Turbinate-Specific IgE in Normal and Rhinitic Patients

Farit NA. The Efficacy of Elonide Nasal Corticosteroids in Managing Allergic Rhinitis: A Randomized, Double-Blinded Trial

Background: Mometasone furoate nasal spray is efficacious in relieving allergic rhinitis symptoms. The objectives of this study were, firstly, to compare the efficacy of Elonide to Nasonex® and a placebo and secondly, to investigate the side effects of Elonide. Method: This was a prospective, single-centered, double blinded, randomized, placebo-controlled, non-inferiority trial. A total of 163 participants from the Otorhinolaryngology Clinic, Hospital Canselor Tuanku Muhriz (HCTM), were randomized into three treatment groups receiving Elonide (n = 56), Nasonex® (n = 54), and placebo (n = 53) nasal sprays using an online randomizer (Random.org). Treatment was administered for 4 weeks. The primary outcome measure was the Total Nasal Resistance (TNR), and the secondary outcomes were the Visual Analogue Score (VAS) and the Rhinoconjunctivitis Quality of Life Questionnaire (RQOLQ) score. Side effects were recorded. Results: There were significant improvements for all groups from baseline. The Elonide group had the greatest mean difference for all primary and secondary outcomes compared to Nasonex® and the placebo (0.77 ± 2.44 vs. 0.35 ± 1.16, p = 1.00 vs. 0.17 ± 0.82, p = 0.01). Elonide is non-inferior to Nasonex (p = 1.00) and superior to the placebo (p < 0.05). The highest side effects reported were for Nasonex (n = 14, 26%), followed by the placebo (n = 8, 16%) and Elonide (n = 6, 12%); headaches (n = 9, 17%) and sore throat (n = 9, 17%) were the most common. Conclusions: Elonide has similar efficacy to Nasonex® when compared to a placebo in the treatment of AR in adults. Elonide is safe and tolerable, with fewer side effects and no adverse side effects.

International consensus statement on allergy and rhinology: Allergic rhinitis - 2023

BACKGROUND

In the 5 years that have passed since the publication of the 2018 International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis (ICAR-Allergic Rhinitis 2018), the literature has expanded substantially. The ICAR-Allergic Rhinitis 2023 update presents 144 individual topics on allergic rhinitis (AR), expanded by over 40 topics from the 2018 document. Originally presented topics from 2018 have also been reviewed and updated. The executive summary highlights key evidence-based findings and recommendation from the full document.

METHODS

ICAR-Allergic Rhinitis 2023 employed established evidence-based review with recommendation (EBRR) methodology to individually evaluate each topic. Stepwise iterative peer review and consensus was performed for each topic. The final document was then collated and includes the results of this work.

RESULTS

ICAR-Allergic Rhinitis 2023 includes 10 major content areas and 144 individual topics related to AR. For a substantial proportion of topics included, an aggregate grade of evidence is presented, which is determined by collating the levels of evidence for each available study identified in the literature. For topics in which a diagnostic or therapeutic intervention is considered, a recommendation summary is presented, which considers the aggregate grade of evidence, benefit, harm, and cost.

CONCLUSION

The ICAR-Allergic Rhinitis 2023 update provides a comprehensive evaluation of AR and the currently available evidence. It is this evidence that contributes to our current knowledge base and recommendations for patient evaluation and treatment.

[Research progress of botulinum toxin type A in the treatment of chronic rhinitis]

Botulinum toxin（BoNT）, a superfamily of neurotoxins produced by the bacterium Clostridium botulinum, disturbs the signal transmission at the neuromuscular and neuroglandular junctions by inhibiting the neurotransmitter release from the presynaptic nerve terminal. BoNT has been widely used in neuromuscular, hypersecretory, and autonomic nerve system disorders. In recent years, botulinum toxin type A（BoNT-A） has been used to treat chronic rhinitis. Studies have shown that intranasal administration of BoNT-A is safe and effective, and can reduce nasal symptoms in rhinitis patients with long-lasting effects. This article reviews the research progress of BoNT-A in the treatment of chronic rhinitis.

Endoplasmic reticulum stress promotes local immunoglobulin E production in allergic rhinitis

BACKGROUND

The role of endoplasmic reticulum (ER) stress in the pathogenesis of allergic rhinitis (AR) remains elusive.

METHODS

Real-time polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR), immunohistochemistry, and western blotting analyses were performed to detect the expression of ER stress and unfolded protein response markers: 78-kDa glucose-regulated protein (GRP78), C/EBP homologous protein (CHOP), activating transcription factor 6 (ATF6α), spliced X-box binding protein 1 (sXBP-1), and phosphorylated eukaryotic initiation factor 2α (p-eIF2α), in inferior turbinate tissue samples from patients with AR and non-AR controls. Nasal tissues from patients with AR were cultured ex vivo and treated with 4-phenylbutyric acid (4-PBA), an ER stress inhibitor.

RESULTS

Compared to those in non-AR controls, the mRNA and protein levels of GRP78, CHOP, ATF6α, sXBP-1, and p-eIF2α were significantly increased in nasal tissues from patients with AR. GRP78 and CHOP were mainly expressed in CD138+ plasma cells in nasal tissues from patients with AR. The frequency of IgE+CD138+ plasma cells was significantly higher in nasal tissues from patients with AR than that in non-AR controls. IgE levels in nasal secretions and tissues were positively correlated with GRP78 and CHOP mRNA levels in the nasal tissues. After 4-PBA treatment, the protein expression of GRP78, CHOP, ATF6α, sXBP-1, and p-eIF2α was significantly reduced in cultured AR-derived nasal tissues, and IgE levels were simultaneously decreased in cultured supernatants.

