A dose-ranging study of mometasone furoate aqueous nasal spray in children with seasonal allergic rhinitis

Pharmacology, particle deposition and drug administration techniques of intranasal corticosteroids for treating allergic rhinitis

This review presents an overview of the available literature regarding intranasal corticosteroids (INCs) for the treatment of allergic rhinitis (AR). Various treatment options exist for AR including INCs, antihistamines and leucotriene antagonists. INCs are considered to be the most effective therapy for moderate-to-severe AR, as they are effective against nasal and ocular symptoms and improve quality of life. Their safety has been widely observed. INCs are effective and safe for short-term use. Local adverse events are observed but generally well-tolerated. The occurrence of (serious) systemic adverse events is unlikely but cannot be ruled out. There is a lack of long-term safety data. INC may cause serious eye complications. The risk of INCs on the hypothalamic-pituitary-adrenal axis, on bone mineral density reduction or osteoporosis and on growth in children, should be considered during treatment. Pharmacological characteristics of INCs (e.g. the mode of action and pharmacokinetics) are well known and described. We sought to gain insight into whether specific properties affect the efficacy and safety of INCs, including nasal particle deposition, which the administration technique affects. However, advances are lacking regarding the improved understanding of the effect of particle deposition on efficacy and safety and the effect of the administration technique. This review emphasizes the gaps in knowledge regarding this subject. Advances in research and health care are necessary to improve care for patients with AR.

Safety of intranasal corticosteroids for allergic rhinitis in children

INTRODUCTION

Allergic rhinitis (AR) is a common chronic inflammatory disease of the nasal mucosa, affecting about 10-40% of children worldwide. Intranasal corticosteroids (INCSs) are the first line anti-inflammatory drug in the treatment of pediatric AR. The systemic and local adverse effects of INCSs in children with AR should be assessed.

AREAS COVERED

Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) reporting local and systemic adverse effects of INCSs in pediatric populations with AR were searched out of PubMed and Embase.

EXPERT OPINION

Overall, INCSs displayed a favorable safety profile and high local-systemic balance of bioavailability with a low incidence of adverse events in the treatment of AR children. Nevertheless, the use of INCSs should be designed depending on one patient's response and adverse effects. The benefits and risks of INCSs should be assessed to ensure the clinical efficacy and avoid the insidious events.

The possibility of short-term hypothalamic-pituitary-adrenal axis suppression with high-volume, high-dose nasal mometasone irrigation in postsurgical patients with chronic rhinosinusitis

BACKGROUND

Medically refractory chronic rhinosinusitis (CRS) is often treated with functional endoscopic sinus surgery (FESS) and high-volume steroid nasal irrigation. While budesonide is the most common steroid irrigation for this indication, mometasone has a superior pharmacokinetic profile, which may allow dose escalation. The safety and efficacy of mometasone at higher concentrations than previously used in treating CRS have not been explored.

METHODS

Patients were recruited from a tertiary level clinic between June 2018 and December 2019. Inclusion criteria included adults (>18 years); CRS diagnosis; previous FESS; pre-treatment morning cortisol within normal range; minimum of twice daily high-volume sinonasal mometasone irrigations (total dose of 4 mg) for 12 weeks; and post-treatment morning cortisol measured within 2 weeks following the study period. Patients with potential for endogenous or exogenous disruption of the HPA axis were excluded.

RESULTS

14 patients were enrolled in this prospective cohort study. In all but one patient, pre- and post-treatment morning cortisol levels were not significantly different and were within normal limits (6.7-25.4 μg/dL). Following an uninterrupted 12-week treatment course, no evidence of HPA axis suppression was found (P = 0.915). The single patient who was found to have a low (1.3 μg/dL) post-treatment morning serum cortisol level reportedly received an intraarticular steroid shot several days prior to the blood draw. She remained asymptomatic and her rechecked serum cortisol was within normal limits at 12.3 μg/dL.

CONCLUSIONS

High-volume 2 mg twice daily sinonasal mometasone irrigations did not cause HPA axis suppression in a representative sample of patients with refractory CRS post-FESS with normal baseline cortisol levels.

Rhinitis 2020: A practice parameter update

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

Effects of double-dose intranasal corticosteroid for allergic rhinitis: a systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

When a standard dose of intranasal corticosteroid (INCS) fails to control symptoms of allergic rhinitis (AR), a double dose of INCS is optional. This systematic review aimed to assess the effects of double-dose INCS.

METHODS

Literature searches were performed using MEDLINE and EMBASE. Randomized controlled trials that studied the effects of double-dose INCS vs standard-dose INCS for treating patients with AR were included. Data from the included studies were extracted and collected for meta-analyses. The outcomes were nasal symptoms, ocular symptoms, and adverse events.

RESULTS

Twelve studies (4166 patients) met the inclusion criteria. There were 5 pediatric studies (1868 patients), 5 adult studies (1414 patients), and 2 studies with mixed populations (884 patients). The meta-analysis results in adult patients favored the effects of double-dose INCS on: total nasal symptom score (standardized mean difference [SMD] -0.25; 95% confidence interval [CI], -0.41 to -0.08; 4 studies; 568 patients) and total ocular symptom score (SMD -0.27; 95% CI, -0.52 to -0.03; 1 study; 259 patients). The meta-analysis results in pediatric patients did not show the difference between groups on total nasal symptom score (SMD -0.16; 95% CI, -0.40 to 0.07; 3 studies; 801 patients). The meta-analysis of ocular symptom score in pediatric patients had insufficient data. There were no differences between groups on adverse events.

