Treatment of Acute Sore Throat in Malaysia: A Consensus of Multidisciplinary Recommendations Using Modified Delphi Methodology

Introduction

Using antibiotics in the treatment of acute sore throats has been linked with antimicrobial resistance (AMR) and needs to be addressed. The consensus sought to improve diagnostic accuracy, decrease unwarranted antibiotic prescriptions and enhance patient outcomes.

Methods

A multidisciplinary panel of nine experts reviewed published literature and discussed current practices in managing sore throat. Ten evidence-based statements on sore throat and AMR, diagnostic accuracy and antibiotic prescribing, and symptomatic therapy were developed. A modified Delphi exercise was then carried out. A consensus was reached if at least 70% of the group agreed with the statement.

Results

All 10 statements for managing acute sore throat achieved consensus. The major concern of AMR caused by improper antibiotic prescribing, particularly in cases of viral sore throat, was recognized. This underscores the need for improved diagnostic tools, such as the McIsaac score, to reduce needless antibiotic prescriptions. To improve patient satisfaction, effective pain management using non-antibiotic alternatives such as paracetamol, non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs), and flurbiprofen throat lozenges was recommended. Pain and inflammation can be adequately managed with low-dose NSAIDs. The potential benefits of topical NSAIDs were acknowledged for their milder safety profile than oral formulations.

Conclusion

A consensus was achieved on the use of a clinical diagnostic tool, prudent use of antibiotics, and symptomatic therapy in acute sore throat management. The McIsaac score and point-of-care testing (POCT) for the presence of group A beta-hemolytic Streptococcus (GABHS) can aid in the decision-making process for antibiotic use, reducing needless prescriptions. The mainstay of therapy is symptomatic treatment, which includes the use of NSAIDs.

A systematic review of flurbiprofen 8.75 mg dose and risk of adverse events (excluding haemorrhagic) resulting from drug-drug interactions

Background: Flurbiprofen 8.75 mg lozenges and oromucosal sprays are used for symptomatic relief of sore throat in patients aged 12 years and over. The documented adverse events of flurbiprofen use include those related to its pharmacological actions, namely, increased risk of haemorrhagic events, however other adverse events (such as nephrotoxicity and cardiac failure) have been known to occur. The likelihood of occurrence of adverse events increases when flurbiprofen is used concomitantly with some other medications. Therefore, the objective of this systematic review was to collate the current evidence on adverse events which occur with flurbiprofen 8.75 mg dose (any formulation), in particular as a result of interaction with other medicinal products, with a focus on non-haemorrhagic events. Methods: Systematic searches of the literature were conducted to identify literature on any formulation of flurbiprofen 8.75 mg up to the date of the electronic database search (data lock: 28 April 2020). Publications were screened to identify studies reporting non-haemorrhagic adverse events with flurbiprofen 8.75 mg and/or non-haemorrhagic adverse events in the comparator arm. Data extraction was performed for eligible studies according to pre-defined criteria and summarised in narratives, tables and figures. Risk of bias and certainty of evidence assessments were planned for each included study where results relating to the primary objective of the systematic review were available. Results: Of 1,528 publications identified by systematic literature searches, 26 met the inclusion criteria and were included in this review. None of these 26 studies contained information on non-haemorrhagic adverse events occurring as a result of a drug-drug interaction (interaction with concomitant medication used with flurbiprofen 8.75 mg), as per the primary objective and secondary objectives of the systematic review. Conclusion: Results from this systematic review on the risk of non-haemorrhagic events did not provide evidence for these events occurring as a result of interaction with other medicinal products. Additional appropriately designed studies would be required to confirm whether these findings suggest a true absence of risk or limitations in reporting.

Evidence of the Efficacy of Flurbiprofen 8.75 mg Lozenges for Patients Receiving Antibiotics for Laboratory-Confirmed Streptococcal Pharyngitis

OBJECTIVES

To determine the efficacy of flurbiprofen 8.75 mg lozenges for patients with laboratory-confirmed streptococcal pharyngitis both before and concomitant with antibiotics.

METHODS

This post hoc analysis comprised adult participants from 2 earlier randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled studies evaluating the analgesic efficacy of flurbiprofen 8.75 mg lozenges in acute pharyngitis. Throat swabs were obtained to diagnose streptococcal infection. Prior to and 2 hours after each dose of study medication (flurbiprofen or placebo lozenges), patients rated 3 symptoms of acute pharyngitis (sore throat pain, difficulty swallowing, and swollen throat) using visual analogue scales. Appropriate antibiotic treatment was initiated when culture results were reported. Mean changes in each pharyngeal symptom were compared over the immediate 24 hours before and during the initial 24 hours of antibiotic treatment.

RESULTS

Twenty-four patients provided both preantibiotic and concomitant antibiotic efficacy outcomes. Relief of throat pain was 93% greater in the flurbiprofen group than in the placebo group before antibiotic coadministration and 84% greater than placebo during antibiotic administration (both P < .05). Relief of difficulty swallowing was 71% greater in the flurbiprofen group than in the placebo before antibiotic administration (P = .16) and 107% greater during concomitant antibiotic administration (P = .04). Relief of the sensation of throat swelling was 295% greater with flurbiprofen than placebo before antibiotic administration (P = .008) and 70% greater during concomitant antibiotic administration (P = .06). For placebo-treated patients, relief from throat pain and difficulty swallowing were similar before and during antibiotic treatment (P > .05), indicating no benefit with antibiotic administration for these symptoms. No treatment-related discontinuations or serious adverse events were reported.

CONCLUSIONS

Irrespective of antibiotic use, flurbiprofen 8.75 mg lozenges provide well-tolerated, effective relief of pharyngeal symptoms in patients with streptococcal infection. In the 24 hours after administration, antibiotics provide no relief of throat pain or difficulty swallowing beyond the topical demulcent effects of placebo lozenges.

Morniflumate in the treatment of upper airways affections in adults: a review and meta-analysis

INTRODUCTION

We compared, by a meta-analytic process, the antipyretic and symptomatic activity, and the safety profile of morniflumate (ATC code: M01AX22) with those of other commonly used non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) in acute ear, nose and throat (ENT) diseases.

