Long-term treatment of perennial allergic rhinitis with ipratropium bromide nasal spray 0.06%

Using Ipratropium Bromide Nasal Spray Response as a Screening Tool in the Diagnostic Workup of Cerebrospinal Fluid Rhinorrhea

OBJECTIVES

Unilateral clear thin rhinorrhea (UCTR) can be concerning for a nasal cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) leak. Beta-2 transferrin electrophoresis has been the gold standard for initial non-invasive confirmatory testing for CSF rhinorrhea, but there can be issues with fluid collection and testing errors. Ipratropium bromide nasal spray (IBNS) is highly effective at reducing rhinitis-related rhinorrhea, and should presumably not resolve CSF rhinorrhea. This study assessed whether different clinical features and IBNS response helped predict presence or absence of CSF rhinorrhea.

METHODS

A prospective cohort study was conducted where all patients with UCTR had nasal fluid tested for beta-2 transferrin, and were prescribed 0.06% IBNS. Patients were diagnosed with CSF rhinorrhea or other rhinologic conditions. Clinical variables like IBNS response (rhinorrhea reduction), positional worsening, salty taste, postoperative state, female gender, and body-mass index were assessed for their ability to predict CSF rhinorrhea. Sensitivity, specificity, and predictive values and odds ratios were calculated for all clinical variables.

RESULTS

Twenty patients had CSF rhinorrhea, and 53 had non-CSF etiologies. Amongst clinical variables assessed for predicting CSF absence or presence, significant associations were shown for IBNS response (OR = 844.66, p = 0.001), positional rhinorrhea worsening (OR = 8.22, p = 0.049), and body-mass index ≥30 (OR = 2.92, p = 0.048). IBNS response demonstrated 96% sensitivity and 100% specificity, and 100% positive and 91% negative predictive values for predicting CSF rhinorrhea.

CONCLUSIONS

In patients with UCTR, 0.06% IBNS response is an excellent screening tool for excluding CSF rhinorrhea, and should be considered in the diagnostic workup of CSF rhinorrhea.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

2 Laryngoscope, 134:56-61, 2024.

Effects of 101BHG-D01, a novel M receptor antagonism, on allergic rhinitis in animal models and its mechanism

Allergic rhinitis (AR) is a nasal mucosal disease with sneezing and nasal itching as the main symptoms. Although AR treatment continues to improve, there remains a lack of effective drugs. There are still controversies regarding whether anticholinergic drugs can effectively and safely relieve the symptoms of AR and reduce inflammation in the nasal mucosa. Here, we synthesized 101BHG-D01, which is a novel anticholinergic drug that mainly targets the M3 receptor and may reduce the adverse effects of other anticholinergic drugs on the heart. We evaluated the effects of 101BHG-D01 on AR and investigated the potential molecular mechanism of anticholinergic therapy for AR. We found that 101BHG-D01 effectively alleviated AR symptoms, reduced the infiltration of inflammatory cells and attenuated the expression of inflammatory factors (IL-4, IL-5, IL-13, etc.) in various AR animal models. In addition, 101BHG-D01 reduced the activation of mast cells and the release of histamine from rat peritoneal mesothelial cells (RPMCs) challenged by IgE. Moreover, 101BHG-D01 reduced the expression of MUC5AC in IL-13-challenged rat nasal epithelial cells (RNECs) and human nasal epithelial cells (HNEpCs). Furthermore, IL-13 stimulation significantly increased JAK1 and STAT6 phosphorylation, which was suppressed by 101BHG-D01. We demonstrated that 101BHG-D01 reduced mucus secretion and inflammatory cell infiltration in the nasal mucosa, which may occur through a reduction in activation of the JAK1-STAT6 signaling pathway, indicating that 101BHG-D01 is a potent and safe anticholinergic therapy for AR.

Utilization of intranasal ipratropium bromide in the prevention of recurrent croup events: Is it effective?

OBJECTIVE

Recurrent croup (RC) is a common problem in the pediatric population. We theorize that reduced rhinorrhea and post-nasal drip as well as suppressed cough receptor activity by the anticholinergic, intranasal ipratropium bromide (IB), may lead to reduced inflammation and edema of the subglottis, decreasing RC symptoms. The aim of this study is to determine the effectiveness of IB in improving symptoms of RC and in reducing the need for alternative forms of management.

