Safety and tolerability profiles of intranasal antihistamines and intranasal corticosteroids in the treatment of allergic rhinitis

Optimization of Nasal Liposome Formulation of Venlafaxine Hydrochloride using a Box-Behnken Experimental Design

Background

Intranasal administration is among the most effective alternatives to deliver drugs directly to the brain and prevent first-pass metabolism. Venlafaxine-loaded liposomes are biocompatible carriers that enhance transport qualities over the nasal mucosa.

Objective

This research aimed to develop, formulate, characterize, and observe the prepared formulation.

Methods

The formulation was developed using the thin-film hydration technique. The response surface plot interrelationship between three independent variables are lipid, cholesterol and polymer and four dependent variables such as particle size, percentage entrapment efficiency, and percentage drug release were ascertained using the Box-Behnken design.

Results

The drug-release chitosan-coated liposomes were reported to have a particle size distribution, entanglement efficiency, and 84%, respectively, of 191 ± 34.71 nm, 94 ± 2.71% and 94 ± 2.71%. According to in vitro investigations, liposomes as a delivery system for the nasal route provided a more sustained drug release than the oral dosing form.

Conclusions

The intranasal administration of venlafaxine liposomal vesicles effectively enhanced the absolute bioavailability, retention time, and brain delivery of venlafaxine.

Challenges in the Development and Application of Organ-on-Chips for Intranasal Drug Delivery Studies

With the growing demand for the development of intranasal (IN) products, such as nasal vaccines, which has been especially highlighted during the COVID-19 pandemic, the lack of novel technologies to accurately test the safety and effectiveness of IN products in vitro so that they can be delivered promptly to the market is critically acknowledged. There have been attempts to manufacture anatomically relevant 3D replicas of the human nasal cavity for in vitro IN drug tests, and a couple of organ-on-chip (OoC) models, which mimic some key features of the nasal mucosa, have been proposed. However, these models are still in their infancy, and have not completely recapitulated the critical characteristics of the human nasal mucosa, including its biological interactions with other organs, to provide a reliable platform for preclinical IN drug tests. While the promising potential of OoCs for drug testing and development is being extensively investigated in recent research, the applicability of this technology for IN drug tests has barely been explored. This review aims to highlight the importance of using OoC models for in vitro IN drug tests and their potential applications in IN drug development by covering the background information on the wide usage of IN drugs and their common side effects where some classical examples of each area are pointed out. Specifically, this review focuses on the major challenges of developing advanced OoC technology and discusses the need to mimic the physiological and anatomical features of the nasal cavity and nasal mucosa, the performance of relevant drug safety assays, as well as the fabrication and operational aspects, with the ultimate goal to highlight the much-needed consensus, to converge the effort of the research community in this area of work.

Efficacy of Topical Azelastine and Fluticasone Dipropionate Combination in Children With Adenoid Hypertrophy

OBJECTIVE

Adenoid hypertrophy (AH) is one of the common childhood diseases. Surgical and non-surgical treatment of AH in children is planned according to the severity of symptoms and associated complications. In recent years, treatment methods with intranasal sprays have been reported quite frequently in uncomplicated cases. We aim to evaluate the effectiveness of a new combination of azelastine - fluticasone (AZE-FLU) (137mcg azelastine and 50mcg fluticasone) nasal spray in children with uncomplicated AH.

METHODS

Sixty-five children diagnosed with AH were included in the study. The mean age of the children was 7.42 ± 2.26 (4-13 years). The cohort consisted of 29 males and 36 females. All children were evaluated clinically and endoscopically. AZE-FLU nasal spray was applied to both nostrils twice a day for three months. Adenoid/choana ratio and symptom scores were evaluated before treatment and at the end of the 12th week.

RESULTS

At the end of 24 weeks of AZE-FLU application, there was a statistically significant decrease in both adenoid/choana ratio and symptom scores. While the initial adenoid/choana (A/C) score was 3.57 ± 0.58, it decreased to 1.74 ± 0.61 following treatment. A dramatic decrease in total symptom scores was observed. The total symptom score average was 15.63 ± 1.28 before treatment, while it was 2.31 ± 1.4 after the treatment with the difference being statistically significant (P < .01).

CONCLUSION

In this study, the effectiveness of AZE-FLU nasal spray on AH was investigated for the first time. This treatment provides an effective alternative to the surgical approach in children with uncomplicated adenoid hypertrophy. Using this protocol, 96% of patients were removed from the surgery list.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

is IV.

Different Methods and Formulations of Drugs and Vaccines for Nasal Administration

Nasal drug delivery is advantageous when compared with other routes of drug delivery as it avoids the hepatic first-pass effect, blood–brain barrier penetration, and compliance issues with parenteral administration. However, nasal administration also has some limitations, such as its low bioavailability due to metabolism on the mucosal surface, and irreversible damage to the nasal mucosa due to the ingredients added into the formula. Moreover, the method of nasal administration is not applicable to all drugs. The current review presents the nasal anatomy and mucosal environment for the nasal delivery of vaccines and drugs, as well as presents various methods for enhancing nasal absorption, and different drug carriers and delivery devices to improve nasal drug delivery. It also presents future prospects on the nasal drug delivery of vaccines and drugs.

Spray-dried mucoadhesive microparticles based on S-protected thiolated hydroxypropyl-β-cyclodextrin for budesonide nasal delivery