EVIDENCE ACQUISITION

Our search strategy was performed in various database, included Google Scholar, PubMed and Embase, the key word was "morniflumate". Interventional studies in adults with ENT or lower airway inflammatory diseases were compared in a meta-analysis for the number of symptom-free and fever-free patients at day 3 of therapy, and of drug interruptions due to adverse events (AEs). For symptoms, we included only studies on ENT inflammatory diseases; for fever and AEs, we also considered studies on lower airway inflammatory diseases. Of 33 studies retrieved, 8 (24.2%) met the inclusion criteria and compared morniflumate to placebo, nimesulide, paracetamol and other NSAIDs.

EVIDENCE SYNTHESIS

On day 3, the number of symptom-free patients was significantly higher with morniflumate vs placebo and nimesulide (+20% and +30%, respectively) and similar to the other comparators. The number of fever-free patients significantly increased (up to 70%) with morniflumate vs all comparators except paracetamol (similar). No difference was found in the number of AE-related interruptions.

CONCLUSIONS

morniflumate showed good antipyretic and symptomatic activity and a short-term safety profile at least comparable to that of other NSAIDs.

[Results of a clinical study of the combination of flurbiprofen and cetylpyridinium chloride in patients with sore throat]

Sore throat is one of the most frequent complaints with which patients seek medical help from an otorhinolaryngologist, therapist and pediatrician.

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the efficacy and safety of a combined topical drug with flurbiprofen and cetylpyridinium chloride in patients with sore throat caused by upper respiratory tract infections.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

A prospective multicenter open randomized comparative study in parallel groups included 266 adult patients with an established diagnosis of acute pharyngitis or acute tonsillitis aged 18 to 60 years with the main complaint of sore throat caused by viral infections of the upper respiratory tract. The patients included in the study were randomized into two groups of 133 participants each: the 1st group included patients who received the combined agent flurbiprofen 8.75 mg and cetylpyridinium chloride 1.00 mg in the form of tablets for resorption, the 2nd group included patients who received cetylpyridinium chloride 1.2 mg in the form of medicinal lozenges. The effectiveness was evaluated on several scales (RADT, STPIS, TPA, STPR) reflecting subjective and objective indicators of the dynamics of the disease.

RESULTS

The studied combination proved to be more effective than the monocomponent agent and was characterized by a more pronounced decrease in sore throat within 2 hours after taking the drug and a decrease in pharyngeal hyperemia.

CONCLUSION

According to the results of the study, the use of a drug based on a combination of flurbiprofen and cetylpyridinium chloride was accompanied by a rapid and pronounced decrease in sore throat and pharyngeal hyperemia in patients with upper respiratory tract infections.

[Results of the clinical study of the combination of flurbiprofen and cetylpyridinium chloride in patients with sore throat]

Sore throat is one of the most frequent complaints with which patients seek medical help from an otorhinolaryngologist, therapist and pediatrician.

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the efficacy and safety of a combined topical drug with flurbiprofen and cetylpyridinium chloride compared with a monocomponent drug in patients with sore throat associated with manifestations of acute pharyngitis, tonsillitis or with exacerbation of chronic forms of pharyngitis or tonsillitis.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

A prospective, multicenter, open, randomized, comparative study in parallel groups included 266 adult patients aged 18 to 60 years with an established diagnosis of acute pharyngitis or acute tonsillitis with the main complaint of sore throat caused by viral infections of the upper respiratory tract. The patients included in the study were randomized into two groups of 133 participants each: the 1st group included patients who received the combined agent flurbiprofen 8.75 mg and cetylpyridinium chloride 1.0 mg in the form of tablets for resorption; the 2nd group included patients who received cetylpyridinium chloride 1.2 mg in the form of medicinal lozenges. The effectiveness was evaluated on three scales - STPIS, TPA, STPR, reflecting indicators of the dynamics of the disease.

RESULTS

The studied combination turned out to be more effective than the monocomponent remedy and was characterized by a more pronounced decrease in the intensity of sore throat within 2 hours after taking the drug and a decrease in pharyngeal hyperemia.

CONCLUSION

According to results of the study, the use of a drug based on the combination of flurbiprofen and cetylpyridinium chloride was accompanied by a rapid and pronounced decrease in the intensity of sore throat and pharyngeal hyperemia in patients with upper respiratory tract infections.

Inhibition of viral and bacterial trigger-stimulated prostaglandin E2 by a throat lozenge containing flurbiprofen: An in vitro study using a human respiratory epithelial cell line

Objectives:

Symptoms of sore throat result from oropharyngeal inflammation, for which prostaglandin E₂ is a key mediator. Flurbiprofen is a non-steroidal anti-inflammatory that provides sore throat relief. The preliminary objective of this study was to develop an in vitro model for assessing prostaglandin E₂ stimulation by viral and bacterial triggers. The primary objective was to investigate the effect of diluted flurbiprofen-containing lozenges on prostaglandin E₂ concentrations in stimulated cells.

Methods:

Prostaglandin E₂ production was stimulated in three epithelial cell lines (A549, HEp2, and clonetics bronchial/tracheal epithelial) with influenza A virus (4.5 log₁₀ tissue culture infectious dose₅₀/mL), or bacterial lipopolysaccharide (10µ g/mL) and peptidoglycan (3µ g/mL) and incubated overnight. Prostaglandin E₂ levels were assessed by enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay up to 24 h after stimulation. The effect of flurbiprofen 8.75 mg lozenges (diluted to 0.44 mg/mL) on PGE₂ production in stimulated cells was assessed in parallel; prior to viral/LPS/PEP stimulation of cells, 300 μL of test product or control was added and incubated for 30 s, 2 and 5 min (and 10 min for bacterial trigger). Prostaglandin E₂ levels were measured following stimulation.

Results:

Viral and lipopolysaccharide/peptidoglycan infection did not consistently stimulate HEp2 cells and bronchial/tracheal epithelial cells to produce prostaglandin E₂. Influenza virus, and lipopolysaccharide/peptidoglycan stimulated high prostaglandin E₂ concentrations in A549: mean prostaglandin E₂ concentration 106.48 pg/mL with viral stimulation vs 33.82 pg/mL for uninfected cells; 83.84 pg/mL with lipopolysaccharide/peptidoglycan vs 71.96 pg/mL for uninfected cells. Flurbiprofen produced significant reductions in virus-stimulated prostaglandin E₂ vs stimulated untreated cells at 2 min (p = 0.03). Flurbiprofen produced significant reductions in lipopolysaccharide/peptidoglycan-stimulated prostaglandin E₂ concentrations from 30 s (p = 0.02), and at 2, 5 and 10 min (all p < 0.005) vs stimulated untreated cells.

