Randomized controlled trial of desloratadine for persistent allergic rhinitis: correlations between symptom improvement and quality of life

Pharmacotherapy and immunotherapy of allergic rhinitis induced by house dust mite, grass, and birch pollen allergens: a meta-analysis of randomized clinical trials

BACKGROUND

The aim of this study was to assess the efficacy and safety of oral antihistamines (AHs), intranasal antihistamines (INAH) intranasal glucocorticosteroids (INCS), subcutaneous immunotherapy (SCIT), and sublingual immunotherapy (SLIT) in the management of allergic rhinitis (AR). The authors focused on the division into selected AR's triggers: house dust mites (HDMs), grass pollen, and birch pollen.

METHODS

For each drug and allergen class, a meta-analysis of the efficacy and adverse events (AEs) was performed. The obtained results were presented as a therapeutic index (TIX-Score).

RESULTS

Twenty-seven randomized clinical trials (RCTs) were included. The best total efficacy was observed for: HDMs for INCS and grass pollen for combination of INCS with INAH in a single device and for INAH. Considering the data that was obtained for birch pollen, SLIT showed statistically significant total efficacy. Summation scores for efficacy and AEs showed highest TIX-Score for combination of INCS and INAH in a single device in grass pollen.

CONCLUSIONS

Treatment methods selected for this review may serve as an effective and safe treatment in reducing perennial and seasonal AR's symptoms. However, due to high heterogeneity probably associated with potential confounders existence in control in some cases, results should be interpreted with caution.

Efficacy of different oral H1 antihistamine treatments on allergic rhinitis: a systematic review and network meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

INTRODUCTION

Oral H1 antihistamines are the first-line treatment for patients with allergic rhinitis, while it is uncertain which kind and dosage of the antihistamines are more effective in improving symptoms of patients.

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the efficacy of different oral H1 antihistamine treatments on patients with allergic rhinitis by performing a network meta-analysis.

METHODS

The search was executed in PubMed, Embase, OVID, the Cochrane Library and ClinicalTrials.gov for relevant studies. The network meta-analysis was performed by using Stata 16.0, and the outcome measures of the analysis were symptom score reductions of patients. Relative risks with 95% Confidence Intervals were used in the network meta-analysis to compare the clinical effect of treatments involved, and Surface Under the Cumulative Ranking Curves (SUCRAs) were also calculated to rank the treatments' efficacy.

RESULTS

18 eligible randomized controlled studies, involving a total of 9419 participants, were included in this meta-analysis. All the antihistamine treatments outperformed placebo in total symptom score reduction and each individual symptom score reduction. According to the results of SUCRA, rupatadine 20 mg and rupatadine 10 mg were ranked relatively high in reductions of total symptom score (SUCRA: 99.7%, 76.3%), nasal congestion score (SUCRA: 96.4%, 76.4%), rhinorrhea score (SUCRA: 96.6%, 74.6%) and ocular symptom score (SUCRA: 97.2%, 88.8%); rupatadine 20 mg and levocetirizine 5 mg were ranked relatively high in reductions of nasal itching score (SUCRA: 84.8%, 83.4%) and sneezing score (SUCRA: 87.3%, 95.4%); loratadine 10 mg was ranked the lowest in each symptom score reduction besides placebo.

CONCLUSION

This study suggests that rupatadine is the most effective in alleviating symptoms of patients with allergic rhinitis among different oral H1 antihistamine treatments involved, and rupatadine 20 mg performs better than rupatadine 10 mg. While loratadine 10 mg has inferior efficacy for patients to the other antihistamine treatments.

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.

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.

Impact of Rhinitis on Work Productivity: A Systematic Review

BACKGROUND

Allergic rhinitis (AR) is increasingly acknowledged as having a substantial socioeconomic impact associated with impaired work productivity, although available information remains fragmented.

OBJECTIVE

This systematic review summarizes recently available information to provide a quantitative estimate of the burden of AR on work productivity including lost work time (ie, absenteeism) and reduced performance while working (ie, presenteeism).

METHODS

A Medline search retrieved original studies from 2005 to 2015 pertaining to the impact of AR on work productivity. A pooled analysis of results was carried out with studies reporting data collected through the validated Work Productivity and Activity Impairment (WPAI) questionnaire.

RESULTS

The search identified 19 observational surveys and 9 interventional studies. Six studies reported economic evaluations. Pooled analysis of WPAI-based studies found an estimated 3.6% (95% confidence interval [CI], 2.4; 4.8%) missed work time and 35.9% (95% CI, 29.7; 42.1%) had impairment in at-work performance due to AR. Economic evaluations indicated that indirect costs associated with lost work productivity are the principal contributor to the total AR costs and result mainly from impaired presenteeism. The severity of AR symptoms was the most consistent disease-related factor associated with a greater impact of AR on work productivity, although ocular symptoms and sleep disturbances may independently affect work productivity. Overall, the pharmacologic treatment of AR showed a beneficial effect on work productivity.

