Differences between allergic and nonallergic rhinitis in a large sample of adolescents and adults

Validation of a Novel Allergy-Specific Domain for the 22-Item Sino-Nasal Outcomes Test

OBJECTIVES

To develop and assess the validity of a novel allergy-specific domain for the 22-item sino-nasal outcomes test (SNOT-22), to provide a new tool that efficiently quantifies the impact of allergic rhinitis (AR) concurrent with chronic rhinosinusitis.

STUDY DESIGN

Prospective validation study.

SETTING

Tertiary care hospital and community-based clinic.

METHODS

Proposed items were developed based on clinician and patient input, and further assessed via factor analysis and for internal consistency (n = 1987). Items were then additionally assessed for convergent and discriminant validity (n = 415), applying data from concurrent completions of the Nasal Obstruction and Septoplasty Effectiveness Scale (NOSE), Mini-Rhinoconjunctivitis Quality-of-Life Questionnaire (MiniRQLQ), and validated global health assessments. Assessments of intra-rater reliability, responsiveness to change, and qualitative input were also performed.

RESULTS

Factor analysis demonstrated that proposed allergy items mapped to a single domain. Items were internally consistent (Cronbach α: 0.80 within domain, 0.91 within all SNOT). In assessments of convergent validity, domain scores were associated with MiniRQLQ (Spearman's ρ: 0.46, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.30-0.59) and NOSE scores (0.36, 95% CI: 0.27-0.44). The novel items also discriminated among clinical states: a 1-point increase in domain score was associated with an 8.32 (95% CI: 5.43-12.75) increase in the odds of prompting a visit for allergy-related symptoms and a 1.52 (95% CI: 1.13-2.05) increase in the odds of positive allergy testing. Intra-rater reliability was substantial (Cohen's κ: 0.8, 95% CI: 0.8-0.9), and responsiveness to change was demonstrated (mean difference: -0.6, 95% CI: -0.8 to -0.4).

CONCLUSIONS

This novel domain is a valid, efficient measure of AR alongside rhinosinusitis.

The Impact of Cytokines on Health-Related Quality of Life in Adolescents with Allergic Rhinitis

BACKGROUND

Frequent episodes of nasal symptoms are the usual clinical manifestations (CM) of allergic rhinitis (AR) and have a significant negative impact on health-related quality of life (HRQoL) in adolescents. The purpose of this cross-sectional study was to test the hypothesis that cytokines in nasal mucus may be associated with HRQoL in adolescents with AR.

METHODS

European Quality of Life 5 Dimensions 3 Level Version (EQ-5D-3L), "The Adolescent Rhinoconjunctivitis Quality of Life Questionnaire" (AdolRQLQ) and the Total 4 Symptom Score (T4SS) scoring system were administered to 113 adolescents with AR, nonallergic rhinitis (NAR) and to healthy control subjects. Nasal secretions were sampled and tested for 13 cytokines using a multiplex flow cytometric bead assay.

RESULTS

The AR group had significantly lower EQ-5D-3L (0.661 ± 0.267 vs. 0.943 ± 0.088; p < 0.001) and higher AdolRQLQ total scores (2.76 ± 1.01 vs. 1.02 ± 0.10; p < 0.001) compared to the control group. The AR group had higher concentrations of IL-1β (p = 0.002), IL-6 (p = 0.031), IL-8 (p < 0.001), IL17-A (p = 0.013) and IL-18 (p = 0.014) compared to the control group, and IL-1β, IL-6, IL17-A and IL-18 were significantly (p < 0.050) increased with disease progression. Cytokines IL-1β, IL-6, as well as severe CM, were identified as significant predictors of lower HRQoL in adolescents with AR.

CONCLUSIONS

This study identified IL-1β, IL-6, as well as severe CM, as predictors of lower HRQoL in adolescents with AR. However, these results should only serve as a starting point for additional confirmation research.

Rhinitis phenotypes and multimorbidities in the general population: the CONSTANCES cohort

BACKGROUND

Scarce epidemiological studies have characterised allergic rhinitis (AR) and non-allergic rhinitis (NAR) in adults. In a population-based cohort, our aims were to 1) describe rhinitis, AR and NAR, and 2) explore how asthma and conjunctivitis may lead to the identification of novel rhinitis phenotypes.

METHODS

In this cross-sectional analysis, current rhinitis was defined as present in the last 12 months using a questionnaire from the French CONSTANCES cohort. Participants with current rhinitis reporting nasal allergies were considered as AR, otherwise as NAR. We described AR and NAR phenotypes, and their phenotypes including co-occurrence with ever-asthma and ever-conjunctivitis.

RESULTS

Among the 20 772 participants included in this analysis (mean±sd age 52.6±12.6 years; 55.2% female), crude prevalences of AR and NAR were 28.0% and 10.9%. AR participants more frequently reported persistent rhinitis (31.6% versus 25.1%) and moderate-to-severe rhinitis (40.1% versus 24.2%) than NAR participants. Among AR or NAR participants, those with ever-asthma reported more moderate-to-severe rhinitis. Participants with AR, ever-asthma and ever-conjunctivitis had an earlier age of rhinitis onset, more severe rhinitis and higher eosinophil counts than participants in other groups. Results were replicated in another cohort.

CONCLUSIONS

In this large population-based cohort, 40% reported current rhinitis, with a lower prevalence of moderate-to-severe rhinitis than in clinical practice. For the first time in a general adult population, we showed that AR and NAR alone or in combination with asthma or in combination with asthma and conjunctivitis are different phenotypes. These results provide new insights on how best to manage rhinitis and its multimorbidities.

Mometasone Furoate in Non-Allergic Rhinitis: A Real-Life Italian Study

Background: In order to evaluate the efficacy of intranasal mometasone furoate in patients with non-allergic rhinitis (NAR), a real-life, observational, prospective study is performed. Methods: Thirty-one patients (age 18–64 years) receive intranasal (mometasone furoate, 200 µg b.i.d. for 15 consecutive days per month for 6 consecutive months), plus isotonic nasal saline. The cytologic pattern of local inflammation, nasal airflow, through peak nasal inspiratory flow (PNIF), quality of life (QoL), through the rhinitis quality of life questionnaire (RQLQ), the sinonasal outcome test (SNOT-22), the short-form 36-item health survey (SF-36v2), and the combined symptom medication score (CSMS), and, finally, olfactory function, through Sniffin’ sticks-16 identification test (SSIT-16), are evaluated at baseline and after treatment. Results: NARNE is the most frequent cytological pattern (48% of the total sample). The therapeutic response shows improvement in olfactory function and QoL. Conclusions: The results of this study confirm that intranasal mometasone furoate is an effective treatment for patients with NAR.

Concordance of Skin Prick Test, Intradermal Testing, Serum IgE Levels and Symptoms in Patients with Allergic Rhinitis

Background: Diagnosis of allergic rhinitis is achieved by a combination of patient history and different screening tools, followed by specific provocation testing. Screening tools usually involve a skin prick test (SPT), specific serum IgE or a combination of both. Objective: The purpose of this study was to evaluate the correlation of SPT, intradermal testing and specific serum IgE testing in certain allergens and to evaluate sensitization rates, symptom patterns and time of symptoms in a cohort of patients with suspected allergic rhinitis. Methods: Data on 4653 patients with suspected allergic rhinitis were included and divided into five groups: spring bloomers (birch, hazel, etc.), summer bloomers (grasses and rye), autumn bloomers (ribwort and mugwort), mites and mold. Correlation of SPT, intradermal testing and specific IgE test results using Cohen’s kappa and logistic regression were carried out to evaluate the probability of symptoms. Results: Comparison of SPT and specific serum IgE led to kappa coefficients between 0.33 and 0.47, corresponding to a minor to moderate concordance. Comparing the symptoms reported by patients with sensitization diagnosed by SPT, a correlation was only found for spring and summer bloomers with an odds ratio of 1.5 and 2.1, respectively. The most prevalent symptom in the study cohort was rhinitis, followed by others such as asthma, sense of smell and atopic dermatitis. Conclusions: SPT seems to be more sensitive than specific IgE for detection of sensitization. Patients’ symptoms as well as the timing of symptoms, especially for perennial allergies, are not always very pronounced.

