Mometasone furoate improves congestion in patients with moderate-to-severe seasonal allergic rhinitis

Pollen Allergy Screening with Allergen-Specific and Total Immunoglobulin E Titers

Background

Allergic rhinitis is a typical type I hypersensitivity reaction, commonly caused by inhalant allergens. Accurate identification of the causative antigen is important for rapid diagnosis and treatment initiation.

Objective

This study examined the efficiency of serum-based allergen-specific immunoglobulin E and total immunoglobulin E antibody titers in screening for pollen allergy. We also examined the effect of cross-reactive carbohydrate determinants on specific immunoglobulin E titers in screening for pollen allergy, one of the causes of false positivity in specific immunoglobulin E measurements.

Methods

A questionnaire was used to evaluate the symptoms of pollinosis among participants who underwent a medical examination. One hundred and thirty-two participants reported pollen allergy symptoms and 127 reported an absence of symptoms. Specific immunoglobulin E levels were measured using the AlaSTAT 3g Allergy method. Seventeen components, including four types of cross-reactive carbohydrate determinant-specific immunoglobulin E antibodies, were measured and evaluated comparatively.

Results

The sensitivity and specificity of the tests in predicting the presence or absence of pollen allergy were analyzed. The values of the areas under the curves for immunoglobulin E antibody levels against cedar, cypress, orchard grass, and ragweed pollen were 0.87, 0.82, 0.63, and 0.56, respectively. A cross-reactive carbohydrate determinant-related false-positive effect on the pollen specific immunoglobulin E titer was noted in pollen screening.

Conclusion

Cedar pollen-specific immunoglobulin E titers showed sufficient accuracy for use in pollen allergy screening. The study of cross-reactive carbohydrate determinants suggested that subjects who tested positive for pollen often had false-positive results due to the impact of cross-reactive carbohydrate determinants.

The Nose as a Route for Therapy: Part 1. Pharmacotherapy

This article reviews nasal structure and function in the light of intranasal pharmacotherapy. The nose provides an accessible, fast route for local treatment of nose and sinus diseases, with lower doses than are necessary systemically and few adverse effects. It can also be used for other medications as it has sufficient surface area protected from local damage by mucociliary clearance, absence of digestive enzymes, responsive blood flow, and provides a rapid route to the central nervous system.

Perceptions and Management of Allergic Rhinitis Among Ecuadorian Otorhinolaryngologists: A Survey-Based Study

Objective

Allergic rhinitis (AR) represents a large burden to the healthcare system due to its high prevalence and impact on patients’ lives. Despite the existence of evidence-based guidelines, some studies have found that physicians do not always follow the latest recommendations. The aim of our study was to determine how Ecuadorian otorhinolaryngologists (ENTs) perceive some epidemiological aspects related to AR, as well as their preferences for managing the disease.

Methods

We conducted an observational, survey-based cross-sectional study, among 116 Ecuadorian ENTs. The survey used was adapted from a previous publication and consisted of 30 multiple choice questions, concerning several topics of AR. Descriptive statistics (frequency, and standard deviation) were performed for clinical and demographic variables.

Results

A total of 116 Ecuadorian ENTs completed the survey. Of them, 62.9% were male, with an average age of 42 years (SD ± 11.58). Computed tomography (CT) scan and nasal cytology were selected as the main diagnostic tests for AR by 62/91 (68.1%) and 45/91 (49.5%) of participants, respectively. Moreover, only 12/116 (10.3%) of participants performed skin prick tests (SPT). Allergen immunotherapy (AIT) was performed by 37/107 (36.4%) of participants.

Conclusion

In general, most participants agreed that the prevalence of AR appears to be increasing, with increased exposure to allergens, irritants, and pollutants as the main probable cause. Children and adolescents were accounted as the group most affected by AR, with sinusitis and asthma identified as the most frequent comorbidities. Finally, we found unmet needs in the diagnostic and management of AR that should be addressed among Ecuadorian ENTs, in particular the high use of CT scans as part of routine evaluations, as well as the low use of allergen immunotherapy.

