Efficacy, safety, and optimal dose selection of beclomethasone dipropionate nasal aerosol for seasonal allergic rhinitis in adolescents and adults

Intranasal antihistamines and corticosteroids in allergic rhinitis: A systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

There is insufficient systematized evidence on the effectiveness of individual intranasal medications in allergic rhinitis (AR).

OBJECTIVES

We sought to perform a systematic review to compare the efficacy of individual intranasal corticosteroids and antihistamines against placebo in improving the nasal and ocular symptoms and the rhinoconjunctivitis-related quality of life of patients with perennial or seasonal AR.

METHODS

The investigators searched 4 electronic bibliographic databases and 3 clinical trials databases for randomized controlled trials (1) assessing adult patients with seasonal or perennial AR and (2) comparing the use of intranasal corticosteroids or antihistamines versus placebo. Assessed outcomes included the Total Nasal Symptom Score, the Total Ocular Symptom Score, and the Rhinoconjunctivitis Quality-of-Life Questionnaire. The investigators performed random-effects meta-analyses of mean differences for each medication and outcome. The investigators assessed evidence certainty using the GRADE (Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluation) approach.

RESULTS

This review included 151 primary studies, most of which assessed patients with seasonal AR and displayed unclear or high risk of bias. Both in perennial and seasonal AR, most assessed treatments were more effective than placebo. In seasonal AR, azelastine-fluticasone, fluticasone furoate, and fluticasone propionate were the medications with the highest probability of resulting in moderate or large improvements in the Total Nasal Symptom Score and Rhinoconjunctivitis Quality-of-Life Questionnaire. Azelastine-fluticasone displayed the highest probability of resulting in moderate or large improvements of Total Ocular Symptom Score. Overall, evidence certainty was considered "high" in 6 of 46 analyses, "moderate" in 23 of 46 analyses, and "low"/"very low" in 17 of 46 analyses.

CONCLUSIONS

Most intranasal medications are effective in improving rhinitis symptoms and quality of life. However, there are relevant differences in the associated evidence certainty.

Pharmacotherapy and immunotherapy of allergic rhinitis induced by house dust mite, grass, and birch pollen allergens: a meta-analysis of randomized clinical trials

BACKGROUND

The aim of this study was to assess the efficacy and safety of oral antihistamines (AHs), intranasal antihistamines (INAH) intranasal glucocorticosteroids (INCS), subcutaneous immunotherapy (SCIT), and sublingual immunotherapy (SLIT) in the management of allergic rhinitis (AR). The authors focused on the division into selected AR's triggers: house dust mites (HDMs), grass pollen, and birch pollen.

METHODS

For each drug and allergen class, a meta-analysis of the efficacy and adverse events (AEs) was performed. The obtained results were presented as a therapeutic index (TIX-Score).

RESULTS

Twenty-seven randomized clinical trials (RCTs) were included. The best total efficacy was observed for: HDMs for INCS and grass pollen for combination of INCS with INAH in a single device and for INAH. Considering the data that was obtained for birch pollen, SLIT showed statistically significant total efficacy. Summation scores for efficacy and AEs showed highest TIX-Score for combination of INCS and INAH in a single device in grass pollen.

CONCLUSIONS

Treatment methods selected for this review may serve as an effective and safe treatment in reducing perennial and seasonal AR's symptoms. However, due to high heterogeneity probably associated with potential confounders existence in control in some cases, results should be interpreted with caution.

Intranasal Corticosteroid Therapy: Systematic Review and Meta-analysis of Reported Safety and Adverse Effects in Adults

Objectives

To address concerns related to the safety profile of both Food and Drug Administration (FDA)–approved and non–FDA-approved intranasal corticosteroid (INCS) use in the adult population.

Data Source

Systematic review of MEDLINE, PubMed, and EMBASE databases using a comprehensive search strategy including all INCS formulations and adverse events. The study design was developed using Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. Additional sources were identified from study references of relevant articles.

Review Methods

A structured literature search was conducted. Each study was graded for level of evidence using the Oxford Centre for Evidence-Based Medicine. Extracted data included population size, study design, drug (dosage, route, and frequency), presence of hypothalamus pituitary axis suppression, ocular symptoms, and treatment-related adverse events.