CONCLUSION

Double-dose INCS showed better improvement in nasal and ocular symptoms in adult patients with AR when compared to the standard dose. These beneficial effects were not seen in the pediatric population. Adverse events between groups were not different.

Comprehensive management of congenital choanal atresia

OBJECTIVES

To present results of a one-stage minimally invasive surgical procedure for congenital choanal atresia (CCA). Seven outcome measures were applied.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Retrospective study conducted between 1999 and 2015. The same endonasal endoscopic approach with multiflaps and no stenting was used on 36 children. The flaps were attached with fibrine glue. There were 50% unilateral and 50% bilateral cases, 70% primary and 30% secondary surgery. The mean age at primary surgery for bilateral atresia was 10 days and for unilateral atresia 4 years. Associated loco-regional disorders were: hypoplasia of the inferior turbinate, rhinopharyngeal stenosis and rhinopharyngeal web.

RESULTS

The average follow-up time was 6 years, ranging from 1 to 14 years. There was a functionally patent choanae in 94% of children, and 6% showed severe restenosis with a diameter less than 4 mm, which needed one revision surgery each. Charge patients were not associated with worse outcome. There was no external nasal valve stenosis and no permanent Eustachian tube dysfunction. Synechiae occurred in 3 patients with hyperplastic inferior turbinate. No patients showed any disharmonious nasal growth. In neonates with isolated bilateral CCA, breast-suction could be started within 1 day (range 1-2 days), and pain-killers were needed on average for 1.5 days (range 1-4 days). The hospital stay for unilateral isolated CCA was on average 1.5 days (range 1-2 days) and for bilateral isolated CCA, 8 days (range 3-20 days). Postoperative procedures under a short general anesthesia were necessary in 12 cases, 10 of them were infants under 6 months of age.

CONCLUSION

Surgery could be performed safely in the newborn in the early stage of life, even for unilateral atresia. Tendency for restenosis can be minimized by: 1. the construction of an as large as possible uni-neochoanae by removing the posterior part of the vomer and by drilling away the medial pterygoid; 2. in case of rhinopharyngeal stenosis, part of the endochondral clivus bone should be resected; 3. all raw surfaces should be covered by multiple mucosal flaps secured with fibrin glue; 4. no stenting; 5. appropriate postoperative care.

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.

Impact of study design on the evaluation of inhaled and intranasal corticosteroids' effect on hypothalamic-pituitary-adrenal axis function

In part I of this review, an overview of the designs of hypothalamic-pituitary-adrenal (HPA) axis studies in the setting of inhaled corticosteroids (ICS) or intranasal corticosteroids (INS) use was discussed. Part II provides detailed discussion on the HPA axis evaluation results for each common ICS and INS, and how these results are possibly affected by the factors of study design. Significant adrenal suppression at conventional ICS/INS doses appears to be rare in clinical settings. The magnitude of cortisol suppression varies widely among different study designs. Factors potentially impacting this variability include: the choice of dose, dosing duration, assay sensitivity, statistical methodology, study population, and compliance. All of these factors have the potential to affect the extent of HPA axis effects detected and should be considered when designing or interpreting the results of a HPA axis study.

An overview of the pediatric medications for the symptomatic treatment of allergic rhinitis, cough, and cold

Upper respiratory infections and allergic rhinitis are common diseases in children. In recent years, U.S. Food and Drug Administration has been promoting pediatric drug development with marketing exclusivity incentives and requirements. The assessment of clinical pharmacology, efficacy, and safety data has facilitated pediatric drug development and provided appropriate labeling for pediatric use. Regulatory decision making involves multiple evaluation processes, including drug exposure comparison between adult and pediatric population, formulation bridging, dose selection, and evaluation of efficacy and safety in pediatric patients. This article reviews the pediatric drugs indicated for cough, cold, and allergic rhinitis, focusing on the utility of clinical pharmacology, safety, and efficacy data in determining the pediatric dosing regimen and the approaches taken for regulatory decision making.

Therapeutic equivalence of triamcinolone acetonide hydrofluoroalkane and chlorofluorocarbon nasal inhalers in patients with seasonal allergic rhinitis

BACKGROUND

Triamcinolone acetonide (TAA) has been reformulated as an hydrofluoroalkane (HFA) aerosol for intranasal use in patients with seasonal allergic rhinitis (SAR). This study compared the TAA HFA formulation with the previously available chlorofluorocarbon (CFC) nasal inhaler in a dose-ranging study.

METHODS

This was a double-blind, parallel-group, multicenter study in 780 adults with SAR. Patients had a history of fall seasonal rhinitis and positive skin tests to ragweed. After meeting minimum symptom requirements during the run-in phase, patients were randomized to one of eight groups: TAA CFC or HFA at 14, 110, or 440 micrograms once daily or matching placebo. Treatment was continued for two weeks and patient completed a daily diary for reflective and instantaneous rating of nasal and ocular allergy symptoms.

RESULTS

All active treatment groups were statistically superior to placebo with respect to the primary outcome variable, total nasal symptoms. Furthermore, the TAA HFA and TAA CFC formulations were statistically comparable over the dose range. Within each formulation, there was a significant mean reduction from baseline in the symptoms of rhinitis that increased with increasing dose. Ocular symptoms were also reduced with both formulations. Both preparations were well tolerated without any safety concerns.

