Efficacy of MP-AzeFlu in children with seasonal allergic rhinitis: Importance of paediatric symptom assessment

Nasal Disorders

Nasal obstruction, rhinorrhea, and epistaxis are common presenting concerns in primary care clinics. Nasal disorders affect the quality of life for many children and families. Rarely, these complaints may represent a life-threatening condition among infant obligate nasal breathers or cases of unusual pathology. The most common causes of rhinorrhea and nasal obstruction vary by age and include physiologic, infectious, allergic, foreign body, irritant, and traumatic causes. Less commonly, children may have congenital malformations, sinonasal masses, or autoimmune disease. The most common causes of epistaxis are inflammatory, environmental, and traumatic causes and medication misuse, but rarely, children may have predisposing anatomic, hematologic, or vascular abnormalities or even sinonasal tumors. In this article, we provide a thorough review of the common nasal disorders treated every day in primary care clinics and mention briefly some of the rare but serious cases that may be overlooked without considering a full differential diagnosis.

Updates in the diagnosis and practical management of allergic rhinitis

INTRODUCTION

Allergic rhinitis (AR) is a widespread disease that can be associated with other conditions, including conjunctivitis, rhinosinusitis, asthma, food allergy, and atopic dermatitis. Diagnosis is based on the history and documentation of sensitization, such as the production of allergen-specific IgE, preferably using molecular diagnostics. Treatments are based on patient education, non-pharmacological and pharmacological remedies, allergen-specific immunotherapy (AIT), and surgery. Symptomatic treatments mainly concern intranasal/oral antihistamines and/or nasal corticosteroids.

AREAS COVERED

This review discusses current and emerging management strategies for AR, covering pharmacological and non-pharmacological remedies, AIT, and biologics in selected cases with associated severe asthma. However, AIT presently remains the unique causal treatment for AR.

EXPERT OPINION

The management of allergic rhinitis could include new strategies. In this regard, particular interest should be considered in the fixed association between intranasal antihistamines and corticosteroids, probiotics and other natural substances, and new formulations (tablets) of AIT.

International consensus statement on allergy and rhinology: Allergic rhinitis - 2023

BACKGROUND

In the 5 years that have passed since the publication of the 2018 International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis (ICAR-Allergic Rhinitis 2018), the literature has expanded substantially. The ICAR-Allergic Rhinitis 2023 update presents 144 individual topics on allergic rhinitis (AR), expanded by over 40 topics from the 2018 document. Originally presented topics from 2018 have also been reviewed and updated. The executive summary highlights key evidence-based findings and recommendation from the full document.

METHODS

ICAR-Allergic Rhinitis 2023 employed established evidence-based review with recommendation (EBRR) methodology to individually evaluate each topic. Stepwise iterative peer review and consensus was performed for each topic. The final document was then collated and includes the results of this work.

RESULTS

ICAR-Allergic Rhinitis 2023 includes 10 major content areas and 144 individual topics related to AR. For a substantial proportion of topics included, an aggregate grade of evidence is presented, which is determined by collating the levels of evidence for each available study identified in the literature. For topics in which a diagnostic or therapeutic intervention is considered, a recommendation summary is presented, which considers the aggregate grade of evidence, benefit, harm, and cost.

CONCLUSION

The ICAR-Allergic Rhinitis 2023 update provides a comprehensive evaluation of AR and the currently available evidence. It is this evidence that contributes to our current knowledge base and recommendations for patient evaluation and treatment.

Research Advances in the Treatment of Allergic Rhinitis by Probiotics

Allergic rhinitis (AR) impairs the quality of life of patients and reduces the efficiency of social work, it is an increasingly serious public medical and economic problem in the world. Conventional anti-allergic drugs for the treatment of allergic rhinitis (AR) can cause certain side effects, which limit the quality of life of patients. Therefore, it makes sense to look for other forms of treatment. Several studies in recent years have shown that probiotics have shown anti-allergic effects in various mouse and human studies. For example, the application of certain probiotic strains can effectively relieve the typical nasal and ocular symptoms of allergic rhinitis in children and adults, thereby improving the quality of life and work efficiency. At the same time, previous studies in humans and mice have found that probiotics can produce multiple effects, such as reduction of Th2 cell inflammatory factors and/or increase of Th1 cell inflammatory factors, changes in allergy-related immunoglobulins and cell migration, regulate Th1/Th2 balance or restore intestinal microbiota disturbance. For patients with limited activity or allergic rhinitis with more attacks and longer attack duration, oral probiotics have positive effects. The efficacy of probiotics in the prevention and treatment of allergic rhinitis is remarkable, but its specific mechanism needs further study. This review summarizes the research progress of probiotics in the treatment of allergic rhinitis in recent years.