METHOD

A retrospective chart review combined with survey data of patients with RC was conducted to assess demographic data, comorbidities, and treatment outcomes. Pediatric patients less than 10 years of age diagnosed with RC through the department of pediatric otolaryngology between 2018 and 2020 were included. Results were compared between one group treated with IB for RC and a second group treated with medications other than IB.

RESULTS

Among the 67 patients treated for RC, 34 completed survey data and were included in the study. Overall, patients who were treated with IB for RC had 1.83 less croup episodes per year (p = 0.046), a 0.5-point improvement in child symptoms (p = 0.017) and 1.3 fewer doses of steroids per year than the patients not treated with IB (p = 0.018). Patients treated with IB were significantly more likely to answer "yes," that the use of medication helped improve symptoms (p < 0.01).

CONCLUSION

Intranasal IB is a novel therapeutic option that may reduce RC events, improve patient symptoms and reduce steroid use. Further prospective studies are needed to definitively characterize the benefits of IB in the treatment of RC.

Rhinitis 2020: A practice parameter update

This comprehensive practice parameter for allergic rhinitis (AR) and nonallergic rhinitis (NAR) provides updated guidance on diagnosis, assessment, selection of monotherapy and combination pharmacologic options, and allergen immunotherapy for AR. Newer information about local AR is reviewed. Cough is emphasized as a common symptom in both AR and NAR. Food allergy testing is not recommended in the routine evaluation of rhinitis. Intranasal corticosteroids (INCS) remain the preferred monotherapy for persistent AR, but additional studies support the additive benefit of combination treatment with INCS and intranasal antihistamines in both AR and NAR. Either intranasal antihistamines or INCS may be offered as first-line monotherapy for NAR. Montelukast should only be used for AR if there has been an inadequate response or intolerance to alternative therapies. Depot parenteral corticosteroids are not recommended for treatment of AR due to potential risks. While intranasal decongestants generally should be limited to short-term use to prevent rebound congestion, in limited circumstances, patients receiving regimens that include an INCS may be offered, in addition, an intranasal decongestant for up to 4 weeks. Neither acupuncture nor herbal products have adequate studies to support their use for AR. Oral decongestants should be avoided during the first trimester of pregnancy. Recommendations for use of subcutaneous and sublingual tablet allergen immunotherapy in AR are provided. Algorithms based on a combination of evidence and expert opinion are provided to guide in the selection of pharmacologic options for intermittent and persistent AR and NAR.

Bencycloquidium bromide nasal spray is effective and safe for persistent allergic rhinitis: a phase III, multicenter, randomized, double-blinded, placebo-controlled clinical trial

PURPOSE

To investigate the efficacy and safety of bencycloquidium bromide nasal spray (BCQB) in patients with persistent allergic rhinitis (PAR).

METHODS

We enrolled 720 patients from 15 hospitals across China and randomly assigned them into BCQB group or placebo group (90 μg per nostril qid) to receive a 4-week treatment. Visual analog scale (VAS) for rhinorrhea, sneezing, nasal congestion, itching and overall symptoms were recorded by patients every day. Anterior rhinoscopy scoring was completed by doctors on every visit. Adverse events were recorded in detail.

RESULTS

A total of 354 and 351 patients were included in BCQB group and in placebo group. Baseline information was comparable. At the end of the trial, the decrease of VAS for rhinorrhea from baseline was 4.83 ± 2.35 and 2.46 ± 2.34 in BCQB group and placebo group, respectively (P < 0.001). The change ratio from baseline of VAS for rhinorrhea in BCQB group was 72.32%, higher than 31.03% in placebo group (P < 0.001). VAS for other symptoms and overall symptoms also improved significantly in the BCQB group, while no inter-group difference was found in anterior rhinoscopy scoring. The incidence of adverse reaction was similar between the two groups. Most reactions were mild and no severe reactions happened.

CONCLUSION

90 μg BCQB per nostril four times daily is effective and safe in the treatment of rhinorrhea as well as sneezing, nasal congestion and itching for patients with PAR.

RETROSPECTIVELY REGISTERED

ChiCTR2000030924, 2020/3/17.