CONCLUSION

In conclusion, a new formulation of TAA with a HFA propellant was found to be effective in the treatment of SAR and comparable with the previously available TAA CFC formulation. There was a dose response to TAA, with doses as low as 7 micrograms per nostril once daily producing statistically significant improvement in rhinitis symptoms.

Impact of study design on the evaluation of inhaled and intranasal corticosteroids' effect on hypothalamic-pituitary-adrenal axis function, part I: general overview of HPA axis study design

Inhaled and intranasal corticosteroids (ICS and INS) are among the mainstays of the treatment for asthma and allergic rhinitis, respectively, and also carry the potential to suppress the hypothalamic-pituitary-adrenal (HPA) axis. Several important factors affect the interpretability of trials investigating the impact of ICS and INS on the HPA axis. This paper reviews 106 published clinical trials, peer-reviewed articles, and New Drug Application reviews of approved ICS and INS, using MEDLINE and Drugs@FDA database. The trials included in this review evaluated the potential impact on HPA axis function of eight approved single-ingredient ICS and INS (beclomethasone dipropionate, budesonide, ciclesonide, flunisolide, fluticasone furoate, flucticasone propionate, mometasone furoate, and triamcinolone acetonide) and combination products containing these ingredients. The most commonly utilized design was blinded, placebo controlled, and short term (<6 weeks) for adult trials and blinded, placebo controlled, and long term (≥6 weeks) for pediatric trials. Factors potentially affecting trial results include the choice of dose, dosing duration, assay sensitivity, statistical methodology, and the study population evaluated (patients or healthy volunteers). All of these factors have the potential to affect the level of adrenal suppression detected. In conclusion, to be informative, a HPA axis study should be well designed and carefully implemented to minimize variability in results and improve the overall interpretability of data obtained.

The 1 μg cosyntropin test in normal individuals: A reappraisal

BACKGROUND

The 1μg cosyntropin test has some advantages over the 250μg test as a test of adrenal function. One of the concerns regarding the 1 μg test includes stability of the cosyntropin when reconstituted and stored. Classically the 5(th) percentile responses to cosyntropin in normal individuals have been used to define a normal response. Recent studies have shown that these normative values should be determined for individual assays.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

We performed a 1μg cosyntropin test using reconstituted and refrigerated (4-8(°) C) cosyntropin in saline solution in 49 non pregnant adults who were apparently healthy and had no exposure to exogenous glucocorticoids. The cosyntropin solution was stored for up to 60 days following reconstitution. We analysed the data for any association between duration of cosyntropin solution storage and the cortisol responses to cosyntropin administration.

RESULTS

The mean ± SD cortisol level at baseline, 30 and 60 min were-12.19 ± 3 μg/dl, 20.72 ± 2.63 μg/dl, 16.86 ± 3.33 μg/dl. The 5(th) percentile cortisol response at 30 min was 16.5 μg/dl (16.33 μg/dl rounded off). The correlation coefficients between number of days of cosyntropin solution storage and the cortisol responses at 30 and 60 min were (Spear mans rho = 0.06,-0.24 respectively) (P = 0.69 and 0.41). There were no differences in cortisol values whether the storage was for less than 30 days or more than 30 days (mean difference 0.25 μg/dl P = 0.44).

CONCLUSION

The 5(th) percentile normative values determined for our assay is lower than what is currently being used clinically and in research publications. Prolonged refrigerated storage of cosyntropin solution does not affect the validity of the 1 μg cosyntropin test.

Relieving nasal congestion in children with seasonal and perennial allergic rhinitis: efficacy and safety studies of mometasone furoate nasal spray

Background

In surveys of children with allergic rhinitis (AR), nasal congestion has been identified as the most frequently experienced and bothersome symptom. This analysis was conducted to investigate the effect of mometasone furoate nasal spray (MFNS) on congestion in children with AR.

Methods

Two multicenter, double-blind, placebo-controlled studies randomly assigned children to MFNS 100 μg or placebo, 1 spray/nostril QD for 4 weeks (Study 1: ages 6–11 years with seasonal AR [SAR] ≥1 year; Study 2: ages 3–11 years with perennial AR [PAR] ≥1 year). Least square (LS) means were obtained from an ANCOVA model with treatment and study center effects, with baseline score as a covariate. We conducted post hoc evaluation of changes from baseline in AM/PM PRIOR (average of reflective AM and PM scores) nasal congestion (0=none to 3=severe).

Results

Study 1: MFNS (n=134) reduced congestion significantly more than placebo (n=135) on day 2 (P=.004) and on 23/29 days (P≤.037). Change from baseline was −0.53 and −0.28 for MFNS and placebo (P<.001) over days 1–15 and −0.64 and −0.38 for MFNS and placebo (P<.001) over days 1–29. Study 2: MFNS (n=185) reduced congestion significantly more than placebo (n=189) on day 3 (P=.015) and on 22/29 days (P≤.047). Change from baseline was −0.56 and −0.36 for MFNS and placebo (P<.001) over days 1–15 and −0.64 and −0.45 for MFNS and placebo (P<.001) over days 1–29. MFNS was well tolerated, with no unusual or unexpected adverse events.

Conclusion

MFNS effectively relieved nasal congestion and was well tolerated in children with SAR or PAR.

Effects of inhaled fluticasone on intraocular pressure and central corneal thickness in asthmatic children without a family history of glaucoma

Purpose:

The aim of this study is to report the effects of fluticasone-inhaled corticosteroid on intraocular pressure (IOP) and central corneal thickness (CCT) of asthmatic children without a family history of glaucoma.

