New therapeutic options for allergic rhinitis: back to the future with intranasal corticosteroid aerosols

Pharmacology, particle deposition and drug administration techniques of intranasal corticosteroids for treating allergic rhinitis

This review presents an overview of the available literature regarding intranasal corticosteroids (INCs) for the treatment of allergic rhinitis (AR). Various treatment options exist for AR including INCs, antihistamines and leucotriene antagonists. INCs are considered to be the most effective therapy for moderate-to-severe AR, as they are effective against nasal and ocular symptoms and improve quality of life. Their safety has been widely observed. INCs are effective and safe for short-term use. Local adverse events are observed but generally well-tolerated. The occurrence of (serious) systemic adverse events is unlikely but cannot be ruled out. There is a lack of long-term safety data. INC may cause serious eye complications. The risk of INCs on the hypothalamic-pituitary-adrenal axis, on bone mineral density reduction or osteoporosis and on growth in children, should be considered during treatment. Pharmacological characteristics of INCs (e.g. the mode of action and pharmacokinetics) are well known and described. We sought to gain insight into whether specific properties affect the efficacy and safety of INCs, including nasal particle deposition, which the administration technique affects. However, advances are lacking regarding the improved understanding of the effect of particle deposition on efficacy and safety and the effect of the administration technique. This review emphasizes the gaps in knowledge regarding this subject. Advances in research and health care are necessary to improve care for patients with AR.

Trends in Nasal Spray Prescribing Patterns by Otolaryngologists in the US Medicare Population

OBJECTIVES

To quantify national and state-level prescribing and cost trends for the 3 most prescribed nasal sprays by otolaryngologists in the Medicare population.

METHODS

Through the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) database and the Kaiser Family Foundation, we retrieved data on Medicare enrollment and on claims and costs of fluticasone propionate, azelastine HCl, and ipratropium bromide prescribed by otolaryngologists from January 1, 2013 to December 31, 2017.

RESULTS

From 2013 to 2017, CMS reimbursed $128.8 million for 5.2 million claims of fluticasone propionate, azelastine HCl, and ipratropium bromide prescribed by otolaryngologists. The national claim rate for fluticasone propionate increased 6.5% per year from 2013 to 2015 and then decreased 4.3% per year from 2015 to 2017 while azelastine HCl and ipratropium bromide consistently increased annually (19.0% and 12.2% respectively) from 2013 to 2017. The cost for fluticasone propionate decreased 33.0% a year from 2013 to 2015 and then increased 5.4% annually to $13.60 per claim in 2017. Azelastine HCl decreased 14.8% annually from $91.30 to $50.23 per claim and ipratropium bromide increased 5.2% annually to $34.78 in 2017. Variations in the claim rate and cost for all 3 nasal sprays were observed in some states.

CONCLUSIONS

Otolaryngologists are prescribing azelastine HCl and ipratropium at an increasingly higher rate in the Medicare population, while the rate for fluticasone propionate has been decreasing nationally. Utilization and costs of nasal sprays also vary geographically across the United States.

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.

No hypothalamic-pituitary-adrenal function effect with beclomethasone dipropionate nasal aerosol, based on 24-hour serum cortisol in pediatric allergic rhinitis

BACKGROUND

Intranasal corticosteroids are the mainstay of allergic rhinitis (AR) treatment. Their potential to suppress the hypothalamic-pituitary-adrenal axis should be evaluated, especially after long-term daily use in children.

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the effects of treatment with non-aqueous beclomethasone dipropionate (BDP) nasal aerosol on hypothalamic-pituitary-adrenal axis function in children with perennial AR.

METHODS

In this double-blinded, placebo-controlled, parallel-group study, patients (6-11 years old) with perennial AR were randomized (2:1) to BDP nasal aerosol at 80 μg/day (n = 67) or placebo (n = 32). The primary end point was change from baseline in 24-hour serum cortisol (SC) weighted mean for BDP nasal aerosol and placebo after 6 weeks of treatment, which was analyzed in the per-protocol population.

RESULTS

The per-protocol population included 97 patients (BDP nasal aerosol, n = 66; placebo, n = 31). Baseline geometric mean SC weighted mean values were similar in the 80-μg/day BDP nasal aerosol and placebo groups (5.97 and 6.47 μg/dL, respectively). After 6 weeks' treatment, geometric mean values were 6.19 and 7.13 μg/dL, respectively, with no decrease from baseline in either group. Geometric mean SC ratio of BDP nasal aerosol at 80 μg/day to placebo was 0.91 (95% confidence interval 0.81-1.03), indicating predefined noninferiority. SC concentration-time profiles were similar for the placebo and 80-μg/day BDP nasal aerosol groups at baseline and week 6. BDP nasal aerosol at 80 μg/day was generally well tolerated.

CONCLUSION

In pediatric patients with perennial AR, 24-hour SC profiles were comparable for BDP nasal aerosol and placebo, indicating that once-daily BDP nasal aerosol treatment did not significantly affect hypothalamic-pituitary-adrenal axis function.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov; NCT01697956.

Allergic rhinitis: current options and future perspectives

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Allergic rhinitis due its high prevalence and burden needs to be properly treated. The disease's clinical features impose well tolerated drugs usable for long-term treatment. Nowadays, second-generation antihistamines and inhaled steroids represent the milestone of rhinitis therapy. The aim of the present review is to provide an update on allergic rhinitis treatment. A particular attention has been deserved to clinical trials, published in the last year that assess the efficacy and safety of new formulation of available drugs or new molecules.

RECENT FINDINGS

Available and new drugs under investigation seem able to control rhinitis symptoms without a significant patient's burden. The challenge for the next years will be to improve treatment adherence rather than to introduce new drugs.

SUMMARY

Allergic Rhinitis and its Impact on Asthma guidelines have brought attention to allergic rhinitis and its impact on asthma, but have also proposed a new classification in terms of symptoms severity and persistence useful for tailoring treatment on patients' phenotypes. Their further dissemination is needed; furthermore, they represent a cornerstone for the scientific community through a continuous update on relevant issues such as rhinitis phenotypes, disease management on the basis of new treatments, clinical trials transferability in real life, and allergic rhinitis management in public health programs.

The expanding role of aerosols in systemic drug delivery, gene therapy and vaccination: an update

Until the late 1990s, aerosol therapy consisted of beta₂-adrenergic agonists, anti-cholinergics, steroidal and non-steroidal agents, mucolytics and antibiotics that were used to treat patients with asthma, COPD and cystic fibrosis. Since then, inhalation therapy has matured to include drugs that: (1) are designed to treat diseases outside the lung and whose target is the systemic circulation (systemic drug delivery); (2) deliver nucleic acids that lead to permanent expression of a gene construct, or protein coding sequence, in a population of cells (gene therapy); and (3) provide needle-free immunization against disease (aerosolized vaccination). During the evolution of these advanced applications, it was also necessary to develop new devices that provided increased dosing efficiency and less loss during delivery. This review will present an update on the success of each of these new applications and their devices. The early promise of aerosolized systemic drug delivery and its outlook for future success will be highlighted. In addition, the challenges to aerosolized gene therapy and the need for appropriate gene vectors will be discussed. Finally, progress in the development of aerosolized vaccination will be presented. The continued expansion of the role of aerosol therapy in the future will depend on: (1) improving the bioavailability of systemically delivered drugs; (2) developing gene therapy vectors that can efficiently penetrate the mucus barrier and cell membrane, navigate the cell cytoplasm and efficiently transfer DNA material to the cell nucleus; (3) improving delivery of gene vectors and vaccines to infants; and (4) developing formulations that are safe for acute and chronic administrations.