Conclusions:

A549 cells provide a suitable model for assessment of prostaglandin E₂ stimulation by viral and bacterial triggers. Diluted flurbiprofen-containing lozenges demonstrated rapid anti-inflammatory activity in viral- and lipopolysaccharide/peptidoglycan-stimulated A549 cells.

Locally Delivered Flurbiprofen 8.75 mg for Treatment and Prevention of Sore Throat: A Narrative Review of Clinical Studies

BACKGROUND

Antibiotics are inappropriately prescribed to many people with sore throat. As most cases of sore throat are viral and/or self-limiting, guidelines recommend symptomatic management as first-line treatment. This paper reviews the available clinical evidence for the efficacy and safety of low-dose (8.75 mg) flurbiprofen, locally delivered to the throat for the symptomatic management of pharyngitis/sore throat.

METHOD

A literature search was performed on 27 February 2019 using PubMed. Studies that met the following criteria were included in a narrative review: (1) studies evaluating the effectiveness of flurbiprofen for pharyngitis/sore throat; (2) randomized controlled studies; (3) locally administered formulation of study drug/comparator; and (4) flurbiprofen administered at 8.75 mg dose (single- or multiple-dose administration).

RESULTS

A total of 17 papers were included in the review: 15 publications reporting data from nine unique clinical studies of flurbiprofen for acute pharyngitis, and two reporting studies of flurbiprofen for the prevention of postoperative sore throat (POST). Studies in acute pharyngitis demonstrated that single- and multiple-dose flurbiprofen 8.75 mg, locally administered in lozenge, spray or microgranule form, was well tolerated and provided early onset and long-lasting symptomatic relief from throat pain and soreness, sensation of swollen throat, difficulty swallowing, and other associated symptoms. This included patients with more severe symptoms, patients with confirmed Streptococcus A/C sore throat, and patients taking concomitant antibiotics. In addition, a single preoperative dose of flurbiprofen lozenge was shown to be effective for relieving early POST in patients undergoing general anesthesia.

CONCLUSION

Locally administered, low-dose flurbiprofen offers a useful first-line treatment option for symptomatic relief in patients with "uncomplicated" acute pharyngitis/sore throat associated with upper respiratory tract infection, thus potentially helping to reduce unnecessary antibiotic prescribing. It also offers an effective preoperative treatment option for the reduction of early POST severity and incidence.

Onset of analgesia by a topically administered flurbiprofen lozenge: a randomised controlled trial using the double stopwatch method

Background

The double stopwatch (DSW) method for determining the onset of analgesic activity has been implemented extensively by investigators studying orally administered drugs.

Objective

The aim of this randomised, placebo-controlled trial was to use the DSW method to determine the time to onset of analgesia of a single dose of a topically administered non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drug, flurbiprofen 8.75 mg lozenge.

Methods

Adults with acute sore throat (n = 122) were examined to confirm the presence of tonsillopharyngitis (Tonsillo-Pharyngitis Assessment) and sore throat pain of at least moderate intensity (≥6 on a 0-10 Sore Throat Scale). Lozenges containing flurbiprofen 8.75 mg or inert ingredients (identically flavoured) were administered under double-blind conditions in the clinic while patients assessed pain and pain relief over 3 hours. Onset of analgesia was determined using the DSW method and reported as the Kaplan-Meier median time to meaningful relief. The median time to first perceived relief was also documented.

Results

About 78% of flurbiprofen-treated patients reported meaningful pain relief compared with 48% of placebo-treated patients (p < 0.01); median time to meaningful relief for flurbiprofen-treated patients was 43 minutes (placebo-treated patients were right-censored due to non-responsivity; p = 0.01). Median time to first perceived pain relief was 11 minutes for flurbiprofen-treated patients and 19 minutes for placebo-treated patients (p = 0.03). Flurbiprofen lozenge was well tolerated, with no serious adverse events occurring and no patient discontinuing due to an adverse event.

Conclusion

These results indicate that the DSW method can be successfully applied to the evaluation of the onset of action of a locally administered analgesic in patients with acute sore throat, demonstrating that the onset of action (time to meaningful pain relief) of flurbiprofen lozenge was <45 minutes.

Efficacy of AMC/DCBA lozenges for sore throat: A systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Lozenges containing Amylmetacresol and 2,4-Dichlorobenzylalcohol (AMC/DCBA, eg Strepsils^® ) are marketed as a remedy for acute sore throat. This over-the-counter formulation has antiseptic and local anaesthetic qualities.

OBJECTIVES

The objective of this systematic review and meta-analysis is to evaluate the efficacy and safety of AMC/DCBA for the relief of pain associated with acute uncomplicated sore throat.

METHODS

A systematic review of Literature was conducted using databases Medline, Embase and Cochrane to identify randomised controlled trials comparing AMC/DCBA against placebo or alternative local treatment options for acute uncomplicated sore throat. An additional hand search was performed. Two reviewers independently assessed citations for relevance, inclusion criteria and risk of bias. Meta-analysis was performed on included trials and standardised mean differences (SMD; d_Cohen ) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were calculated.

RESULTS

The literature search yielded 77 citations, 3 of which met the inclusion criteria. AMC/DCBA lozenges (0.6 mg Amylmetacresol, 1.2 mg 2, 4-Dichlorobenzylalcohol) were compared with unflavoured, non-medicated lozenges. The AMC/DCBA formulation additionally contained lidocaine in one and flavouring additives in another trial. A total of 660 adults participated in the included trials. Primary outcome was reduction in pain intensity against baseline, 2 hours after intervention compared with placebo group. Fixed effects meta-analysis resulted in a standardised mean difference in pain intensity of -0.6 (-0.75; -0.45) on an 11-point ordinal rating scale, favouring the AMC/DCBA lozenges. Secondary outcomes were sore throat relief, difficulty swallowing and throat numbness. No serious side effects were reported, whereas mild side effects like headache, cough, nasal congestion and irritation of the oral cavity, were reported in up to 16% of subjects in both groups. All included trials were sponsored by a manufacturer of AMC/DCBA containing lozenges.

CONCLUSIONS

Lozenges with AMC/DCBA can be a safe treatment option to relieve pain in patients with uncomplicated sore throat looking for local treatment options and valuing the modest additional effect compared with non-medicated lozenges. Registration: PROSPERO CRD42015008826.