Results

A total of 60 studies met inclusion criteria. The studies included use of INCS as metered nasal sprays, drops, injections, aerosols, and irrigations. There were no persistent abnormalities in cortisol level or intraocular pressure change. Meta-analysis of epistaxis showed a significantly increased risk in the FDA-approved treatment group in comparison with control (risk ratio 1.56; 95% confidence interval, 1.13-2.14; P = .007).

Conclusions

Overall, it appears that the use of both FDA and published non-FDA application of INCS are safe in the adult population. Meta-analysis demonstrated an increased risk of epistaxis in patients using INCS compared with placebo. Otherwise, there was no significant difference between in adults in the treatment group and placebo group. As an important caveat, the interpretation of safety of nonstandard INCS is restricted to delivery methods and dosages published in the literature.

Epistaxis Risk Associated with Intranasal Corticosteroid Sprays: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

Objective

Intranasal corticosteroids (INCSs) are widely utilized for the treatment of allergic rhinitis. Epistaxis is a known adverse effect of INCSs, but it is not known if the risk of epistaxis differs among INCSs.

Data Sources

Systematic review of primary studies identified through Medline, Embase, Web of Science, PubMed Central, and Cochrane databases.

Review Methods

Systematic review was conducted according to the PRISMA standard. English-language studies were queried through February 1, 2018. The search identified randomized controlled trials of INCSs for treatment of allergic rhinitis that reported incidence of epistaxis. An itemized assessment of the risk of bias was conducted for each included study, and meta-analysis was performed of the relative risk of epistaxis for each INCS.

Results

Of 949 identified studies, 72 met the criteria for analysis. Meta-analysis demonstrated an overall relative risk of epistaxis of 1.48 (95% CI, 1.32-1.67) for all INCSs. The INCSs associated with the highest risk of epistaxis were beclomethasone hydrofluoroalkane, fluticasone furoate, mometasone furoate, and fluticasone propionate. Beclomethasone aqueous, ciclesonide hydrofluoroalkane, and ciclesonide aqueous were associated with the lowest risk of epistaxis. Conclusions about epistaxis with use of budesonide, triamcinolone, and flunisolide are limited due to the low number of studies and high heterogeneity.

Conclusions

While a differential effect on epistaxis among INCS agents is not clearly demonstrated, this meta-analysis does confirm an increased risk of epistaxis for patients using INCSs as compared with placebo for treatment of allergic rhinitis.

Influence of Intranasal Drugs on Human Nasal Mucociliary Clearance and Ciliary Beat Frequency

The nasal mucociliary clearance system, which comprises epithelial cilia and mucus from goblet cells, is an important intrinsic defense mechanism of the upper respiratory tract. Intranasal drugs and additives can have a detrimental effect on ciliary activity and mucociliary clearance, and thus impact the integrity of nasal defense mechanisms. This article discusses the current literature on the effects of different classes of intranasal drugs including intranasal corticosteroids, antihistamines, decongestants, antimicrobials and antivirals, as well as various drug excipients and nasal irrigation solutions on human nasal mucociliary clearance and ciliary beat frequency. Available data indicate that some intranasal formulations tend to hamper nasal ciliary function and mucociliary clearance. Therefore, it is of great importance to assess the effects of intranasal drugs and additives on mucociliary function before they are recommended as therapy for different nasal conditions.

Safety and pharmacodynamics of intranasal GSK2245035, a TLR7 agonist for allergic rhinitis: A randomized trial

BACKGROUND

Toll-like receptor 7 (TLR7) stimulation in the airways may reduce responses to aeroallergens by induction of type 1 interferons (IFNs). GSK2245035 is a novel selective TLR7 agonist in pharmaceutical development.

OBJECTIVE

Assessment of safety, pharmacodynamics and nasal allergic reactivity following repeated weekly intranasal (i.n.) GSK2245035.