CONCLUSIONS

This systematic review provides summary estimates of the magnitude of work productivity impairment due to AR and identifies its main determinant factors. This information may help guide both clinicians and health policy makers.

Dissemination of definitions and concepts of allergic and hypersensitivity conditions

BACKGROUND

Allergy and hypersensitivity can affect people of any age and manifest with problems in a range of organ systems. Moreover, they can have a significant impact on the quality of life of patients and their families. Although once rare, there is presently an epidemic of allergic disorders with associated considerable societal consequences. Our understanding of the pathophysiology of these disorders has changed substantially over the last 20 years. In the light of these developments, the Joint Allergy Academies have made concerted efforts to ensure that these are reflected in the current definitions and concepts used in clinical allergy and to ensure these are reflected in the forthcoming International Classification of Diseases-11 (ICD-11).

OBJECTIVE

In this review, we seek to provide an update on the current definitions and concepts in relation to allergic disorders.

RESULTS

Once the new section has been built in the ICD-11 to address allergic and hypersensitivity conditions, we have been moving actions to try to support awareness by disseminating updated concepts in the field. Aligned with the ICD and the WAO philosophy of being global, this document presents fundamental and broad allergy concepts to strengthen the understanding by different health professionals worldwide, besides to support the formation of in training students.

CONCLUSION

This current review intends to be accepted and used universally by all health professionals involved in diseases' classification and coding and, therefore, contribute to improve care and outcomes in this increasing sub-section of the world's population.

Clinically relevant outcome measures for new pharmacotherapy, allergen avoidance and immunotherapy trials in allergic rhinoconjunctivitis

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

The purpose of this review is to provide a current overview on both primary and secondary measures of efficacy of therapeutic interventions for clinical trials in allergic rhinoconjunctivitis (ARC) patients. In particular, this review highlights similarities and differences regarding endpoints in trials involving allergen immunotherapy (AIT), pharmacotherapy and allergen avoidance and addresses unmet needs regarding these measures in the future.

RECENT FINDINGS

In 2014, the European Academy of Allergy and Clinical Immunology (EAACI) proposed a standard for the definition of the primary endpoint for AIT trials in ARC and, moreover, emphasized the advantages and disadvantages as well as unmet needs considering outcome measures for this treatment. Recently, as an (indirect) comparison of clinical efficacy of different interventions, the relative clinical impact (RCI) has been used to determine the percentage reduction of symptom scores in active versus placebo treatment.

SUMMARY

Several primary and secondary clinical endpoints of therapeutic interventions for clinical trials in ARC patients such as AIT or pharmacotherapy have been proposed by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) as well as by the European Medicines Agency (EMA). Moreover, recommendations for the implication of these endpoints in clinical trials have been promoted by academia such as the World Allergy Organization (WAO) or the European Academy of Allergy and Clinical Immunology (EAACI).However, an urgent need for the future will be a thorough international harmonization regarding the definition of clinical endpoints, timing of assessments of clinical efficacy and determination of the clinically meaningful and relevant magnitude of efficacy of therapeutic interventions for clinical trials in ARC patients.

Does allergic rhinitis affect communication skills in young adults?

Allergic rhinitis (AR) is a chronic disorder with a high prevalence in the general population. The symptoms of AR can impair the cognitive capabilities of the affected people. The study of communication skills and AR interaction has not been adequately discussed. We aimed to analyze Social Communication Skills of university students with AR. Fifty patients suffering from AR and 50 healthy subjects were studied. All participants completed two questionnaires [Social Communication Skills Rating Scale (SCSRS) and Communication Questionnaire] for the assessment of social communication skills. Total scores of both SCSRS and Communication Questionnaire were higher in participants with AR than controls. When the questions of SCSRS were compared between the groups one by one, significant difference was observed between the groups for questions numbered 1-9 and 11, 12 (p < 0.05). Also, significant differences were observed between the groups for questions numbered 4, 5, 6, 7 and 8 of Communication Questionnaire (p < 0.05). Results of our study indicate that AR could negatively affect the social communication skills of the patients with AR. More research is however needed to validate this hypothesis.

When perennial rhinitis worsens: rhinolith mimicking severe allergic rhinitis

Allergic rhinitis is one of the most common causes of nasal obstruction, but other diseases need to be considered particularly when the clinical course is getting worse. We present a patient with known mild persistent allergic rhinitis due to house dust mites who experienced progressive worsening of nasal obstruction with associated hyposmia and mucopurulent discharge. The lack of improvement of the patient's symptoms prompted the re-evaluation of the case. Skin prick tests for airborne allergens confirmed sensitisation only to house dust mites. Nasal endoscopy and facial CT scan revealed a huge rhinolith occupying almost completely the right nasal cavity. The rhinolith was surgically removed with resolution of symptoms. Rhinoliths are rare and unusual calcified materials which grow around intranasal foreign body; they are often promoted by trauma, surgical operations and dental work. The patient underwent dental work about 30 months before the diagnosis of rhinolith, suggesting a possible aetiology.