Budesonide (BUD) is used as first choice therapy for the treatment of allergic rhinitis, a chronic allergic-immune condition with an increased incidence in the pediatric population. The main problem of BUD nasal formulations is related to its poor aqueous solubility (S₀ = 5.03·10^-5 M), sometimes compensated by the administration of high doses of the drug. The ability of thiolated hydroxypropyl-β-cyclodextrin (HP- β -CD-SH, 100 mM) to increase the water solubility of BUD (S_HP- β_-CD-SH = 10.9·10^-3 M) more than pristine hydroxypropyl- β -cyclodextrin (HP- β-CD, S_HP- β-_CD = 4.3·10^-3 M) has been previously demonstrated. Considering that S-protected thiomers have the advantage of increasing the stability of thiols over a wide pH range prolonging their residence time at the target site, 2-mercapto-nicotinic acid (MNA) was used in this study to protect the free thiol groups on HP- β -CD-SH generating the corresponding S-protected cyclodextrin (HP-β-CD-MNA). Besides, given the increased stability and processability of HP-β-CD-MNA, mucoadhesive microparticles (MPs) were prepared via spray-drying of aqueous solutions of the inclusion complex HP-β-CD-MNA/BUD. MPs were morphologically and dimensionally homogeneous exhibiting an average diameter of 3.24 ± 0.57 µm. Over time these MPs formed larger aggregates with an average diameter of 10-50 μm, suitable for the design of intranasal delivery systems. Differential scanning calorimetry analyses revealed the absence of crystalline BUD from spray-dried complexes. Dissolution studies shown that spray-dried MPs dissolved quickly and the complexed drug was completely solubilized within the first 20 min of the dissolution process. Cell viability assay indicated that spray-dried complexes are safe. In vitro mucoadhesion studies on freshly excised porcine nasal mucosa showed a 1.4- and 2.3-fold prolonged mucosal residence time of HP- β -CD-SH/BUD and HP-β-CD-MNA/BUD in comparison to the unmodified cyclodextrin (CD), respectively. Rheological behaviour of spray-dried MPs complexes/mucus mixtures confirmed the results of the mucoadhesion studies, as the dynamic viscosity of the spray-dried inclusion complexes HP-β-CD-SH/BUD and HP-β-CD-MNA/BUD was 1.1-fold and 2.4 fold increased in comparison to the unmodified HP-β-CD/BUD complex. According to these results, MPs comprising HP- β -CD-MNA/BUD might be a promising tool for nasal delivery of poorly water-soluble corticosteroids such as BUD.

Adverse Events Associated with Intranasal Sprays: An Analysis of the Food and Drug Administration Database and Literature Review

BACKGROUND

Intranasal sprays (INSs) are commonly used medications for the treatment of many rhinologic conditions. Despite their popularity, an analysis of a nationwide reporting database and comparison to the available literature has never been performed.

METHODS

The Food and Drug Administration Adverse Event Reporting System (FAERS) database was accessed to obtain adverse event (AE) records from 2014 to 2019 for varying INSs, including: 10 corticosteroids, 1 alpha adrenergic, and 3 antihistamines. The Proportional Reporting Ratios (PRR) and Reporting Odds Ratios (ROR) were calculated for dyspnea, anosmia, ageusia/dysgeusia, epistaxis, and headache. A PRR ≥ 2 or ROR ≥ 1 was considered significant.

RESULTS

Corticosteroids had 98 864 total reported AEs to the database, followed by antihistamines (7011) and alpha adrenergics (2071). In total, dyspnea was reported 5843 times, followed by headache (4230), epistaxis (1205), ageusia/dysgeusia (920), and anosmia (312). Overall, PRR and ROR values for dyspnea ranged from 0.51 to 4.25 and 0.51 to 4.49; for dysgeusia/ageusia from 0.56 to 6.09 and 0.56 to 6.12; and for epistaxis from 1.03 to 27.24 and 1.03 to 30.76, respectively. All medications which listed anosmia within the top AEs had PRR and ROR values exceeding 2 and 1, respectively. The PRR for headache exceeded 2 for 1 medication and the ROR exceeded 1 in 7 medications.

CONCLUSION

The AEs of dyspnea, anosmia, ageusia/dysgeusia, epistaxis, and headache are reported within the FAERS database for commonly prescribed INSs. When compared against the existing scientific literature, the clinical significance of this reporting tool from the FDA for these classes of medications remains unvalidated.

Intranasal drug delivery: opportunities and toxicologic challenges during drug development

Over the past 10 years, the interest in intranasal drug delivery in pharmaceutical R&D has increased. This review article summarises information on intranasal administration for local and systemic delivery, as well as for CNS indications. Nasal delivery offers many advantages over standard systemic delivery systems, such as its non-invasive character, a fast onset of action and in many cases reduced side effects due to a more targeted delivery. There are still formulation limitations and toxicological aspects to be optimised. Intranasal drug delivery in the field of drug development is an interesting delivery route for the treatment of neurological disorders. Systemic approaches often fail to efficiently supply the CNS with drugs. This review paper describes the anatomical, histological and physiological basis and summarises currently approved drugs for administration via intranasal delivery. Further, the review focuses on toxicological considerations of intranasally applied compounds and discusses formulation aspects that need to be considered for drug development.

Efficacy and Safety of Guizhi Decoction AssociatedFormulas for Allergic Rhinitis: A Systematic Review

In this study, we aim to evaluate the efficacy and safety of Guizhi Decoction associated formulas for the treatment of allergic rhinitis. A total of seven online databases were searched to collect studies published up to Feb 23rd, 2020. Study quality of each included article was evaluated by the Cochrane Collaboration risk of bias tool. Systematic reviews were conducted based on the Cochrane systematic review method by using RevMan 5.3 Software. Among the included trials, Guizhi Decoction associated formulas alone (or plus Western medicine, or acupoint-based therapy) were main therapies in experimental groups. Interventions in control groups include Western medicine, Guizhi Decoction associated formulas alone, Chinese patent medicine, and placebo control. Primary outcomes in this study include recovery rate, accumulative marked effective rate, accumulative effective rate, and recurrence rate. Finally, 23 trials involving 2281 participants were included. Results of systematic reviews show that Guizhi Decoction and associated formulas alone, plus Western medicine or plus acupoint-based therapies, were significantly better compared with using Western medicine alone in terms of efficacy. In addition, the formulas plus nasal TCM fumigation therapy could improve effective rate for AR treatment compared to using the formulas alone. More types and cases of adverse events were reported in the control groups (Western medicine alone), but events of included trials were all mild and did not need specific medical intervention. More RCTs of high quality, and large sample size, with appropriate blinding methods or nonblinded pragmatic trials of Guizhi Decoction and associated formulas for AR are needed.

Safety of Intranasal Steroids: an Updated Perspective

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Intranasal corticosteroid sprays have been available as over-the-counter (OTC) medications since 2013. As such, clinicians need to be up-to-date with the risks and the safety of INS, as patients may have concerns and detailed questions. The following is a review of the recent medical literature regarding the safety profile, adverse reactions, and special populations using INS.