METHODS

This randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled study (TL7116958) was conducted over two pollen seasons (2013-2014) and follow-up study (204509) conducted 1 year later. Participants with allergic rhinitis (n=42) were randomized to receive eight weekly doses of i.n. GSK2245035 (20 ng [2014 Cohort; n=14] or 80 ng [2013 Cohort; n=14]) or placebo (n=14). Adverse events (AEs) including cytokine release syndrome AEs (CytoRS-AEs) and nasal symptoms were assessed. Nasal and serum IFN-inducible protein 10 (IP-10) were measured after doses 1 and 8, then 1 (follow-up visit [FUV] 1) and 3 (FUV2) weeks after final dose. Nasal allergen challenges (NACs) and allergic biomarker assessment (nasal, serum) were conducted at baseline, FUV1, FUV2 and at a FUV 1 year after final dose (FUV3; 2014 Cohort only). A Bayesian framework enabled probability statements for mean effect sizes.

RESULTS

GSK2245035 induced CytoRS-AEs (most commonly headache, median duration <1 day) in 93% of participants at 80 ng, while AE incidence at 20 ng was similar to placebo. There was no evidence of nasal inflammation. Dose-related increases in nasal and serum IP-10 were observed 24 hours after doses 1 and 8 (>95% certainty). Both doses showed a trend in reducing total nasal symptom score 15 minutes post-NAC at FUV1 and FUV2, but there was no reduction evident at FUV3. Nasal levels of selected allergic biomarkers demonstrated trends for reductions at FUV1, FUV2 and FUV3.

CONCLUSIONS AND CLINICAL RELEVANCE

Weekly i.n. GSK2245035 20 ng was well tolerated and reduced allergic reactivity to nasal challenge for 3 weeks post-treatment.

Novel, Alternative, and Controversial Therapies of Rhinitis

Rhinitis is a multifactorial disease characterized by sneezing, rhinorrhea, postnasal drip, and nasal congestion. This condition affects 10% to 40% of the population and is responsible for billions of spent health care dollars and impairment in quality of life for those affected. Currently available medical and vaccine therapies are effective for a large segment of this population; however, a subset of patients still has difficult-to-control rhinitis. This article reviews the current progress being made in novel drug and vaccine development and delves into alternative medical, surgical, and homeopathic strategies that may be promising adjunctive treatments for the difficult-to-treat rhinitis patient.

Beclomethasone dipropionate hydrofluoroalkane for the treatment of allergic rhinitis

Allergic rhinitis (AR) is a common respiratory disease, and its prevalence is increasing all over the world, both in adults and in children. Patients experience symptoms that may negatively impact on physical, social and psychological well-being. Hence, if left untreated, allergic rhinitis may significantly affect quality of life. Under current guidelines, intranasal corticosteroids are considered the most effective drugs and they are recommended as first-line therapy. Among the several corticosteroid intranasal sprays available, beclomethasone dipropionate is one of the most prescribed. Recently, new intranasal hydrofluoroalkane-propelled formulations with little or no impact on the ozone layer have been developed for the treatment of AR. The use of these devices might improve patients' adherence to treatment, avoiding some of the most common side effects associated with aqueous formulations. This review provides the most recent evidence for the efficacy and safety of beclomethasone dipropionate hydrofluoroalkane nasal aerosol in the treatment of allergic rhinitis.

Lentiviral shRNA against KCa3.1 inhibits allergic response in allergic rhinitis and suppresses mast cell activity via PI3K/AKT signaling pathway

Calcium-activated potassium ion channel-3.1 (KCa3.1) plays a pivotal role in the potassium-calcium exchange involved in atopy. This study aimed to explore the impact of lentiviral-mediated shRNA silencing KCa3.1 on allergic response in a murine allergic rhinitis (AR) model. The BALB/c mice were divided into four groups: untreated AR group, negative control AR group, lentiviral KCa3.1-shRNA treated AR group and normal control group. Concentrations of ovalbumin (OVA)-specific IgE, histamine and leukotrienes C4 (LTC4) in serum, and IL-4, IL-9 and IL-17 in nasal lavage fluid (NLF) were analyzed. Goblet cells and mast cells were counted. KCa3.1 positive cells were counted after immunolabelling by immunofluorescence method. KCa3.1, Mucin 5AC (MUC5AC), and tryptase mRNA levels were determined using real-time polymerase chain reaction. Furthermore, P815 cell line was used to explore the role and mechanism of lentiviral KCa3.1-shRNA on mast cells. The results showed that LV-KCa3.1-shRNA intervention effectively attenuated allergic responses in LV-KCa3.1-shRNA treated mice. LV-KCa3.1-shRNA intervention effectively suppressed KCa3.1 levels and phosphorylation of AKT in P815 cells, leading to the downregulation of tryptase, IL-6 and IL-8 levels. LV-KCa3.1-shRNA intervention effectively attenuated the allergic responses in AR and suppressed mast cell activity by inhibiting PI3K/AKT signaling pathway.