Predictors of rhinorrhea response after posterior nasal nerve cryoablation for chronic rhinitis

BACKGROUND

Posterior nasal nerve (PNN) cryoablation has shown promise in improving rhinorrhea due to allergic and nonallergic rhinitis (NAR). Early case series have shown meaningful clinical improvement in 75-80% of patients, but variables predicting PNN cryoablation success have not been studied. The purpose of this study was to evaluate whether disease features and ipratropium nasal spray response predicted rhinorrhea response after PNN cryoablation.

METHODS

A multi-institutional retrospective case-control study of 55 patients who underwent PNN cryoablation for bilateral rhinorrhea due to allergic, nonallergic, or mixed rhinitis was conducted at 3 tertiary medical centers. Patients received a 1-month trial of ipratropium spray. Runny Nose Scores (RNSs) of 0-5 from the 22-item Sino-Nasal Outcome Test were collected prospectively, before and after PNN cryoablation.

RESULTS

The mean age of subjects was 55.3 years and 54.6% were women. Mean follow-up was 170 days. NAR comprised 62% of patients. Of the 48 patients who trialed ipratropium spray, 33 (69%) had some response and 15 (31%) had no response. Mean overall preprocedural RNS was 4.2 ± 1.0. After PNN cryoablation, there was a ≥1-point decrease in RNS in 39 patients (71%). Only ipratropium spray (INS) response predicted cryoablation success. For ipratropium spray responders, 28 of 33 (85%) had improved RNS after cryoablation, whereas 5 of 15 (33%) nonresponders improved (p = 0.001).

CONCLUSION

In chronic rhinitis patients, rhinorrhea response to ipratropium was predictive of rhinorrhea improvement after PNN cryoablation. This study has important implications for preoperative counseling and guiding patient expectations when considering PNN cryoablation.

International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis

BACKGROUND

Critical examination of the quality and validity of available allergic rhinitis (AR) literature is necessary to improve understanding and to appropriately translate this knowledge to clinical care of the AR patient. To evaluate the existing AR literature, international multidisciplinary experts with an interest in AR have produced the International Consensus statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis (ICAR:AR).

METHODS

Using previously described methodology, specific topics were developed relating to AR. Each topic was assigned a literature review, evidence-based review (EBR), or evidence-based review with recommendations (EBRR) format as dictated by available evidence and purpose within the ICAR:AR document. Following iterative reviews of each topic, the ICAR:AR document was synthesized and reviewed by all authors for consensus.

RESULTS

The ICAR:AR document addresses over 100 individual topics related to AR, including diagnosis, pathophysiology, epidemiology, disease burden, risk factors for the development of AR, allergy testing modalities, treatment, and other conditions/comorbidities associated with AR.

CONCLUSION

This critical review of the AR literature has identified several strengths; providers can be confident that treatment decisions are supported by rigorous studies. However, there are also substantial gaps in the AR literature. These knowledge gaps should be viewed as opportunities for improvement, as often the things that we teach and the medicine that we practice are not based on the best quality evidence. This document aims to highlight the strengths and weaknesses of the AR literature to identify areas for future AR research and improved understanding.

Recent pharmacological developments in the treatment of perennial and persistent allergic rhinitis

INTRODUCTION

Allergic rhinitis (AR) has a major negative impact on patients' quality of life (QoL) and carries a high socio economic burden. This is particularly the case for patients who experience symptoms for extended periods of time (i.e. those with perennial (PAR) or persistent AR (PER), depending on the classification system used). This review covers available pharmacological advances and recent developments in the treatment of PAR or PER.

AREAS COVERED

Pharmacological AR treatment is used to reduce symptom burden and help restore patients' normal daily routine. Traditionally, non-sedating antihistamines and intranasal corticosteroids (INS) were the two drug classes recommended for use first line. These, along with antileukotrienes, decongestants, mast cell stabilizers and anticholinergics, constituted the bulk of the AR treatment arsenal. MP-AzeFlu (Dymista®, Meda, Solna, Sweden) is the most recent addition to that arsenal. It is a novel intranasal formulation of azelastine hydrochloride (AZE) and fluticasone propionate (FP) delivered in a single spray and has surpassed available therapies in terms of symptom control and treatment response. Other relatively new treatments for PAR or PER include H3 antihistamines, toll-like receptor (TLR) agonists, cellulose powders and micro-emulsions, novel biomolecular formulations and omalizumab. Each of these new additions is reviewed here.