Allergic Rhinitis in Childhood and the New EUFOREA Algorithm

Allergic rhinitis in childhood has been often missed, mistreated and misunderstood. It has significant comorbidities, adverse effects upon quality of life and educational performance and can progress to asthma or worsen control of existing asthma. Accurate diagnosis and effective treatment are important. The new EUFOREA algorithm provides a succinct but wide- ranging guide to management at all levels, based on previous guidelines with updated evidence and has been adjusted and approved by experts worldwide.

Clinical efficacy and safety of MP-AzeFlu for the treatment of allergic rhinitis: a meta-analysis

OBJECTIVE

MP-AzeFlu is a novel option for therapy of allergic rhinitis (AR). The purpose of our study was to assess the safety and efficacy of MP-AzeFlu for the treatment of allergic rhinitis, compared to placebo and azelastine monotherapy.

METHODS

The PubMed, MEDLINE, EMBASE and Cochrane databases were comprehensively searched for all published randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of using MP-AzeFlu nasal spray on July 26, 2019. In these studies, we selected patients with clinical symptom scores. The heterogeneity of the included studies was assessed by I².

RESULTS

Among the 336 citations retrieved, 6 articles with over 6000 patients were finally included in the meta-analysis. The results of meta-analysis revealed that MP-AzeFlu was superior to placebo ( - 2.43 [95%CI,  - 2.73 to  - 2.14], P < 0.00001) and azelastine ( - 1.27 [95% CI,  - 1.57 to  - 0.97], P < 0.00001) in reflective total nasal symptom score. In the MP-AzeFlu group, the instantaneous total nasal symptom score ( - 2.56 [95% CI,  - 3.02 to  - 2.10], P < 0.00001) and the reflective total ocular symptom score ( - 1.22 [95% CI,  - 1.57 to  - 0.87], P < 0.00001) were significantly reduced compared to the placebo group.

CONCLUSION

MP-AzeFlu is as safe and mild as placebo and azelastine, which also is associated with symptom relief and the improvement of quality of life in AR patients. MP-AzeFlu can provide better clinical benefits than two currently available first-line intranasal therapies. It is an ideal therapy for AR patients.

New concepts in pediatric rhinitis

Rhinitis-and especially allergic rhinitis (AR)-remains the most frequent hypersensitivity condition, affecting up to a quarter of the population and impacting the quality of life of individual patients and the health economy. Data, especially with respect to underlying pathophysiologic mechanisms, mainly derive from studies on adults and are subsequently extrapolated to the pediatric population. Therapeutic algorithms for children with rhinitis are long based on the same principles as in adults. We explore and describe novel aspects of rhinitis, ranging from mechanisms to disease classification, phenotypes, diagnostic and monitoring tools, and the use of treatments, with a focus on the traits of pediatric age groups.

Allergic rhinitis

Allergic rhinitis (AR) is caused by immunoglobulin E (IgE)-mediated reactions to inhaled allergens and is one of the most common chronic conditions globally. AR often co-occurs with asthma and conjunctivitis and is a global health problem causing major burden and disability worldwide. Risk factors include inhalant and occupational allergens, as well as genetic factors. AR impairs quality of life, affects social life, school and work, and is associated with substantial economic costs. The Allergic Rhinitis and its Impact on Asthma (ARIA) initiative classified AR into intermittent or persistent and mild or moderate/severe. The diagnosis is based on the clinical history and, if needed in patients with uncontrolled rhinitis despite medications or with long-lasting symptoms, on skin tests or the presence of serum-specific IgE antibodies to allergens. The most frequently used pharmacological treatments include oral, intranasal or ocular H₁-antihistamines, intranasal corticosteroids or a fixed combination of intranasal H₁-antihistamines and corticosteroids. Allergen immunotherapy prescribed by a specialist using high-quality extracts in stratified patients is effective in patients with persistent symptoms. Real-world data obtained by mobile technology offer new insights into AR phenotypes and management. The outlook for AR includes a better understanding of novel multimorbid phenotypes, health technology assessment and patient-centred shared decision-making.

Current and emerging pharmacotherapy for pediatric allergic rhinitis

INTRODUCTION

Allergic rhinitis (AR) is a global health problem in adults as well as the younger population, continuously increasing and posing a significant problem for patients, health care systems and economies. For the younger population, some aspects differ from treatment of adults, namely, prevention, compliance and adherence.

