Smell Changes and Efficacy of Nasal Theophylline (SCENT) irrigation: A randomized controlled trial for treatment of post-viral olfactory dysfunction

Olfaction and drug delivery to the human olfactory airspace: current challenges and recent advances

INTRODUCTION

Olfactory function, despite its critical role in human survival and quality of life, is often underappreciated. This could be associated with the fact that symptoms of olfactory dysfunction rarely occur in isolation as they are frequently concomitant with comorbidities. Furthermore, effective treatments for olfactory dysfunction largely remain elusive, and no standardized clinical practice for treating this dysfunction currently exist, thus complicating the initiation of appropriate therapeutic modalities. Intranasal administration of topical medication targeting the olfactory cleft represents a safe, noninvasive and potentially efficacious approach, but several challenges impede effective drug delivery.

AREAS COVERED

This review highlights the importance of human olfaction, assessment of olfactory function, underlying sources of olfactory dysfunction, and challenges involved in developing long-term and effective treatment modalities, particularly in the administration of topical medication to the olfactory cleft intranasally. Advancements in both device-related and administration-related modalities designed to enhance intranasal drug delivery are discussed.

EXPERT OPINION

Clinical management typically prioritizes comorbid conditions, relegating symptoms pertaining olfactory dysfunction to ancillary concerns. Device manufacturers for intranasal administration likewise underestimate the complexity and variabilities of the nasal cavity, and how these impact drug transport. Synergistic implementation of device and formulation strategies can potentially yield enhanced olfactory cleft drug delivery.

Different Modalities in the Management of Post-COVID-19 Olfactory Dysfunction

SARS-CoV-2 infection may lead to olfactory dysfunctions affecting patients' quality of life. Despite various ongoing studies, solid evidence supporting therapies, especially for COVID-19-related olfactory dysfunction, remains scarce. To assess nasal steroid, nasal vitamin A, and intranasal theophylline as treatment options for post-COVID-19 olfactory dysfunction. This is a multi-center retrospective case-controlled study of 120 cases with post-COVID-19 olfactory dysfunction (hyposmia or anosmia) at Benha University Hospitals, Egypt, and Dallah Hospital, Riyadh City, Kingdom of Saudi Arabia (KSA) between January 2020 and December 2022. 43.3% males and 56.6% females with median age was 38.5 years. Nasal steroid, nasal vitamin A, and intranasal theophylline had a significantly reduced time for complete smell recovery (25.7 ± 9.20 days, 24.8 ± 6.67 days. 23.5 ± 7.13 days Respectively) in comparison to the control group (olfactory training alone) (28.97 ± 4.29 days) (P = 0.02*). No significant correlation between age, gender, severity, duration of COVID-19 illness, and obesity with anosmia/hyposmia duration and smell scores, however a highly significant negative correlation between diabetes, hypertension, smoking, and asthma complete smell recovery within four weeks of treatment (P-Value < 0.001***). A combination of topical mometasone furoate, vitamin A, or intranasal theophylline with olfactory training can shorten post-COVID-19 olfactory dysfunction. However, no significant smell score improvement was found when compared to olfactory training alone after four weeks. Diabetes, hypertension, smoking, and asthma adversely affect complete smell recovery within four weeks of treatment.

The efficacy of olfactory training in improving olfactory function: a meta-analysis

PURPOSE

Study the efficacy of olfactory training in smell recovery.

METHODS

An extensive search was performed through different databases in order to find articles analyzing the efficacy of olfactory training as a treatment for olfactory dysfunction. Methodological quality of primary studies within the final sample was assessed following PRISMA guidelines. Standardized mean differences in pre-post olfactory training groups, and also in experimental-control and pre-follow up if possible, were computed by Hedges' g effect size statistic. Each effect size was weighted by its inverse variance.

RESULTS

Final sample was composed of 36 articles (45 pre-post effect sizes). Contrasts were performed separately for odor identification, odor discrimination, odor threshold and general olfactory function. Moderate to large and heterogeneous effect was obtained for olfactory function (g = 0.755, k = 45, SE = 0.093, CI 95% = [0.572, 0.937]), different moderators had a significant effects, such as, training duration, age and anosmia diagnosis.

CONCLUSION

Olfactory training was found to have a positive and significant effect on rehabilitating the olfactory function.