EXPERT OPINION

A new AR drug class has recently been introduced (i.e. RO1AD58). Currently MP-AzeFlu is the only treatment option within this drug class. It can be estimated that combination treatments like MP-AzeFlu will become the mainstay of PAR and PER therapy since use will result in better compliance, improved efficacy over INS and a faster response together with good levels of tolerability. The challenge is to find other equally, or more effective, combination treatments, as has been the therapeutic standard in bronchial asthma for decades. The potential of biologics, as well as TLR-agonists and other new treatment options needs to be further evaluated.

Intranasal steroids in the treatment of allergy-induced rhinorrhea

While nasal congestion has been identified as one of the most bothersome and prevalent symptoms of allergic rhinitis, it is underappreciated that many patients find rhinorrhea also to be bothersome. Rhinorrhea as a symptom of allergic rhinitis virtually never occurs alone; about 97% of patients with allergic rhinitis suffer from at least two symptoms, a finding that underscores the advantage of treating a broad range of symptoms with a single medication. Along with sneezing and nasal obstruction, rhinorrhea is a classic acute symptom of allergic rhinitis; it appears as a late-phase symptom as well. In this review, the characterization and epidemiology of rhinorrhea, the pathophysiology of rhinorrhea in allergic rhinitis, the roles played by mediators in early- and late-phase rhinorrhea, the prevalence and impact of this symptom, and the efficacy and safety of available treatment options are all discussed in context of relevant literature. A review of the clinical studies assessing the efficacy of intranasal corticosteroids (INS) for rhinorrhea is presented. Many clinical studies and several meta-analyses conclusively demonstrate that, in addition to being safe and well-tolerated, INS are more effective than other agents (including oral and intranasal antihistamines) across the spectrum of AR symptoms, including rhinorrhea and nasal congestion.

Pharmacotherapy for allergic rhinitis

Allergic rhinitis affects millions of Americans and the numbers continue to increase. Fortunately, there exists a wide array of pharmacotherapeutic options with relatively safe side effect profiles for the management of the varying subtypes. Additionally, there are newer agents on the horizon. The efficacies of intranasal corticosteroids, antihistamines, combination topical therapy, leukotriene inhibitors, mast cell stabilizers, anticholinergics, mucolytics, decongestants, and anti-IgE are reviewed.

Subchronic toxicity and toxicokinetics of long-term intranasal administration of bencycloquidium bromide: a 91-day study in dogs

The subchronic toxicity and toxicokinetics of Bencycloquidium bromide (BCQB) were evaluated after 91-day intranasal administration in dogs at daily dose levels of 2.5, 5.0, and 10.0 mg/kg. Following repeated exposure to medium- or high-dose of BCQB, apparent changes were observed in the levels of blood glucose, creatinine or blood urea nitrogen in both male and female dogs. The no-observed-adverse-effect level (NOAEL) of BCQB was considered to be 2.5 mg/kg/day under the present study conditions. There were no significant gender differences in most indexes of subchronic toxicity throughout the experimental period with the exception of food consumption and body weight, or in the parameters of plasma toxicokinetics after either single-dose or repeated administrations of BCQB at each dosage. In dog, BCQB did not accumulate in blood plasma, while much higher concentrations of BCQB residues were found in most tissues examined (especially the kidney) following 91-day repeated exposure relative to a single dose. In all tissues except the reproductive organs, BCQB concentrations reverted to low levels by 2 weeks post-dosing. The results indicate that blood glucose levels and renal function should be closely monitored when BCQB is used in long-term therapy.

Allergic rhinitis

Allergic rhinitis is common malady with a significant impact on quality of life. It can affect 25% to 35% of people, depending on the population studied. Costs for physicians' visits and medications, and indirect costs of missed school and work and lost productivity, are estimated to be $2 billion annually in the United States. Pharmacotherapy is the most used therapeutic modality. Topical corticosteroids are the preferred method of treatment for seasonal and perennial allergic rhinitis. Antihistamines and antileukotrienes may be beneficial add-ons to topical steroids. Allergen avoidance is recommended, but may be difficult. Allergen immunotherapy is effective and should be considered with poor response to pharmacotherapy and avoidance.

Rhinitis in the elderly

The effects of aging on the nose include structural, hormonal, mucosal, olfactory, and neural changes. As the US population ages and remains in overall better health, we will have more patients with rhinologic problems related to aging. In this manuscript, we review the available evidence on the structural and physiologic changes of the nose caused by aging, and we briefly describe management of common causes of rhinitis in the elderly.