RECENT FINDINGS

The latest research on intranasal steroid sprays (INS) continue to confirm that INS rarely have significant local side effects, such as severe and persistent epistaxis. Recent studies looking at systemic side effects such as hypothalamic pituitary axis suppression, growth effects, and ocular effects do not indicate any new concerns nor have found significant differences from the past literature. The use of combination INS and topical antihistamine medications did not reveal any new safety issues. Use of INS with topical decongestants found some limited effects of tachyphylaxis and rebound congestion. Studies continue to support the use of newer INS for children and continued monitoring of growth in this population. The HIV population should avoid use of INS with the prescription of ritonavir, given demonstration of adrenal suppression. This updated perspective has found that newer generation INS should be used at the lowest effective dose for the selected population, that clinicians can inform patients using the OTC INS preparations that there are very few safety concerns, and that regular follow-up visits can provide further reassurance with physical examinations and address patient's questions. Future research regarding the safety of INS should study newer preparations when developed and if used in combination with other topical agents.

[Rhinitis medicamentosa]

One type of non-allergic non-infectious rhinitis is represented by a heterogeneous group of rhinitis medicamentosa, which can be divided into several pathogenetic types. The most common rebound nasal congestion associated with the use of topical decongestants. Excessive use of intranasal decongestants leads to a decrease in the number of alpha-adrenoreceptors on the surface of cell membranes and uncoupling their connection with the G-protein and the development of tachyphylaxis. To prevent the development of rebound nasal congestion caused by topical decongestants, it is important to limit the frequency of their use. In most cases, the duration of the use of vasoconstrictor drugs should be limited to 5-7 days, according to Patient information leaflets for the drugs. However, in patients who have had a history of episodes of rebound nasal congestion, which develops including the previously indicated periods, the duration of decongestant therapy should be limited to 3 days. Rhinitis associated with local inflammation is caused by the intake of acetylsalicylic acid (ASA) or other non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs. Currently, the so-called "aspirin triad" is well known - a combination of bronchial asthma, rhinosinusitis (often polyposis) and intolerance to ASA. Neurogenic rhinitis develops due to the use of drugs that violate vascular tone, for example, antihypertensive drugs or type 5 phosphodiesterase inhibitors. Drug-induced rhinitis has a significant impact on the patient's quality of life: nasal congestion, rhinorrhea, secondary night apnea, insomnia as a result of nasal breathing disturbances, headaches, irritability, weakness after sleepless nights disturb patients to a large extent. Timely diagnosis and withdrawal of a provocative drug, the use of topical corticosteroids in case of severe rhinitis are the basis of the treatment of rhinitis medicamentosa. In severe cases, there is a need, including surgical treatment, such as, for example, submucosal laser destruction of the lower nasal concha.

Effects and safety of intranasal phototherapy for allergic rhinitis: Study protocol for a single-center, randomized, double-blind, parallel, placebo-controlled, investigator-initiated, pilot study

INTRODUCTION

Allergic rhinitis (AR) is an immunoglobulin E (Ig E)-mediated inflammatory disease. Intranasal phototherapy is a promising treatment modality because it has a profound immunosuppressive effect, but the available evidence of its use for AR is insufficient. Therefore, rigorously designed randomized controlled trials (RCTs) are needed. Our objective is to describe the protocol for a feasibility trial to assess the effects and safety of intranasal phototherapy for the treatment of AR.

METHODS AND ANALYSIS

This is a study protocol for a single-center, randomized, double-blind, parallel, placebo-controlled, investigator-initiated pilot study. A total of 40 patients with AR will be randomly assigned to the medical device or sham device group in a 1:1 ratio. The participants will receive intranasal phototherapy with a medical or sham device for 20 min 5 times a week for 2 weeks. The primary outcome will be the mean change in the Total Nasal Symptom Score (TNSS) from baseline to 2 weeks. The secondary outcomes will include the Rhinoconjunctivitis Quality of Life Questionnaire (RQLQ) score, Nasal Endoscopy Index, total serum Ig E level, and eosinophil count.

DISCUSSION

The findings of this study will provide the basis for subsequent large-scale definitive RCTs to confirm the effects and safety of intranasal phototherapy for the treatment of nasal symptoms in patients with AR who do not respond well to conventional therapy. This study may assist in the development of noninvasive treatment for patients with AR.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

This study was registered at the Korean National Clinical Trial Registry, Clinical Research Information Service (KCT0003253).

Effects and safety of intranasal phototherapy for allergic rhinitis: Study protocol for a single-center, randomized, parallel (acupuncture-controlled), open-label, investigator-initiated, pilot study

INTRODUCTION

Allergic rhinitis (AR) is an immunoglobulin E (Ig E)-mediated inflammatory disease. Intranasal phototherapy is a promising treatment modality because it has a profound immunosuppressive effect, but the evidence of its use for AR is insufficient. Therefore, rigorously designed randomized controlled trials (RCTs) are needed. Our objective is to describe the protocol for an RCT to assess the effects and safety of intranasal phototherapy for the treatment of AR.

METHODS AND ANALYSIS

This is a study protocol for a single-center, randomized, parallel (acupuncture-controlled), open-label, investigator-initiated, pilot study. A total of 80 patients with AR will be randomly assigned to the intranasal phototherapy or acupuncture group at a 1:1 ratio. The participants will receive intranasal phototherapy with medical or acupuncture treatment for 20 minutes, 3 times a week for 4 weeks. The primary outcome will be the mean change in the total nasal symptom score (TNSS) from baseline to 4 weeks. The secondary outcomes will include the Rhinoconjunctivitis Quality of Life Questionnaire (RQLQ) score, Nasal Endoscopy Index, total serum immunoglobulin E (Ig E) level and eosinophil count.

DISCUSSION

The findings of this study will provide the basis for the design and implementation of RCTs investigating the effects and safety of intranasal phototherapy for AR. Additionally, it will provide preliminary evidence of intranasal phototherapy for use in AR.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

This study was registered at the Korean National Clinical Trial Registry, Clinical Research Information Service (KCT0004079).

Consensus on the methodology for experimental studies in allergic rhinitis

OBJECTIVES

Allergic rhinitis (AR) is a symptomatic disorder of the nose induced by allergen exposure, which triggers immunoglobulin E (IgE)-mediated inflammation of the nasal membranes. Allergic rhinitis is one of the most common health problems and has a major effect on the quality of life.

