotherapy available to a wider selection of eligible patients with allergic rhinitis.

Impact of intranasal corticosteroids on asthma outcomes in allergic rhinitis: a meta-analysis

Given the relationship between allergic rhinitis (AR) and asthma, it can be hypothesized that reducing inflammation in the upper airway with intranasal corticosteroid (INCS) medications may improve asthma outcomes. The goal of this study was to perform a systematic review with meta-analysis of the efficacy of INCS medications on asthma outcomes in patients with AR and asthma. Asthma-specific outcomes from randomized, controlled studies evaluating INCS medications in patients with AR were evaluated, including studies that compared INCS sprays to placebo, INCS sprays plus orally inhaled corticosteroids to orally inhaled corticosteroids alone, and nasally inhaled corticosteroids to placebo. Sufficient data for meta-analysis were retrieved for 18 trials with a total of 2162 patients. Asthma outcomes included pulmonary function, bronchial reactivity, asthma symptom scores, asthma-specific quality of life, and rescue medication use. The subgroup of studies comparing INCS spray to placebo had significant improvements in FEV1 (SMD = 0.31; 95% CI, 0.04-0.58), bronchial challenge (SMD = 0.46; 95% CI, 0.12-0.79), asthma symptom scores (SMD = -0.42; 95% CI, -0.53 to -0.30), and rescue medication use (SMD = -0.29; 95% CI, -0.58 to -0.01). Nasal inhalation of corticosteroids significantly improved morning and evening peak expiratory flow. There were no significant changes in asthma outcomes with the addition of INCS spray to orally inhaled corticosteroids. Thus, the results of this meta-analysis demonstrated that intranasal corticosteroid medications significantly improve some asthma-specific outcome measures in patients suffering from both AR and asthma. This effect was most pronounced with INCS sprays when patients were not on orally inhaled corticosteroids, or when corticosteroid medications were inhaled through the nose into the lungs. Overall, intranasal corticosteroid medications improve some asthma-specific outcome measures in patients with both AR and asthma. Further research is needed to clarify the role of INCS sprays as asthma-specific therapy, as well as the role of the nasal inhalation technique as a monotherapy in patients suffering from both asthma and AR.

Addition of anti-leukotriene agents to inhaled corticosteroids in children with persistent asthma

BACKGROUND

In the treatment of children with mild persistent asthma, low-dose inhaled corticosteroids (ICS) are recommended as the preferred monotherapy (referred to as step 2 of therapy). In children with inadequate asthma control on low doses of ICS (step 2), asthma management guidelines recommend adding an anti-leukotriene agent to existing ICS as one of three therapeutic options to intensify therapy (step 3).

OBJECTIVES

To compare the efficacy and safety of the combination of anti-leukotriene agents and ICS to the use of the same, an increased, or a tapering dose of ICS in children and adolescents with persistent asthma who remain symptomatic despite the use of maintenance ICS. In addition, we wished to determine the characteristics of people or treatments, if any, that influenced the magnitude of response attributable to the addition of anti-leukotrienes.

SEARCH METHODS

We identified trials from the Cochrane Airways Group Specialised Register of Trials (CAGR), which were derived from systematic searches of bibliographic databases including the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), MEDLINE, EMBASE, PsycINFO, AMED, and CINAHL; and the handsearching of respiratory journals and meeting abstracts, as well as the www.clinicaltrials.gov website. The search was conducted until January 2013.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We considered for inclusion randomised controlled trials (RCTs) conducted in children and adolescents, aged one to 18 years, with asthma, who remained symptomatic despite the use of a stable maintenance dose of ICS and in whom anti-leukotrienes were added to the ICS if they were compared to the same, an increased, or a tapering dose of ICS for at least four weeks.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We used standard methods expected by The Cochrane Collaboration.