Modulation of Allergic Inflammation in the Nasal Mucosa of Allergic Rhinitis Sufferers With Topical Pharmaceutical Agents

Allergic rhinitis (AR) is a chronic upper respiratory disease estimated to affect between 10 and 40% of the worldwide population. The mechanisms underlying AR are highly complex and involve multiple immune cells, mediators, and cytokines. As such, the development of a single drug to treat allergic inflammation and/or symptoms is confounded by the complexity of the disease pathophysiology. Complete avoidance of allergens that trigger AR symptoms is not possible and without a cure, the available therapeutic options are typically focused on achieving symptomatic relief. Topical therapies offer many advantages over oral therapies, such as delivering greater concentrations of drugs to the receptor sites at the source of the allergic inflammation and the reduced risk of systemic side effects. This review describes the complex pathophysiology of AR and identifies the mechanism(s) of action of topical treatments including antihistamines, steroids, anticholinergics, decongestants and chromones in relation to AR pathophysiology. Following the literature review a discussion on the future therapeutic strategies for AR treatment is provided.

Update on local allergic rhinitis

We here provide an update on the literature regarding local allergic rhinitis (LAR). In reviewing LAR, we have included an updated definition, classifications, mechanisms, comorbidities, and recommendations for diagnosis and treatment for LAR, as well as the defined research areas for future evidence-based studies. LAR is a localised nasal allergic response in the absence of systemic atopy characterised by local production of specific IgE (sIgE) antibodies, a TH2 pattern of mucosal cell infiltration during natural exposure to aeroallergens, and a positive nasal allergen provocation test response, with the release of inflammatory mediators. The localised allergic response of LAR is an important topic for the study of allergies. This review provides an update on the current knowledge of LAR.

The effect of combined medical treatment on quality of life in persistent allergic rhinitis

Allergic rhinitis may significantly affect the patients' quality of life. The aim of this study was to compare the effects of nasal steroids alone, to nasal steroids plus Levocetirizine or Montelukast, on quality of life in persistent allergic rhinitis. This is a prospective, randomized study and included 56 patients with moderate to severe persistent allergic rhinitis. All patients had house dust mite allergy on skin prick test and we divided the patients into three groups. 1 month long medical treatment was; topical Mometasone furoate 200 mcg/day in the first group (n:14), Mometasone furoate 200 mcg/day plus oral Levocetirizine 5 mg/day in the second group (n:21), and Mometasone furoate 200 mcg/day plus oral Montelukast 10 mg/day in the third group (n:21). We evaluated the patients before treatment and at the first month after treatment with mini rhinoconjunctivitis quality of life questionnaire (miniRQLQ) and nasal symptom scores. In the first group nasal symptom and mini RQLQ scores were not improved but in second and third group, both scores were improved significantly (p < 0.05). Nasal obstruction symptom score was better in the third group after treatment (p < 0.01), but other nasal symptom scores (rhinorrhea, sneezing and nasal itching) were better in the second group (For each symptom p < 0.05). Improvement of quality of life scores in the second group were better than the third group (p < 0.05). In persistent allergic rhinitis, combination of levocetirizine or montelukast to nasal steroids was better than the topical mometasone furoate alone in terms of quality of life.

Delay of onset of symptoms of Japanese cedar pollinosis by treatment with a leukotriene receptor antagonist

BACKGROUND

Leukotriene receptor antagonists (LTRAs) are effective for prophylactic treatment of pollinosis based on studies showing that administration of LTRAs prior to or at the start of the pollen season reduces symptoms and QOL disturbance at the peak of pollen dispersal. Two goals of prophylactic treatment of pollinosis are use of fewer types of drugs and delay of onset of symptoms and impairement of QOL. Therefore, this study was performed to determine if pranlukast, a LTRA, met these goals in treatment of pollinosis.