Prevalence, comorbidities, diagnosis, and treatment of nonallergic rhinitis: real-world comparison with allergic rhinitis

Rhinitis is among the most common respiratory diseases in children. Nonallergic rhinitis, which involves nasal symptoms without evidence of systemic allergic inflammation or infection, is a heterogeneous entity with diverse manifestations and intensities. Nonallergic rhinitis accounts for 16%-89% of the chronic rhinitis cases, affecting 1%-50% (median 10%) of the total pediatric population. The clinical course of nonallergic rhinitis is generally rather mild and less likely to be associated with allergic comorbidities than allergic rhinitis. Here, we aimed to estimate the rate of coexisting comorbidities of nonallergic rhinitis. Nonallergic rhinitis is more prevalent during the first 2 years of life; however, its underestimation for children with atopic tendencies is likely due to low positive rates of specific allergic tests during early childhood. Local allergic rhinitis is a recently noted phenotype with rates similar to those in adults (median, 44%; range, 4%-67%), among patients previously diagnosed with nonallergic rhinitis. Idiopathic rhinitis, a subtype of nonallergic rhinitis, has been poorly studied in children, and its rates are known to be lower than those in adults. The prevalence of nonallergic rhinitis with eosinophilia syndrome is even lower. A correlation between nonallergic rhinitis and pollution has been suggested owing to the recent increase in nonallergic rhinitis rates in highly developing regions such as some Asian countries, but many aspects remain unknown. Conventional treatments include antihistamines, intranasal corticosteroids, and recent treatments include combination of intranasal corticosteroids with azelastin or decongestants. Here we review the prevalence, diagnosis, comorbidities, and treatment recommendations for nonallergic rhinitis versus allergic rhinitis in children.

Developing nomograms for identifying allergic rhinitis among chronic rhinitis: A real-world study

Background

It is difficult to discriminate allergic rhinitis (AR) and nonallergic rhinitis (NAR) in clinical practice due to the similar clinical manifestations. The study was to assess both the demographical and clinical features of AR and NAR in the real-world data of outpatients in China.

Methods

It was a cross-sectional real-world study. AR and NAR were defined based on both subjective symptoms and objective specific serum IgE test. General demographic characteristics as well as clinical information were documented. Patients were further classified according the seasons of initial visiting hospital (during pollen seasons or not). A scoring system presented as nomograms for presence of AR was performed.

Results

In the pollen season group, age distribution, the duration of rhinitis, comorbidity of asthma, food allergies, and score of coughing were found significantly associated with AR. Additionally, in the non-pollen season group, we found that ethnicity, age distributions, duration of rhinitis, comorbidity of asthma, food allergies, and family history of allergy, together with scores of gritty eyes were associated factors of AR. Based on multivariate logistic model, we built two nomograms which included previously identified significant risk factors that could be acquired easily during clinical practice with predictive variables to assess their roles in predicting the risk of AR among outpatients with rhinitis.

Conclusions

The characteristics of patients with different phenotypes of chronic rhinitis are distinctive in different seasons and the developed nomogram in this study might be beneficial for clinical practice.

Food allergy, airborne allergies, and allergic sensitisation among adolescents living in two disparate socioeconomic regions in Ecuador: A cross-sectional study

Background

Allergic diseases are under-investigated and overlooked health conditions in developing countries. We measured the prevalence of food allergy (FA), airborne allergic disease, and allergic sensitisation among adolescents living in 2 socio-demographically disparate regions in Ecuador. We investigated which risk factors are associated with these conditions.

Methods

A cross-sectional study involved 1338 students (mean age: 13 ± 0.9 years old) living in Cuenca (n = 876) and Santa Isabel (n = 462). History of allergic symptoms (noted by parents or doctor) to food, house dust mites (HDM), pollen, and pets were recorded. Sociodemographic characteristics, environmental exposures, and parental history of allergic disorders data were collected. Sensitisation to 19 food and 20 aeroallergens was measured by skin-prick testing (SPT). FA and airborne allergic diseases (to HDM, pollen, cat, or dog) were defined as a report of allergic symptoms noted by doctor, together with a positive SPT (wheal size ≥3 mm). Logistic regression models were used to identify environmental and parental factors associated with allergic conditions.

Results

FA was prevalent among 0.4% (95% CI 0.2%–0.9%), and food sensitisation among 19.1% of the adolescents. Shrimp was the most frequent food linked with FA and food sensitisation. Risk factors associated with FA could not be evaluated due to the low prevalence. Food sensitisation was higher among adolescents exposed to family smoking (OR 1.63, 95% CI 1.14–2.34, p = 0.008) and those with parental history of allergic disorders (OR 1.68, 95% CI 1.13–2.49, p = 0.01), but less common among adolescents owning dogs (OR 0.59, 95% CI 0.41–0.84, p = 0.003).

Airborne allergic diseases were prevalent amongst 12.0% of the adolescents (95% CI: 10.4–13.9, n = 1321), with HDM as the primary allergen (11.2%). Airborne allergic diseases were less common among adolescents with more siblings (OR 0.79, 95% CI 0.65–0.96, p = 0.02) and those who lived with farm animals in the first year of life (OR 0.47, 95% CI 0.23–0.95, p = 0.04), but, most common among adolescents with a smoking family (OR 1.67, 95% CI 1.04–2.70, p = 0.03) and with a parental history of allergic disorders (OR self-perceived: 2.62, 95% CI 1.46–4.71, p = 0.001; OR diagnosed by a doctor: 4.07, 95% CI 2.44–6.80, p < 0.001).

Conclusions

FA and airborne allergies are less prevalent in Ecuador than in developed regions; there is a great dissociation between the prevalence of allergic disease and allergic sensitisation. Shrimp and HDM were the most prevalent allergens. Risk factors identified in this study to be related to allergic diseases should be considered by physicians, health practitioners, and epidemiologists in Ecuador.

Heterogeneity of Adult Rhinitis for Multimorbidity and Age at Onset among Non-Sensitized Rhinitis and Mono-/Poly-Sensitized Rhinitis: A Retrospective Cross-Sectional Study

BACKGROUND

Recent studies have proposed that clinical and immunological differences exist between mono- and poly-sensitized subjects with allergic diseases, and poly-sensitization was related to multimorbidity of allergic diseases among children and adolescents.

OBJECTIVE

We compared the clinical characteristics and multimorbidity of allergic diseases between adult rhinitis patients mono- and poly-sensitized to common aeroallergens using a retrospective cross-sectional study for tertiary care subjects.

METHODS

The medical records of 1,615 patients who were clinically diagnosed with rhinitis by an otolaryngologist and evaluated with skin prick tests were reviewed. The severity of the rhinitis symptoms, comorbidities (asthma, conjunctivitis, and eczema), family history of allergic diseases, and the results of skin prick tests were evaluated.

RESULTS

There were 392 patients with mono-sensitized rhinitis (mono-sR), 325 with poly-sensitized rhinitis (poly-sR), and 898 with non-sensitized rhinitis (non-sR). Comorbid conjunctivitis and eczema were most common in poly-sR, followed by mono-sR, and least common in non-sR patients. The age at onset of rhinitis was clearly different between adult patients with non-sR and mono-/poly-sR, but not between patients with mono-sR and poly-sR. However, the age at onset of rhinitis was much younger in non-sR and mono-sR patients with conjunctivitis or eczema than those without such comorbidities.

CONCLUSION

Thefrequency of comorbid conjunctivitis and eczema in adult rhinitis patients differed by a quantitative trait of immunoglobulin E sensitization. Depending on the multimorbidity of allergic diseases, onset age of rhinitis seems to be different in adult rhinitis patients.

Intranasal corticosteroids for non-allergic rhinitis

BACKGROUND

Non-allergic rhinitis is defined as dysfunction and non-infectious inflammation of the nasal mucosa that is caused by provoking agents other than allergens or microbes. It is common, with an estimated prevalence of around 10% to 20%. Patients experience symptoms of nasal obstruction, anterior rhinorrhoea/post-nasal drip and sneezing. Several subgroups of non-allergic rhinitis can be distinguished, depending on the trigger responsible for symptoms; these include occupation, cigarette smoke, hormones, medication, food and age. On a cellular molecular level different disease mechanisms can also be identified. People with non-allergic rhinitis often lack an effective treatment as a result of poor understanding and lack of recognition of the underlying disease mechanism. Intranasal corticosteroids are one of the most common types of medication prescribed in patients with rhinitis or rhinosinusitis symptoms, including those with non-allergic rhinitis. However, it is unclear whether intranasal corticosteroids are truly effective in these patients.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effects of intranasal corticosteroids in the management of non-allergic rhinitis.

SEARCH METHODS

The Cochrane ENT Information Specialist searched the Cochrane ENT Register; Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL 2019, Issue 7); PubMed; Ovid Embase; CINAHL; Web of Science; ClinicalTrials.gov; ICTRP and additional sources for published and unpublished trials. The date of the search was 1 July 2019.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) comparing intranasal corticosteroids, delivered by any means and in any volume, with (a) placebo/no intervention or (b) other active treatments in adults and children (aged ≥ 12 years).