AREAS COVERED

This narrative review summarizes all the pharmacotherapeutic options with special focus on the pediatric population. Moreover, it elucidates prevention strategies as well as future developments of AR treatment. Currently, symptomatic therapy in the form of steroids and antihistamines is applied topically and systemically where steroids need to be administered with caution and for a very short term. The only disease-modifying and causal treatment is allergen immunotherapy administered sublingually and subcutaneously. Future and current novel therapeutic options are human monoclonal antibodies.

EXPERT OPINION

The greatest potential for future developments currently lie in allergen immunotherapy and here in different routes of administration and modification of (recombinant) allergens as well as immune-modulating adjuvants and nanoparticles. Secondly, monoclonal antibodies are promising molecules blocking and/or interfering with up- and downstream immune mechanisms. Another important aspect lies in prevention of allergic sensitization and disease progression through both AIT and biologics which is particularly true for the pediatric population.

The complex pathophysiology of allergic rhinitis: scientific rationale for the development of an alternative treatment option

Allergic rhinitis (AR) poses a global health problem and can be challenging to treat. Many of the current symptomatic treatments for AR have been available for decades, yet there has been little improvement in patient quality of life or symptom burden over the years. In this review, we ask why this might be and explore the pathophysiological gaps that exist within the various AR treatment classes. We focus on the benefits and drawbacks of different treatment options and delivery routes for AR treatments and consider how, given what is known about AR pathophysiology and symptomatology, patients may be offered more effective treatment options for rapid, effective, and sustained AR control. In particular, we consider how a new AR preparation, MP-AzeFlu (Dymista^®, Meda, Sweden), comprising a formulation of an intranasal antihistamine (azelastine hydrochloride), an intranasal corticosteroid (fluticasone propionate), and excipients delivered in a single spray, may offer benefits over and above single and multiple AR therapy options. We review the evidence in support of this treatment across the spectrum of AR disease. The concept of AR control is also reviewed within the context of new European Union and Contre les Maladies Chroniques pour un VIeillissement Actif-Allergic Rhinitis and its Impact on Asthma initiatives.

Intranasal Azelastine and Fluticasone as Combination Therapy for Allergic Rhinitis: Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

Objective

Combination therapy with intranasal azelastine and fluticasone propionate is an option for treatment of allergic rhinitis. This systematic review and meta-analysis examines existing literature to determine efficacy in treating allergic rhinitis compared to monotherapy.

Data Sources

The PubMed, EMBASE, Cochrane, and MEDLINE databases were systematically searched for randomized controlled trials using AzeFlu nasal spray.

Review Methods

Randomized, controlled trials that reported symptom relief of allergic rhinitis in males and females of all ages were included. Results were reported in accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) standard.

Results

Systematic review identified 8 articles suitable for review. The risk of bias was generally low. All studies exhibited a greater decrease in patient-reported symptom scores in patients treated with combination therapy compared to monotherapy or placebo. Meta-analysis revealed superiority of combination therapy in reducing Total Nasal Symptom Score compared to placebo (mean change from baseline: −2.41; 95% confidence interval [CI], −2.82 to −1.99; P < .001; I 2 = 60%), azelastine (mean change from baseline: −1.40; 95% CI, −1.82 to −0.98; P < .001; I 2 = 0%), and fluticasone (mean change from baseline: −0.74; 95% CI, −1.17 to −0.31; P < .001; I 2 = 12%).

Conclusion

Current evidence supports both efficacy and superiority of combination intranasal azelastine and fluticasone in reducing patient-reported symptom scores in patients with allergic rhinitis. Combination nasal spray should be considered as second-line therapy in patients with allergic rhinitis that is not controlled with monotherapy.

Efficacy and safety of SQ house dust mite sublingual immunotherapy-tablet in Japanese children

BACKGROUND

The SQ house dust mite (HDM) sublingual immunotherapy (SLIT)-tablet (TO-203, Torii, Japan/ALK, Denmark) treatment has been effective against respiratory allergic diseases in patients aged ≥12 years during European, Japanese, and North American trials. This trial was conducted to investigate the efficacy and safety of this treatment in Japanese children (5-17 years) with moderate-to-severe HDM allergic rhinitis (AR).

METHODS

In this randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial, 458 Japanese children were randomly assigned to a daily SQ HDM SLIT-tablet [10 000 Japanese Allergy Unit (JAU), equivalent to 6 SQ-HDM in Europe and the US] or placebo (1:1) treatment for 1 year. Inclusion required an AR symptom score of ≥7 on at least 7 days during a 14-day run-in period while symptomatic treatment was withdrawn. The primary endpoint was the total combined rhinitis score (TCRS) comprising AR symptom and medication scores during the last 8 weeks of the treatment period.