METHODS

In this review, we aimed to provide a consensus for experimental studies on allergic rhinitis in terms of allergic rhinitis models. For this purpose, we searched for experimental studies in the PubMed, Proquest Central, and Google electronic databases over a 20-year period from the current time (1996-2016). The literature survey was performed using keywords including "allergic rhinitis", "experimental", "animal", "model", "rat", "rabbit", "guinea pig", and "mice" alone or in various combinations. The search identified a total of 285 papers, which were included in this review.

RESULTS

It is vital to select a suitable animal for an allergic model. Rodents like rats, guinea pigs, and mice can produce allergen-specific antibodies with the use of adjuvants. Rats are cheap and the vast majority of the allergen-specific antibodies are immunoglobulin E (IgE). Still, intraperitoneal sensitization is inescapable and adjuvants are required for sensitization. Rats, mice, rabbits, and guinea pigs can be utilized for this reason.

CONCLUSION

This review presented allergic rhinitis models in rats, mice, guinea pigs, and rabbits. Using these methods, researchers may perform well-designed studies.

The efficacy and safety of ciclesonide for the treatment of perennial allergic rhinitis: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Introduction

Allergic rhinitis is a chronic inflammatory disease which affects 1 out of 6 individuals. Perennial allergic rhinitis accounts for 40% of AR cases. Ciclesonide is one of the relatively new intranasal steroid for allergic rhinitis.

Objective

The purpose of this study was to evaluate the efficacy and safety of ciclesonide in the treatment of perennial allergic rhinitis.

Methods

We searched Pubmed, Scientific Citation Index, Embase, Clinical Trial Registries for randomized controlled trials and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials to find out the randomized controlled Trial comparing ciclesonide with placebo for PAR.

Results

Eight studies were included. In comparison with placebo groups, ciclesonide groups significantly decreased Reflective Total Nasal Symptom Score (MD = −0.56; 95% CI −0.72 to 0.39, p < 0.00001) with heterogeneity (p = 0.19, I² = 24%), Instantaneous Total Nasal Symptom Score (MD = −0.57; 95% CI −0.75 to −0.39, p < 0.00001) with heterogeneity (p = 0.34, I² = 11%). A significant effect for Reflective Nasal Symptom Score Subtotal (MD = −0.15; 95% CI −0.18 to −0.13, p < 0.00001) with heterogeneity (p = 0.12, I² = 24%) was also demonstrated. Rhinoconjunctivitis quality of life questionnaire score (RQLQs) (MD = −0.27; 95% CI −0.39 to −0.15, p < 0.00001) with heterogeneity (p = 0.58, I² = 0%) in the treatment of ciclesonide was also significantly reduced. In addition, the difference in Treatment-Emergent Adverse Events between the two groups was not significant.

Conclusion

Ciclesonide can improve perennial allergic rhinitis without increasing adverse events. Ciclesonide may be another valuable choice for perennial allergic rhinitis in the future.

Septoplasty versus non-surgical management for nasal obstruction due to a deviated nasal septum in adults: A modelling study of cost-effectiveness

OBJECTIVE

The objective of this study was to demonstrate how decision-analytic modelling can help to determine circumstances under which surgery may become cost-effective, using septoplasty as an example.

DESIGN

We developed a decision-analytic model comparing septoplasty to non-surgical management for nasal obstruction in adults with a deviated septum. Based on the estimated cost difference between both treatments, we calculated the minimal (a) gain in quality-adjusted life-years, or (b) reduction in productivity losses needed for septoplasty to be cost-effective. Input was derived from literature and publicly available data sources. The time horizon of our model was one year, and the willingness-to-pay per quality-adjusted life-year was €20 000, in accordance with current guidelines.

RESULTS

The cost difference between septoplasty and non-surgical management for nasal obstruction due to a deviated nasal septum was €2227 per patient from a healthcare perspective (including direct healthcare costs) and €3288 per patient from an extended perspective (additionally including travel expenses and productivity losses due to poor health). In comparison with non-surgical management, septoplasty needed to gain 0.11 to 0.16 QALYs or save 13 sick days for nasal obstruction. The longer septoplasty's effect lasts, the more time it will have to compensate its extra costs.

CONCLUSION

This study shows that the known cost difference between treatments can be used as the starting point to determine beneficial effects needed for cost-effectiveness of surgical interventions. The effect required by septoplasty from a healthcare perspective seems potentially achievable, meaning that it would be useful to perform an RCT assessing the actual benefits of septoplasty.

Mucosal Applications of Poloxamer 407-Based Hydrogels: An Overview

Poloxamer 407, also known by the trademark Pluronic^® F127, is a water-soluble, non-ionic triblock copolymer that is made up of a hydrophobic residue of polyoxypropylene (POP) between the two hydrophilic units of polyoxyethylene (POE). Poloxamer 407-based hydrogels exhibit an interesting reversible thermal characteristic. That is, they are liquid at room temperature, but they assume a gel form when administered at body temperature, which makes them attractive candidates as pharmaceutical drug carriers. These systems have been widely investigated in the development of mucoadhesive formulations because they do not irritate the mucosal membranes. Based on these mucoadhesive properties, a simple administration into a specific compartment should maintain the required drug concentration in situ for a prolonged period of time, decreasing the necessary dosages and side effects. Their main limitations are their modest mechanical strength and, notwithstanding their bioadhesive properties, their tendency to succumb to rapid elimination in physiological media. Various technological approaches have been investigated in the attempt to modulate these properties. This review focuses on the application of poloxamer 407-based hydrogels for mucosal drug delivery with particular attention being paid to the latest published works.

Onset of Action of Azelastine Nasal Spray Compared with Mometasone Nasal Spray and Placebo in Subjects with Seasonal Allergic Rhinitis Evaluated in an Environmental Exposure Chamber

Background

The objective of this study was to determine the onset of action of azelastine hydrochloride nasal spray compared with placebo and an intranasal steroid, mometasone furoate, in subjects with seasonal allergic rhinitis (SAR).