MAIN RESULTS

Five paediatric (parallel group or cross-over) trials met the inclusion criteria. We considered two (40%) trials to be at a low risk of bias. Four published trials, representing 559 children (aged ≥ six years) and adolescents with mild to moderate asthma, contributed data to the review. No trial enrolled preschoolers. All trials used montelukast as the anti-leukotriene agent administered for between four and 16 weeks. Three trials evaluated the combination of anti-leukotrienes and ICS compared to the same dose of ICS alone (step 3 versus step 2). No statistically significant group difference was observed in the only trial reporting participants with exacerbations requiring oral corticosteroids over four weeks (N = 268 participants; risk ratio (RR) 0.80, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.34 to 1.91). There was also no statistically significant difference in percentage change in FEV₁ (forced expiratory volume in 1 second) with mean difference (MD) 1.3 (95% CI -0.09 to 2.69) in this trial, but a significant group difference was observed in the morning (AM) and evening (PM) peak expiratory flow rates (PEFR): N = 218 participants; MD 9.70 L/min (95% CI 1.27 to 18.13) and MD 10.70 (95% CI 2.41 to 18.99), respectively. One trial compared the combination of anti-leukotrienes and ICS to a higher-dose of ICS (step 3 versus step 3). No significant group difference was observed in this trial for participants with exacerbations requiring rescue oral corticosteroids over 16 weeks (N = 182 participants; RR 0.82, 95% CI 0.54 to 1.25), nor was there any significant difference in exacerbations requiring hospitalisation. There was no statistically significant group difference in withdrawals overall or because of any cause with either protocol. No trial explored the impact of adding anti-leukotrienes as a means to taper the dose of ICS.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

The addition of anti-leukotrienes to ICS is not associated with a statistically significant reduction in the need for rescue oral corticosteroids or hospital admission compared to the same or an increased dose of ICS in children and adolescents with mild to moderate asthma. Although anti-leukotrienes have been licensed for use in children for over 10 years, the paucity of paediatric trials, the absence of data on preschoolers, and the variability in the reporting of relevant clinical outcomes considerably limit firm conclusions. At present, there is no firm evidence to support the efficacy and safety of anti-leukotrienes as add-on therapy to ICS as a step-3 option in the therapeutic arsenal for children with uncontrolled asthma symptoms on low-dose ICS.

Impact of montelukast on asthma associated with rhinitis, and other triggers and co-morbidities

INTRODUCTION

Rhinitis and other specific triggers or co-morbidities (tobacco exposure, excess weight, aspirin sensitivity or heredity factors) are frequently associated with uncontrolled asthma. Asthma associated with these exacerbating factors appears to be related to an increase in leukotriene-mediated inflammation.

METHODS

We reviewed the role of montelukast, a leukotriene receptor antagonist, in the treatment of asthma associated with these factors by using the PubMed database to search the English and French biomedical literature for articles describing randomized-controlled trials, large observational studies and reviews (published up to May 2012, inclusive).

RESULTS

Montelukast, either alone or in combination with other drugs, is an effective treatment against rhinitis-associated asthma. Montelukast also offers therapeutic benefits against exercise-induced asthma or in cases of asthma linked to tobacco exposure, excess weight or aspirin hypersensitivity. Thus, for some patients, montelukast may constitute an alternative to the gold-standard treatment of inhaled corticosteroids. Polymorphisms in several genes encoding proteins of the leukotriene signaling pathway may contribute to the variability in response to montelukast.

CONCLUSIONS

In conclusion, we have shown that montelukast treatment could be of particular benefit to subgroups of patients with asthma associated with rhinitis, exercise, tobacco exposure, being overweight or aspirin hypersensitivity.

Anti-leukotriene agents compared to inhaled corticosteroids in the management of recurrent and/or chronic asthma in adults and children

BACKGROUND

Anti-leukotrienes (5-lipoxygenase inhibitors and leukotriene receptors antagonists) serve as alternative monotherapy to inhaled corticosteroids (ICS) in the management of recurrent and/or chronic asthma in adults and children.

OBJECTIVES

To determine the safety and efficacy of anti-leukotrienes compared to inhaled corticosteroids as monotherapy in adults and children with asthma and to provide better insight into the influence of patient and treatment characteristics on the magnitude of effects.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched MEDLINE (1966 to Dec 2010), EMBASE (1980 to Dec 2010), CINAHL (1982 to Dec 2010), the Cochrane Airways Group trials register, and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (Dec 2010), abstract books, and reference lists of review articles and trials. We contacted colleagues and the international headquarters of anti-leukotrienes producers.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomised trials that compared anti-leukotrienes with inhaled corticosteroids as monotherapy for a minimum period of four weeks in patients with asthma aged two years and older.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently assessed the methodological quality of trials and extracted data. The primary outcome was the number of patients with at least one exacerbation requiring systemic corticosteroids. Secondary outcomes included patients with at least one exacerbation requiring hospital admission, lung function tests, indices of chronic asthma control, adverse effects, withdrawal rates and biological inflammatory markers.