Materials and Methods:

In this prospective study, 93 children were divided into two groups: 69 asthmatic children with no family history of glaucoma who were taking inhaled fluticasone propionate 250 μg daily for at least 6 months (Group 1) and 24 age-matched control subjects without asthma (Group 2). Three measurements each, of IOP and CCT, were performed with a hand-held noncontact tonometer and a noncontact specular microscope, respectively, over a 12-week period. The order of IOP and CCT measured were randomized at each visit. Between-group comparison and the relationship between CCT and IOP measurements were investigated. P < 0.05 was statistically significant.

Results:

The mean age was 8 ± 2.4 years (range, 5–15 years) and 9 ± 2.9 years (range, 5–15 years) for Groups 1 and 2, respectively (P = 0.1337). The mean IOP was 14 ± 3.3 mmHg (range, 10–24 mmHg) and 14 ± 2.9 mmHg (range, 11–22 mmHg) for Groups 1 and 2, respectively (P = 0.3626). The mean CCT was 531 ± 30.1 μm (range, 467–601 μm) and 519 ± 47.0 μm (range, 415589 μm) for Groups 1 and 2, respectively (P = 0.1625). There was a weak but statistically significant correlation between IOP and CCT in Group 1 (Pearson's R = 0.3580, P = 0.0025).

Conclusions:

Inhaled fluticasone at the regular dose used in this study over a short period (6–24 months) was not associated with a significant effect on CCT and IOP measured with noncontact devices in asthmatic children between 5 and 15 years, without a family history of glaucoma. A weak correlation between IOP and CCT values in asthmatic children did exist.

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.

Efficacy and long-term safety of mometasone furoate nasal spray in children with perennial allergic rhinitis

BACKGROUND

Allergic rhinitis (AR) affects up to 40% of children by age 6 years. Perennial AR (PAR) causes sleep disturbance, diminishes concentration in school, impairs psychosocial functioning, and reduces quality of life. This study evaluated efficacy and long-term safety of the intranasal corticosteroid mometasone furoate nasal spray (MFNS) in children with PAR.

METHODS

This study comprised a double-blind, 4-week efficacy and safety period followed by a 6-month, open-label safety period. Primary efficacy variable during the double-blind period was mean change in physician-evaluated total nasal symptom score (TNSS) from baseline to day 15. Other efficacy variables during this phase included subject-evaluated TNSS, individual nasal symptoms, and total symptom score (TSS, nasal and non-nasal symptoms, summed). Physician-evaluated improvement in overall condition of PAR was assessed during the open-label period. Adverse events (AEs) were monitored throughout.

RESULTS

Subjects aged 3-11 years with PAR (n = 381) were randomized to MFNS 100 microg (n = 190) or placebo (n = 191) daily for 4 weeks; 357 subjects continued into the open-label period, receiving MFNS only. Between baseline and day 15, significantly greater mean changes were seen with MFNS-treated patients than placebo in physician-evaluated TNSS (-2.8, -39%, vs. -2.2, -32%; p = 0.02). Statistically significant improvements in MFNS versus placebo were reported for subject-evaluated TNSS, TSS, and individual nasal symptom scores (p < or = 0.03 for all). Improvement continued through the open-label period. Subjects treated with MFNS in both periods experienced a 45% further reduction in TSS in this study phase, while those who switched from placebo to MFNS saw a further 49% decrease. MFNS was well-tolerated in both periods. The most frequently reported treatment-related AEs during the double-blind period for MFNS and placebo, respectively, were epistaxis, seven (4%) and nine (5%); sneezing, five (3%) and seven (4%); headache, six (3%) and five (3%). During the open-label period, the AEs reported most often were epistaxis 37 (10%), headache nine (3%), and rhinitis 12 (3%).

LIMITATIONS

Studies in children present unique challenges because subjects are too young to grasp subjective concepts such as symptom severity, especially as rated on a numbered scale. In addition, the 6-month extension of the placebo-controlled phase used a single agent. It is also possible that subjects' symptoms could have abated independent of mometasone furoate treatment.

CONCLUSION

MFNS 100 microg/day effectively reduces TNSS, TSS (including ocular symptoms), and individual symptoms associated with PAR and is well-tolerated for up to 6 months in children aged 3-11 years with a safety profile similar to placebo.

Mometasone furoate nasal spray reduces the ocular symptoms of seasonal allergic rhinitis

BACKGROUND

Mometasone furoate nasal spray (MFNS), a potent intranasal corticosteroid with proved efficacy in relieving nasal allergic rhinitis symptoms, has demonstrated effectiveness in improving ocular symptoms associated with seasonal allergic rhinitis (SAR) in retrospective analyses.

OBJECTIVE

We sought to evaluate prospectively the efficacy of MFNS in reducing total ocular symptom scores (TOSSs) and individual ocular symptoms in subjects with SAR.

METHODS

Subjects 12 years or older (n = 429) with moderate-to-severe baseline symptoms were randomized to MFNS, 200 microg once daily, or placebo in this 15-day, double-blind, parallel-group study. Subjects evaluated morning instantaneous TOSSs and daily reflective TOSSs, total nasal symptom scores (TNSSs; both instantaneous TNSSs and reflective TNSSs, respectively), and individual ocular and nasal symptoms. Mean changes from baseline averaged over days 2 to 15 (instantaneous) and days 1 to 15 (reflective) were calculated. Quality of life was assessed by using the Rhinoconjunctivitis Quality of Life Questionnaire.