Use of 0.06% ipratropium bromide nasal spray in children aged 2 to 5 years with rhinorrhea due to a common cold or allergies

BACKGROUND

Rhinorrhea from common colds or allergies in children is similar to that in adults, yet there are few data on the use of ipratropium bromide nasal spray in children younger than 5 years.

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the safety and efficacy of 0.06% ipratropium bromide nasal spray in 2- to 5-year-old children with rhinorrhea from a common cold or allergies.

METHODS

A total of 230 children (43 with common colds and 187 with allergies) participated in an open-label, multicenter study. Patients with a common cold received ipratropium bromide nasal spray (84 microg per nostril) 3 times daily for 4 days; those with allergies received ipratropium bromide nasal spray (42 microg per nostril) 3 times daily for 14 days.

RESULTS

In the common cold and allergy groups, 91% and 90% of the parents, respectively, found that ipratropium bromide was either "very useful" or "somewhat useful." Furthermore, 67% and 91% of parents in the common cold and allergy groups, respectively, found that administration of a nasal spray was either "extremely easy" or "very easy." Symptom scores were improved from baseline in both groups. The nasal spray was well tolerated and was not associated with serious or systemic anticholinergic adverse effects. Most adverse events were infrequent and mild to moderate, and study discontinuation due to an adverse event occurred in less than 3% of patients.

CONCLUSIONS

The 0.06% ipratropium bromide nasal spray, 42 or 84 microg per nostril 3 times daily, is easy to administer, safe, and effective for the control of rhinorrhea in children aged 2 to 5 years with a common cold or allergies.

Quality of life in allergic rhinitis

OBJECTIVE

This review will furnish the reader current information on the importance of quality of life evaluation in patients suffering from allergic rhinitis, the different types of quality of life instruments used, and how they can be used in judging different pharmaceutical therapies.

DATA SOURCES

Computer-assisted MEDLINE searches for articles assessing "quality of life" and "outcomes" in rhinitis. Also MEDLINE searches evaluating health-related quality of life in relationship to different pharmacologic treatments in allergic rhinitis.

STUDY SELECTIONS

Pertinent abstracts and articles in two broad areas were selected. The first groups were articles in the fields of outcomes, quality of life, allergic rhinitis, and its relationship to health-related quality of life. The second group of articles evaluated different pharmacologic agents' effect on the health-related quality of life of rhinitis patients. Both sets of articles were critically analyzed with important representative studies selected for this review.

RESULTS

Health-related quality of life of patients with allergic rhinitis is impaired as measured by both generic and specific health-related quality of life instruments. Use of second generation antihistamines, intranasal corticosteroids, and intranasal ipratropium bromide have been shown to improve the health-related quality of life of sufferers of allergic rhinitis.

CONCLUSIONS

The measuring of health-related quality of life is assuming a primary position in outcomes analysis in the patient with allergic rhinitis. Studies have documented the validity of using generic and specific health-related quality of life instruments in allergic rhinitis. Each type has its own weaknesses and strengths that the user needs to appreciate. Appraising the role of different pharmacologic agents in allergic rhinitis in improving the patient's quality of life is an important part of proving the medication's worth to the health care community.

Impact on quality of life during an allergen challenge research trial

BACKGROUND

Quality of life (QOL) issues resulting from participation in an allergy research trial, or indeed any clinical trial, is not documented in the medical literature.

OBJECTIVE

To determine whether participating in a trial where allergic symptoms are induced has a significant impact on subjects' QOL, and to quantify extent and duration.

METHODS

Subjects were recruited from a trial utilizing a controlled allergen environment to assess anti-allergic medications. A QOL survey (consisting of the Rhinoconjunctivitis Quality of Life Questionnaire [RQLQ] & the SF-36) was completed at screening, on study day, and approximately 2 weeks post-study. Follow-up was sought from subjects' whose QOL was significantly worse than baseline.

RESULTS

Of 219 trial participants, 206 completed both screening and study surveys; 141 returned at least one follow-up survey; and 136 constructed the final dataset. Mean overall scores at follow-up via RQLQ were significantly better than screening (P < .001). Significant decreases in QOL from baseline on study day occurred in social function on the SF-36 (P = .026) and in domains of sleep (P = .019), non-nasal symptoms (P = .05), ocular symptoms (P < .001), and nasal symptoms (P < .001) on the RQLQ. Average post-study follow-up was 17.1 days (range = 5 to 55 days).