Adenosine A2AR in viral immune evasion and therapy: unveiling new avenues for treating COVID-19 and AIDS

Adenosine is a neuro- and immunomodulator that functions via G protein-coupled cell surface receptors. Several microbes, including viruses, use the adenosine signaling pathway to escape from host defense systems. Since the recent research developments in its role in health and disease, adenosine and its signaling pathway have attracted attention for targeting to treat many diseases. The therapeutic role of adenosine has been extensively studied for neurological, cardiovascular, and inflammatory disorders and bacterial pathophysiology, but published data on the role of adenosine in viral infections are lacking. Therefore, the purpose of this review article was to explain in detail the therapeutic role of adenosine signaling against viral infections, particularly COVID-19 and HIV. Several therapeutic approaches targeting A2AR-mediated pathways are in development and have shown encouraging results in decreasing the intensity of inflammatory reaction. The hypoxia-adenosinergic mechanism provides protection from inflammation-mediated tissue injury during COVID-19. A2AR expression increased remarkably in CD39 + and CD8 + T cells harvested from HIV patients in comparison to healthy subjects. A combined in vitro treatment performed by blocking PD-1 and CD39/adenosine signaling produced a synergistic outcome in restoring the CD8 + T cells funstion in HIV patients. We suggest that A2AR is an ideal target for pharmacological interventions against viral infections because it reduces inflammation, prevents disease progression, and ultimately improves patient survival.

Clinical studies in COVID-related olfactory disorders: Review of an institutional experience

Objective

To share a single institutional experience with clinical research on COVID-related olfactory dysfunction (OD).

Data Source/Method

Narrative review of published original data and ongoing clinical trials on COVID-related OD at Washington University from 2020 to 2023.

Results

There were three new diagnostic-/patient-reported outcome measures developed and tested. We report five clinical trials of interventions for COVID-related olfactory disorders: combined Visual-Olfactory Training (VOLT) with patient-preferred scents versus standard olfactory training (VOLT trial), oral gabapentin versus placebo (Gabapentin for the Relief of Acquired Chemosensory Experience trial), nasal theophylline irrigations versus placebo (Smell Changes and Efficacy of Nasal Theophylline trial), stellate ganglion block (single-arm), and mindfulness-based stress reduction (MBSR) versus lifestyle intervention (MBSR trial).

Conclusions

Initial intervention trials for COVID-related OD have shown potential for improving subjective and objective olfactory outcomes. However, there remains no gold standard treatment that definitively outperforms placebo in controlled trials. Therefore, continued investigation of novel therapeutic strategies for COVID-related OD is necessary to maximize olfactory outcomes for affected patients.

Assessment of COVID-19-related olfactory dysfunction and its association with psychological, neuropsychiatric, and cognitive symptoms

Purpose of review

To provide a detailed overview of the assessment of COVID-19-related olfactory dysfunction and its association with psychological, neuropsychiatric, and cognitive symptoms.

Recent findings

COVID-19-related olfactory dysfunction can have a detrimental impact to the quality of life of patients. Prior to the COVID-19 pandemic, olfactory and taste disorders were a common but under-rated, under-researched and under-treated sensory loss. The pandemic has exacerbated the current unmet need for accessing good healthcare for patients living with olfactory disorders and other symptoms secondary to COVID-19. This review thus explores the associations that COVID-19 has with psychological, neuropsychiatric, and cognitive symptoms, and provide a framework and rationale for the assessment of patients presenting with COVID-19 olfactory dysfunction.

Summary

Acute COVID-19 infection and long COVID is not solely a disease of the respiratory and vascular systems. These two conditions have strong associations with psychological, neuropsychiatric, and cognitive symptoms. A systematic approach with history taking and examination particularly with nasal endoscopy can determine the impact that this has on the patient. Specific olfactory disorder questionnaires can demonstrate the impact on quality of life, while psychophysical testing can objectively assess and monitor olfaction over time. The role of cross-sectional imaging is not yet described for COVID-19-related olfactory dysfunction. Management options are limited to conservative adjunctive measures, with some medical therapies described.

Olfactory Function and Olfactory Disorders

The sense of smell is important. This became especially clear to patients with infection-related olfactory loss during the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic. We react, for example, to the body odors of other humans. The sense of smell warns us of danger, and it allows us to perceive flavors when eating and drinking. In essence, this means quality of life. Therefore, anosmia must be taken seriously. Although olfactory receptor neurons are characterized by regenerative capacity, anosmia is relatively common with about 5 % of anosmic people in the general population. Olfactory disorders are classified according to their causes (e. g., infections of the upper respiratory tract, traumatic brain injury, chronic rhinosinusitis, age) with the resulting different therapeutic options and prognoses. Thorough history taking is therefore important. A wide variety of tools are available for diagnosis, ranging from short screening tests and detailed multidimensional test procedures to electrophysiological and imaging methods. Thus, quantitative olfactory disorders are easily assessable and traceable. For qualitative olfactory disorders such as parosmia, however, no objectifying diagnostic procedures are currently available. Therapeutic options for olfactory disorders are limited. Nevertheless, there are effective options consisting of olfactory training as well as various additive drug therapies. The consultation and the competent discussion with the patients are of major importance.