Methods

Subjects with a history of SAR and symptomatic while exposed to ragweed pollen in an environmental exposure chamber (EEC) were randomized to azelastine nasal spray (n = 150), mometasone nasal spray (n = 150), or placebo (n = 150) and recorded total nasal symptom scores (TNSS), consisting of sneezing, nasal pruritus, rhinorrhea, and congestion, during an 8-hour study period.

Results

Azelastine nasal spray showed a statistically significant improvement in the TNSS at 15 minutes compared with placebo. The effect was durable at each time point during the 8-hour study. Azelastine nasal spray also was significantly more effective than mometasone at each time point.

Conclusion

Azelastine nasal spray has a rapid (15 minute) onset of action. Azelastine nasal spray was superior to both placebo and mometasone nasal spray in reducing nasal symptoms of SAR occurring within 8 hours after an allergen challenge.

Intranasal azelastine and mometasone exhibit a synergistic effect on a murine model of allergic rhinitis

PURPOSE

The purpose of this study was to compare the anti-allergic effects of the combination of azelastine and mometasone with those of either agent alone in a Dermatophagoides farinae (Derf)-induced murine model of allergic rhinitis (AR).

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Forty BALB/c mice were divided into five groups: azelastine (A), mometasone (M), a combination of azelastine and mometasone (MA), Derf, and control. Derf served as the allergen. Allergic symptom scores, eosinophil counts, and serum Derf-specific IgE levels were measured. The mucosal levels of mRNAs encoding interferon (IFN)-γ, T-bet, interleukin (IL)-4, GATA-3, Foxp3, IL-17, and ROR-γt were determined by real-time polymerase chain reaction. The T-bet, GATA-3, Foxp3, and ROR-γt results were confirmed by Western blotting.

RESULTS

Nose-rubbing motions; the levels of mRNAs encoding IL-4, GATA-3, and ROR-γt; and tissue eosinophil count were reduced in the MA compared with those in the Derf group (all P values <0.05). The levels of mRNAs encoding GATA3 and IL-4 mRNA [synthesized by T helper (Th)2 cells] were reduced and that of mRNA encoding Foxp3 was increased in the MA compared with those in the Derf and A groups. Western blotting confirmed these findings.

CONCLUSION

We found that the combination of intranasal azelastine and mometasone synergistically suppressed Th17 responses and (reciprocally) elevated Treg responses. Therefore, this combination not only ameliorated allergic inflammation by suppressing Th2 responses, but also usefully modified the Treg/Th17 balance.

Optimal Duration of Allergic Rhinitis Clinical Trials

OBJECTIVE: Guidelines have been published by the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) and the European Agency for the Evaluation of Medicinal Products (EMEA) for the conduct of seasonal allergic rhinitis (SAR) and perennial allergic rhinitis (PAR) studies. These guidelines have differences regarding the duration of such trials: the FDA suggests 2 weeks for SAR and 4 weeks for PAR but the EMEA suggests 2 to 4 weeks for SAR and 6 to 12 weeks for PAR trials. In the interest of global harmonization, it would be desirable to have a uniform duration of such trials so that investigators, internationally, would be able to readily compare results for various types of treatments based on a single standard. Therefore, we performed an evidence-based review to answer the clinical question, What is the optimal duration for SAR and PAR clinical trials?

METHODS: We performed a MEDLINE search of the published literature from 1995 to the present. We used appropriate search terms, such as allergic rhinitis, seasonal allergic rhinitis, perennial allergic rhinitis, SAR, and PAR, to identify pertinent articles. These articles were reviewed and graded according to the evidence quality.

RESULTS: After an initial screening of more than 300 articles, 138 articles were analyzed thoroughly. No study specifically addressed the question of the optimal duration of SAR or PAR clinical trials.

CONCLUSIONS: We conclude that the current FDA (draft) guidelines calling for a study length of 2 weeks for the assessment of drug efficacy for SAR and 4 weeks for the study of drug efficacy in PAR are appropriate and that longer study periods are not likely to add meaningfully to the assessment of drug efficacy.

Effects of azelastine nasal spray on nasal and nasopharyngeal microflora

OBJECTIVE

Azelastine nasal spray is a topical antihistaminic drug for the symptomatic treatment of allergic rhinitis. This study aimed to investigate the effects of azelastine on nasal and nasopharyngeal microflora.

METHODS

Swab samples from 25 patients prescribed azelastine nasal spray monotherapy were collected just before treatment and after 1 month of treatment. After incubation of inoculates, the number of bacteria present in cultures was measured (in colony-forming units per millilitre).

RESULTS

Evaluation of the number of microflora revealed increased bacterial reproduction after treatment, but this difference was not statistically significant. The use of azelastine nasal spray decreased the reproduction of three potentially pathogenic bacteria; however, it did not affect the reproduction of other potentially pathogenic bacteria.

CONCLUSION

The use of azelastine nasal spray for one month did not have a statistically significant effect on the numbers of nasal and nasopharyngeal microflora; it is therefore safe from a microbiological viewpoint.

Histopathological effects of intranasal phototherapy and nasal corticosteroids in allergic rhinitis in a rabbit model

Allergic rhinitis is one of the most common health problems and has a major effect on quality of life. Although new-generation antihistamines and nasal steroids are the main treatment options, complete resolution cannot be obtained in some patients. Besides common side effects such as nasal irritation and epistaxis, the use of these drugs is controversial in some patients, such as pregnant or breastfeeding women. These findings highlight the need for new treatment options. Although phototherapy has been successfully used in the treatment of atopic dermatitis, which is an IgE-mediated disease and shares several common pathogenic features with allergic rhinitis, there are limited studies about its role in the treatment of allergic rhinitis. In this study, we aimed to evaluate and compare the histopathological effects of intranasal phototherapy (Rhinolight) and nasal corticosteroid treatment on the nasal mucosa in allergic rhinitis in a rabbit model and we found that both treatment options significantly reduced inflammation in the nasal mucosa without increasing apoptosis of mucosal cells.