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We used the standard methodological procedures expected by Cochrane. The primary outcomes were patient-reported disease severity and a significant adverse effect - epistaxis. Secondary outcomes were (disease-specific) health-related quality of life, objective measurements of airflow and other adverse events. We used GRADE to assess the certainty of the evidence for each outcome.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 34 studies (4452 participants); however, only 13 studies provided data for our main comparison, intranasal corticosteroids versus placebo. The participants were mainly defined as patients with perennial rhinitis symptoms and negative allergy tests. No distinction between different pheno- and endotypes could be made, although a few studies only included a specific phenotype such as pregnancy rhinitis, vasomotor rhinitis, rhinitis medicamentosa or senile rhinitis. Most studies were conducted in a secondary or tertiary healthcare setting. No studies reported outcomes beyond three months follow-up. Intranasal corticosteroid dosage in the review ranged from 50 µg to 2000 µg daily. Intranasal corticosteroids versus placebo Thirteen studies (2045 participants) provided data for this comparison. These studies used different scoring systems for patient-reported disease severity, so we pooled the data in each analysis using the standardised mean difference (SMD). Intranasal corticosteroid treatment may improve patient-reported disease severity as measured by total nasal symptom score compared with placebo at up to four weeks (SMD -0.74, 95% confidence interval (CI) -1.15 to -0.33; 4 studies; 131 participants; I2 = 22%) (low-certainty evidence). However, between four weeks and three months the evidence is very uncertain (SMD -0.24, 95% CI -0.67 to 0.20; 3 studies; 85 participants; I2 = 0%) (very low-certainty evidence). Intranasal corticosteroid treatment may slightly improve patient-reported disease severity as measured by total nasal symptom score change from baseline when compared with placebo at up to four weeks (SMD -0.15, 95% CI -0.25 to -0.05; 4 studies; 1465 participants; I2 = 35%) (low-certainty evidence). All four studies evaluating the risk of epistaxis showed that there is probably a higher risk in the intranasal corticosteroids group (65 per 1000) compared to placebo (31 per 1000) (risk ratio (RR) 2.10, 95% CI 1.24 to 3.57; 4 studies; 1174 participants; I2 = 0%) (moderate-certainty evidence). The absolute risk difference (RD) was 0.04 with a number needed to treat for an additional harmful outcome (NNTH) of 25 (95% CI 16.7 to 100). Only one study reported numerical data for quality of life. It did report a higher quality of life score in the intranasal corticosteroids group (152.3 versus 145.6; SF-12v2 range 0 to 800); however, this disappeared at longer-term follow-up (148.4 versus 145.6) (low-certainty evidence). Only two studies provided data for the outcome objective measurements of airflow. These data could not be pooled because they used different methods of outcome measurement. Neither found a significant difference between the intranasal corticosteroids and placebo group (rhinomanometry SMD -0.46, 95% CI -1.06 to 0.14; 44 participants; peak expiratory flow rate SMD 0.78, 95% CI -0.47 to 2.03; 11 participants) (very low-certainty evidence). Intranasal corticosteroids probably resulted in little or no difference in the risk of other adverse events compared to placebo (RR 0.99, 95% CI 0.87 to 1.12; 3 studies; 1130 participants; I2 = 0%) (moderate-certainty evidence). Intranasal corticosteroids versus other treatments Only one or a few studies assessed each of the other comparisons (intranasal corticosteroids versus saline irrigation, intranasal antihistamine, capsaicin, cromoglycate sodium, ipratropium bromide, intranasal corticosteroids combined with intranasal antihistamine, intranasal corticosteroids combined with intranasal antihistamine and intranasal corticosteroids with saline compared to saline alone). It is therefore uncertain whether there are differences between intranasal corticosteroids and other active treatments for any of the outcomes reported.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Overall, the certainty of the evidence for most outcomes in this review was low or very low. It is unclear whether intranasal corticosteroids reduce patient-reported disease severity in non-allergic rhinitis patients compared with placebo when measured at up to three months. However, intranasal corticosteroids probably have a higher risk of the adverse effect epistaxis. There are very few studies comparing intranasal corticosteroids to other treatment modalities making it difficult to draw conclusions.

Endotypes of chronic rhinitis: A cluster analysis study

BACKGROUND

Chronic rhinitis (CR) is currently regarded as a syndrome, which presents as several endotypes. The aim of this study was to identify the CR endotype clusters and investigate the inflammatory patterns associated with the different endotypes.

METHODS

A total of 259 CR patients and 20 control subjects were enrolled in this prospective study. Twelve clinical variables were analyzed using cluster analysis and five inflammatory variables were measured to investigate the inflammatory patterns associated with the different clusters.

RESULTS

Six endotype clusters of CR were defined in the Chinese CR patients. Patients in cluster 1 (38.6%) were diagnosed as allergic rhinitis (AR) without asthma, and in cluster 2 (13.5%) as AR with asthma, with all demonstrating positive results for local eosinophils and high levels of local and serum IgE. Similarly, patients in cluster 3 (18.6%) were diagnosed as nonallergic rhinitis with eosinophilia syndrome (NARES) without asthma and in cluster 5 (5.0%) as NARES with asthma, with all demonstrating positive results for local eosinophils, and negative results for both local and serum IgE. Patients in cluster 4 (4.6%) were diagnosed as local allergic rhinitis and showed positive results for local eosinophils and local IgE, but negative results for serum IgE, whereas patients in cluster 6 (19.7%) were diagnosed as idiopathic rhinitis because of high symptoms scores, but negative findings for local eosinophils, local IgE, and serum IgE.

CONCLUSIONS

Chinese CR patients may be clustered into six endotypes with different inflammatory patterns, which may help in delivering individualized treatment.

Disentangling the heterogeneity of allergic respiratory diseases by latent class analysis reveals novel phenotypes

BACKGROUND

Refined phenotyping of allergic diseases may unravel novel phenotypes. Conjunctivitis as an independent disorder has never been approached.

AIM

To identify distinct classes of allergic respiratory diseases using latent class analysis (LCA) and distinguish each class using classification and regression tree (CART) analysis.

METHODS

Seven hundred and twenty-eight adults from the Portuguese general population study ICAR had a structured medical interview combined with blood collection, skin prick tests, spirometry with bronchodilation, and exhaled nitric oxide. LCA was applied to 19 variables. The CART algorithm selected the most likely variables distinguishing LCA-classes.

RESULTS

A six-class model was obtained. Class 1 (25%): nonallergic participants without bronchial or ocular symptoms. Classes 2 (22%) and 3 (11%): nasal and ocular (low levels) symptoms without nasal impairment, monosensitized (Class 2) or polysensitized (Class 3). Class 4 (13%): polysensitized participants with high levels of nasal and ocular symptoms, and nasal impairment. Classes 5 (16%) and 6 (14%): high level of nasal, bronchial and ocular symptoms with nasal impairment (non-allergic or polysensitized, respectively). Participants in classes 5 and 6 had more bronchial exacerbations and unscheduled medical visits (P < 0.001). Ocular symptoms were significantly higher in classes with nasal impairment, compared to those without impairment (P < 0.001) or no nasal symptom (P < 0.001). CART highlighted ocular symptoms as the most relevant variable in distinguishing LCA-classes.

CONCLUSION

Novel severe phenotypes of participants with co-occurrence of ocular, nasal and bronchial symptoms, and exacerbation-prone were identified. The tree algorithm showed the importance of the ocular symptoms in the expression of allergic diseases phenotypes.

Screening instrument to identify skin prick test-negative patients with asthma and/or rhinitis

INTRODUCTION

To the best of our knowledge, there is no prediction tool for determining respiratory allergy in patients with asthma and/or rhinitis.

OBJECTIVES

As such, this study aimed to develop an instrument for identifying skin prick test (SPT)-negative patients with asthma and/or rhinitis.

METHODS

This cross-sectional study screened 510 consecutive patients diagnosed with asthma and/or rhinitis between November 2009 and May 2011 in Ankara, Turkey. A structured questionnaire was the screening tool that was administered during the initial visit by the treating specialist and compared with a SPT result. All 15 variables were analysed using the logistic regression model to obtain β values (a score) for each variable. Each variable had a score, and scores were summed up to obtain final score for each patient.

RESULTS

The study included 363 patients, of which 165 (45.5%) were SPT positive. The final model included 13 variables. The lowest and highest scores were -21 and 26. A total score of 5.5 had sensitivity of 63% and specificity of 80%. The area under the receiver operating characteristic curve was 0.78. The histogram of the total scores for the study population was bimodal.