METHODS

Pranlukast or placebo was administered to patients who visited our hospital immediately before the start of Japanese cedar pollen dispersal. The study was performed for 4 weeks as a double blind randomized trial. Subsequently, all patients were given pranlukast for a further 4 weeks from the peak until the end of pollen dispersal. The incidence of symptoms and use of concomitant drugs were investigated from daily nasal allergy records kept by patients. QOL was evaluated using the JRQLQ questionnaire.

RESULTS

In the double blind period of the study, the percentage of patients who used concomitant drugs for nasal symptoms was significantly lower in the pranlukast group compared to the placebo group. Development of nasal symptoms (sneezing, runny nose and nasal congestion) and disturbance of daily activities were significantly delayed in the pranlukast group. No serious adverse reactions occurred in the pranlukast group and no patient withdrew from treatment with pranlukast.

CONCLUSIONS

Pranlukast is effective for prophylactic treatment of pollinosis.

Mometasone Furoate Nasal Spray Provides Early, Continuing Relief of Nasal Congestion and Improves Nasal Patency in Allergic Patients

Background

Patients report nasal congestion as the most bothersome seasonal allergic rhinitis (SAR) symptom. Measurement of this symptom in previous research has largely been based on subjective patient ratings. This study was designed to measure efficacy, onset, and duration of action of the corticosteroid mometasone furoate nasal spray (MFNS) on nasal congestion using an environmental exposure chamber (EEC) and the objective assessment acoustic rhinometry (AcR).

Methods

In a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled study, ragweed-sensitive subjects were exposed to ragweed pollen (3500 ± 500 pollen grains/m3) in an EEC (day 1). Subjects rated instantaneous total nasal symptom score (TNSS), including NSS for congestion (NSS-C). Qualifying subjects received MFNS, 200 micrograms, or placebo and rated postdosing symptoms; a subset received MFNS, 200 micrograms, or placebo q.d. for 6 subsequent days, returning to EEC on day 8. Days 1 and 8 assessments included AcR, TNSS, and the Rhinoconjunctivitis Quality of Life Questionnaire developed for use in the EEC (RQOLQ-EEC).

Results

At day 1, hour 6, patients receiving MFNS (n = 155) reported significantly reduced congestion versus placebo (n = 155) per AcR and NSS-C after one dose, showing numerically superior TNSS change from baseline (p = NS). Among the subset who received 6 additional days of treatment, MFNS (n = 78) yielded significantly lower TNSS versus placebo (n = 77) before day 8 EEC entry and throughout 4-hour exposure (p < 0.05), except at 3.5 hours. AcR showed lower congestion with MFNS versus placebo before day 8 EEC exposure and at 24 and 26 hours after final dose (p < 0.05 for all). AcR and NSS-C correlated at multiple time points. Day 8 RQOLQ-EEC between-group scores were significantly different (p = 0.02) for practical problems.

Conclusion

MFNS, 200 micrograms, showed onset of nasal congestion relief at 6 hours and duration of action beyond 24 hours postdosing. Objective and subjective assessments were correlated in subjects with maximal (placebo) or minimal (MFNS treatment) congestion symptoms; both assessments were correlated with improved QOL.

Intranasal mometasone furoate therapy for allergic rhinitis symptoms and rhinitis-disturbed sleep

BACKGROUND

Allergic rhinitis (AR) and related nasal congestion cause rhinitis-disturbed sleep (RDS). Intranasal corticosteroids reduce nasal congestion and improve sleep quality in AR but have not been extensively studied in RDS.

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the efficacy of mometasone furoate nasal spray (NS) on nasal symptoms, nasal patency, sleep variables, quality of life, and daytime functioning in perennial AR (PAR) and concomitant RDS.

