Kinins and rhinitis

Review of azelastine nasal spray in the treatment of allergic and non-allergic rhinitis

Azelastine is a potent H(1)-antihistamine, which is available as a topical nasal spray and indicated for both seasonal allergic and non-allergic vasomotor rhinitis. In addition to its antihistaminic effects, it has also been shown to have a number of other potentially important attributes, including effects on cytokines, adhesion molecules and inflammatory cells. Azelastine nasal spray has been shown to benefit patients who have not responded adequately to loratadine and fexofenadine, and is significantly more efficacious than cetirizine and levocabastine in patients with seasonal allergic rhinitis. Given its unique pharmacologic properties and clinical profile, azelastine maintains an important role in the treatment of chronic rhinitis.

Pathophysiology of nasal obstruction and meta-analysis of early and late effects of levocetirizine

Nasal obstruction, also referred to as congestion, blockage or stuffiness, is a crucial symptom in allergic rhinitis (AR) and may affect sleep as well as quality of life. Early- and late-phase-allergic reactions both contribute to nasal obstruction, although it primarily represents a major symptom in the chronic allergic reaction. A complex network of inflammatory and neurogenic phenomena relates to chronic nasal obstruction, including the subepithelial accumulation of inflammatory cells, particularly mast cells and eosinophils, and the release of neuropeptides. Nasal obstruction is a difficult-to-treat symptom. Vasoconstrictors (decongestants) and intranasal corticosteroids, due to their anti-inflammatory properties, have mainly been used for relieving the nasal passages from the congested mucosa. However, there is accumulating evidence recently that the latest-generation potent antihistamines have decongestant properties in AR. This paper aims to review the pathophysiologic background of nasal obstruction and the evidence for an antihistamine, levocetirizine, in relieving nasal congestion. A meta-analysis on the early and late effects of levocetirizine on nasal obstruction under artificial and natural allergen exposure conditions is presented, demonstrating convincingly that levocetirizine shows a consistent effect on nasal obstruction as early as over the first 2 h and sustained over 6 weeks.

Allergic rhinitis: not purely a histamine-related disease

Allergic rhinitis is an inflammatory disorder of the nasal mucosa typified by the symptoms of nasal itch, sneeze, anterior nasal secretions, and nasal blockage. These symptoms arise from the interaction between mediators and neural, vascular, and glandular structures within the nose. Nasal itch, sneezes, and rhinorrhoea are predominantly neural in origin, while nasal obstruction is predominantly vascular. Nasal biopsy studies show accumulation of eosinophils within the lamina propria and epithelium and an increase in tissue and cell surface basophils in both seasonal and perennial allergic rhinitis. These cells are in an activated state. Within the epithelium, increased numbers of mast cells, T cells and Langerhans' cells, which induce T-cell activation, are found. The accumulation of these cells can be linked to chemokine and cytokine generation by the epithelial cells themselves. Thus, the tissue cell recruitment is orchestrated by activated mast cells, T cells, and epithelial cells, with the recruited tissue eosinophils also contributing to their persistence at this site through autocrine mechanisms. Mast cells generate an array of mediators including histamine, tryptase, leukotrienes, and prostaglandins. Histamine is also generated by basophils. Eosinophils and basophils contribute to the leukotriene synthesis within the tissue. Histamine nasal insufflation induces nasal itch, sneeze, and rhinorrhoea as well as nasal blockage, thereby reproducing all the symptoms of allergic rhinitis. These effects are primarily mediated by H1-receptors, and H1-receptor antagonists are a prominent treatment. Antagonism of histamine at these receptors reduces symptoms by about 40-50%, with the greatest effect on the neurally mediated responses. Thus, histamine is a major mediator of allergic rhinitis, but not the sole contributor. Nasal insufflation with leukotrienes, prostaglandins, or kinins is associated with the development of nasal blockage. These mediators act primarily on the nasal vasculature and, in this respect, leukotrienes are potent mediators. Leukotrienes also induce plasma protein exudation, which contributes to the anterior nasal secretions. Studies with combination products have suggested that modifying the effects of both leukotrienes and histamine has complementary effects in relieving nasal symptoms, indicating that both these mediators are relevant to disease expression.

Cetirizine inhibits bradykinin-induced cutaneous wheal and flare in atopic and healthy subjects

BACKGROUND

Kinins are vasoactive mediators involved in allergic reactions. When applied on the skin or in the nose, bradykinin (BK) elicits inflammation that is poorly affected by previous H1-blockade. The aim of this study was to compare the possible effect of cetirizine (an H1-antagonist) on wheal and flare responses to BK, histamine, and compound 48/80 in atopic and healthy subjects.

METHODS

In a randomized, double-blind, crossover study, eight atopic and eight healthy subjects received cetirizine (10 mg/day) or placebo for 3 days before cutaneous tests. Intradermal tests (IDT) and prick tests (PT) were performed with BK (20 nmol/ml for IDT and 20 micromol/ml for PT), histamine (100 microg/ml IDT and 100 mg/ml PT), and compound 48/80 (100 microg/ml IDT and 100 mg/ml PT) as positive controls and saline as negative control. The skin responses were monitored by measurement of wheal and flare areas.