CONCLUSIONS

We designed a highly specific 13-item instrument for identifying SPT-negative patients. It may be used in middle income countries where allergy testing is expensive, not reimbursed or few allergy clinics are available. We think that our idea is interesting, that needs further research.

Allergic asthma is associated with increased risk of infections requiring antibiotics

BACKGROUND

Viral infection and allergy have been identified as major risk factors for exacerbation in asthma, especially in the presence of both. However, whether patients with allergic asthma are more susceptible to respiratory infections requiring antibiotics remains unknown.

OBJECTIVE

To investigate allergy as a risk factor for respiratory infections requiring antibiotics based on register data from a nationwide population of patients with asthma.

METHODS

A register-based prospective follow-up study was performed using the Danish prescription database. In the inclusion period from 2010 through 2011, we identified patients with allergic asthma 18 to 44 years old. Patients were investigated during the follow-up period from 2012 through 2013, depending on their prescription drug use of antiallergic medication and antibiotics. Odds ratios were adjusted for age, sex, asthma severity, education, and urban vs rural residence.

RESULTS

In a nationwide population we identified 60,415 patients with asthma. Based on prescriptions fillings for antiallergic medication, patients were subdivided into (1) nonallergic asthma (n = 35,334, 51.5%) and (2) allergic asthma (n = 25,081, 48.5%). Allergic asthma was associated with an increased risk of filling at least 2 antibiotic prescriptions per year compared with nonallergic asthma (odds ratio 1.28, 95% confidence interval 1.24-1.33, P < .0001). Interestingly, a subgroup analysis showed a protective effect of immunotherapy against the risk of requiring antibiotics (odds ratio 0.76, 95% confidence interval 0.66-0.87, P = .0001).

CONCLUSION

Patients with allergic asthma have an increased risk of being prescribed antibiotics for respiratory infections compared with those with nonallergic asthma. Treatment with allergen immunotherapy appears to have a protective effect against this risk.

Basophils from allergic rhinitis patients show allergen-specific upregulation of thymic stromal lymphopoietin receptor

BACKGROUND

An allergic rhinitis (AR) diagnosis is based on typical nasal symptoms and allergen sensitization testing. However, it is sometimes difficult to distinguish AR from non-AR, and it is especially difficult to identify the causal allergen for immunotherapy of patients with AR.

OBJECTIVE

To identify differences among patients with AR, subjects with asymptomatic sensitization (AS), and subjects without sensitization (NS) that could facilitate the diagnosis of AR.

METHODS

We used RNA sequencing to examine differential gene expression in unstimulated and allergen-stimulated peripheral basophils from participants with NS, AS, and AR. We selected genes that were upregulated after allergen stimulation and showed differences in expression in patients with AR compared with subjects with AS and NS. Basophil surface expression of 1 gene product was examined by flow cytometry. The usefulness of gene expression in the diagnosis of AR was examined with receiver operating characteristic curves.

RESULTS

Expression of cytokine receptor-like factor 2 and its product, thymic stromal lymphopoietin receptor (TSLPR), was significantly increased in basophils of patients with AR after allergen stimulation. A significantly larger percentage of TSLPR-positive cells was observed after allergen-specific stimulation of basophils from patients with AR compared with subjects with AS. Basophil TSLPR expression was as good as or better than CD203c expression in discriminating between patients with AR and subjects with AS, as judged by receiver operating characteristic curves.

CONCLUSION

Our data suggest that TSLPR expression on basophils was specifically upregulated by allergen stimulation and might be useful for the identification of the causative allergen in patients with AR.

Non-atopic rhinitis at age 6 is associated with subsequent development of asthma

BACKGROUND

It has been postulated that the association between allergic rhinitis and asthma is attributable to the progressive clinical expression of respiratory inflammation during childhood. The role of non-allergic rhinitis in early life in relation to subsequent asthma has not been extensively explored.

OBJECTIVE

We sought to determine whether rhinitis in early life was associated with risk of asthma development into adulthood, and whether this relationship is independent of allergic sensitization.

METHODS

Participants were identified from the Tucson Children's Respiratory Study, a non-selected birth cohort. Allergy skin prick testing was performed at age 6 years using house dust mix, Bermuda, mesquite, olive, mulberry, careless weed, and Alternaria aeroallergens. Atopy was defined as ≥1 positive tests. Physician-diagnosed active asthma from age 6 to 32 and physician-diagnosed rhinitis at age 6 were determined by questionnaire. Participants with asthma or active wheezing at age 6 were excluded from analyses. Risk estimates were obtained with Cox regression.

RESULTS

There were 521 participants who met inclusion criteria. The hazard ratio for subsequently acquiring a diagnosis of asthma between the ages of 8 and 32 for those with non-atopic rhinitis was 2.1 (95% CI: 1.2, 3.4, P = 0.005), compared with the non-atopic no rhinitis group, after adjusting for sex, ethnicity, maternal asthma, maternal education and smoking, and history of 4+ colds per year at age 6. Among the atopic participants, both the active and no rhinitis groups were more likely to develop and have asthma through age 32. The relation between non-atopic rhinitis and asthma was independent of total serum IgE levels at age 6.

CONCLUSION AND CLINICAL RELEVANCE

Childhood rhinitis, even in the absence of atopy, confers significant risk for asthma development through adulthood. These findings underscore the importance of non-allergic mechanisms in the development of asthma.

Quality of life is significantly impaired in nonallergic rhinitis patients

BACKGROUND

In contrast to the well-known significant impairment of quality of life (QoL) in allergic rhinitis (AR), the degree of impairment in QoL in nonallergic rhinitis (NAR) remained unknown for a long time, due to a lack of a validated questionnaire to assess QoL in the NAR patient group. In this study, a validation of the mini-RQLQ questionnaire in NAR patients was performed, followed by an assessment of QoL in NAR patients compared to AR and healthy controls. Secondly, use of medication and treatment satisfaction in AR and NAR was assessed.

METHODS

The study was an observational cohort study in 287 AR and 160 NAR patients. Patients with symptoms of rhinitis were recruited from a tertiary care outpatient clinic of the Otorhinolaryngology Department. Allergic rhinitis (AR) was defined as one or more positive results on skin prick testing and clinically relevant symptoms of rhinitis related to their sensitization. Nonallergic rhinitis (NAR) was defined as clinically relevant symptoms of rhinitis but without positive results on skin prick testing. The mini-RQLQ was successfully validated in this study for NAR patients.

RESULTS

Quality of life (QoL) in NAR patients was equally-and for some aspects even more-impaired compared to AR. More than half of both AR and NAR patients were unsatisfied with treatment.

CONCLUSION

These results demonstrate a significant impairment in both AR and NAR patients in their QoL combined with a low treatment satisfaction, emphasizing the need for adequate treatment, especially in the NAR patient group.

Allergic and Non-Allergic Rhinitis Are Common in Obstructive Sleep Apnea but Not Associated With Disease Severity

STUDY OBJECTIVES

Several studies have suggested that rhinitis contributes to the pathogenesis of obstructive sleep apnea (OSA). We aimed to investigate the prevalence and influence of allergic rhinitis (AR) and non-allergic rhinitis (NAR) on severity of OSA.

METHODS

Two hundred forty patients with OSA confirmed by standardized polysomnography were assessed for presence of AR and NAR, using validated questionnaires and skin prick tests. Data comparison was carried out by using chi-square test, analysis of variance, and least significant difference test. Associations between severity of OSA and rhinitis, age, sex, and body mass index were assessed with ordinal logistic regression analysis.

RESULTS

The prevalence of AR and NAR among patients with OSA was 27.1% and 28.7%, respectively, with no significant differences in the severity of rhinitis. Ordinal logistic regression analysis showed AR and NAR were not the risk factors for severity of OSA. There were significant differences of polysomnography parameters in sleep efficiency (79.7 ± 2.0 versus 85.2 ± 1.4 between AR and NAR; 79.7 ± 2.0 versus 87.2 ± 1.4 between AR and no-rhinitis) and arousal index (36.8 ± 4.1 versus 24.7 ± 3.5 between AR and no-rhinitis). Patients with NAR had lower average arterial oxygen saturation (91.9 ± 0.6 versus 94.0 ± 0.6) and minimal arterial oxygen saturation (70.6 ± 1.7 versus 77.3 ± 1.8), compared with subjects categorized as no-rhinitis.

CONCLUSIONS

This study suggests that despite a comparatively high prevalence in patients with OSA, the presence or severity of AR or NAR does not influence the severity of OSA; however, rhinitis may significantly disturb sleep in patients with OSA.