METHODS

In this double-blind 4-week study, 30 adults with PAR and moderate RDS were randomized 2:1 to receive mometasone furoate NS, 200 microg, or placebo each morning. The primary end point was the apnea-hypopnea index. Secondary outcome measures included changes in total nasal symptom score (TNSS), nighttime symptom score, daytime peak nasal inspiratory flow, nighttime flow limitation index, Rhinoconjunctivitis Quality of Life Questionnaire-Standardized (RQLQ-S) score, Epworth Sleepiness Scale score, and Work Productivity and Activities Impairment-Allergy Specific (WPAI-AS) questionnaire score. Analysis of covariance was used for all efficacy end points.

RESULTS

The apnea-hypopnea index at study end was not statistically significantly different between groups. However, mometasone furoate NS therapy significantly improved morning (P = .04) and evening (P = .01) TNSSs, morning (P = .049) and evening (P = .03) nasal obstruction/blockage/congestion, daily peak nasal inspiratory flow (P = .03), flow limitation index (P = .02), Epworth Sleepiness Scale score (P = .048), RQLQ-S score (P = .03), and 2 of 5 WPAI-AS domains. Among patients receiving mometasone furoate NS, TNSS improvements were significantly correlated with improved work- and non-work-related productivity.

CONCLUSIONS

In patients with PAR and RDS, mometasone furoate NS use improved nasal symptoms, sleepiness, and impairment in daily activities. Correlated reduced nasal symptoms and improved performance suggest that improving AR symptoms with mometasone furoate NS administration can benefit sleep and daytime functioning.

Treatment of congestion in upper respiratory diseases

Congestion, as a symptom of upper respiratory tract diseases including seasonal and perennial allergic rhinitis, acute and chronic rhinosinusitis, and nasal polyposis, is principally caused by mucosal inflammation. Though effective pharmacotherapy options exist, no agent is universally efficacious; therapeutic decisions must account for individual patient preferences. Oral H₁-antihistamines, though effective for the common symptoms of allergic rhinitis, have modest decongestant action, as do leukotriene receptor antagonists. Intranasal antihistamines appear to improve congestion better than oral forms. Topical decongestants reduce congestion associated with allergic rhinitis, but local adverse effects make them unsuitable for long-term use. Oral decongestants show some efficacy against congestion in allergic rhinitis and the common cold, and can be combined with oral antihistamines. Intranasal corticosteroids have broad anti-inflammatory activities, are the most potent long-term pharmacologic treatment of congestion associated with allergic rhinitis, and show some congestion relief in rhinosinusitis and nasal polyposis. Immunotherapy and surgery may be used in some cases refractory to pharmacotherapy. Steps in congestion management include (1) diagnosis of the cause(s), (2) patient education and monitoring, (3) avoidance of environmental triggers where possible, (4) pharmacotherapy, and (5) immunotherapy (for patients with allergic rhinitis) or surgery for patients whose condition is otherwise uncontrolled.

Allergic rhinitis

Childhood rhinitis may be classified into non-allergic and allergic. Allergic rhinitis is further divided into seasonal and perennial. Seasonal rhinitis is a disease particularly of teenagers and young adults and appears to be less common in primary and pre school age children. In seasonal rhinitis, with relevant grass pollen sensitization, the link between the allergen exposure and rhinitis is clear cut. However, in other situations such as perennial rhinitis and house dust mite allergen sensitization, the link between symptoms and allergen exposure is less certain. Avoidance of allergens often proves to be difficult in practice. Intranasal steroids are the treatment of choice for persistent moderate-severe allergic rhinitis and are more effective than antihistamines for relief of nasal obstruction. Antihistamines are effective for control of histamine related symptoms such as itching, rhinorrhoea and sneezing. The use and benefits of sublingual or injectable immunotherapy in children are controversial.

Efficacy of mometasone furoate nasal spray in the treatment of allergic rhinitis. Meta-analysis of randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, clinical trials

RATIONALE

Several randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled clinical trials have demonstrated the efficacy of mometasone furoate nasal spray (MFNS) in the treatment of allergic rhinitis (AR) thus allowing for a meta-analysis to determine the overall treatment effect.