RESULTS

BK, histamine, and 48/80 induced wheal and flare reactions in all placebo-treated subjects. Histamine elicited larger wheal and flare reactions than BK and 48/80. IDT with BK induced four- to six-fold larger wheal and flare reaction than PT. No differences in BK-induced wheal and flare were observed between atopic and healthy subjects. In atopic subjects, cetirizine induced a significant reduction of flare reactions after the BK test (80% for IDT, and 94% for PT [P<0.01]). Moreover, cetirizine reduced significantly BK-induced wheals by 70% for IDT (P<0.01) and 65% for PT (P<0.01). A similar inhibiting effect of cetirizine was also observed in healthy subjects.

CONCLUSIONS

These findings showed that the wheal and flare reactions induced by BK challenge were markedly inhibited by previous intake of cetirizine. The mechanism by which this effect is mediated cannot be established at present.

Cetirizine inhibits bradykinin-induced cutaneous wheal and flare in atopic and healthy subjects

BACKGROUND

Kinins are vasoactive mediators involved in allergic reactions. When applied on the skin or in the nose, bradykinin (BK) elicits inflammation that is poorly affected by previous H1-blockade. The aim of this study was to compare the possible effect of cetirizine (an H1-antagonist) on wheal and flare responses to BK, histamine, and compound 48/80 in atopic and healthy subjects.

METHODS

In a randomized, double-blind, crossover study, eight atopic and eight healthy subjects received cetirizine (10 mg/day) or placebo for 3 days before cutaneous tests. Intradermal tests (IDT) and prick tests (PT) were performed with BK (20 nmol/ml for IDT and 20 micromol/ml for PT), histamine (100 microg/ml IDT and 100 mg/ml PT), and compound 48/80 (100 microg/ml IDT and 100 mg/ml PT) as positive controls and saline as negative control. The skin responses were monitored by measurement of wheal and flare areas.

RESULTS

BK, histamine, and 48/80 induced wheal and flare reactions in all placebo-treated subjects. Histamine elicited larger wheal and flare reactions than BK and 48/80. IDT with BK induced four- to sixfold larger wheal and flare reaction than PT. No differences in BK-induced wheal and flare were observed between atopic and healthy subjects. In atopic subjects, cetirizine induced a significant reduction of flare reactions after the BK test (80% for IDT, and 94% for PT [P < 0.01]). Moreover, cetirizine reduced significantly BK-induced wheals by 70% for IDT (P < 0.01) and 65% for PT (P < 0.01). A similar inhibiting effect of cetirizine was also observed in healthy subjects.

CONCLUSIONS

These findings showed that the wheal and flare reactions induced by BK challenge were markedly inhibited by previous intake of cetirizine. The mechanism by which this effect is mediated cannot be established at present.

Rhinitis as a mechanism of respiratory defense

The incidence of rhinitis is on the increase, especially in towns and cities with high levels of pollution from motor traffic and industry. There is a growing body of evidence which links this increased incidence of rhinitis to chronic nasal irritation from industrial pollution. Studies on the mechanisms of nasal inflammation and the nasal immune response are now providing insights into the etiology of rhinitis. This knowledge will help in the development of therapies aimed at alleviating the symptoms of rhinitis and controlling the development of rhinitis in susceptible individuals. This review discusses some of the factors that may explain the increased incidence of rhinitis and examines basic mechanisms involved in the nasal response to infection and allergy.

Effect of inhaled frusemide on responses of airways to bradykinin and adenosine 5'-monophosphate in asthma

BACKGROUND

Inhaled frusemide exerts a protective effect against bronchoconstriction induced by several indirect stimuli in asthma. This effect could be caused by interference with neural pathways. The effect of inhaled frusemide on bronchoconstriction induced by inhaled bradykinin, which is thought to cause bronchoconstriction via neural mechanisms, was studied and compared with the effects of adenosine 5'-monophosphate (AMP) which probably produces its airway effects by augmenting mast cell mediator release and interfering with neural pathways.

METHODS

Patients first underwent AMP and bradykinin challenges. They were then studied in a randomised, placebo controlled, double blind fashion. Ten atopic asthmatic subjects, studied on four days, were pretreated with inhaled frusemide (40 mg) or placebo for 10 minutes, five minutes before challenge with increasing concentrations of nebulised AMP or bradykinin.

RESULTS

On the open visit days the provocative concentrations required to reduce forced expiratory volume in one second (FEV1) by 20% from baseline (PC20) for AMP and bradykinin were 16.23 (1.42-67.16) and 2.75 (0.81-6.6) mg/ml. There was a significant correlation between baseline AMP and bradykinin PC20 values. For AMP the geometric mean PC20 values following pretreatment with inhaled frusemide and matched placebo were 80.97 (9.97- > 400.0) and 14.86 (2.6-104.6) mg/ml respectively (95% CI 0.49 to 0.98). For bradykinin the geometric mean PC20 values following pretreatment with inhaled frusemide and matched placebo were 13.22 (2.53- > 16.0) and 2.52 (0.45-5.61) mg/ml respectively (95% CI 0.43 to 1.01). Frusemide afforded 5.45 and 5.24 fold protection against AMP and bradykinin-induced bronchoconstriction respectively. Furthermore, there was a significant correlation between protection afforded to the airways against AMP and bradykinin.

CONCLUSIONS

These data suggest that inhaled frusemide affords protection against bradykinin-induced bronchoconstriction which is comparable to that against AMP, supporting a common mechanism of action for frusemide.