Pain relief of sore throat with a new anti-inflammatory throat lozenge, ibuprofen 25 mg: A randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled, international phase III study

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this study was to compare the efficacy and safety of a new oromucosal ibuprofen form, ibuprofen 25 mg lozenge, in single and repeat dosing for up to 4 days, to the matched placebo, in the treatment of acute sore throat pain in adults.

METHODS

In this randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial, adult patients with non-streptococcal sore throat and signs of moderate-to-severe associated pain (≥5 on the objective Tonsillo-Pharyngitis Assessment 21-point scale and ≥60 mm on the subjective 0-100 mm visual analogue Sore Throat Pain Intensity Scale [STPIS]) were assigned ibuprofen 25 mg (n=194) or matching placebo (n=191) lozenge treatment. Efficacy was assessed (at the investigating centre up to 2 hours after first dosing, then on an ambulatory basis) by parameters derived from patient's scores on scales of pain relief, pain intensity, and global efficacy assessment. The primary efficacy end-point was the time-weighted TOTal PAin Relief (TOTPAR) over 2 hours after first dosing using the Sore Throat Relief Scale (STRS). Safety and local tolerability were assessed.

RESULTS

Ibuprofen 25 mg was superior to placebo on numerous pain relief parameters; TOTPAR was significantly higher with ibuprofen 25 mg over 2 hours after first dosing (P<.05), the effect being apparent from the first evaluation at 15 minutes (P<.05). The STPIS reduction in favour of ibuprofen 25 mg was not significant vs placebo. Mean STRS scores and patient's global efficacy assessment both reflected a higher efficacy of ibuprofen 25 mg over the 4-day treatment period with tests of statistical significance up to day 1 evening (P<.05), and, in patients with still clinically significant pain (n=128), after an average 4 days (P<.01). Ibuprofen 25 mg lozenge was well tolerated with a safety profile similar to placebo.

CONCLUSION

Low-dose ibuprofen 25 mg lozenge in repeat dosing provides in adults more efficacious and rapid relief of sore throat pain and is as well tolerated as placebo.

CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT01785862.

Efficacy of flurbiprofen 8.75 mg delivered as a spray or lozenge in patients with sore throat due to upper respiratory tract infection: a randomized, non-inferiority trial in the Russian Federation

OBJECTIVE

To assess the efficacy of flurbiprofen 8.75 mg delivered as a spray or lozenge in patients with sore throat due to upper respiratory tract infection (URTI).

MATERIALS AND METHODS

This multicenter, double-blind, double-dummy, non-inferiority study randomized 440 adults with recent-onset, moderate-to-severe sore throat due to URTI to a single dose of either flurbiprofen 8.75 mg spray (n=218) or flurbiprofen 8.75 mg lozenge (n=222). The presence or absence of beta-hemolytic streptococci (A or C) was confirmed by culture tests (throat swab). The primary efficacy end point was the difference from baseline to 2 hours post-dose in sore throat pain intensity scale (STPIS pain intensity difference [PID] 2h), a validated 100 mm visual analog scale (from 0="no pain" to 100="severe pain"), with a non-inferiority margin of -6 mm. Secondary end points included STPIS PID at 1 hour (STPIS PID 1h) and over 2 hours (STPIS sum of sore throat pain intensity differences [SPID]_0-2h) and ratings of patient satisfaction and investigator assessment of drug efficacy at 2 hours. Safety (adverse events [AEs]) was also assessed.

RESULTS

Reductions in sore throat pain intensity at 2 hours (STPIS PID 2h) were similar for spray (least square mean -40.51) and lozenge (-40.10) (difference: 0.41, 95% confidence interval [95% CI] -3.20, 4.01), with non-inferiority demonstrated. Subgroup analyses showed similar efficacy (STPIS PID 2h) for patients testing positive or negative for Strep A or C. There was no significant difference between spray and lozenge in STPIS PID 1h or STPIS SPID_0-2h, and patient satisfaction and investigators' assessment of efficacy at 2 hours were similar for both groups. There were no significant differences in AEs between the two groups, with 17 drug-related events across both groups, all being mild and none being serious.

CONCLUSION

Both formulations demonstrated comparable efficacy and safety profiles and provide patients with two different treatment formats to choose from for effective symptomatic relief of sore throat, depending on their preference.

Flurbiprofen 8.75 mg lozenges for treating sore throat symptoms: a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled study

Aim: This study assessed multiple doses of flurbiprofen 8.75 mg lozenges for the relief of three prominent symptoms of acute pharyngitis: pain intensity (primary end point), difficulty swallowing and swollen throat. Patients & methods: A total of 204 patients (102 in each group) with confirmed pharyngitis (onset ≤4 days) were randomly assigned to take up to five flurbiprofen or placebo lozenges every 3–6 h, for 7 days. Using validated rating scales (sore throat pain intensity, difficulty swallowing and swollen throat) patients rated their symptoms for the duration of the study. Results: Over the first 24 h, patients treated with flurbiprofen lozenges reported significantly greater reductions in sore throat pain (47%) as well as difficulty swallowing (66%) and swollen throat (40%) compared with placebo (all p < 0.05). Conclusion: Multiple doses of flurbiprofen lozenges provide effective relief of sore throat pain intensity as well as difficulty swallowing and swollen throat.

Efficacy of flurbiprofen 8.75 mg lozenge in patients with a swollen and inflamed sore throat

OBJECTIVE

Sore throat is often over-treated with antibiotics, therefore there is a need for non-antibiotic treatments that provide effective relief. From the patient's point of view, symptoms of pharyngeal inflammation such as a "swollen" and "inflamed" throat are often considered the most bothersome; so, a non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drug could be an appropriate treatment. We investigated the efficacy and safety of flurbiprofen 8.75 mg lozenge in adults with a swollen and inflamed throat.

RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS

We enrolled adults with moderate-to-severe sore throat and evidence of tonsillo-pharyngitis into a randomized, double-blind study. Patients received flurbiprofen 8.75 mg or placebo lozenges every 3-6 hours as needed (up to five lozenges in 24 hours) and rated their symptoms (sore throat pain, difficulty swallowing and the sensation of a swollen throat) on standard linear scales regularly over 24 hours. The efficacy of flurbiprofen lozenge was determined in patients reporting a swollen and inflamed throat at baseline, as well as those with relatively severe symptoms.

CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov NCT01049334.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

The main outcome measures were the time-weighted summed differences in patient-reported sore throat pain, difficulty swallowing and swollen throat over 24 hours.

RESULTS

Out of 204 patients, 124 (60.8%) described their throats as swollen and inflamed at baseline. Flurbiprofen lozenges provided greater relief than placebo over 24 hours: 79.8%, 99.6% and 69.3% (for sore throat pain, difficulty swallowing and swollen throat, respectively, all P ≤ 0.01). These outcomes were more substantial in patients with relatively severe symptoms. No serious or unexpected adverse events occurred.

CONCLUSIONS

Flurbiprofen 8.75 mg lozenge appears to provide effective, well-tolerated relief of sore throat, difficulty swallowing and swollen throat in adults with a swollen and inflamed throat, as well as those with relatively severe symptoms. A limitation of these findings is that, while predetermined, these are secondary outcomes derived from a targeted sub-group of patients, not the entire study population.

Parameters of Calcium Metabolism Fluctuated during Initiation or Changing of Antipsychotic Drugs

OBJECTIVE

Serum parameters of calcium homeostasis were measured based on previously published evidence linking osteoporotic fractures and/or bone/mineral loss with antipsychotics.

METHODS

Prospective, four-week, time-series trial was conducted and study population consisted of patients of both genders, aged 35-85 years, admitted within the routine practice, with acute psychotic symptoms, to whom an antipsychotic drug was either introduced or substituted. Serial measurements of serum calcium, phosphorous, magnesium, 25(OH)D, parathyroid hormone, calcitonin, osteocalcin and C-telopeptide were made from patient venous blood samples.

RESULTS

Calcium serum concentrations significantly decreased from baseline to the fourth week (2.42±0.12 vs. 2.33±0.16 mmol/L, p=0.022, n=25). The mean of all calcemia changes from the baseline was -2.6±5.7% (-24.1 to 7.7) with more decreases than increases (78 vs. 49, p=0.010) and more patents having negative sum of calcemia changes from baseline (n=28) than positive ones (n=10) (p=0.004). There were simultaneous falls of calcium and magnesium from baseline (63/15 vs. 23/26, p<0.001; OR=4.75, 95% CI 2.14-10.51), phosphorous (45/33 vs. 9/40, p<0.001; 6.06, 2.59-14.20) and 25(OH)D concentrations (57/21 vs. 13/35, p<0.001; 7.31, 3.25-16.42), respectively. Calcemia positively correlated with magnesemia, phosphatemia and 25(OH)D values. Parathyroid hormone and C-telopeptide showed only subtle oscillations of their absolute concentrations or changes from baseline; calcitonin and osteocalcin did not change. Adjustment of final calcemia trend (depletion/accumulation) for relevant risk factors, generally, did not change the results.

CONCLUSION

In patients with psychotic disorders and several risks for bone metabolism disturbances antipsychotic treatment was associated with the decrease of calcemia and changes in levels of the associated ions.

Efficacy of disintegrating aspirin in two different models for acute mild-to-moderate pain: sore throat pain and dental pain

A recently developed fast-release aspirin tablet formulation has been evaluated in two different pain models. The dental impaction pain model and the sore throat pain model are widely used for assessing analgesia, including acute mild-to-moderate pain. Both studies were double-blind, randomized, parallel group and compared a single dose of 1000 mg aspirin with 1000 mg paracetamol and with placebo and investigated the onset and overall time course of pain relief. Speed of onset was measured by the double-stopwatch method for time to meaningful pain relief and time to first perceptible pain relief. Pain intensity and pain relief were rated subjectively over a 6-h (dental pain) and 2-h (sore throat pain) time period. In both models fast-release aspirin and commercial paracetamol were statistically significantly different from placebo for onset of action, summed pain intensity differences and total pain relief. Meaningful pain relief was achieved within a median of 42.3 and 42.9 min for aspirin and paracetamol, respectively, in the dental pain model. The corresponding numbers in sore throat pain were 48.0 and 40.4 min. All treatments in both studies were safe and well tolerated. No serious adverse events were reported and no subject was discontinued due to an adverse event. Overall the two studies clearly demonstrated efficacy over placebo in the two pain models and a comparable efficacy and safety profile between aspirin and an equivalent dose of paracetamol under the conditions of acute dental pain and acute sore throat pain.

Trial registration These trials were registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, registration number: NCT01420094, registration date: July 27, 2011 and registration number: NCT01453400, registration date: October 13, 2011.

Non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs for the common cold

BACKGROUND

Non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) have been widely used for the treatment of pain and fever associated with the common cold.

OBJECTIVES

To determine the effects of NSAIDs versus placebo (and other treatments) on signs and symptoms of the common cold, and to determine any adverse effects of NSAIDs in people with the common cold.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched CENTRAL (2015, Issue 4, April), (January 1966 to April week 3, 2015), EMBASE (January 1980 to April 2015), CINAHL (January 1982 to April 2015) and ProQuest Digital Dissertations (January 1938 to April 2015).

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) of NSAIDS in adults or children with the common cold.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Four review authors extracted data. We subdivided trials into placebo-controlled RCTs and head-to-head comparisons of NSAIDs. We extracted and summarised data on global analgesic effects (such as reduction of headache and myalgia), non-analgesic effects (such as reduction of nasal symptoms, cough, sputum and sneezing) and side effects. We expressed dichotomous outcomes as risk ratios (RR) with 95% confidence intervals (CI) and continuous data as mean differences (MD) or standardised mean differences (SMD). We pooled data using the fixed-effect and random-effects models.

MAIN RESULTS

We included nine RCTs with 1069 participants, describing 37 comparisons: six were NSAIDs versus placebo and three were NSAIDs versus NSAIDs. The overall risk of bias in the included studies was mixed. In a pooled analysis, NSAIDs did not significantly reduce the total symptom score (SMD -0.40, 95% CI -1.03 to 0.24, three studies, random-effects model), or duration of colds (MD -0.23, 95% CI -1.75 to 1.29, two studies, random-effects model). For respiratory symptoms, cough did not improve (SMD -0.05, 95% CI -0.66 to 0.56, two studies, random-effects model) but the sneezing score significantly improved (SMD -0.44, 95% CI -0.75 to -0.12, two studies, random-effects model). For outcomes related to the analgesic effects of NSAIDs (headache, ear pain, and muscle and joint pain) the treatment produced significant benefits. The risk of adverse effects was not high with NSAIDs (RR 2.94, 95% CI 0.51 to 17.03, two studies, random-effects model) but it is difficult to conclude that such drugs are no different from placebo. The quality of the evidence may be estimated as 'moderate' because of imprecision. The major limitations of this review are that the results of the studies are quite diverse and the number of studies for one result is quite small.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

NSAIDs are somewhat effective in relieving the discomfort caused by a cold but there is no clear evidence of their effect in easing respiratory symptoms. The balance of benefit and harms needs to be considered when using NSAIDs for colds.

Randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled studies on flurbiprofen 8.75 mg lozenges in patients with/without group A or C streptococcal throat infection, with an assessment of clinicians' prediction of 'strep throat'

BACKGROUND

Diagnosing group A streptococcus (Strep A) throat infection by clinical examination is difficult, and misdiagnosis may lead to inappropriate antibiotic use. Most patients with sore throat seek symptom relief rather than antibiotics, therefore, therapies that relieve symptoms should be recommended to patients. We report two clinical trials on the efficacy and safety of flurbiprofen 8.75 mg lozenge in patients with and without streptococcal sore throat.

METHODS

The studies enrolled adults with moderate-to-severe throat symptoms (sore throat pain, difficulty swallowing and swollen throat) and a diagnosis of pharyngitis. The practitioner assessed the likelihood of Strep A infection based on historical and clinical findings. Patients were randomised to flurbiprofen 8.75 mg or placebo lozenges under double-blind conditions and reported the three throat symptoms at baseline and at regular intervals over 24 h.

RESULTS

A total of 402 patients received study medication (n = 203 flurbiprofen, n = 199 placebo). Throat culture identified Strep A in 10.0% of patients and group C streptococcus (Strep C) in a further 14.0%. The practitioners' assessments correctly diagnosed Strep A in 11/40 cases (sensitivity 27.5%, and specificity 79.7%). A single flurbiprofen lozenge provided significantly greater relief than placebo for all three throat symptoms, lasting 3-4 h for patients with and without Strep A/C. Multiple doses of flurbiprofen lozenges over 24 h also led to symptom relief, although not statistically significant in the Strep A/C group. There were no serious adverse events.

CONCLUSIONS

The results highlight the challenge of identifying Strep A based on clinical features. With the growing problem of antibiotic resistance, non-antibiotic treatments should be considered. As demonstrated here, flurbiprofen 8.75 mg lozenges are an effective therapeutic option, providing immediate and long-lasting symptom relief in patients with and without Strep A/C infection.

Influence of the oral dissolution time on the absorption rate of locally administered solid formulations for oromucosal use: the flurbiprofen lozenges paradigm

Flurbiprofen is a nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory agent preferentially used for local oromucosal treatment of painful and/or inflammatory conditions of the oropharynx such as gingivitis, stomatitis, periodontitis, pharyngitis and laryngitis. In this study, we have investigated the bioavailability of a new generic formulation of flurbiprofen lozenges developed by Epifarma Srl, compared to the originator Benactiv Gola® taken as reference. Within the framework of a formal bioequivalence study, we investigated in particular the putative influence of oral dissolution time (i.e. the time spent suckling the lozenge from its intake to complete dissolution) on the absorption rate, and the contribution of this factor to the total variability of plasma flurbiprofen during absorption. We found that the amount of flurbiprofen absorbed into the systemic circulation is not significantly higher for the test drug compared to that of the reference product. We observed that the length of oral dissolution time is inversely correlated to 10-min flurbiprofen plasma levels in the test but not in the reference formulation. We estimated that oral dissolution time accounts for about 14% of overall variability in flurbiprofen plasma 10 min after test drug administration.

Sore throat: effective communication delivers improved diagnosis, enhanced self-care and more rational use of antibiotics

The majority of throat infections are of viral origin and resolve without antibiotic treatment. Despite this, antibiotic use for sore throat infections remains high, partly because it is difficult to determine when antibiotics may be useful, on the basis of physical findings alone. Antibiotics may be beneficial in bacterial throat infections under certain clinical and epidemiological circumstances; however, even many of those infections in which bacteria play a role do resolve just as quickly without antibiotics. Furthermore, non-medical factors such as patient expectations and patient pressure are also important drivers of antibiotic use. To address these issues, a behavioural change is required that can be facilitated by improved communication between primary healthcare providers and patients. In this article, we provide doctors, nurses and pharmacy staff, working in primary care or in the community, with a structured approach to sore throat management, with the aim of educating and empowering patients to self-manage their condition. The first component of this approach involves identifying and addressing patients' expectations and concerns with regard to their sore throat and eliciting their opinion on antibiotics. The second part is dedicated to a pragmatic assessment of the severity of the condition, with attention to red-flag symptoms and risk factors for serious complications. Rather than just focusing on the cause (bacterial or viral) of the upper respiratory tract infections as a rationale for antibiotic use, healthcare providers should instead consider the severity of the patient's condition and whether they are at high risk of complications. The third part involves counselling patients on effective self-management options and providing information on the expected clinical course. Such a structured approach to sore throat management, using empathetic, non-paternalistic language, combined with written patient information, will help to drive patient confidence in self-care and encourage them to accept the self-limiting character of the illness - important steps towards improving antibiotic stewardship in acute throat infections.

Utility of the sore throat pain model in a multiple-dose assessment of the acute analgesic flurbiprofen: a randomized controlled study

BACKGROUND

The sore throat pain model has been conducted by different clinical investigators to demonstrate the efficacy of acute analgesic drugs in single-dose randomized clinical trials. The model used here was designed to study the multiple-dose safety and efficacy of lozenges containing flurbiprofen at 8.75 mg.

METHODS

Adults (n=198) with moderate or severe acute sore throat and findings of pharyngitis on a Tonsillo-Pharyngitis Assessment (TPA) were randomly assigned to use either flurbiprofen 8.75 mg lozenges (n=101) or matching placebo lozenges (n=97) under double-blind conditions. Patients sucked one lozenge every three to six hours as needed, up to five lozenges per day, and rated symptoms on 100-mm scales: the Sore Throat Pain Intensity Scale (STPIS), the Difficulty Swallowing Scale (DSS), and the Swollen Throat Scale (SwoTS).