Evidence and role of autoantibodies in chronic rhinosinusitis with nasal polyps

In this study, we review our current knowledge of the autoimmune etiopathogenesis of chronic rhinosinusitis with nasal polyps including bacterial infections, viral infections and immunomediated mechanisms and to discuss pathogenesis with relevance for pharmacotherapy. Relevant publications on the etiopathogenesis and treatment of chronic rhinosinusitis with nasal polyps (CRSwNP) from 1977 to 2013 were analyzed. The characteristic signs and symptoms include appearance of relapsing nasal polyps, with typical symptoms such as nasal obstruction, nasal discharge and, usually, loss of the sense of smell. The etiology and pathogenesis remain unknown. Proposed theories of causation include bacterial or viral infections and immunomediated mechanisms. The autoimmune aetiology of unknown origin or failure to respond to classic pharmacological treatments with nasal and oral steroids is now suspected. At present, the nature of the antigen trigger, the exact role played by B/T cells and anti-dsDNA autoantibodies in the pathogenesis of nasal polyposis remains unclear. Corticosteroids and surgery are the first line of treatment in CRSwNP. In the case of corticosteroid treatment failure, other drugs can be used such as rituximab, belimumab or omalizumab which have demonstrated clinical efficacy in the treatment of nasal polyposis with comorbid asthma. Immunosuppressive drugs such as methotrexate, and cyclophosphamide have also been used with varying degrees of success.

The use of postoperative topical corticosteroids in chronic rhinosinusitis with nasal polyps: a systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Topical intranasal corticosteroids (INCSs) are used to control disease symptoms in patients with chronic rhinosinusitis with nasal polyposis (CRSwNP). The evidence to recommend INCSs as part of the postoperative care is limited. This study was designed to assess the efficacy of INCSs in the postoperative care of patients undergoing functional endoscopic sinus surgery (FESS) during the 1st year postoperatively.

METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (1995 to May 2012), MEDLINE (January 1948 to May 2012), EMBASE (January 1980 to May 2012), and the reference lists of articles. The Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines were followed. Randomized controlled trials (RCT) and cohort studies comparing INCSs with placebo or comparing different types of INCSs were included.

RESULTS

Eleven studies (n = 945 patients) were RCTs and one prospective cohort study (n = 32 patients). As measured by the standardized mean difference (SMD) INCSs had a beneficial effect on symptom scores (SMD, -1.35; 95% CI, -2.05 to -0.64; p = 0.0002; 3 trials; 137 patients) and polyp score (SMD, 0.53; 95% CI, -0.91 to -0.14; p = 0.007; 5 trials; 223 patients). Compared with placebo, the use of INCSs decreased the odds of polyp recurrence (odds ratio, 0.17; 95% CI, 0.06-0.51; p = 0.002; 2 trials; 74 patients). Two RCTs (n = 105) and one cohort study (n = 32) reported normal adrenocorticotropic hormone levels postintervention.

CONCLUSION

INCS use is a safe therapy in postoperative management of CRSwNP patients. INCS showed significant improvement in polyp score, patients' symptoms and significant decrease in polyp recurrence in the first year postoperatively.

Effect of intranasal steroids on glucose and hemoglobin A1c levels in diabetic patients

BACKGROUND

Intranasal steroids are widely used for the treatment of inflammatory diseases of the nose and sinuses such as rhinosinusitis, allergic rhinitis, and nonallergic rhinitis. Along with the general otherwise healthy population, many diabetic patients use intranasal steroids as well. This study was designed to evaluate the adverse effects of long-term treatment with intranasal corticosteroid preparations in diabetic patients.

METHODS

The study group included all diabetic patients treated with intranasal steroids for at least 3 months at primary care clinics in Clalit Health Services Central District in Israel in 2002-2007. The central database had been reviewed for demographic data, medical history, medications, and laboratory test results.

RESULTS

A total of 1768 diabetic patients were treated with topical nasal steroid sprays during the study period. Data on hemoglobin A1c (HbA1c) levels both before and during steroid treatment was available for 245 patients, and data on fasting serum glucose levels at both time points was available for 163 patients. On statistical analysis, there was no change in either measure from baseline to 3 months after starting treatment (p = 0.104 and p = 0.101, respectively). Treatment with triamcinolone acetonide was associated with a significantly greater increase in fasting serum glucose levels than other preparations (p = 0.006).

CONCLUSION

Intranasal corticosteroids seem to have no adverse effects on HbA1c and serum glucose levels in diabetic patients. Their long-term use appears to be safe, provided that the patients are carefully monitored, especially those receiving triamcinolone acetonide.

Indications, efficacy, and safety of intranasal corticosteriods in rhinosinusitis

Rhinosinusitis is a significant health problem, causing significant morbidity and resulting in considerable financial cost. Some patients suffer persistent or recurrent symptoms despite receiving optimal medical and surgical treatment. Rhinosinusitis can be acute or chronic, acute often due to viral or bacterial infections and chronic which is classified into chronic with nasal polyposids or chronic rhinosinusitis without nasal polyposis. The disease affects the quality of life significantly and presents a significant burden on health costs globally. The anatomical linkage of the nose with the paranasal sinuses facilitates a common pathology in both organs. Chronic rhinosinusitis (CRS) has heterogeneous origins, including viruses, bacteria, fungal infections, anatomical abnormalities, polyposis, and aspirin sensitivity. Other conditions such as human immunodeficiency virus acquired immunodeficiency and cystic fibrosis may also be predisposing factors. Nasal polyposis is often associated with increased numbers of Th2 lymphocytes, fibroblasts, goblet cells, mast cells, and eosinophils, with upregulation of IL-13 and the release of specific IgE to staphylococcal enterotoxins. There is recent evidence that antibiotic treatment may not be as effective as higher doses of intranasal steroids in acute uncomplicated rhinosinusitis, especially in those with allergic disease. The broad inflammatory basis of the pathology of CRS also reveals a cellular infiltrate theoretically suppressed by intranasal corticosteroids. This has been confirmed in recent clinical studies of CRS with or without polyps. A treatment approach based on such studies reported in the European Position Paper on Rhinosinusitis guidelines and a guideline summary are presented. The current review represents the proceedings of a session (3 talks) by the authors at the first Middle East-Asia Allergy, Asthma, Immunology Congress in 2009.