METHODS

A comprehensive search of the MEDLINE, LILACS, SCOPUS, and the Cochrane Library databases up to 31 October, 2007 was carried out. Randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, clinical trials evaluating the efficacy of MFNS in patients with AR compared to placebo were included. Total nasal symptom scores (TNSS), individual nasal symptoms, total non-nasal symptom scores (TNNSS) and nasal airflow were analysed as the standardized mean difference (SMD). Meta-analysis was performed with the random or the fixed effect models depending on heterogeneity, by using revman 5 software.

DATA SYNTHESIS

Sixteen of the 113 identified articles met the inclusion criteria. For MFNS efficacy on TNSS, 2998 participants were analysed: 1534 received MFNS and 1464 placebo. Mometasone furoate nasal spray was associated with a significant reduction in TNSS (SMD -0.49, 95% CI: -0.60 to -0.38; P < 0.00001; I(2) = 50.1%). A significant effect on SMD for nasal stuffiness/congestion (-0.41; 95% CI: -0.56 to -0.27), rhinorrhoea (-0.44; 95% CI: -0.66 to -0.21), sneezing (-0.40; 95% CI: -0.57 to -0.23) and nasal itching (-0.39; 95% CI: -0.53 to -0.25) was also demonstrated. Mometasone furoate nasal spray treated subjects also showed a significant reduction in TNNSS (-0.30; 95% CI: -0.43 to -0.18). The proportion of patients with adverse events was similar for MFNS and placebo (0.99; 95% CI: 0.81-1.20; P = 0.91).

CONCLUSIONS

This meta-analysis provides a level Ia evidence for the efficacy of MFSN in the treatment of AR vs placebo. Adverse events frequency was similar in both groups.

Optimal management of nasal congestion caused by allergic rhinitis in children: safety and efficacy of medical treatments

Nasal congestion is such a frequent and multifactorial occurrence in young children that parents and medical caregivers often overlook the need for medical intervention. However, children with congestion can suffer quality-of-life detriments resulting from sleep disturbance, learning impairment, and fatigue. Congestion also impairs the normal nasal breathing that is physiologically important for the efficient cleaning and conditioning of inspired air. Further, the most common cause of congestion, allergic rhinitis, is considered a potential risk factor for asthma. Published guidelines on the treatment of allergic rhinitis agree that management strategies in children should follow the same principles as in adults, while recognizing the need for dosage adjustments and being aware of unique safety issues. Intranasal corticosteroids, with robust effects in reducing congestion and good tolerability, remain a treatment of choice. Despite lingering concerns about the potential for growth suppression with these drugs, clinical evidence suggests a very low risk at prescribed dosages, especially with compounds that have a low systemic bioavailability. Oral antihistamines are commonly cited as first-line options for allergic rhinitis, although their effect on nasal congestion is relatively modest. First-generation antihistamines should not be administered to children because of their sedative properties, which can worsen learning problems associated with allergic rhinitis. Second-generation oral antihistamines are preferred, although this class is not completely devoid of adverse effects. Other treatments, such as a nasal antihistamine, decongestants, and immunotherapy, present varying levels of safety and tolerability issues in children.

Clinical benefits of combination treatment with mometasone furoate nasal spray and loratadine vs monotherapy with mometasone furoate in the treatment of seasonal allergic rhinitis

BACKGROUND

Intranasal corticosteroids and nonsedating antihistamines are the drug classes most often prescribed to treat allergic rhinitis (AR). Treatment guidelines recommend a combination of these agents for moderate-to-severe AR. However, clinical studies have found that combining an antihistamine with an intranasal corticosteroid provides few or no advantages over monotherapy with an intranasal corticosteroid.

OBJECTIVE

To compare the efficacy of mometasone furoate nasal spray (NS) plus loratadine with that of monotherapy with the individual agents in patients 12 years and older with at least a 2-year history of seasonal AR.