A Systematic Review of the Role of Purinergic Signalling Pathway in the Treatment of COVID-19

The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic, caused by severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2), has become a global health concern. Three years since its origin, despite the approval of vaccines and specific treatments against this new coronavirus, there are still high rates of infection, hospitalization, and mortality in some countries. COVID-19 is characterised by a high inflammatory state and coagulation disturbances that may be linked to purinergic signalling molecules such as adenosine triphosphate (ATP), adenosine diphosphate (ADP), adenosine (ADO), and purinergic receptors (P1 and P2). These nucleotides/nucleosides play important roles in cellular processes, such as immunomodulation, blood clot formation, and vasodilation, which are affected during SARS-CoV-2 infection. Therefore, drugs targeting this purinergic pathway, currently used for other pathologies, are being evaluated in preclinical and clinical trials for COVID-19. In this review, we focus on the potential of these drugs to control the release, degradation, and reuptake of these extracellular nucleotides and nucleosides to treat COVID-19. Drugs targeting the P1 receptors could have therapeutic efficacy due to their capacity to modulate the cytokine storm and the immune response. Those acting in P2X7, which is linked to NLRP3 inflammasome activation, are also valuable candidates as they can reduce the release of pro-inflammatory cytokines. However, according to the available preclinical and clinical data, the most promising medications to be used for COVID-19 treatment are those that modulate platelets behaviour and blood coagulation factors, mainly through the P2Y12 receptor.

Development and Psychometric Validation of the Olfactory Dysfunction Outcomes Rating

Importance

Olfactory dysfunction (OD) is an increasingly common and morbid condition, especially given the ongoing COVID-19 pandemic. Thus, the ability to reproducibly measure smell loss-associated quality of life (QOL) and its response to treatment is paramount.

Objective

To develop and validate a concise and visually appealing smell loss-associated QOL patient-reported outcome measure for OD.

Design, Setting, and Participants

A secondary analysis of comments to an online survey by 1000 patients with olfactory dysfunction published in 2013 was used as the primary source to generate items of the Olfactory Dysfunction Outcomes Rating (ODOR). In addition, 30 patients with OD enrolled in 2 clinical studies at a tertiary care medical center (Washington University) were asked to identify their main concerns associated with smell loss. And finally, 4 otolaryngologists reviewed the items generated from the online survey and the patients' interviews to identify any additional items. Prospective study design was used for data collection from the 30 patients and 4 otolaryngologists. Prospective study design was used for survey validation. Validation of the ODOR was performed with 283 patients enrolled in several prospective studies at a single institution that completed the ODOR as an outcome measure.

Main Outcomes and Measures

Item generation and selection were the outcomes of ODOR development. The psychometric and clinimetric measures evaluated for validation were internal consistency, test-retest reliability, face and content validity, concurrent validity, and discriminant validity. Minimal clinically important difference was also determined.

Results

The ODOR is a 28-item instrument with each item scored as either no difficulty or very rarely bothered (0) to complete difficulty or very frequently bothered (4) with a total instrument score range of 0 to 112 points. Higher scores indicate higher degree of dysfunction and limitation. Validation in the cohort of 283 patients (mean [SD] age, 47.0 [14.4] years; 198 female participants [73%]; 179 White participants [80%]) revealed that the instrument has high internal consistency (Cronbach α = 0.968), test-retest reliability (r = 0.90 [95% CI, 0.81-0.95]), face validity, content validity, concurrent validity (r = 0.87 [95% CI, 0.80-0.91] compared with the Questionnaire of Olfactory Disorders-Negative Statements; ρ = -0.76 [95% CI, -0.81 to -0.71] compared with a patient-reported symptom severity scale), and divergent validity (mean score difference, -33.9 [95% CI, -38.3 to -29.6] between normosmic patients and hyposmic/anosmic patients). The minimal clinically important difference was 15 points. The estimated time for survey completion was approximately 5 minutes.

Conclusions and Relevance

In this survey creation and validation study, the ODOR was shown to be a novel, concise, reliable, and valid patient-reported outcome measure of OD-associated QOL. It can be used to measure physical problems, functional limitations, and emotional consequences associated with OD and how they change after a given intervention, which is clinically applicable and particularly pertinent given the growing burden of OD associated with COVID-19.