RESULTS

The analysis of primary endpoint demonstrated statistically significant absolute reduction in TCRS of 1.22 with a relative difference of 23% (95% confidence interval, 14% to 31%) in the 10 000 JAU compared with placebo. Predefined stratified analyses revealed the same degree of efficacy of 1.11 (P = 0.002), 21% (8% to 32%) and 1.36 (P = 0.001), 26% (11% to 38%), respectively, in pediatric (5-11 years) and adolescent subjects (12-17 years). The treatment was well tolerated by both pediatric and adolescent subjects.

CONCLUSION

This trial, for the first time, demonstrated the efficacy and safety of the HDM SLIT-tablet in pediatric patients with moderate-to-severe HDM AR (JapicCTI-152953).

Safety of a novel intranasal formulation of azelastine hydrochloride and fluticasone propionate in children: A randomized clinical trial

BACKGROUND

The safety of a novel intranasal formulation of azelastine hydrochloride (AZE) and fluticasone propionate (FP) has been established in adults and adolescents with allergic rhinitis but not in children <12 years old.

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the safety and tolerability of an intranasal formulation of AZE and FP in children ages 4-11 years with allergic rhinitis.

METHODS

The study was a randomized, 3-month, parallel-group, open-label design. Qualified patients were randomized in a 3:1 ratio to AZE/FP (n = 304) or fluticasone propionate (FP) (n = 101), one spray per nostril twice daily, and to one of three age groups: ≥4 to <6 years, ≥6 to <9 years, and ≥9 to <12 years. Safety was assessed by child- or caregiver-reported adverse events, nasal examinations, vital signs, and laboratory assessments.

RESULTS

The incidence of treatment-related adverse events (TRAEs) was low in both the AZE/FP (16%) and FP-only (12%) groups after 90 days' continuous use. Epistaxis was the most frequently reported TRAE in both groups (AZE/FP, 9%; FP, 9%), followed by headache (AZE/FP, 3%; FP, 1%). All other TRAEs in the AZE/FP group were reported by ≤1% of the children. The majority of TRAEs were of mild intensity and resolved spontaneously. Results of nasal examinations showed an improvement over time in both groups, with no cases of mucosal ulceration or nasal septal perforation. There were no unusual or unexpected changes in laboratory parameters or vital signs.

CONCLUSION

The intranasal formulation of AZE and FP was safe and well tolerated after 3 months' continuous use in children with allergic rhinitis.The study was registered on <ext-link xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink" ext-link-type="uri" xlink:href="http://ClinicalTrials.gov">ClinicalTrials.gov</ext-link> (NCT01794741).

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.

IV Brazilian Consensus on Rhinitis - an update on allergic rhinitis

INTRODUCTION

The guidelines on allergic rhinitis aim to update knowledge about the disease and care for affected patients. The initiative called "Allergic Rhinitis and its Impact on Asthma", initially published in 2001 and updated in 2008 and 2010, has been very successful in disseminating information and evidence, as well as providing a classification of severity and proposing a systemized treatment protocol. In order to include the participation of other medical professionals in the treatment of allergic rhinitis, it is important to develop algorithms that accurately indicate what should and can be done regionally.

OBJECTIVE

To update the III Brazilian Consensus on Rhinitis - 2012, with the creation of an algorithm for allergic rhinitis management.

METHODS

We invited 24 experts nominated by the Brazilian Association of Allergy and Immunology, Brazilian Association of Otorhinolaryngology and Head and Neck Surgery and Brazilian Society of Pediatrics to update the 2012 document.

RESULTS

The update of the last Brazilian Consensus on Rhinitis incorporated and adapted the relevant information published in all "Allergic Rhinitis and its Impact on Asthma" Initiative documents to the Brazilian scenario, bringing new concepts such as local allergic rhinitis, new drugs and treatment evaluation methods.

CONCLUSION

A flowchart for allergic rhinitis treatment has been proposed.

Findings from an Online Survey Assessing the Burden and Management of Seasonal Allergic Rhinoconjunctivitis in US Patients

BACKGROUND

Seasonal allergic rhinoconjunctivitis (SARC) affects ≥16% of the US population annually. Telephone and in-office surveys have demonstrated negative effects of allergic rhinitis (AR) symptoms on sleep, daily activities, productivity, concentration, and emotions.

OBJECTIVE

The objective of this study was to assess the patient-perceived burden of SARC in relation to newer treatments, increased access to treatments, and changing management protocols.

METHODS

An online survey of symptom experience, impact on daily life, and management was conducted in US respondents who suffer (or whose child suffers) from SARC symptoms.