Ca2+ -activated K+ channel-3.1 blocker TRAM-34 alleviates murine allergic rhinitis

The precise pathogenesis of allergic rhinitis (AR) remains unclear and AR is less easily cured. Recent evidence has suggested that calcium-activated K+ channel-3.1(KCa3.1) is implicated in the immune response of allergic and inflammatory diseases and TRAM-34 is a selective KCa3.1 blocker. However, little is known about its role in AR. We aimed to investigate the effect of TRAM-34 in a mouse model of AR induced by ovalbumin (OVA). The BALB/c mice were divided into six groups: untreated AR group, 200 μg TRAM-34 treated AR group, 400 μg TRAM-34 treated AR group, 200 μg TRAM-34 treated normal group, 400 μg TRAM-34 treated normal group and untreated normal control group. Histopathological characteristics were assessed by HE staining. KCa3.1 protein expression was investigated by immunohistochemistry and western blotting method, and mRNA expression of KCa3.1, stromal interaction molecule1 (STIM1) and Orai1 in nasal tissues were assessed by real-time PCR. Furthermore, concentrations of OVA-specific IgE, ECP, IL-4, IL-5, IL-17 and IL-1β in nasal lavage fluid (NLF) were analyzed by enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA). Results showed that TRAM-34 administration into the nostril attenuated sneezing, nasal rubbing, epithelial cell proliferation, eosinophil infiltration and inhibited nasal mucosa KCa3.1, STIM1 and Orai1 expression in TRAM-34 treated mice compared with untreated AR mice and suppressed inflammatory cytokines in the NLF of TRAM-34 treated groups compared with untreated AR mice. In conclusion, TRAM-34 could effectively alleviate murine allergic rhinitis by suppressing KCa3.1 and leads to reduction of K+ efflux and Ca2 + influx, leading to inflammation reduction and allergic responses attenuation.

Intranasal spray medications for maintenance therapy of allergic rhinitis

BACKGROUND

Intranasal sprays are recommended as targeted therapy for allergic rhinitis (AR) by providing direct delivery of medication to the nasal mucosa, reducing the potential for systemic adverse effects, decreasing burden of disease, and improving quality of life.

OBJECTIVE

To review currently available intranasal sprays indicated for maintenance therapy of AR in the United States: intranasal antihistamines (INAH); intranasal corticosteroids (INCS); and MP-AzeFlu, a single formulation nasal spray of the INAH, azelastine hydrochloride, and the INCS, fluticasone propionate.

METHODS

MEDLINE searches were conducted to identify placebo-controlled studies of commercially available prescription nasal sprays at U.S.-approved doses and indications, and published after an earlier systematic review of AR treatment. Inclusion criteria were ≥20 subjects; duration of ≥2 weeks for seasonal (or episodic) AR, ≥4 weeks for perennial (or persistent) AR, and reporting a total nasal symptom score as a primary or secondary outcome.

RESULTS

Twenty studies met the inclusion criteria: 4 pediatric, 16 adult/adolescent. There were 4 perennial AR studies (381 children, 1607 adults) and 16 seasonal AR trials (3081 children, 6548 adults). In these studies, 2451 subjects (481 children, 1970 adults) received an INCS, 3001 (1116 children, 1885 adults) received an INAH, and 346 adult subjects received MP-AzeFlu. All active treatments were well tolerated and effective as measured by the reduction in nasal symptoms. Head-to-head comparisons were only available for MP-AzeFlu versus the individual active agent components. MP-AzeFlu provided significantly greater symptom relief than either azelastine or fluticasone propionate alone and with an onset starting at 30 minutes after the dose.

CONCLUSION

The most recent addition to intranasal sprays for the maintenance therapy of AR is MP-AzeFlu, a single formulation nasal spray of azelastine hydrochloride and fluticasone propionate in an advanced delivery system. Analysis of clinical data showed this to be the first new intranasal medication that provides greater clinical benefit than an INCS in treating AR.

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.