Demographics and clinical features predictive of allergic versus non-allergic rhinitis in children aged 6-18 years: A single-center experience of 1535 patients

BACKGROUND

Chronic rhinitis (CR) is one of the most common causes accounting for lost-school days, absenteeism and resource utilization in pediatric patients. Distinction between common causes of CR, allergic (AR)and non-allergic rhinitis (NAR), based upon clinical features is critical, especially in primary care settings or facilities with lack of allergen sensitivity testing, as management strategies differ considerably. The current study elucidates clinical factors, particularly facial features associated with AR and NAR using a large cohort.

METHODS

In a retrospective cohort analysis of pediatric patients aged 6-18 years, we assessed patient demographics, clinical symptoms, and signs associated with allergic rhinitis using multivariable regression techniques.

RESULTS

Overall, 1490 patients (mean age: 10.11 ± 3.31 years; 48% female; 69% AR and 31% NAR) were included in the study. In multivariable regression analysis, major clinical features associated with AR were: sneezing (OR: 3.53; 95% CI: 2.35-5.32; p < 0.001), rhinorrhea (OR: 1.77; 95% CI: 1.18-2.66; p = 0.006), nasal itching (OR: 17.88; 95% CI: 11.92-26.83; p < 0.001), horizontal nasal crease (OR: 5.09; 95% CI: 1.29-20.01; p = 0.020) and conjunctivitis (OR: 4.66; 95% CI: 3.28-6.62; p < 0.001). On the contrary, we noted presence of Dennie-Morgan fold (OR: 1.67; 95% CI: 1.11-2.56; p = 0.014), moderate to severe persistent or intermittent symptoms to be likely associated with NAR than AR.

CONCLUSION

In pediatric patients presenting with symptoms of rhinitis, facial hallmarks serve as an adjunct to sensitivity testing in establishing a diagnosis as well as differentiating between NAR from AR, albeit individualized upon patient history and clinical features.

Non-allergic rhinitis in children: Epidemiological aspects, pathological features, diagnostic methodology and clinical management

Chronic rhinitis is a very common disease, as the prevalence in the general population resulted to be 40%. Allergic rhinitis has been considered to be the most frequent form of chronic rhinitis, as non-allergic rhinitis has been estimated to account for 25%. However, several evidences suggested that non-allergic rhinitis have been underrated, especially in children. In pediatrics, the diagnostic definition of non-allergic rhinitis has been often limited to the exclusion of an allergic sensitization. Actually, local allergic rhinitis has been often misdiagnosed as well as mixed rhinitis has not been recognized in most cases. Nasal cytology is a diagnostic procedure being suitable for routine clinical practice with children and could be a very useful tool to characterize and diagnose non-allergic rhinitis, providing important clues for epidemiological analysis and clinical management.

The proportion of local allergic rhinitis to Dermatophagoides pteronyssinus in children

BACKGROUND

Local allergic rhinitis (LAR) is diagnosed by the positive response to nasal allergen provocation test (NAPT) to aeroallergen and/or local synthesis of specific IgE (sIgE). This entity is found in half of the adults with non-allergic rhinitis (NAR). In children, very few data of the prevalence and characteristics of LAR were reported.

METHODS

Children 8-18 years with NAR were recruited. A NAPT with Dermatophagoides pteronyssinus extract (NAPT-Dp) at 200, 600, and 2000 AU/ml, respectively, at 15-min interval was performed. The immediate response was assessed using the clinical symptom score, peak nasal inspiratory flow (PNIF), and acoustic rhinometry (ARM). The nasal tryptase and sIgE-Dp were measured at baseline and 15 min and 1 h after a positive NAPT-Dp. Two allergic rhinitis (AR) patients were used as positive controls.

RESULTS

Fifty-four NAR children (61.1% boys) with the mean ± SD age of 11.1 ± 2.1 years were enrolled. The median duration of disease was 6.3 years. The most frequent comorbidity was asthma (38.9%). Eighty-seven percent of patients had mild persistent severity. NAPT-Dp was positive in 2/54 (3.7%) of NAR children who had increased symptom score and decreased minimal cross-sectional area (MCA) on ARM as well as PNIF. However, there was no change in the nasal tryptase and sIgE-Dp. The control AR patients had positive NAPT-Dp and increased nasal tryptase at 15 min without the change of sIgE-Dp.

CONCLUSION

LAR is an uncommon condition in children. Further investigation in a large population of children with NAR is needed.

UK prescribing practices as proxy markers of unmet need in allergic rhinitis: a retrospective observational study

Little data on UK prescribing patterns and treatment effectiveness for allergic rhinitis (AR) are available. We quantified unmet pharmacologic needs in AR by assessing AR treatment effectiveness based on the prescribing behaviour of UK general practitioners (GP) during two consecutive pollen seasons (2009 and 2010). We conducted a retrospective observational study with the data from the Optimum Patient Care Research Database. We assessed diagnoses and prescription data for patients with a recorded diagnosis of rhinitis who took rhinitis medication during the study period. We assessed the data from 25,069 patients in 2009 and 22,381 patients in 2010. Monotherapy was the initial prescription of the season for 67% of patients with seasonal AR (SAR) and 77% of patients with nonseasonal upper airways disease (NSUAD), for both years. Initial oral antihistamine (OAH) or intranasal corticosteroid (INS) monotherapy proved insufficient for >20% of SAR and >37% of NSUAD patients. Multiple therapy was the initial prescription for 33% of SAR and 23% of NSUAD in both years, rising to 45% and >50% by season end, respectively. For NSUAD, dual-therapy prescriptions doubled and triple-therapy prescriptions almost tripled during both seasons. Many patients revisited their GP regardless of initial prescription. Initial OAH or INS monotherapy provides insufficient symptom control for many AR patients. GPs often prescribe multiple therapies at the start of the season, with co-prescription becoming more common as the season progresses. However, patients prescribed multiple therapies frequently revisit their GP, presumably to adjust treatment. These data suggest the need for more effective AR treatment and management strategies.

Extranasal symptoms of allergic rhinitis are difficult to treat and affect quality of life

BACKGROUND

Total nasal symptom score is widely used to evaluate the severity of allergic rhinitis, but the clinical significance of extranasal symptoms is largely unknown. We wished to analyze the presenting symptoms in allergic rhinitis, as well as their relationship with quality of life (QoL) and therapeutic outcomes.

METHODS

Presenting symptoms and QoL were assessed using the Optum™ SF-12v2(®) Health Survey in 260 patients with allergic rhinitis. Clinical response at 3 months after treatment was measured.

RESULTS

Ten most common symptoms presenting with at least moderate severity in allergic rhinitis were: blocked nose (82.7%), rhinorrhea (75.0%), sneeze (70.9%), itchy nose (68.5%), fatigue (63.6%), mouth breathing (61.1%), daytime somnolence (52.7%), postnasal drip (49.1%), itchy eyes (47.3%), and dry mouth (46.3%). Severity of sneeze was correlated with physical component summary (PCS) whereas postnasal drip and daytime somnolence were correlated with mental component summary (MCS). Severity of dry mouth was correlated with PCS and MCS. The symptoms with the highest severity scores after treatment were blocked nose, postnasal drip, fatigue, and dry mouth, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

Extranasal symptom scores correlated well with physical health and mental health in allergic rhinitis patients. Assessment of extranasal symptoms should be included to evaluate disease severity and assess therapeutic outcomes. Clinical trial NCT02000648, http://www.clinicaltrials.gov.

Rhinitis Subtypes, Endotypes, and Definitions

Rhinitis is often seen as posing a small burden. However, rhinitis is a complex disease that is underpinned by a plethora of different mechanisms and causes. Rhinitis is frequently associated with other comorbid conditions but, by itself, is a source of considerable morbidity for patients and creates a significant financial burden on health systems worldwide. This article approaches this condition from both a phenotypic and mechanistic standpoint, focusing on the complexity of characterizing these subtypes. Developing a clearer demarcation of the currently obscure rhinitis phenotypes and endotypes will substantially improve their future prevention and treatment.

The importance of mold sensitivity in nonallergic rhinitis patients

BACKGROUND

In recent studies, local specific immunoglobulin E (sIgE) production against allergens in nasal mucosa and a positive response to a nasal allergen provocation test (NAPT) have been demonstrated in some patients initially diagnosed as nonallergic rhinitis (NAR) or idiopathic rhinitis (IR). The aim of this study was to evaluate the presence of local allergic rhinitis (LAR) in patients who experience rhinitis symptoms in indoor and outdoor moldy conditions and to investigate the role of the NAPT in diagnosis.

METHODS

A total of 40 NAR patients with a history of persistent rhinitis and who had negative skin-prick tests (SPTs) and serum sIgE levels to common aeroallergens, as well as 20 healthy subjects were included in the study. NAPTs were performed with Aspergillus fumigatus (group 1) or a mixture of Alternaria alternata and Cladosporium herbarum extracts (group 2).