Efficacy and Safety of Saline Nasal Irrigation Plus Theophylline for Treatment of COVID-19-Related Olfactory Dysfunction: The SCENT2 Phase 2 Randomized Clinical Trial

Importance

Recent studies suggest that theophylline added to saline nasal irrigation (SNI) can be an effective treatment for postviral olfactory dysfunction (OD), a growing public health concern during the COVID-19 pandemic.

Objective

To evaluate the efficacy and safety of theophylline added to SNI compared with placebo for COVID-19-related OD.

Design, Setting, and Participants

This triple-blinded, placebo-controlled, phase 2 randomized clinical trial was conducted virtually between March 15 and August 31, 2021. Adults residing in Missouri or Illinois were recruited during this time period if they had OD persisting for 3 to 12 months following suspected COVID-19 infection. Data analysis was conducted from October to December 2021.

Interventions

Saline sinus rinse kits and bottles of identical-appearing capsules with either 400 mg of theophylline (treatment) or 500 mg of lactose powder (control) were mailed to consenting study participants. Participants were instructed to dissolve the capsule contents into the saline rinse and use the solution to irrigate their nasal cavities in the morning and at night for 6 weeks.

Main Outcomes and Measures

The primary outcome was the difference in the rate of responders between the treatment and the control arms, defined as a response of at least slightly better improvement in the Clinical Global Impression-Improvement scale posttreatment. Secondary outcome measures included changes in the University of Pennsylvania Smell Identification Test (UPSIT), the Questionnaire for Olfactory Disorders, the 36-Item Short Form Health Survey on general health, and COVID-19-related questions.

Results

A total of 51 participants were enrolled in the study; the mean (SD) age was 46.0 (13.1) years, and 36 (71%) participants were women. Participants were randomized to SNI with theophylline (n = 26) or to SNI with placebo (n = 25). Forty-five participants completed the study. At the end of treatment, 13 (59%) participants in the theophylline arm reported at least slight improvement in the Clinical Global Impression-Improvement scale (responders) compared with 10 (43%) in the placebo arm (absolute difference, 15.6%; 95% CI, -13.2% to 44.5%). The median difference for the UPSIT change between baseline and 6 weeks was 3.0 (95% CI, -1.0 to 7.0) for participants in the theophylline arm and 0.0 (95% CI, -2.0 to 6.0) for participants in the placebo arm. Mixed-model analysis revealed that the change in UPSIT scores through study assessments was not statistically significantly different between the 2 study arms. Eleven (50%) participants in the theophylline arm and 6 (26%) in the placebo arm had a change of 4 or more points in UPSIT scores from baseline to 6 weeks. The difference in the rate of responders as measured by the UPSIT was 24% (95% CI, -4% to 52%) in favor of theophylline.

Conclusions and Relevance

This randomized clinical trial suggests that the clinical benefit of theophylline nasal irrigations on olfaction in participants with COVID-19-related OD is inconclusive, though suggested by subjective assessments. Larger studies are warranted to investigate the efficacy of this treatment more fully.

Trial Registration

ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT04789499.

The Effect of Topical Aminophylline on Hyposmia and Anosmia

Introduction

Olfactory training is accounted as a significantly beneficial therapy for hyposmia or anosmia. There is some evidence about methylxanthine usage for this issue. In the present study, we have investigated the effects of topical aminophylline in hyposmic and anosmic patients.

Materials and Methods

In this clinical trial study, patients were randomly divided into two groups (n= 20/each), the case group was given aminophylline drops over a three-month period (using the contents of the vial aminophylline in the form of nasal drops, 250 micrograms daily) with olfactory training and the control group was given normal saline drops with olfactory training over a three-month period. The olfactory capacities were assessed before the start and after the completion of treatments using a valid and reliable smell identification test.

Results

In the saline and aminophylline groups, the mean ± SD relative changes in SIT score were 0.55±0.31 and 0.85±0.56, respectively. As a result, the SIT score in the saline group climbed by 55 percent but increased by 85 percent in the aminophylline group. The difference in SIT score between pre- and post-test was meaningful in both groups (P< 0.001). The aminophylline group scored significantly higher according to the marginal longitudinal regression model, adjusting baseline parameters.

Conclusions

Intranasal aminophylline plus olfactory training significantly improved SIT scores in severe hyposmia or anosmia. Hypothetically, these effects are mediated through changes in cAMP and cGMP.