RESULTS

Reductions in pain (lasting for three hours) and in difficulty swallowing and throat swelling (for four hours) were observed after a single dose of the flurbiprofen 8.75 mg lozenge (P<0.05 compared with placebo). After using multiple doses over 24 hours, flurbiprofen-treated patients experienced a 59% greater reduction in throat pain, 45% less difficulty swallowing, and 44% less throat swelling than placebo-treated patients (all P<0.01). There were no serious adverse events.

CONCLUSIONS

Utilizing the sore throat pain model with multiple doses over 24 hours, flurbiprofen 8.75 mg lozenges were shown to be an effective, well-tolerated treatment for sore throat pain. Other pharmacologic actions (reduced difficulty swallowing and reduced throat swelling) and overall patient satisfaction from the flurbiprofen lozenges were also demonstrated in this multiple-dose implementation of the sore throat pain model.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

This trial was registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, registration number: NCT01048866, registration date: January 13, 2010.

Flurbiprofen microgranules for relief of sore throat: a randomised, double-blind trial

BACKGROUND

Many people with sore throat seek, and are often inappropriately prescribed, antibiotics.

AIM

The objective of this study was to determine the analgesic efficacy of flurbiprofen 8.75 mg microgranules versus placebo. These microgranules are a possible alternative treatment for patients with sore throat due to upper respiratory tract infection (URTI).

DESIGN AND SETTING

Randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled, multiple-dose study conducted at eight primary care sites in Australia.

METHOD

Participants with sore throat of onset within the past 4 days received either flurbiprofen 8.75 mg microgranules or non-medicated placebo microgranules. Throat soreness, difficulty in swallowing, sore throat pain intensity, sore throat relief, oral temperature, and treatment benefits were all assessed at regular intervals.

RESULT

Of 373 patients from eight centres, 186 received flurbiprofen 8.75 mg microgranules and 187 received placebo microgranules (intent-to-treat population). Throat soreness was significantly reduced over the first 2 hours after the first dose. Reductions in difficulty in swallowing were observed at all time points from 5 to 360 minutes after the first dose, after taking flurbiprofen microgranules versus placebo. Sore throat relief was also evident at 1 minute and lasted for at least 6 hours. The multiple-dose efficacy results showed reduction of difficulty in swallowing at the end of days 1-3 and sore throat relief at the end of day 1.

CONCLUSION

Microgranules containing flurbiprofen 8.75 mg provided fast and effective relief from sore throat due to URTI and represent an alternative treatment option to antibiotic therapy.

Non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs for the common cold

BACKGROUND

Non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) have been widely used for the treatment of pain and fever associated with the common cold. However, there is no systematic review to assess the effects of NSAIDs in treating the common cold.

OBJECTIVES

To determine the effects of NSAIDs versus placebo (and other treatments) on signs and symptoms of the common cold, and to determine any adverse effects of NSAIDs in people with the common cold.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched CENTRAL (The Cochrane Library 2013, Issue 1), MEDLINE (January 1966 to April week 4, 2013), EMBASE (January 1980 to April 2013), CINAHL (January 1982 to April 2013) and ProQuest Digital Dissertations (January 1938 to April 2013).

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) of NSAIDS in adults or children with the common cold.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Four review authors extracted data. We subdivided trials into placebo-controlled RCTs and head-to-head comparisons of NSAIDs. We extracted and summarised data on global efficacies of analgesic effects (such as reduction of headache and myalgia), non-analgesic effects (such as reduction of nasal symptoms, cough, sputum and sneezing) and side effects. We expressed dichotomous outcomes as risk ratios (RR) with 95% confidence intervals (CI) and continuous data as mean differences (MD) or standardised mean differences (SMD). We pooled data using the fixed- and random-effects models.

MAIN RESULTS

We included nine RCTs with 1069 participants, describing 37 comparisons: six were NSAIDs versus placebo and three were NSAIDs versus NSAIDs. The overall risk of bias in the included studies was mixed. In a pooled analysis, NSAIDs did not significantly reduce the total symptom score (SMD -0.40, 95% CI -1.03 to 0.24, three studies, random-effects model), or duration of colds (MD -0.23, 95% CI -1.75 to 1.29, two studies, random-effects model). For respiratory symptoms, cough did not improve (SMD -0.05, 95% CI -0.66 to 0.56, two studies, random-effects model) but the sneezing score significantly improved (SMD -0.44, 95% CI -0.75 to -0.12, two studies, random-effects model). For outcomes related to the analgesic effects of NSAIDs (headache, ear pain, and muscle and joint pain) the treatment produced significant benefits. The risk of adverse effects was not high with NSAIDs (RR 2.94, 95% CI 0.51 to 17.03, two studies, random-effects model) and it is difficult to conclude that such drugs are not different from placebo.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

NSAIDs are somewhat effective in relieving discomfort caused by a cold but there is no clear evidence of their effect in easing respiratory symptoms. The balance of benefit and harms needs to be considered when using NSAIDs for colds.

Guideline for the management of acute sore throat

The European Society for Clinical Microbiology and Infectious Diseases established the Sore Throat Guideline Group to write an updated guideline to diagnose and treat patients with acute sore throat. In diagnosis, Centor clinical scoring system or rapid antigen test can be helpful in targeting antibiotic use. The Centor scoring system can help to identify those patients who have higher likelihood of group A streptococcal infection. In patients with high likelihood of streptococcal infections (e.g. 3-4 Centor criteria) physicians can consider the use of rapid antigen test (RAT). If RAT is performed, throat culture is not necessary after a negative RAT for the diagnosis of group A streptococci. To treat sore throat, either ibuprofen or paracetamol are recommended for relief of acute sore throat symptoms. Zinc gluconate is not recommended to be used in sore throat. There is inconsistent evidence of herbal treatments and acupuncture as treatments for sore throat. Antibiotics should not be used in patients with less severe presentation of sore throat, e.g. 0-2 Centor criteria to relieve symptoms. Modest benefits of antibiotics, which have been observed in patients with 3-4 Centor criteria, have to be weighed against side effects, the effect of antibiotics on microbiota, increased antibacterial resistance, medicalisation and costs. The prevention of suppurative complications is not a specific indication for antibiotic therapy in sore throat. If antibiotics are indicated, penicillin V, twice or three times daily for 10 days is recommended. At the present, there is no evidence enough that indicates shorter treatment length.

Non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs for the common cold

BACKGROUND

Although non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) have been widely used for the treatment of pain and fever associated with the common cold, there is no systematic review to assess the effects of NSAIDs in patients with the common cold.