MAIN RESULTS

Sixty-five trials met the inclusion criteria for this review. Fifty-six trials (19 paediatric trials) contributed data (representing total of 10,005 adults and 3,333 children); 21 trials were of high methodological quality; 44 were published in full-text. All trials pertained to patients with mild or moderate persistent asthma. Trial durations varied from four to 52 weeks. The median dose of inhaled corticosteroids was quite homogeneous at 200 µg/day of microfine hydrofluoroalkane-propelled beclomethasone or equivalent (HFA-BDP eq). Patients treated with anti-leukotrienes were more likely to suffer an exacerbation requiring systemic corticosteroids (N = 6077 participants; risk ratio (RR) 1.51, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.17, 1.96). For every 28 (95% CI 15 to 82) patients treated with anti-leukotrienes instead of inhaled corticosteroids, there was one additional patient with an exacerbation requiring rescue systemic corticosteroids. The magnitude of effect was significantly greater in patients with moderate compared with those with mild airway obstruction (RR 2.03, 95% CI 1.41, 2.91 versus RR 1.25, 95% CI 0.97, 1.61), but was not significantly influenced by age group (children representing 23% of the weight versus adults), anti-leukotriene used, duration of intervention, methodological quality, and funding source. Significant group differences favouring inhaled corticosteroids were noted in most secondary outcomes including patients with at least one exacerbation requiring hospital admission (N = 2715 participants; RR 3.33; 95% CI 1.02 to 10.94), the change from baseline FEV(1) (N = 7128 participants; mean group difference (MD) 110 mL, 95% CI 140 to 80) as well as other lung function parameters, asthma symptoms, nocturnal awakenings, rescue medication use, symptom-free days, the quality of life, parents' and physicians' satisfaction. Anti-leukotriene therapy was associated with increased risk of withdrawals due to poor asthma control (N = 7669 participants; RR 2.56; 95% CI 2.01 to 3.27). For every thirty one (95% CI 22 to 47) patients treated with anti-leukotrienes instead of inhaled corticosteroids, there was one additional withdrawal due to poor control. Risk of side effects was not significantly different between both groups.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

As monotherapy, inhaled corticosteroids display superior efficacy to anti-leukotrienes in adults and children with persistent asthma; the superiority is particularly marked in patients with moderate airway obstruction. On the basis of efficacy, the results support the current guidelines' recommendation that inhaled corticosteroids remain the preferred monotherapy. 

Allergic Rhinitis and Its Impact on Asthma in Asia Pacific and the ARIA Update 2008

The prevalence of allergic diseases such as allergic rhinitis (AR) and asthma are markedly increasing to epidemic proportions worldwide as societies adopt Western lifestyles. An estimated 300 million persons worldwide have asthma, about 50% of whom live in developing countries, and about 400 million people suffer from AR. AR has a marked impact on quality of life, socially, at school, and in the workplace and is a huge socioeconomic burden. Thus, there was clearly a need for a global evidence-based guideline not only for managing AR but also highlighting the interactions between the upper and lower airways including diagnosis, epidemiology, common risk factors, management, and prevention. The Allergic Rhinitis and its Impact on Asthma (ARIA) document was first published in 2001 as a state-of-the-art document for the specialist, the general practitioner, and other health care professionals. Subsequent research and increasing knowledge have resulted in the ARIA 2008 update. The present review summarizes the ARIA update with particular emphasis on the current status of AR and asthma in Asia Pacific.

Importance of allergic rhinitis management in achieving asthma control: ARIA update