RESULTS

MFNS treatment yielded significant reductions from baseline versus placebo in instantaneous TOSSs (-0.34, P = .026, coprimary end point), instantaneous TNSSs (-0.88, P < .001, coprimary end point), reflective TOSSs (-0.44, P = .005), and reflective TNSSs (-1.06, P < .001). Significant decreases in all individual reflective ocular symptoms and instantaneous eye itching/burning and eye watering/tearing were observed for MFNS versus placebo (P < .05). Numeric improvements in instantaneous eye redness were seen but did not reach statistical significance. Improvements in Rhinoconjunctivitis Quality of Life Questionnaire total scores and individual symptom domains were achieved with MFNS treatment versus placebo (P < .001). MFNS was well tolerated.

CONCLUSION

This prospective study demonstrates that MFNS significantly reduces ocular symptoms in subjects with SAR.

Objective improvement in nasal congestion and nasal hyperreactivity with use of nasal steroids in persistent allergic rhinitis

OBJECTIVE

Our objective was to evaluate the action of topical nasal steroid in nasal congestion and nasal hyper-reactivity in children and adolescents with persistent allergic rhinitis.

METHODS

Twenty atopic children and adolescents (6 to 18 years) with moderate-to-severe persistent allergic rhinitis (PAR) were treated with mometasone furoate (100 microg once a day) for 21 days. At the beginning and end of treatment, the following were recorded: a) nasal symptoms score; b) several parameters of nasal congestion measured by acoustic rhinometry (SRE 2000 Rhinometrics); c) degree of nasal hyper-reactivity to histamine (concentration of histamine necessary to induce at least 100% increase in total nasal resistance during nasal provocation test). Data were compared with those from 20 controls.

RESULTS

Compared to controls, PAR patients had significantly higher score of symptoms, as well as higher degree of nasal hyper-reactivity and lower nasal volumes. After treatment, there was a significant decrease in the mean nasal symptoms score (8.0 versus 3.8; p < 0.001) and in the nasal hyper-reactivity (histamine concentration: 0.72 mg/ml versus 2.60 mg/ml; p < 0.001). Congestion improvement was observed by the increase in all acoustic rhinometry parameters. Among all studied volumes, the volume in the segment between 2 and 5 cm showed the highest mean increase (19.8%).

CONCLUSION

Treatment with topical nasal steroid objectively reduced nasal congestion and nasal histamine hyper-reactivity in children and adolescents with PAR.

Treatment of congestion in upper respiratory diseases

Congestion, as a symptom of upper respiratory tract diseases including seasonal and perennial allergic rhinitis, acute and chronic rhinosinusitis, and nasal polyposis, is principally caused by mucosal inflammation. Though effective pharmacotherapy options exist, no agent is universally efficacious; therapeutic decisions must account for individual patient preferences. Oral H₁-antihistamines, though effective for the common symptoms of allergic rhinitis, have modest decongestant action, as do leukotriene receptor antagonists. Intranasal antihistamines appear to improve congestion better than oral forms. Topical decongestants reduce congestion associated with allergic rhinitis, but local adverse effects make them unsuitable for long-term use. Oral decongestants show some efficacy against congestion in allergic rhinitis and the common cold, and can be combined with oral antihistamines. Intranasal corticosteroids have broad anti-inflammatory activities, are the most potent long-term pharmacologic treatment of congestion associated with allergic rhinitis, and show some congestion relief in rhinosinusitis and nasal polyposis. Immunotherapy and surgery may be used in some cases refractory to pharmacotherapy. Steps in congestion management include (1) diagnosis of the cause(s), (2) patient education and monitoring, (3) avoidance of environmental triggers where possible, (4) pharmacotherapy, and (5) immunotherapy (for patients with allergic rhinitis) or surgery for patients whose condition is otherwise uncontrolled.

Pediatric allergy medications: review of currently available formulations

BACKGROUND

Allergy affects about 50% of the pediatric population globally. Allergic rhinitis (AR), one form of allergy, causes considerable impairment in quality of life, including disruption of sleep and, in children, interference with school attendance and performance.

SCOPE

Traditional formulations and delivery systems - tablets, capsules, or intranasal sprays - successfully used by adults for treatment of AR may not be as easily administered in children. Liquid oral medications are more readily taken by children but contain sugars and excipients; they can also be inconvenient with less accurate dosing and are associated with dental caries and gastrointestinal upset.

METHODOLOGY

This review evaluated medications for treatment of AR currently available for pediatric patients and identified the attitudes of parents and health care professionals toward these medications. Guidelines from international organizations and governmental websites were reviewed for recommendations and product labeling requirements. A Medline search was conducted using the terms dyes, excipients, palatability, prescribing habits, sugar, among others.

FINDINGS

In recent years, governmental regulatory agencies and professional organizations in Europe and the United States have recommended avoidance of sugar in pediatric medicines and required stricter labeling of their ingredients. Public awareness about the adverse effects of sugar and some excipients has also increased, and parents more frequently express the desire for safer and more convenient medicines for their children. In response, more sugar-free, dye-free liquid medicines and other formulations, such as granules, filmstrips, chewable tablets, fast-dissolving tablets, and drops, are becoming available for pediatric use.

LIMITATIONS

Data from well-designed trials conducted in children for the treatment of AR are lacking. In addition, the possibility of a social response bias may exist for parents and physicians about sugar and other ingredients in children's medications.

CONCLUSION

Treatment for AR is often long-term, particularly in persistent AR; therefore, safety, tolerability, convenience, and patient/parental acceptance are important considerations when deciding which medication to prescribe.