RESULTS

In patient nasal lavage fluids, tryptase and mold sIgE levels were not significantly different from the control group. NAPT with Aspergillus fumigatus was positive in 8 of 12 NAR patients (66.6%) in group 1 and NAPT with the mixture of extracts was positive in 9 of 13 NAR patients (69.2%) in group 2.

CONCLUSION

This study suggests that LAR may exist in a significant number of the persistent rhinitis patients who were previously considered as NAR based on negative SPTs or serum sIgE tests. To the best of our knowledge, this is the first study evaluating a nasal local allergic response to both indoor and outdoor molds.

[Local allergic rhinitis to Alternaria alternata : Evidence for local IgE production exclusively in the nasal mucosa]

In a subgroup of patients with symptoms of allergic rhinitis (AR), no systemic sensitization can be detected in skin tests or serum. These patients are considered to be afflicted with so-called "local allergic rhinitis" (LAR) with IgE-production exclusively at the site of the nasal mucosa. Patients without any positive allergy test results but seasonal (intermittent) or perennial (persistent) allergic symptoms were often misdiagnosed as having "non-allergic rhinitis" (NAR) in the past.However, there is evidence for a specific IgE-production in the nasal mucosa in these patients without systemic sensitization. The diagnosis of LAR is confirmed by clinical symptoms, the detection of specific IgE production in the nasal mucosa and/or nasal provocation tests.We report on two cases of LAR to Alternaria alternata with symptoms of persistent allergic rhinitis that have been diagnosed by positive allergenspecific nasal challenge tests and specific IgE determinations in nasal secretions.According to an actual literature research, this is the second report published on LAR caused by Alternaria alternata.

The gender, age and risk factor distribution differs in self-reported allergic and non-allergic rhinitis: a cross-sectional population-based study

Background

Few population-based studies have assessed the prevalence and the risk factors of non-allergic rhinitis (NAR) in comparison to allergic rhinitis (AR). Moreover, epidemiologic data on rhinitis in the elderly subjects and in southern Europe are scarce.

Objective

This study aimed at estimating the prevalence and at comparing the risk factor distribution of AR and NAR in a general population sample aged 20–84 years in Italy.

Methods

A questionnaire on respiratory symptoms and risk factors was administered to random samples of the Italian population aged 20–44 (n = 10,494) 45–64 (n = 2167) and 65–84 (n = 1030) in the frame of the Gene Environment Interactions in Respiratory Diseases (GEIRD) study. Current AR and NAR were defined according to the self-reported presence of nasal allergies or of nasal symptoms without a cold or the flu.

Results

NAR showed a significant descending pattern in females from 12.0 % (95 % CI 11.1, 13.1) in the 20–44 year age class, to 7.5 % (5.4, 10.3) in the 65–84 year age class (p = 0.0009), and a roughly stable pattern in males, from 10.2 % (9.3, 11.2) to 11.1 % (8.4, 13.9) (p = 0.5261). AR decreased from 26.6 % (25.7, 27.6) in 20–44 years age class to 15.6 % (13.3, 18.0) in the 65–84 years age class (p < 0.0001), without gender difference. Subjects living near industrial plants and ex- and current smokers had a higher risk of NAR. Current smokers had a lower risk and subjects living in a Mediterranean climate a higher risk of AR.

Conclusion

AR and NAR are fairly distinct conditions, as they have a different age, gender and risk factor distribution.

Characterization of Rhinitis According to the Asthma Status in Adults Using an Unsupervised Approach in the EGEA Study

Background

The classification of rhinitis in adults is missing in epidemiological studies.

Objective

To identify phenotypes of adult rhinitis using an unsupervised approach (data-driven) compared with a classical hypothesis-driven approach.

Methods

983 adults of the French Epidemiological Study on the Genetics and Environment of Asthma (EGEA) were studied. Self-reported symptoms related to rhinitis such as nasal symptoms, hay fever, sinusitis, conjunctivitis, and sensitivities to different triggers (dust, animals, hay/flowers, cold air…) were used. Allergic sensitization was defined by at least one positive skin prick test to 12 aeroallergens. Mixture model was used to cluster participants, independently in those without (Asthma-, n = 582) and with asthma (Asthma+, n = 401).

Results

Three clusters were identified in both groups: 1) Cluster A (55% in Asthma-, and 22% in Asthma+) mainly characterized by the absence of nasal symptoms, 2) Cluster B (23% in Asthma-, 36% in Asthma+) mainly characterized by nasal symptoms all over the year, sinusitis and a low prevalence of positive skin prick tests, and 3) Cluster C (22% in Asthma-, 42% in Asthma+) mainly characterized by a peak of nasal symptoms during spring, a high prevalence of positive skin prick tests and a high report of hay fever, allergic rhinitis and conjunctivitis. The highest rate of polysensitization (80%) was found in participants with comorbid asthma and allergic rhinitis.

Conclusion

This cluster analysis highlighted three clusters of rhinitis with similar characteristics than those known by clinicians but differing according to allergic sensitization, and this whatever the asthma status. These clusters could be easily rebuilt using a small number of variables.

Capsaicin for non-allergic rhinitis

BACKGROUND

There are many forms of rhinitis. Patients are diagnosed with non-allergic rhinitis when anatomic, infectious and allergic aetiologies have been excluded. The symptoms, including nasal congestion, blockage or obstruction, clear rhinorrhoea, sneezing and, less frequently, nasal itching, can range from mild to debilitating. It affects between 25% and 50% of patients with rhinitis. Several medications are widely used in the treatment of non-allergic rhinitis, including oral and topical nasal antihistamines, intranasal and (rarely) systemic corticosteroids, and anticholinergics. Capsaicin, the active component of chili peppers, delivered intranasally, is considered a treatment option for non-allergic rhinitis.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effectiveness of capsaicin in the management of non-allergic rhinitis compared with no therapy, placebo or other topical or systemic medications, or two or more of the above therapies in combination, or different capsaicin regimens.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Ear, Nose and Throat Disorders Group Trials Register; the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL 2015, Issue 5); PubMed; EMBASE; CINAHL; Web of Science; Cambridge Scientific Abstracts; ICTRP and additional sources for published and unpublished trials. The date of the search was 24 June 2015.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised controlled trials in adult patients with non-allergic rhinitis comparing intranasal capsaicin with no therapy, placebo or other topical or systemic medications, or their combinations.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We used the standard methodological procedures expected by The Cochrane Collaboration.

MAIN RESULTS

We included four studies (five publications) involving 302 participants with idiopathic non-allergic rhinitis. All the included studies described patients with moderately severe, idiopathic non-allergic rhinitis who were between the ages of 16 and 65. Studies had follow-up periods ranging from four to 38 weeks. The overall risk of bias in the studies was either high or unclear (two studies had overall high risk of bias, while two others had low to unclear risk of bias). Using the GRADE system we assessed the evidence as being of low to moderate quality. A meta-analysis was not possible, given lack of similarity of the reported outcomes.Two studies compared capsaicin with placebo. One study reported that capsaicin resulted in an improvement of overall nasal symptoms (a primary outcome) measured on a visual analogue scale (VAS) of 0 to 10. There was a mean difference (MD) of -3.34 (95% confidence interval (CI) -5.24 to -1.44), MD -3.73 (95% CI -5.45 to -2.01) and MD -3.52 (95% CI -5.55 to -1.48) at two, 12 and 36 weeks post-treatment, respectively. Another study reported that, compared to placebo, capsaicin (at 4 µg/puff) was more likely to produce overall symptom resolution (reduction in nasal blockage, sneezing/itching/coughing and nasal secretion measured with a daily record chart) at four weeks post-treatment (a primary outcome). The risk ratio (RR) was 3.17 (95% CI 1.38 to 7.29).One study compared capsaicin to budesonide (an intranasal corticosteroid). This study found that patients treated with capsaicin had a better overall symptom score compared to those treated with budesonide (MD 2.50, 95% CI 1.06 to 3.94, VAS of 0 to 10). However, there were no differences in the individual symptom scores for headache, postnasal drip, rhinorrhoea, nasal blockage, sneezing and sore throat assessed during the last three days of a four-week treatment.One study compared two different regimens of capsaicin administration: five treatments in one day versus five treatments given every two to three days during two weeks. Using daily record charts, the study reported significant improvement of individual symptom scores for rhinorrhoea in patients treated five times per day, however numerical data were not presented. There were no improvements in the other outcomes: rhinorrhoea, nasal obstruction, sneezing and overall nasal symptoms, measured on a VAS.Finally, one of these studies also compared three doses of capsaicin (to placebo). Patients treated with a 1 µg versus 4 µg per puff dose of capsaicin had a worse daily record chart overall symptom score resolution (RR 0.63, 95% CI 0.34 to 1.16).Only one study attempted to measure adverse effects (a primary outcome), however due to methodological issues with the assessment we are unable to draw any conclusions.We sought to include other secondary outcomes (e.g. quality of life measures, treatment dropouts, endoscopic scores, turbinate or mucosal size, cost of therapy), but none of these were measured or reported in the included studies.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Capsaicin may be an option in the treatment of idiopathic non-allergic rhinitis. It is given in the form of brief treatments, usually during the same day. It appears to have beneficial effects on overall nasal symptoms up to 36 weeks after treatment, based on a few, small studies (low-quality evidence). Well-conducted randomised controlled trials are required to further advance our understanding of the effectiveness of capsaicin in non-allergic rhinitis, especially in patients with non-allergic rhinitis of different types and severity, and using different methods of capsaicin application.