METHODS

In a multicenter, randomized, double-blind, parallel-group, placebo-controlled clinical study, 702 patients were randomized to receive mometasone furoate NS, 200 microg, plus loratadine, 10 mg (n = 169); mometasone furoate NS, 200 microg (n = 176); loratadine, 10 mg (n = 181); or placebo (n = 176) once daily for 15 days. Primary efficacy variables were total nasal symptom score (TNSS) and total symptom score (TSS) as recorded on diary cards.

RESULTS

No statistically significant differences were observed between mometasone furoate NS plus loratadine and mometasone furoate NS monotherapy for the primary efficacy variables. For TNSS and TSS, all 3 active drug therapies were more effective than placebo (P < or = .02). Both mometasone furoate NS treatment regimens were more effective than loratadine or placebo for TNSS (P < .01 for both) and TSS (P < or = .03 for both), whereas loratadine was more effective than placebo for TNSS only (P = .02).

CONCLUSIONS

Combination therapy with mometasone furoate NS and loratadine provided benefits similar to monotherapy with mometasone furoate NS for the symptoms of seasonal AR. Therefore, mometasone furoate NS monotherapy was shown to be an effective treatment for seasonal AR.

Ocular symptom reduction in patients with seasonal allergic rhinitis treated with the intranasal corticosteroid mometasone furoate

BACKGROUND

Allergic rhinitis (AR) is more appropriately termed allergic rhinoconjunctivitis owing to the equally bothersome nasal and ocular symptoms. Extensive evidence supports the ability of intranasal corticosteroids to reduce nasal symptoms of AR, although less evidence is available to define clearly their impact on allergic conjunctivitis.

OBJECTIVE

To determine the effect of the intranasal corticosteroid mometasone furoate nasal spray (NS) on the ocular symptoms of seasonal AR.

METHODS

This retrospective pooled analysis of 4 placebo-controlled clinical studies randomized patients 12 years and older with symptomatic seasonal AR to receive mometasone furoate NS, 200 microg once daily (n = 491), or placebo (n = 492). Ocular symptom (eye tearing [epiphora], itching [pruritus], and redness [erythema]) severity was rated by patients twice daily on a 4-point scale (0 = none to 3 = severe) in the morning and evening, with scores averaged to obtain a daily mean score. Efficacy variables were the pooled mean change from baseline in the averaged morning and evening total ocular symptom score (TOSS) and the individual ocular symptom scores.

RESULTS

The change in mean TOSS from baseline to days 1 to 15 was -1.33 (-19.8%) with mometasone furoate NS and -0.93 (-5.6%) with placebo (P < .001). Improvements in individual symptoms were significantly better with mometasone furoate NS than with placebo on days 2 (tearing) and 4 (itching and redness). A slightly greater reduction in TOSS was seen with mometasone furoate NS treatment in the evening than in the morning.

CONCLUSIONS

This detailed analysis of an intranasal corticosteroid on individual ocular symptoms supports the positive impact of mometasone furoate NS on ocular symptoms.

New treatment options in allergic rhinitis: patient considerations and the role of ciclesonide

Allergic rhinitis (AR) is a chronic inflammatory respiratory disease affecting 5%-50% of the worldwide population and its prevalence is increasing (Herman 2007). In addition, AR is associated with asthma and other co-morbidities such as conjunctivitis and sinusitis. The main symptoms are nasal congestion, rhinorrea, sneezing, itching, and post-nasal drainage induced after allergen exposure by an IgE-mediated inflammation of the membranes lining the nose. AR is not a life-threatening disease, but it has been shown to have a significant impact on quality of life. The Allergic Rhinitis and its Impact on Asthma (ARIA) guidelines propose a classification of AR in intermittent and persistent, each graded as mild or moderate-severe, and provide a stepwise approach to the treatment. Inhaled steroids and antihistamine are the main tools in AR therapy but more safe and effective drugs are, however, needed. Inhaled steroid ciclesonide appears to be safe and effective.