Efficacy and safety of once-daily fluticasone furoate nasal spray in children with seasonal allergic rhinitis treated for 2 wk

The objective of this study was to evaluate the efficacy and safety of fluticasone furoate (FF) nasal spray 55 and 110 microg once daily in children with seasonal allergic rhinitis (SAR). Patients (n = 554) received placebo nasal spray or FF, administered using a unique side-actuated device, in a 2-wk, randomized, double-blind study. Symptoms were evaluated by patients using a 4-point categorical scale. Efficacy assessments included reflective and instantaneous total nasal symptom scores (r/iTNSS). Primary analyses were conducted in patients aged 6-11 yr in the intent-to-treat population (ITT); the 2-11 yr group provided supportive analyses. In patients aged 6-11 yr, FF 110 microg once daily significantly improved the daily rTNSS compared with placebo. FF 55 microg once daily was only numerically better for rTNSS and iTNSS. Secondary pre-dose iTNSS and overall response to therapy were significant with FF 110 microg. The significant findings for FF 110 microg were supported by analyses in the entire ITT population of 2-11 yr olds. Both doses of FF were well tolerated. These study results suggest that FF nasal spray administered once daily for 2 wk is well tolerated and effective for the treatment of SAR symptoms in children aged 2-11 yr.

Safety and tolerability of fluticasone furoate nasal spray once daily in paediatric patients aged 6-11 years with allergic rhinitis: subanalysis of three randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, multicentre studies

BACKGROUND

Fluticasone furoate is a novel enhanced-affinity corticosteroid that has demonstrated favourable safety and tolerability in paediatric patients. Three pivotal phase III studies were conducted in children as young as 2 years of age; however, because the European Medicines Agency has recently approved fluticasone furoate for use in children aged>or=6 years, a subanalysis has been conducted to support safety and tolerability in the 6- to 11-year age group.

METHODS

All three trials included in the subanalysis were randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, parallel-group studies: a 2-week US study in patients with seasonal allergic rhinitis (SAR), a 12-week global study in patients with perennial allergic rhinitis (PAR) and a 6-week US hypothalamic-pituitary-adrenal (HPA) axis safety study in patients with PAR. Randomized patients received once-daily treatment with either fluticasone furoate nasal spray (FFNS) 55 microg (n=297; 2-week SAR and 12-week PAR studies only), FFNS 110 microg (n=321) or vehicle placebo nasal spray (n=330). Safety assessments included clinical adverse event (AE) monitoring, clinical laboratory tests, detailed nasal examinations, monitoring of vital signs, and 12-lead ECGs. Ophthalmic examinations (12-week PAR study only) were conducted by an ophthalmologist or optometrist before randomization and at final treatment visit. Twenty-four-hour urinary cortisol (UC) excretions (6- and 12-week PAR studies) and serum cortisol (SC) concentrations (6-week PAR study only) were assessed at specified timepoints over 24 hours as a measure of HPA axis function. In the 6-week HPA axis safety study in patients with PAR, 24-hour UC and SC samples were collected in a domiciled (clinical) setting.

RESULTS

No unexpected safety results were observed in patients aged 6-11 years enrolled in the three studies. Across all three trials, AEs considered by the investigator to be drug related were observed in 10%, 7% and 8% of patients in the FFNS 55 microg, FFNS 110 microg and placebo groups, respectively. The most common AEs were headache (8%, 9% and 8% in the FFNS 55 microg, FFNS 110 microg and placebo groups, respectively), nasopharyngitis (5%, 6% and 5%, respectively), pharyngolaryngeal pain (5%, 3% and 4%, respectively), epistaxis (4% in both active treatment groups and 4% in the placebo group) and pyrexia (3% in both active treatment groups and 2% in the placebo group). Findings from nasal examinations were similar across the treatment and placebo groups. Ophthalmic examinations found no differences between the treatment groups for mean change from baseline in intraocular pressure (assessed in the 12-week PAR study only), and no posterior subcapsular cataracts were reported in patients in either FFNS-treatment group. In the 6-week HPA axis study, 24-hour SC geometric mean concentrations were similar for FFNS and placebo groups. The lower limit of two-sided 95% confidence interval (CI) for the treatment ratio was greater than the prespecified noninferiority margin of 0.8 (treatment ratio=0.92, 95% CI 0.80, 1.05).

CONCLUSIONS

FFNS has a favourable safety and tolerability profile in patients aged 6-11 years with PAR or SAR.

Mometasone furoate: a review of its intranasal use in allergic rhinitis

Mometasone furoate (Nasonex) is a high-potency intranasal corticosteroid available for the treatment and/or prophylaxis of the nasal symptoms of seasonal allergic rhinitis (SAR) and perennial allergic rhinitis (PAR). In the EU, it is approved for use in patients aged > or =6 years and, in the US, it is approved as a treatment in patients aged > or =2 years and as prophylaxis in those > or =12 years of age.Extensive experience in both clinical trials and the clinical practice setting has firmly established the efficacy and good tolerability profile of intranasal mometasone furoate in children and adults with PAR or SAR. Thus, intranasal mometasone furoate is a useful first-line option for the treatment and prophylactic management of these conditions, including in children as young as 2 years of age in some countries and 6 years of age in others.

Efficacy of mometasone furoate nasal spray in the treatment of allergic rhinitis. Meta-analysis of randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, clinical trials

RATIONALE

Several randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled clinical trials have demonstrated the efficacy of mometasone furoate nasal spray (MFNS) in the treatment of allergic rhinitis (AR) thus allowing for a meta-analysis to determine the overall treatment effect.