CONCLUSION

Subjects participating in a trial involving allergic symptom induction experienced a decrease of QOL in parameters specific to rhinoconjunctivitis and social function. Subjects' QOL returned to or improved over baseline within 2 1/2 weeks. Positive QOL findings are important to studies where symptoms are induced and also have relevance to standard Phase 3 drug trials.

Ipratropium bromide nasal spray 0.03% and beclomethasone nasal spray alone and in combination for the treatment of rhinorrhea in perennial rhinitis

BACKGROUND

Perennial rhinitis is a common condition that affects up to 10% to 20% of the population. Multiple agents are frequently administered since no single agent provides complete relief. Studies assessing the benefit/risk of combined therapy are important especially for newly approved agents such as ipratropium bromide nasal spray 0.03%, a topical anticholinergic agent, approved specifically for the treatment of rhinorrhea in allergic and non-allergic perennial rhinitis.

OBJECTIVE

To compare the efficacy and safety of the combined use of ipratropium bromide nasal spray 0.03% (42 microg per nostril tid) and beclomethasone dipropionate nasal spray (84 microg per nostril bid) against that of either active agent alone for the treatment of rhinorrhea.

DESIGN

Multicenter, 6-week, double-blind, randomized active- and placebo-controlled, parallel trial.

SETTING

Allergist and general practitioner clinical practices.

PATIENTS

Five hundred thirty-three patients with perennial rhinitis (279 allergic and 274 non-allergic), 8 to 75 years of age, who had at least a mild degree of severity of rhinorrhea for a minimum of 2 hours per day during the 1 week screening period as well as congestion or sneezing also of at least mild severity.

INTERVENTION

Either (1) ipratropium bromide nasal spray 0.03% (42 microg per nostril tid) plus beclomethasone dipropionate nasal spray (84 microg per nostril bid), (2) ipratropium bromide nasal spray 0.03% (42 microg per nostril tid) alone, (3) beclomethasone dipropionate nasal spray (84 microg per nostril bid) alone, or (4) vehicle [matching placebo nasal spray for the ipratropium bromide (2 sprays per nostril tid)] or beclomethasone dipropionate (2 sprays per nostril bid).

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE

Severity and duration of rhinorrhea, and patient and physician global assessment of control of rhinorrhea.

RESULTS

Ipratropium bromide nasal spray plus beclomethasone nasal spray was more effective than either active agent alone or vehicle in reducing the average severity and duration of rhinorrhea during 4 weeks of treatment. The advantage of ipratropium bromide plus beclomethasone nasal spray was evident by the first day of combined treatment and continued throughout the 2-week treatment period. Ipratropium bromide nasal spray had a faster onset of action during the first week of treatment and reduced the duration of rhinorrhea more than beclomethasone. Beclomethasone nasal spray was more effective in reducing the severity of congestion and sneezing than ipratropium. In patients who had not responded well to a nasal steroid prior to participation in the study based on a questionnaire administered at screening, ipratropium bromide was as effective in the steroid non-responders as steroid responders, whereas beclomethasone was more effective in steroid responders. Combined active therapy was well tolerated with no increase in adverse events over that seen previously with ipratropium bromide or beclomethasone nasal spray alone.

CONCLUSIONS

The combined use of ipratropium bromide nasal spray with beclomethasone dipropionate nasal spray is more effective than either active agent for the treatment of rhinorrhea, and does not result in a potentiation of adverse drug reactions. Ipratropium bromide nasal spray 0.03% alone should be considered in patients for whom rhinorrhea is the primary symptom, and its use in combination with a nasal steroid should be considered in patients where rhinorrhea is one of the predominant symptoms, or in patients with rhinorrhea not fully responsive to other therapy.