Capsaicin for non-allergic rhinitis

BACKGROUND

There are many forms of rhinitis. Patients are diagnosed with non-allergic rhinitis when anatomic, infectious and allergic aetiologies have been excluded. The symptoms, including nasal congestion, blockage or obstruction, clear rhinorrhoea, sneezing and, less frequently, nasal itching, can range from mild to debilitating. It affects between 25% and 50% of patients with rhinitis. Several medications are widely used in the treatment of non-allergic rhinitis, including oral and topical nasal antihistamines, intranasal and (rarely) systemic corticosteroids, and anticholinergics. Capsaicin, the active component of chili peppers, delivered intranasally, is considered a treatment option for non-allergic rhinitis.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effectiveness of capsaicin in the management of non-allergic rhinitis compared with no therapy, placebo or other topical or systemic medications, or two or more of the above therapies in combination, or different capsaicin regimens.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Ear, Nose and Throat Disorders Group Trials Register; the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL 2015, Issue 5); PubMed; EMBASE; CINAHL; Web of Science; Cambridge Scientific Abstracts; ICTRP and additional sources for published and unpublished trials. The date of the search was 24 June 2015.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised controlled trials in adult patients with non-allergic rhinitis comparing intranasal capsaicin with no therapy, placebo or other topical or systemic medications, or their combinations.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We used the standard methodological procedures expected by The Cochrane Collaboration.

MAIN RESULTS

We included four studies (five publications) involving 302 participants with idiopathic non-allergic rhinitis. All the included studies described patients with moderately severe, idiopathic non-allergic rhinitis who were between the ages of 16 and 65. Studies had follow-up periods ranging from four to 38 weeks. The overall risk of bias in the studies was either high or unclear (two studies had overall high risk of bias, while two others had low to unclear risk of bias). Using the GRADE system we assessed the evidence as being of low to moderate quality. A meta-analysis was not possible, given lack of similarity of the reported outcomes.Two studies compared capsaicin with placebo. One study reported that capsaicin resulted in an improvement of overall nasal symptoms (a primary outcome) measured on a visual analogue scale (VAS) of 0 to 10. There was a mean difference (MD) of -3.34 (95% confidence interval (CI) -5.24 to -1.44), MD -3.73 (95% CI -5.45 to -2.01) and MD -3.52 (95% CI -5.55 to -1.48) at two, 12 and 36 weeks post-treatment, respectively. Another study reported that, compared to placebo, capsaicin (at 4 µg/puff) was more likely to produce overall symptom resolution (reduction in nasal blockage, sneezing/itching/coughing and nasal secretion measured with a daily record chart) at four weeks post-treatment (a primary outcome). The risk ratio (RR) was 3.17 (95% CI 1.38 to 7.29).One study compared capsaicin to budesonide (an intranasal corticosteroid). This study found that patients treated with capsaicin had a better overall symptom score compared to those treated with budesonide (MD 2.50, 95% CI 1.06 to 3.94, VAS of 0 to 10). However, there were no differences in the individual symptom scores for headache, postnasal drip, rhinorrhoea, nasal blockage, sneezing and sore throat assessed during the last three days of a four-week treatment.One study compared two different regimens of capsaicin administration: five treatments in one day versus five treatments given every two to three days during two weeks. Using daily record charts, the study reported significant improvement of individual symptom scores for rhinorrhoea in patients treated five times per day, however numerical data were not presented. There were no improvements in the other outcomes: rhinorrhoea, nasal obstruction, sneezing and overall nasal symptoms, measured on a VAS.Finally, one of these studies also compared three doses of capsaicin (to placebo). Patients treated with a 1 µg versus 4 µg per puff dose of capsaicin had a worse daily record chart overall symptom score resolution (RR 0.63, 95% CI 0.34 to 1.16).Only one study attempted to measure adverse effects (a primary outcome), however due to methodological issues with the assessment we are unable to draw any conclusions.We sought to include other secondary outcomes (e.g. quality of life measures, treatment dropouts, endoscopic scores, turbinate or mucosal size, cost of therapy), but none of these were measured or reported in the included studies.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Capsaicin may be an option in the treatment of idiopathic non-allergic rhinitis. It is given in the form of brief treatments, usually during the same day. It appears to have beneficial effects on overall nasal symptoms up to 36 weeks after treatment, based on a few, small studies (low-quality evidence). Well-conducted randomised controlled trials are required to further advance our understanding of the effectiveness of capsaicin in non-allergic rhinitis, especially in patients with non-allergic rhinitis of different types and severity, and using different methods of capsaicin application.

Local immunoglobulin e in the nasal mucosa: clinical implications

Immunoglobulin E (IgE) can be highly elevated in the airway mucosa independently of IgE serum levels and atopic status. Mostly, systemic markers are assessed to investigate inflammation in airway disease for research or clinical practice. A more accurate but more cumbersome approach to determine inflammation at the target organ would be to evaluate markers locally. We review evidence for local production of IgE in allergic rhinitis (AR) and chronic rhinosinusitis with nasal polyps (CRSwNP). Diagnostic and therapeutic consequences in clinical practice are discussed. We describe that the airway mucosa has the intrinsic capability to produce IgE. Moreover, not only do IgE-positive B cells reside within the mucosa, but all tools are present locally for affinity maturation by somatic hypermutation (SHM), clonal expansion, and class switch recombination to IgE. Recognizing local IgE in the absence of systemic IgE has diagnostic and therapeutic consequences. Therefore, we emphasize the importance of local IgE in patients with a history of AR or CRSwNP.

Phenotypes and endotypes of rhinitis and their impact on management: a PRACTALL report

Rhinitis is an umbrella term that encompasses many different subtypes, several of which still elude complete characterization. The concept of phenotyping, being the definition of disease subtypes on the basis of clinical presentation, has been well established in the last decade. Classification of rhinitis entities on the basis of phenotypes has facilitated their characterization and has helped practicing clinicians to efficiently approach rhinitis patients. Recently, the concept of endotypes, that is, the definition of disease subtypes on the basis of underlying pathophysiology, has emerged. Phenotypes/endotypes are dynamic, overlapping, and may evolve into one another, thus rendering clear-cut definitions difficult. Nevertheless, a phenotype-/endotype-based classification approach could lead toward the application of stratified and personalized medicine in the rhinitis field. In this PRACTALL document, rhinitis phenotypes and endotypes are described, and rhinitis diagnosis and management approaches focusing on those phenotypes/endotypes are presented and discussed. We emphasize the concept of control-based management, which transcends all rhinitis subtypes.

Epidemiology and natural history of atopic diseases

The atopic diseases – atopic dermatitis, asthma, and hay fever – pose a great burden to the individual and society, not least, since these diseases have reached epidemic proportions during the past decades in industrialized and, more recently, in developing countries. Whereas the prevalence of the atopic diseases now seems to have reached a plateau in many Western countries, they are still on the increase in the developing world. This emphasizes continuing research aimed at identifying the causes, risk factors, and natural history of these diseases. Herein, the fundamental aspects of the natural history and epidemiology of the atopic diseases are reviewed.

Nonallergic rhinitis

Rhinitis is normally defined by the symptoms of nasal congestion, postnasal drainage, rhinorrhea, and sneezing. It has been associated with various pathologic changes, but can occur in the absence of any inflammation. Thus, the diagnosis is based on the clinical presentation. There are no clear-cut criteria to distinguish when rhinitis becomes chronic, but in its chronic form, it can be complex. Chronic forms of rhinitis that occur in the absence of any detectable specific IgE against relevant aeroallergens in its broadest sense can be called chronic nonallergic rhinitis. This review will concentrate on chronic nonallergic rhinitis in its various forms, discussing the epidemiology, underlying mechanisms, and its therapy.