Allergic rhinitis in children

Allergic rhinitis affects up to 40% of children but is commonly undiagnosed. Careful assessment of nasal symptoms allows for the most appropriate therapeutic options to be chosen. Allergen avoidance is often difficult in practice. Antihistamines are of limited benefit in allergic rhinitis caused by house dust mite and other perennial allergens, where symptoms, predominantly nasal obstruction, are not histamine mediated. In contrast, symptoms triggered by pollen, such as nasal itch, rhinorrhoea and sneezing, are relieved by antihistamines. Intranasal steroids are the treatment of choice for persistent moderate-severe allergic rhinitis and are more effective than antihistamines for relief of nasal obstruction. Failure to respond to intranasal medications is often caused by poor compliance or inefficient use of nasal sprays. Immunotherapy may be a useful, if expensive, option, particularly where symptoms are because of a specific pollen. The benefits of immunotherapy in house dust mite-induced rhinitis and asthma remain controversial.

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.

Histopathological evaluation of the effect of intranasal phototherapy on nasal mucosa in rabbits

Allergic rhinitis is a high-incidence allergic inflammation of the nasal airways that impacts quality of life. Of the numerous therapies used to treat allergic rhinitis, intranasal phototherapy has emerged as a promising new treatment modality for inflammatory airway disease. Phototherapy is widely used for the treatment of immune-mediated skin diseases because its profound immunosuppressive effect inhibits hypersensitivity reactions in the skin. Intranasal phototherapy using a combination of Ultraviolet-A (UVA) and Ultraviolet-B (UVB) plus Visible light (VIS) has been shown to suppress the clinical symptoms of allergic rhinitis, but limited data regarding its adverse effects on the nasal mucosa currently exists. In this study, we demonstrate that UV displays no harmful effects on the nasal mucosa cells of rabbits following 2 weeks of intranasal phototherapy.

Effectiveness of twice daily azelastine nasal spray in patients with seasonal allergic rhinitis

Azelastine nasal spray (Allergodil^®, Lastin^®, Afluon^®; Meda AB, Stockholm, Sweden) is a fast-acting, efficacious and well-tolerated H1-receptor antagonist for the treatment of rhinitis. In addition it also has mast-cell stabilizing and anti-inflammatory properties, reducing the concentration of leukotrienes, kinins and platelet activating factor in vitro and in vivo, as well as inflammatory cell migration in rhinitis patients. Well-controlled studies in patients with seasonal allergic rhinitis (SAR), perennial rhinitis (PR) or vasomotor rhinitis (VMR) confirm that azelastine nasal spray has a rapid onset of action, and improves nasal symptoms associated with rhinitis such as nasal congestion and post-nasal drip. Azelastine nasal spray is effective at the lower dose of 1 spray as well at a dose of 2 sprays per nostril twice daily, but with an improved tolerability profile compared to the 2-spray per nostril twice daily regimen. Compared with intranasal corticosteroids, azelastine nasal spray has a faster onset of action and a better safety profile, showing at least comparable efficacy with fluticasone propionate (Flonase^®; GSK, USA), and a superior efficacy to mometasone furoate (Nasonex^®; Schering Plough, USA). In combination with fluticasone propionate, azelastine nasal spray exhibits greater efficacy than either agent used alone, and this combination may provide benefit for patients with difficult to treat seasonal allergic rhinitis. In addition, azelastine nasal spray can be used on an as-needed basis without compromising clinical efficacy. Compared with oral antihistamines, azelastine nasal spray also demonstrates superior efficacy and a more rapid onset of action, and is effective even in patients who did not respond to previous oral antihistamine therapy. Unlike most oral antihistamines, azelastine nasal spray is effective in alleviating nasal congestion, a particularly bothersome symptom for rhinitis sufferers. Azelastine nasal spray is well tolerated in both adults and children with allergic rhinitis. Bitter taste which seems to be associated with incorrect dosing technique is the most common side effect reported by patients, but this problem can be minimized by correct dosing technique.

Evidence-based management of nasal polyposis by intranasal corticosteroids: from the cause to the clinic

BACKGROUND

Nasal polyposis is an inflammatory disorder involving the mucosa of the nose and paranasal sinuses and affecting approximately 2-4% of the general population.

METHODS

A literature search of Medline and Embase was conducted to obtain an overview of the epidemiology, pathophysiology, and current treatment of nasal polyposis, focusing on evidence-based efficacy of intranasal corticosteroids (INSs) as primary and postoperative therapy. Recent research on INSs in nasal polyp treatment, along with notable historic findings, was reviewed.

RESULTS

Nasal polyps are mostly characterized by eosinophil infiltration, a complex inflammation of nasal mucosa, and possibly production of polyclonal IgE. Current treatment modalities include INSs, oral corticosteroids, and surgery; surgery is generally limited to those with an insufficient response to medical treatment. Because of their effects on eosinophil-dominated inflammation, INSs and oral corticosteroids are the primary medical treatment strategies. The very low (≤1%) systemic bioavailability of newer INSs minimizes the systemic adverse effects seen with oral corticosteroids.

CONCLUSION

Based on randomized, controlled trials, guidelines recommend INSs as first-line therapy for nasal polyps and for care after polypectomy. Clinical data suggest INSs are effective in reducing polyp size and relieving nasal symptoms. INS treatment has also reduced nasal polyp recurrence in patients undergoing functional endoscopic sinus surgery. Treatment with these mainstay options has been found to improve quality of life, which, along with symptom improvement, is a key factor in disease treatment.

Non-surgical treatment of adenoidal hypertrophy: the role of treating IgE-mediated inflammation

Adenoidal hypertrophy (AH) and adenotonsillar hypertrophy are common disorders in the pediatric population and can cause symptoms such as mouth breathing, nasal congestion, hyponasal speech, snoring, and obstructive sleep apnea (OSA), as well as chronic sinusitis and recurrent otitis media. More serious long-term sequelae, typically secondary to OSA, include neurocognitive abnormalities (e.g. behavioral and learning difficulties, poor attention span, hyperactivity, below average intelligence quotient); cardiovascular morbidity (e.g. decreased right ventricular ejection fraction, left ventricular hypertrophy, elevated diastolic blood pressure); and growth failure. Adenoidectomy (with tonsillectomy in cases of adenotonsillar hypertrophy) is the typical management strategy for patients with AH. Potential complications have prompted the investigation of non-surgical alternatives. Evidence of a pathophysiologic link between AH and allergy suggests a possible role for intranasal corticosteroids (INS) in the management of patients with AH. This article reviews the epidemiology and pathophysiology of AH with a particular focus on evidence of its association with allergy and allergic rhinitis. Current treatment options are briefly considered with discussion on the rationale and evidence for the use of INS.