Ipratropium bromide nasal spray 0.03% provides additional relief from rhinorrhea when combined with terfenadine in perennial rhinitis patients; a randomized, double-blind, active-controlled trial

Medical treatment of perennial rhinitis is aimed at providing symptomatic relief of individual symptoms. Multiple agents are administered when no single agent provides complete relief. Studies assessing the benefit/risk of combined therapy are important, especially for newly available agents such as ipratropium bromide nasal spray, a topical anticholinergic agent approved for the treatment of rhinorrhea in allergic and nonallergic perennial rhinitis. The objective was to determine whether the combined use of ipratropium bromide nasal spray 0.03% (42 mcg per nostril) administered three times daily with a nonsedating antihistamine (terfenadine, 60 mg administered twice daily) is safe and provides greater clinical benefit than use of the placebo nasal spray plus terfenadine. Our method was a multicenter, 6-week, double-blind, randomized, active-controlled, crossover trial of 205 patients with perennial rhinitis (114 allergic and 91 nonallergic), 18 to 75 years of age, who had clinically significant rhinorrhea. After a 1-week run-in period, patients were treated for 2 weeks with one of the two treatment regimens, followed by a 1-week washout period, and then were treated for another 2 weeks with the other treatment regimen. Daily diary symptoms scores of rhinorrhea, congestion, and sneezing were obtained, as well as biweekly patient and physician global assessments of treatment effectiveness of each of the nasal symptoms. Ipratropium bromide nasal spray plus terfenadine was more effective than vehicle plus terfenadine in reducing the average severity (38% versus 28%) and duration (46% versus 30%) of rhinorrhea during the 2 weeks of treatment from baseline (p < 0.05). The advantage of ipratropium bromide nasal spray plus terfenadine was evident by the second day of treatment and continued throughout the 2-week treatment period. Of patients who responded more to one treatment than another, 69% responded to ipratropium bromide nasal spray plus terfenadine, compared to 31% to vehicle plus terfenadine (p < 0.05). Both physicians and patients rated control of rhinorrhea and sneezing by ipratropium bromide nasal spray plus terfenadine as superior to vehicle plus terfenadine (p < 0.05). The symptom of congestion was controlled equally well by both treatments. Combined active therapy was well tolerated with no increase in adverse events over that seen previously with ipratropium bromide nasal spray alone. The combination of ipratropium bromide nasal spray with terfenadine is more effective than vehicle plus terfenadine for the treatment of rhinorrhea, and does not result in a potentiation of adverse drug reactions.

The Medical Management of Rhinosinusitis

The management of rhinosinusitis depends on a number of variables related to the duration and severity of symptoms in the individual patient. Furthermore acute rhinosinusitis is managed differently than chronic rhinosinusitis. Because a variety of conservative and pharmacologic interventions are available, the physician can find it difficult to develop a cohesive and logical approach to treatment. An understanding of the pathophysiology, microbiology, and natural history of rhinosinusitis is necessary to formulate the best treatment plan for the individual patient.

Low dose clemastine inhibits sneezing and rhinorrhea during the early nasal allergic reaction

BACKGROUND

Clemastine (1 mg) is currently available over-the-counter for the treatment of allergic rhinitis.

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the efficacy of half the standard dose of clemastine (0.5 mg) in inhibiting the nasal response to allergen and the cutaneous response to histamine.

METHODS

Double-blind, placebo-controlled, crossover study of 20 allergic subjects out of season. The subjects received placebo or clemastine administered one, four, and six hours before the challenges. Filter paper discs were used both to challenge the nasal mucosa with diluent and allergen and collect generated secretions. Sneezes, secretion weights, nasal and ocular symptoms, and albumin levels in nasal secretions were monitored for the nasal challenge. Intradermal skin testing was performed with diluent followed by histamine and the wheal and flare reactions were measured.

RESULTS

There was a significant reduction in the number of sneezes after clemastine administered one, four, and six hours prior to challenge compared with placebo (P < .01). Clemastine administered four and six hours before challenge reduced sneezing significantly more than clemastine administered one hour before challenge (P < .05). Antigen-induced increases in secretion weights and symptoms of rhinorrhea were significantly reduced compared with placebo only when clemastine was administered four and six hours prior to challenge (P < .05). Pretreatment with clemastine had no significant inhibitory effects on other nasal symptoms or on albumin levels in nasal secretions, an objective index of increased vascular permeability. Pretreatment with clemastine did not inhibit the histamine-induced wheal skin reaction but showed a tendency, when administered six hours prior to the intradermal challenge, to reduce the flare reaction induced by the lowest dose of histamine (P = .05).

CONCLUSIONS

The data show that clemastine, given at half the usual dose four and six hours prior to allergen challenge, provides relief for sneezing and rhinorrhea and suggests that this dose might be useful in the treatment of allergic rhinitis.