Predictive factors to differentiate between allergic and nonallergic rhinitis in children

BACKGROUND

Although symptoms and signs of allergic rhinitis (AR) and nonallergic rhinitis (NAR) are similar, treatment and follow-up are different. We aimed to find predictive factors that can be used in primary health care to differentiate AR from NAR.

METHODS

We made a retrospective analysis of cases aged 6-18 years old who were diagnosed as having chronic rhinitis within a 1-year period. Skin-prick tests were done and severity of rhinitis symptoms was recorded on a visual analog scale in all patients.

RESULTS

There were 472 cases whose medical records were complete and included in the analysis. The median age was 11 (interquartile range [IQR], 5) years. AR was diagnosed in 363 patients (76.9%) and was different from NAR with respect to: median age (p = 0.042), seasonality of the symptoms (p = 0.002), persistent symptoms (p = 0.003), moderate/severe according to visual analogue scale (VAS) score (p = 0.017), conjunctivitis (p < 0.001), parental history of AR (p = 0.026), rhinorrhea (p < 0.001), sneezing (p = 0.005), mucosal pallor (p = 0.004), and response to antihistamines (p = 0.035). All parameters with a significance of p < 0.1 between AR and NAR were included in logistic regression analysis. Seasonality, sneezing, moderate/severe rhinitis, and response to antihistamines were identified as significant independent parameters to differentiate AR from NAR.

CONCLUSION

Features of rhinitis patients with seasonality, sneezing, moderate/severe rhinitis, and response to antihistamines may help in differentiation of AR from NAR at the primary care level.

Optical coherence tomography in diagnosing inflammatory diseases of ENT

The object of the study was to demonstrate the abilities of optical coherence tomography (OCT) technique in diagnostics of inflammatory processes in ear, nose, and throat (ENT). When used in diagnostics of the nose and pharynx, OCT facilitates differential diagnostics of rhinitis enabling differentiation between the normal state, two stages of allergic rhinitis, vasomotor and atrophic rhinitis and diagnostics of pharyngitis. This paper also demonstrates the ability of OCT to monitor changes in pharynx induced by cryotherapy. In diagnostics of the tympanic cavity the ability of OCT to differentiate between different stages of chronic otitis and retraction of the tympanic membrane is demonstrated. Finally a correlation is discussed between morphologic alterations induced by inflammatory processes and changes in diagnostic OCT images.

Bronchial hyperresponsiveness in pediatric rhinitis patients: the difference between allergic and nonallergic rhinitis

BACKGROUND

Numerous studies have examined the relationship of bronchial hyperresponsiveness (BHR) to asthma or allergic rhinitis (AR). However, little is known regarding the association between BHR and nonallergic rhinitis (NAR). This study investigated the prevalence and risk factors of BHR in pediatric patients with rhinitis and analyzed the difference between patients with AR and those with NAR.

METHODS

A total of 227 subjects with rhinitis aged 6-15 years underwent a parental survey and laboratory tests, including skin-prick test and methacholine challenge test. Outcome variables were analyzed in relation to BHR.

RESULTS

The prevalence of BHR was 55.7 and 25.5% in patients with AR and those with NAR, respectively. The persistency of rhinitis, blood eosinophil count, and baseline lung function were significantly associated with BHR in patients with AR, whereas individual or familial medical history, environmental factors, the serum immunoglobulin E level, the number of sensitized allergens, and the wheal size ratio of allergen to histamine did not affect the BHR rate. In multivariate analysis, the persistency of rhinitis was the only significant predictor of BHR in AR patients. However, persistent rhinitis symptoms did not increase the risk of BHR in NAR patients.

CONCLUSION

BHR occurs over two times more frequently in children with AR than in those with NAR. In addition, persistent nasal inflammation appears to increase the risk of BHR only in the presence of atopy.

[Local (exclusive) IgE production in the nasal mucosa. Evidence for local allergic rhinitis]

BACKGROUND

IgE production at the site of the nasal mucosa without systemic allergic sensitization in skin tests or in serum represents so-called "local allergic rhinitis (LAR)" as a subgroup of patients with symptoms of allergic rhinitis (AR). Formerly, in case of negative allergological test results, seasonal (intermittent) or perennial (persistent) allergic symptoms have been diagnosed as "non-allergic rhinitis" (NAR). However, there is evidence for specific Th2 cytokine, tryptase, and ECP (eosinophil catonic protein) production in the nasal secretion after allergen exposure in these patients without systemic sensitization.

DIAGNOSIS

Taking this into account, we recommend performing an allergen-specific nasal challenge and measuring the (local) nasal IgE-levels in addition to standard allergy tests in clinical routine in this subgroup of patients. These tests should be perfomed while or shortly after allergen exposure. In addition, an update of the allergy testing should be performed after a time interval since it has been demonstrated that patients formerly diagnosed with NAR may develop LAR or AR, or patients with LAR may develop AR in the future.

TREATMENT

The pharmacological therapeutic options in LAR are in line with the treatment of AR. If and to what extent this subgroup of AR patients benefit from allergen-specific immunotherapy (SIT) is currently being evaluated in clinical trials.

Serum eosinophil cationic protein level in Chinese subjects with nonallergic and local allergic rhinitis and its relation to the severity of disease

BACKGROUND

Nonallergic rhinitis (NAR) is a common disease, and local allergic rhinitis (LAR) is a newly described entity that is called "entopy" in recent years. However, the etiology and incidence of NAR and LAR are uncertain. This study evaluates the incidence of LAR in Chinese subjects and serum eosinophil cationic protein (ECP) levels in patients with NAR and LAR and its relationship with symptom scores.

METHODS

Positive skin-prick tests (SPT), nasal allergen provocation testing (NAPT) to Dermatophagoides farinae (DF), serum Phadiatop tests, and symptom score evaluations were performed in 147 patients with nonatopic persistent rhinitis. LAR was diagnosed by positive NAPT to DF results. The serum ECP level was measured using the UniCAP100 automated system by enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (Pharmacia Diagnostics, Uppsala, Sweden).

RESULTS

Twelve patients were diagnosed with LAR, and 135 patients were diagnosed with NAR. There was no statistical difference of the visual analog scale scores between the two groups. Serum ECP was significantly increased in the patients with NAR. Serum ECP in the LAR group showed no difference compared with the NAR group or the controls. In the NAR group, nasal obstruction, rhinorrhea, and total scores had close and statistically significant relationships with serum ECP level.

CONCLUSION

The present study provides the first evidence that LAR exists in Chinese subjects. This study also suggests that eosinophils and ECP take part in the pathogenesis of NAR. A local examination for ECP and specific IgE in nasal lavage fluid or secretions in patients with LAR should be performed in a future study.

The development of allergic rhinitis in children previously diagnosed as nonallergic rhinitis

BACKGROUND

Nonallergic rhinitis (NAR) is characterized by nasal symptoms similar to allergic rhinitis (AR) without an IgE-mediated immune response. Limited data are available on the natural history of NAR in its progression toward AR, particularly in children. This study evaluates the development of AR in children who were previously diagnosed with NAR.

METHODS

Children with the diagnosis of NAR during the period of 2005-2007 were reevaluated in 2010. Nasal symptoms, disease severity, comorbidities, rescue medication scores (RMSs), and skin-prick test to aeroallergens were assessed.

RESULTS

We recruited 175 children with an early diagnosis of NAR. The median age was 5.7 years, 62.9% were boys and 45.7% had family history of atopy. At reevaluation, 41% of children with previously diagnosed NAR developed sensitization to aeroallergens and were reclassified as having AR. The most frequent aeroallergen sensitization was Dermatophagoides pteronyssinus (59.7%), followed by Dermatophagoides farinae (54.2%) and American cockroach (38.9%). Children who developed AR had more nasal/eye symptoms, higher severity, and RMSs than children who did not develop AR. The predictors of developing AR were persistent nasal symptoms (adjusted odds ratio [OR], 8.9; 95% CI, 3.2-24.6), nasal itching (adjusted OR, 3.4; 95% CI, 1.2-9.5), triggered by house dust (adjusted OR, 4.3; 95% CI, 1.6-11.9) and animal danders (adjusted OR, 15.8; 95% CI, 3.3-76.1), and family history of atopy (adjusted OR, 6.0; 95% CI, 2.3-15.9).

CONCLUSION

Children with NAR who had family history of atopy, persistent nasal symptoms, and symptoms triggered by aeroallergens should be reevaluated periodically for the development of AR. This study was part of the clinical trial NCT01068808 registered in www.clinicaltrials.gov.