Asthma continues to be a major burden for the health and healthcare of people worldwide. The recent updates of the Global Initiative for Asthma and the National Heart, Lung and Blood Institute asthma guidelines stress the need for achieving and monitoring asthma 'control', emphasizing the importance of identifying, assessing and treating comorbid conditions. Allergic rhinitis (AR) is a major comorbid condition in people with asthma and is related to inflammation of the upper portions of the airway. Recognizing and treating AR has been shown to improve asthma control, specifically by decreasing rates of asthma attacks or asthma exacerbations. In 2008, updated Allergic Rhinitis in Asthma (ARIA) guidelines were published. The updated version of the guidelines has a familiar look, with classification systems and care algorithms that are similar to those presented in other asthma guidelines. The new ARIA guidelines make one major change that should affect the care of adults and children with asthma: everyone with asthma should be assessed for AR. In addition, AR should be considered a risk factor for asthma, and all children and adults with AR, especially persistent AR, should be assessed for asthma, including testing lung function for reversible obstruction whenever feasible. Treatment for AR follows a similar format to that for asthma, including symptom management, treatment of chronic inflammation, identification and management of triggers, including allergens, and ongoing education for self-management. Pharmacotherapies that address both asthma and AR include corticosteroids (intranasal and inhaled), leukotriene receptor antagonists, immunomodulation or immunotherapy. Too often, pharmacotherapy is not supplemented by the necessary education and evaluation related to allergen, trigger identification and management.

Early phase resolution of mucosal eosinophilic inflammation in allergic rhinitis

BACKGROUND

It is widely assumed that apoptosis of eosinophils is a central component of resolution of allergic airway disease. However, this has not been demonstrated in human allergic airways in vivo. Based on animal in vivo observations we hypothesised that steroid-induced resolution of human airway eosinophilic inflammation involves inhibition of CCL5 (RANTES), a CC-chemokine regulating eosinophil and lymphocyte traffic, and elimination of eosinophils without evident occurrence of apoptotic eosinophils in the diseased tissue.

OBJECTIVE

To determine mucosal eosinophilia, apoptotic eosinophils, general cell apoptosis and cell proliferation, and expression of CCL5 and CCL11 (eotaxin) in human allergic airway tissues in vivo at resolution of established symptomatic eosinophilic inflammation.

METHODS

Twenty-one patients with intermittent (birch and/or grass) allergic rhinitis received daily nasal allergen challenges for two seven days' periods separated by more than two weeks washout. Five days into these "artificial pollen seasons", nasal treatment with budesonide was instituted and continued for six days in a double blinded, randomized, placebo-controlled, and crossover design. This report is a parallel group comparison of nasal biopsy histochemistry data obtained on the final day of the second treatment period.

RESULTS

Treatments were instituted when clinical rhinitis symptoms had been established. Compared to placebo, budesonide reduced tissue eosinophilia, and subepithelial more than epithelial eosinophilia. Steroid treatment also attenuated tissue expression of CCL5, but CCL11 was not reduced. General tissue cell apoptosis and epithelial cell proliferation were reduced by budesonide. However, apoptotic eosinophils were not detected in any biopsies, irrespective of treatment.

CONCLUSIONS

Inhibition of CCL5-dependent recruitment of cells to diseased airway tissue, and reduced cell proliferation, reduced general cell apoptosis, but not increased eosinophil apoptosis, are involved in early phase steroid-induced resolution of human allergic rhinitis.

The minimal clinically important difference in allergic rhinitis

BACKGROUND

When presented with results from clinical measurements or research findings, clinicians must first make an interpretation of their importance, not only in statistical terms, but also the 'clinical importance' given the size of the change observed. To do this, they require an understanding of the relationship between their outcome measures, and the patient's perception of change. The minimal clinically important difference (MCID) illustrates this relationship by calculating the smallest change in a given outcome that is meaningful to a patient. There are few reports of calculated MCIDs in the Rhinology literature.

OBJECTIVE

To calculate MCIDs for common subjective and objective outcome measures in allergic rhinitis (AR).

METHODS

Nine randomized, blinded, placebo-controlled clinical trials in intermittent and persistent AR (pooled subjects, n=204) were analysed using anchor- and distribution-based approaches, applying regression and meta-analysis techniques.

RESULTS

MCIDs were obtained for the Mini Rhinoconjunctivitis Quality of Life Questionnaire: 0.4 units, peak nasal inspiratory flow: 5 L/min and total nasal symptoms score: 0.55 units. Nasal NO measurement changes had no correlation with patient perceptions of benefit.

CONCLUSION

Estimates of MCIDs were obtained for common subjective and objective rhinological outcomes. MCIDs can and should be applied by physicians interpreting research findings, as well as researchers reporting their findings. We can then be confident that our changes in practice will be of perceptible benefit to the patient.