METHODS

A comprehensive search of the MEDLINE, LILACS, SCOPUS, and the Cochrane Library databases up to 31 October, 2007 was carried out. Randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, clinical trials evaluating the efficacy of MFNS in patients with AR compared to placebo were included. Total nasal symptom scores (TNSS), individual nasal symptoms, total non-nasal symptom scores (TNNSS) and nasal airflow were analysed as the standardized mean difference (SMD). Meta-analysis was performed with the random or the fixed effect models depending on heterogeneity, by using revman 5 software.

DATA SYNTHESIS

Sixteen of the 113 identified articles met the inclusion criteria. For MFNS efficacy on TNSS, 2998 participants were analysed: 1534 received MFNS and 1464 placebo. Mometasone furoate nasal spray was associated with a significant reduction in TNSS (SMD -0.49, 95% CI: -0.60 to -0.38; P < 0.00001; I(2) = 50.1%). A significant effect on SMD for nasal stuffiness/congestion (-0.41; 95% CI: -0.56 to -0.27), rhinorrhoea (-0.44; 95% CI: -0.66 to -0.21), sneezing (-0.40; 95% CI: -0.57 to -0.23) and nasal itching (-0.39; 95% CI: -0.53 to -0.25) was also demonstrated. Mometasone furoate nasal spray treated subjects also showed a significant reduction in TNNSS (-0.30; 95% CI: -0.43 to -0.18). The proportion of patients with adverse events was similar for MFNS and placebo (0.99; 95% CI: 0.81-1.20; P = 0.91).

CONCLUSIONS

This meta-analysis provides a level Ia evidence for the efficacy of MFSN in the treatment of AR vs placebo. Adverse events frequency was similar in both groups.

Optimal management of nasal congestion caused by allergic rhinitis in children: safety and efficacy of medical treatments

Nasal congestion is such a frequent and multifactorial occurrence in young children that parents and medical caregivers often overlook the need for medical intervention. However, children with congestion can suffer quality-of-life detriments resulting from sleep disturbance, learning impairment, and fatigue. Congestion also impairs the normal nasal breathing that is physiologically important for the efficient cleaning and conditioning of inspired air. Further, the most common cause of congestion, allergic rhinitis, is considered a potential risk factor for asthma. Published guidelines on the treatment of allergic rhinitis agree that management strategies in children should follow the same principles as in adults, while recognizing the need for dosage adjustments and being aware of unique safety issues. Intranasal corticosteroids, with robust effects in reducing congestion and good tolerability, remain a treatment of choice. Despite lingering concerns about the potential for growth suppression with these drugs, clinical evidence suggests a very low risk at prescribed dosages, especially with compounds that have a low systemic bioavailability. Oral antihistamines are commonly cited as first-line options for allergic rhinitis, although their effect on nasal congestion is relatively modest. First-generation antihistamines should not be administered to children because of their sedative properties, which can worsen learning problems associated with allergic rhinitis. Second-generation oral antihistamines are preferred, although this class is not completely devoid of adverse effects. Other treatments, such as a nasal antihistamine, decongestants, and immunotherapy, present varying levels of safety and tolerability issues in children.

Identification and management of undiagnosed and undertreated allergic rhinitis in adults and children

Allergic rhinitis (AR) is a common health problem that affects adults, adolescents and children and is often undiagnosed or inadequately treated. Because AR is not a life-threatening disease, many patients do not seek medical treatment for their symptoms, and others self-medicate with over-the-counter medications, often sedating antihistamines. However, untreated or inadequately treated AR can substantially impair overall quality of life (QOL) by causing fatigue, headache, cognitive impairment and other problems. The risk for comorbid conditions, such as asthma, otitis media, and lymphoid hypertrophy with obstructive sleep apnea, can increase, and the symptoms of AR can worsen if AR is not adequately treated. Among the symptoms of AR, nasal congestion has been described by patients as the most bothersome because it disrupts sleep, resulting in diminished daytime performance. A new congestion screening tool, the Congestion Quantifier, has been developed to aid in the diagnosis and treatment of AR and to help guide treatment decisions. Intranasal corticosteroids (INSs) are recommended as effective pharmaceutical treatments for controlling the symptoms of AR. Randomized, controlled trials in children and adults have demonstrated that INSs relieve rhinitis symptoms, thereby improving QOL in individuals with seasonal or perennial AR. Most INSs are approved for use in children >or=6 years of age, but mometasone furoate and fluticasone furoate are approved for use in children as young as 2 years of age and fluticasone propionate for children >or=4 years old. Long-term benefits have also been seen with the use of immunotherapy, although some patients, especially children, resist the injections used in subcutaneous immunotherapy. Recent studies with sublingual immunotherapy have indicated that it might be an effective and well-tolerated alternative to immunotherapy injections.

Use of intranasal corticosteroids in the management of congestion and sleep disturbance in pediatric patients with allergic rhinitis

Allergic rhinitis affects a large number of children and exerts a considerable socioeconomic impact. It is underdiagnosed and inadequately treated, which predisposes children to potentially serious comorbidities. Allergic rhinitis symptoms may create nighttime breathing problems and sleep disturbances and have a negative effect on a child's ability to learn in the classroom. Although antihistamines have shown efficacy in relieving many symptoms, they have little effect on nasal congestion. This article summarizes the advantages of intranasal corticosteroids, including their effectiveness against congestion and excellent safety profile. Intranasal corticosteroids with minimal systemic bioavailability provide topical drug delivery that minimizes the potential for systemic side-effects.