CONCLUSIONS

ER stress may be involved in the regulation of local IgE production in patients with AR. Inhibition of ER stress potentially provides a therapeutic avenue in AR by reducing local IgE production.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

NA.

Nasal IgE in subjects with allergic and non-allergic rhinitis

Purpose

The prevalence of "ocal allergic rhinitis" within individuals suffering from perennial rhinitis remains uncertain, and patients usually are diagnosed with non-allergic rhinitis. The aim of this study was to evaluate the prevalence of a potential "local allergic rhinitis" in subjects suffering from non-allergic rhinitis in a non-selected group of young students.

Methods

131 students (age 25.0 ± 5.1 years) with a possible allergic rhinitis and 25 non-allergic controls without rhinitis symptoms (age 22.0 ± 2.0 years) were recruited by public postings. 97 of 131 students with rhinitis were tested positive (≥3 mm) to prick testing with 17 frequent allergens at visit 1. Twenty-four 24 subjects with a house dust mite allergy, 21 subjects with a non-allergic rhinitis, and 18 non-allergic controls were further investigated at visit 2. Blood samples were taken, and nasal secretion was examined. In addition, all groups performed a nasal provocation test with house dust mite (HDM).

Results

In serum and nasal secretion, total IgE and house dust mite specific IgE significantly differed between HDM positive subjects and controls. However, no differences between non-allergic subjects and control subjects were quantifiable. Neither a nasal provocation test nor a nasal IgE to HDM allergens showed a measurable positive response in any of the non-allergic rhinitis subjects as well as the healthy controls, whilst being positive in 13 subjects with HDM allergy.

Conclusions

Nasal IgE is present in subjects with HDM allergy, but not in non-allergic rhinitis. In the investigated non-selected population, exclusive local production of IgE is absent. By implication, therefore, our findings challenge the emerging concept of local allergic rhinitis.Study identifier at ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT02810535.

How to Diagnose and Treat Local Allergic Rhinitis: A Challenge for Clinicians

Chronic rhinitis is a very common disease that can be divided in various phenotypes. Historically, the condition has been classified into the allergic rhinitis (AR) and non-allergic non-infectious rhinitis (NAR) forms, based on the results of the classical biomarkers of atopy: skin prick test and serum allergen-specific IgE However, this classification does not reflect the complexity of the rhinitis syndrome, as illustrated by the existence of non-atopic rhinitis patients who display a nasal reactivity to environmental allergens. This new phenotype has been termed local allergic rhinitis (LAR) and can be only recognized if an additional test such as the nasal allergen challenge (NAC) is integrated in the diagnostic algorithm for chronic rhinitis. Recent data shows that the NAC is a very safe and reliable technique ready for the clinical practice. LAR is a differentiated rhinitis phenotype which often commences during childhood and quickly progresses towards a clinical worsening and the association of comorbidities in other mucosal organs. Recent evidence supports the existence of a bronchial counterpart of LAR (local allergic asthma), which highlights the pathophysiological links between the upper and lower airways and reinforces the united airways concept. Importantly, several controlled studies have demonstrated the ability of allergen immunotherapy to control LAR symptoms while the therapy is being administered. This review emphasizes the need to implement the NAC in the clinical practice in order to facilitate the recognition of LAR patients, allowing for an early prescription of specific therapies with disease-modifying potential.

The Distinguishing Clinical Features of Nonallergic Rhinitis Patients

Background

Not all rhinitis patients are affected by an immunoglobulin E (IgE)-mediated inflammatory process. Skin and serum allergy assessments are limited in their ability to define local allergic rhinitis (LAR). Thus, patients with negative systemic allergy assessments comprise a mix of those who truly have nonallergic rhinitis (NAR) and patients with LAR.

Objective

To determine the clinical characteristics of patients with NAR.

Methods

A cross-sectional study was performed on consecutive adults with rhinitis symptoms who underwent turbinate surgery. NAR patients were defined by excluding allergy using both systemic (serum-specific IgE and/or skin prick test) and local (inferior turbinate tissue-specific IgE) tests. Allergic rhinitis (AR) patients were defined by any positive systemic or local test toward aeroallergens. The clinical characteristics studied included allergic comorbidities (asthma, eczema, allergic conjunctivitis), inhalant allergen triggers (dust, pollen, animal dander), and environmental triggers (Cincinnati Irritant Index [CII]).

Results

There were 154 participants (41.79 ± 14.78 years, 37.7% female). NAR patients (11.7%) were older (49.33 ± 15.99 vs 40.78 ± 14.38 years, P = .02), had less self-reported asthma (5.6% vs 36.3%, P < .01) and house dust inhalant trigger (38.9 vs 65.2%, P = .03) compared to AR patients. The CII score was similar for NAR and AR (31.06 ± 28.88 vs 35.49 ± 24.70, P = .61).

Conclusion

Patients who were older, without asthma, and lacked an inhalant allergy trigger were more likely to have true NAR. Environmental triggers are not distinguishing features of NAR. This may be used as a guide to identify rhinitis patients whose symptoms are truly nonallergic etiology compared to those with falsely negative systemic allergy assessment but may still need management for LAR.