OBJECTIVES

To determine the effects of NSAIDs versus placebo and other treatments on the signs and symptoms of the common cold. To determine any adverse effects of NSAIDs in patients treated with NSAIDs for the common cold.

SEARCH STRATEGY

We searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) (The Cochrane Library 2009, issue 1) which includes the Acute Respiratory Infections (ARI) Group's Specialized Register; MEDLINE (January 1966 to March 2009); EMBASE (January 1980 to March 2009); CINAHL (January 1982 to March 2009); ProQuest Digital Dissertations (January 1938 to March 2009); KoreaMed (January 1958 to March 2009) and KMbase (January 1949 to March 2009).

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) studying treatment of the common cold with NSAIDs in adults or children.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Four review authors extracted data (SYK, YSM, YJC, YWH). We subdivided trials into placebo-controlled RCTs and NSAIDs versus NSAIDs RCTs. We extracted and summarized data on global efficacies: analgesic effects such as reduction of headache and myalgia; non-analgesic effects such as reduction of nasal symptoms, cough, sputum and sneezing; and side effects.

MAIN RESULTS

This review includes nine RCTs, describing 37 comparisons: six were NSAIDs versus placebo, and three were NSAIDs versus NSAIDs. A total of 1064 patients with the common cold were included. In a pooled analysis, NSAIDs did not significantly reduce the total symptom score, or duration of colds.However, for outcomes related to the analgesic effects of NSAIDs (headache, ear pain, and muscle and joint pain) NSAIDs produced significant benefits, and malaise showed a borderline benefit, although throat irritation was not improved. Chills showed mixed results. For respiratory symptoms, cough and nasal discharge scores were not improved, but the sneezing score significantly improved. We found no evidence of increased frequency of adverse effects in the NSAID treatment groups.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

The authors recommend NSAIDs for relieving discomfort or pain caused by the common cold. Further research is needed to investigate the effect of NSAIDs in relieving respiratory symptoms such as cough and nasal discharge.

Onset of analgesia of a paracetamol tablet containing sodium bicarbonate: A double-blind, placebo-controlled study in adult patients with acute sore throat

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this study was to determine the time to onset of pain relief from a single dose of a tablet formulation of paracetamol (acetaminophen) containing sodium bicarbonate (PSC).

METHODS

A single oral dose of PSC or placebo was randomly administered to patients with acute sore throat under double-blind conditions. Patients rated their pain relief using a conventional categorical relief scale every 5 minutes during the first hour postdose to determine the time to onset of pain relief. They continued evaluations of pain relief at less frequent intervals to 6 hours postdose to confirm the overall analgesia of PSC compared with placebo. To determine if food had any effect on the onset of action of PSC, time to onset of analgesia by PSC was compared between patients in the fed and fasted states. Patients were randomized 3:1 to PSC:placebo based on whether they had eaten food within 2 hours of baseline. Adverse events were recorded by questioning throughout the study period.

RESULTS

A total of 241 patients were enrolled. Both treatment groups were well matched for age (mean, 20 years), sex (male:female ratio, approximately 1:1.5), sore throat duration (mean, 3 days) and severity (mean score, 8). PSC separated significantly from placebo beginning at 15 minutes postdose (P < or = 0.03). There was no difference for onset of analgesia between PSC in the fed and fasted states. PSC showed significantly greater total pain relief over 30 minutes, 1 hour, and 6 hours compared with placebo (all, P < 0.05). Both treatments were well tolerated and there were no serious adverse events.

CONCLUSION

PSC was effective beginning 15 minutes postdose and well tolerated compared with placebo in this population of adults with acute onset of sore throat pain.

Safety and efficacy of a traditional herbal medicine (Throat Coat) in symptomatic temporary relief of pain in patients with acute pharyngitis: a multicenter, prospective, randomized, double-blinded, placebo-controlled study

OBJECTIVE

To investigate the safety and efficacy of Throat Coat) (Traditional Medicinals,) Sebastopol, CA), a traditional demulcent herbal tea, in comparison with a placebo tea in the symptomatic treatment of acute pharyngitis.

DESIGN

Multicenter, prospective, randomized, double-blinded, placebo-controlled, two-armed, parallel-group clinical trial.

SETTINGS

Three primary care clinics in Duluth, MN, Madison, WI, and Middleton, WI.

SUBJECTS

Patients of both genders (>or=18 years of age) with clinical diagnoses of acute pharyngitis.

INTERVENTIONS

Patients (n = 60) were randomly assigned to receive 5-8 oz of Throat Coat (n = 30) or a placebo (n = 30), four to six times daily. The study period was 2 to 7 days with a window for the follow-up visit of 2-10 days accounting for the variable duration of sore throat symptoms.

OUTCOME MEASURES

Primary efficacy parameter: sum of pain intensity differences (SPID) for pain in throat on swallowing, calculated as the area under the curve (AUC) of pain intensity difference scores (assessed at 1 minute, 5 minutes, 10 minutes, 15 minutes, 20 minutes, and 30 minutes after treatment). Secondary efficacy parameter: total pain relief (TOTPAR), calculated as the AUC from time 0 (baseline) to 30 minutes of pain relief (assessed at 1 minute, 5 minutes, 10 minutes, 15 minutes, 20 minutes, and 30 minutes).

RESULTS

Compared to placebo, intensity of throat pain when swallowing was significantly reduced by Throat Coat in intention to treat and valid for efficacy analysis (VEA). Significant differences in change from baseline pain were observed at 5 min (p = 0.007), 10 min (p = 0.005), 15 minutes (p = 0.01), 20 minutes (p = 0.05), and 30 minutes (p = 0.04) after completion of the first dose (VEA analysis). There was a statistically significant improvement of SPID in the Throat Coat-treated group: Least square means +/- standard error of the means (SEM) of SPID were -16.5 +/- 13.9 in the placebo group and -43.8 +/- 11.9 in the Throat Coat-treated group (p = 0.012). TOTPAR was also significantly higher in the Throat Coat-treated group: Least square means +/- SEM of TOTPAR were 32.4 +/- 12.8 in the placebo group and 53.6 +/- 10.9 in the Throat Coat-treated group (p = 0.031). This study shows that Throat Coat is significantly superior to placebo and provided a rapid, temporary relief of sore throat pain in patients with pharyngitis.