Fluticasone Furoate Nasal Spray is Effective and Well Tolerated for Perennial Allergic Rhinitis in Adolescents and Adults

Background

Fluticasone furoate nasal spray (FFNS), an intranasal corticosteroid, has been shown to be effective in perennial allergic rhinitis in randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled studies but has been less extensively studied in perennial allergic rhinitis than seasonal allergic rhinitis. This study was designed to evaluate the efficacy and safety of FFNS in perennial allergic rhinitis in adolescents and adults ≥12 years of age.

Methods

In this randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, parallel-group study (FFU111439), patients ≥12 years old with perennial allergic rhinitis received FFNS, 110 micrograms (n = 160), or placebo (n = 155) q.d. for 4 weeks.

Results

Over the entire treatment period, FFNS was significantly (p < 0.05) more effective than placebo with respect to mean changes from baseline in daily reflective total nasal symptoms (primary end point), morning and evening reflective total nasal symptoms, daily reflective individual nasal symptoms, morning predose instantaneous total and individual nasal symptoms, and morning and evening peak nasal inspiratory flow. FFNS did not show a statistically significant difference from placebo in comparisons of ocular symptom measures. Clinically meaningful improvement versus placebo was observed on the Rhinoconjunctivitis Quality of Life Questionnaire with Standardised Activities overall score. Adverse events reported in >3% of patients in a treatment group and reported more frequently with FFNS than placebo were epistaxis (15% FFNS, 8% placebo) and nasopharyngitis (5% FFNS, 1% placebo).

Conclusion

Once-daily FFNS was well tolerated and more effective than placebo at improving nasal symptoms of perennial allergic rhinitis in adolescents and adults ≥12 years of age.

Allergic conjunctivitis and the impact of allergic rhinitis

Although nasal allergy has been prominent in allergy research, ocular allergy is increasingly recognized as a distinct symptom complex that imposes its own disease burden and reduction in patients' quality of life. In the past year, knowledge of the relationships between allergic conjunctivitis and allergic rhinitis has increased. Allergic conjunctivitis is highly prevalent and has a close epidemiologic relationship with allergic rhinitis. Both conditions also exhibit similar pathophysiologic mechanisms. Pathways of communication are thought to increase the likelihood of an inflammatory reaction at both sites following allergen exposure of nasal or ocular tissue. Clinical trials of intranasal therapies have demonstrated efficacy in allergic conjunctivitis and rhinitis. Newer intranasal steroids decrease ocular symptoms, potentially achieving efficacy by suppressing the naso-ocular reflex, downregulation of inflammatory cell expression, or restoration of nasolacrimal duct patency. Proposed pathophysiologic interactions between allergic rhinitis and ocular allergy underscore the need for therapies with efficacy in both symptom sets.

The role of local steroid injection for nasal polyposis

Sinonasal polyps affect a small but significant percentage of patients with chronic sinusitis. Treatments vary and range from oral and topical medical treatments to surgical removal. Corticosteroids typically have been regarded as the gold standard medical treatment for sinonasal polyps. Delivery of steroids is traditionally via oral or topical means. Over the years, otolaryngologists have also found that intrapolyp injection of corticosteroids is an effective means to treat some patients with sinonasal polyps. This article reviews the prevalence, pathophysiology, and medical treatment options for sinonasal polyps. Focused attention is paid to treatment with steroid injections, including a review of its associated risks and benefits.

Intranasal ketorolac for acute postoperative pain

BACKGROUND

Efficacy and tolerability of intranasal ketorolac (SPRIX(R)) was assessed in abdominal surgery patients.

METHODS

Adult patients were randomly assigned to receive ketorolac 31.5 mg (n = 214) or placebo (n = 107) every 6 hr after surgery for 48 hr, then up to 4 times/day for up to 5 days. Morphine sulfate via patient controlled analgesia was available in both groups as needed.

RESULTS

Least square mean 6 hr summed pain intensity difference scores were significantly greater in the ketorolac group indicating better analgesic efficacy compared to placebo (117.4 vs. 89.9, p = 0.032; difference 27.6, 95% CI 2.5-52.7). Pain intensity difference indicated significantly better pain relief in the ketorolac group at 20 min after the first dose (p = 0.01). Morphine use over 48 hr decreased 26% in the ketorolac group compared to placebo (p = 0.004). Day 1 global pain control scores were significantly higher in the ketorolac group compared to placebo (p = 0.009). Quality of analgesia was rated significantly higher (p = 0.009) in the ketorolac group by 20 min after first dose. Adverse event and serious adverse event incidences were similar in both groups. Rhinalgia and nasal irritation, generally mild and transient in nature, occurred more frequently in the ketorolac group.

CONCLUSION

Intranasal ketorolac was well tolerated and provided effective pain relief within 20 minutes with reduced opioid analgesia use. While IN ketorolac was assessed in an inpatient, conventional surgery setting in this study, IN ketorolac use may have more relevance for use in outpatient settings and ambulatory surgery or fast-track surgical procedures.

Phototherapy for allergic rhinitis: a prospective, randomized, single-blind, placebo-controlled study

Background: Phototherapy has a profound immunosuppressive effect, and phototherapeutic methods using both ultraviolet (UV) and visible light are therefore widely used for the therapy of various inflammatory skin diseases. It is also proposed that phototherapy, using a combination of UV-A (25%), UV-B (5%) and visible light (70%), may represent a therapeutic alternative in patients with allergic rhinitis.

Method: Seventy-nine patients were randomly assigned to receive either a combination of UV-A (25%), UV-B (5%) and visible light (70%), in the phototherapy group, or low-intensity visible light, in the control group. The efficacy of treatment was assessed by means of total nasal symptom score before treatment and 1 month after the end of treatment.

Results: Total nasal scores decreased in both groups but the decrease was highly significant in the active treatment group when compared with the placebo (p < 0.001).

Conclusions: This study demonstrates that phototherapy may be an effective modality in the treatment of allergic rhinitis especially in cases of which commonly used drugs either are contraindicated and/or have insufficient efficacy.