[Allergic rhinitis and its impact on asthma (ARIA update 2008). The Austrian perspective]

In 1999, during the ARIA (Allergic Rhinitis and its Impact on Asthma) WHO workshop, an evidence-based document was produced using an extensive review of the literature available up to December of the same year. An update of the ARIA guidelines was soon needed and started in 2004. Thereafter, there was the need for an even more global document, which would highlight the interactions between the upper and the lower airways including diagnosis, epidemiology, common risk factors, management and prevention, and comprise the allergy perspective also for developing countries. This goal was achieved with the most recently published ARIA update 2008. The present article is the result of consecutive efforts of the authors of the ARIA update 2008 to accomplish the nationwide comprehensive distribution of information by publication in important national journals, like the WMW.

The link between allergic rhinitis and asthma: a role for antileukotrienes?

Allergic rhinitis and asthma are both chronic heterogeneous disorders, with an overlapping epidemiology of prevalence, health care costs and social costs in quality of life. Both are inflammatory disorders with a similar pathophysiology, and both share some treatment approaches. However, each disorder has an array of treatments used separately in controlling these atopic disorders, from inhaled corticosteroids, beta(2)-agonists and antihistamines to newer monoclonal antibody-based treatments. The present article reviews the shared components of allergic rhinitis and asthma, and examines recent evidence supporting antileukotrienes as effective agents in reducing the symptoms of both diseases.

Nitric oxide in the airways

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

This review briefly explains the basic facts about nitric oxide, which is entering clinical practice as a measure of lower airways inflammation and is likely also to be employed in otorhinolaryngological practice.

RECENT FINDINGS

These include the validity of nasal nitric oxide in diagnosing primary ciliary dyskinesia and in monitoring the response to chronic rhinosinusitis therapy. The nasal nitric oxide value combined with a humming manoeuvre, which increases the passage of nitric oxide from the sinuses to the nose if the ostiomeatal complex is patent, could reduce the need for computed tomography scans. The link between nitric oxide production and ciliary beating requires further exploration. Therapeutic adjustments to nitric oxide production are under investigation.

SUMMARY

Nitric oxide is likely to prove highly relevant to airways defence, as well as being an inflammatory mediator. Nasal nitric oxide probably explains some of the benefit of nasal rather than mouth breathing.

Montelukast in the treatment of allergic rhinitis: an evidence-based review

Cysteinyl-leukotrienes (CysLTs) are endogenous mediators of inflammation and play an important role in allergic airway disease by stimulating bronchoconstriction, mucus production, mucosal oedema and inflammation, airway infiltration by eosinophils, and dendritic cell maturation that prepares for future allergic response. Montelukast inhibits these actions by blocking type 1 CysLT receptors found on immunocytes, smooth muscle and endothelium in the respiratory mucosa. Initially developed as a treatment for asthma, montelukast has more recently found use in the treatment of allergic rhinitis (AR). We conducted a systematic review of studies that have evaluated montelukast in the treatment of seasonal AR (SAR) and perennial AR (PAR), with and without concomitant asthma. Primary consideration was given to large, randomised, placebo-controlled, double-blind clinical trials in which AR endpoints were assessed and the use of concurrent treatments for AR was excluded. Eight such studies were found in the literature. The primary endpoint in these was daytime nasal symptom severity represented by a composite score derived from individual self-ratings of nasal congestion, rhinorrhoea, nasal pruritus and sneezing. Secondary endpoints have included these individual nasal symptom scores, additional scores for eye, ear and throat symptoms, the impact of rhinitis on quality of sleep, global evaluations of outcome by patients and physicians, and measures of the severity of concomitant asthma. A general outcome was that patients treated with montelukast had significantly greater improvements in their symptoms of SAR and PAR than did patients who were given a placebo. As monotherapy, montelukast exhibited efficacy similar to that of loratadine, but less than that of the intranasally administered corticosteroid fluticasone propionate. The use of montelukast in combination with antihistamines such as loratadine or cetirizine has generally resulted in greater efficacy than when these agents were used alone, and in some studies has produced results comparable with intranasally applied corticosteroids. In patients with AR comorbid with asthma, montelukast treatment has resulted in significant improvements in both, compared with placebo. Montelukast is well tolerated and has a favourable safety profile; adverse events have occurred at similar frequencies in patients taking either montelukast or placebo. Montelukast provides an effective and well tolerated oral treatment for allergic airway inflammation in patients with SAR or PAR without asthma, and in patients in whom AR is comorbid with asthma.