RESULTS

A total of 1001 surveys were completed: 500 adults (≥18 years old) and 501 children (12-17 years old, documented by their parents). Similar to earlier AR surveys, SARC symptoms negatively affected the patient's (and family's) quality of life, and were most severe in the spring. Before being treated, >50% of respondents reported daily symptoms during their season; 75% to 80% considered their symptoms moderate to severe. Patients saw a variety of health care professionals (including pharmacists) and used over-the-counter and prescription medications for symptoms. Those using prescription medications were generally more satisfied with treatment and less likely to switch or discontinue treatment. Nasal and/or ocular symptoms drove adherence, seeing a health care professional, and reviewing and/or changing treatment.

CONCLUSIONS

The majority of patients with SARC report moderate-to-severe symptoms that significantly impair their quality of life. However, patients appear to be taking more responsibility for their (child's) condition, and patient expectations for therapy are increasingly being met. Continued efforts will be needed to examine the contribution of better information and/or increased access to and availability of medications to control the disease.

Allergy immunotherapy across the life cycle to promote active and healthy ageing: from research to policies: An AIRWAYS Integrated Care Pathways (ICPs) programme item (Action Plan B3 of the European Innovation Partnership on active and healthy ageing) and the Global Alliance against Chronic Respiratory Diseases (GARD), a World Health Organization GARD research demonstration project

Allergic diseases often occur early in life and persist throughout life. This life-course perspective should be considered in allergen immunotherapy. In particular it is essential to understand whether this al treatment may be used in old age adults. The current paper was developed by a working group of AIRWAYS integrated care pathways for airways diseases, the model of chronic respiratory diseases of the European Innovation Partnership on active and healthy ageing (DG CONNECT and DG Santé). It considered (1) the political background, (2) the rationale for allergen immunotherapy across the life cycle, (3) the unmet needs for the treatment, in particular in preschool children and old age adults, (4) the strategic framework and the practical approach to synergize current initiatives in allergen immunotherapy, its mechanisms and the concept of active and healthy ageing.

Treatment of allergic children - Where is the progress (for the practicing allergist)?

For any kind of therapeutic intervention in allergic diseases such as environmental control, pharmacological, or immunomodulating treatment including educational programs, children are addressed separately from adults. Health authorities like the Food and Drug Administration in the United States of America or the European Medicine Agency in Europe request a specific 'Pediatric investigational plan' with studies addressing dose-response relationship, safety, and efficacy for infants, children, and adolescents. During the last 2 years, promising advances have been reported for the treatment of a variety of allergic and immunologic disorders. This review summarizes the progress in the treatment of pediatric asthma and allergic diseases, based on publications of approximately the last 2.5 years (end of 2013 until May 2016) in and beyond this journal. Meanwhile, it highlights areas with promising novel therapeutic approaches, which are likely to change treatment for allergic children in the near future.

Comparison of outcome measures in allergic rhinitis in children, adolescents and adults

BACKGROUND

Grass pollen-induced allergic rhinoconjunctivitis (AR) is very common worldwide. However, its symptoms may vary with the patient's age. The present study compared symptom profiles and quality of life (QoL) in children, adolescents and adults with grass pollen-induced AR.

METHODS

This was a four-week, multicentre, observational study of children (aged 6-11), adolescents (12-17) and adults (18-65) consulting specialist physicians in France. The management of AR was at the physicians' discretion. Participants regularly rated their symptoms (the rhinoconjunctivitis total symptom score (RTSS) and a visual analogue scale (VAS)) and QoL (the Rhinoconjunctivitis Quality of Life Questionnaire (RQLQ).

RESULTS

A total of 806 patients (253 children, 250 adolescents and 303 adults, of whom 83.5% suffered from moderate-to-severe, persistent AR) provided data for at least the first 2 weeks of the study. Ocular pruritus (the most bothersome symptom in children (35%), adolescents (22%) and adults (16%)) was associated with poor QoL in all groups, whereas nasal obstruction and pruritus were associated with poor QoL in adolescents and children. Over 4 weeks, the weekly mean RTSS and VAS scores fell by around half. This change was associated with an improvement in the RQLQ scores. In all age groups, the VAS score was well correlated with the weekly mean RTSS score (Pearson's r: 0.79-0.88) and moderately correlated with the weekly mean RQLQ score (Pearson's r: 0.64-0.80).

CONCLUSIONS

In moderate-to-severe grass pollen-induced AR, symptom perception differs in children vs. older patients. However, the assessments of treatment outcomes (using the RTSS, VAS and RQLQ) were similar in all age groups.