Safety and efficacy of fluticasone furoate in pediatric patients with perennial allergic rhinitis

Objective

To evaluate the safety and efficacy of once-daily (QD) fluticasone furoate (FF) nasal spray in children with perennial allergic rhinitis (PAR).

Study Design

A global, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled study.

Subjects and Methods

Pediatric patients (aged 2–11 years; n = 558) with PAR received once-daily placebo, FF 110 μg, or FF 55 μg for 12 weeks. Efficacy was evaluated by nasal symptom scores. General safety and corticosteroid-specific safety (nasal and ophthalmic examinations, and hypothalamic—pituitary—adrenal assessments) were assessed.

Results

No findings of clinical concern were identified from the safety assessments. For primary efficacy analysis of mean change from baseline over the first 4 weeks of treatment in daily reflective total nasal symptom score, FF 55 μg demonstrated significant improvement ( P = 0.003) compared with placebo; however, the improvement for FF 110 μg versus placebo did not reach statistical significance ( P = 0.073).

Conclusion

FF QD was well tolerated and demonstrated efficacy in children aged 2 to 11 years with PAR.

Topical nasal steroids for intermittent and persistent allergic rhinitis in children

BACKGROUND

Allergic rhinitis is a very common chronic illness affecting 10% to 40% of children worldwide. There has been a significant increase in prevalence among children over the last two decades and this increase has been accompanied by a parallel increase in comorbid illnesses such as asthma.

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate the therapeutic effectiveness and adverse event profiles of topical nasal steroids for intermittent and persistent allergic rhinitis in children.

SEARCH STRATEGY

We searched the Cochrane Ear, Nose and Throat Disorders Group Trials Register, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) (The Cochrane Library Issue 3, 2005), MEDLINE (1950 onwards) and EMBASE (1974 onwards) on 5(th) September 2005. CINAHL, mRCT(a meta-database of controlled trials), NRR (the National Research Register), LILACS, MedCarib, KOREAMED, IndMed, Samed, Panteleimon, Zetoc, ISI Proceedings, the GlaxoSmithKline Clinical Trials Database and the websites of AstraZeneca, Schering Plough and Aventis were also searched.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised controlled trials comparing topical nasal steroid preparations against each other or placebo, prescribed for allergic rhinitis in children.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two authors independently assessed trial quality and extracted data from the included trials. The limited and variable quality of reported data precluded any pooling of results and only a descriptive summary is presented.

MAIN RESULTS

Three trials involving a total of 79 participants were included. All three trials, which compared topical nasal steroids against placebo for perennial rhinitis, provided some, albeit limited data, relevant to our primary outcomes; but in two of the trials the data analysis was flawed and in the third trial it was incomprehensible. None of the trials provided data relevant to our secondary outcomes. There were no adverse events reported from any of the interventions.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

The three included trials provided some weak and unreliable evidence for the effectiveness of Beconase(R) and flunisolide used topically intranasally for the treatment of intermittent and persistent allergic rhinitis in children. The reduction of severity in symptoms as assessed by the trialists could not be confirmed with the data provided and decisions on the use of these medications should, until such time as more robust evidence is available, be guided by the physician's clinical experience and patients' individual circumstances and preferences.

Mometasone Furoate Nasal Spray

The development of corticosteroids that are delivered directly to the nasal mucosa has alleviated much of the concern about the systemic adverse effects associated with oral corticosteroid therapy. However, given the high potency of these drugs and their widespread use in the treatment of allergic rhinitis, it is important to ensure that intranasal corticosteroids have a favourable benefit-risk ratio. One agent that typifies the systemic safety found in the majority of intranasal corticosteroids is mometasone furoate nasal spray, a potent and effective treatment for seasonal and perennial allergic rhinitis and nasal polyposis. Mometasone furoate does not reach high systemic concentrations or cause clinically significant adverse effects. Results from pharmacokinetic studies in adults and children suggest that systemic exposure to mometasone furoate after intranasal administration is negligible. This is probably because of the inherently low aqueous solubility of mometasone furoate, which allows only a small fraction of the drug to cross the nasal mucosa and enter the bloodstream, and because a large amount of the administered drug is swallowed and undergoes extensive first-pass metabolism. There is no clinical evidence that mometasone furoate nasal spray suppresses the function of the hypothalamus-pituitary-adrenal axis when the drug is administered at clinically relevant doses (100-200 microg/day); consequently, mometasone furoate nasal spray has not been associated with growth inhibition in children. The safety and tolerability of mometasone furoate nasal spray have been rigorously assessed in clinical trials involving approximately 4,500 patients, with epistaxis, headache and pharyngitis being the most common adverse effects associated with treatment in adolescents and adults. The clinical effectiveness of mometasone furoate nasal spray, coupled with its agreeable safety and tolerability profile, confirms its favourable benefit-risk ratio.

Benefit versus risk for oral, inhaled, and nasal glucocorticosteroids

Many factors affect the benefit-to-risk analysis of the use of the glucocorticosteroids in the treatment of allergic inflammation. For most patients the benefit-to-risk ratio favors topical over oral administration, but in severe disease oral administration may be required. It is clear from pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic studies that inhaled glucocorticosteroids in particular are absorbed into the systemic circulation and that they can have clinical adverse effects when given in high doses. Therefore, with inhaled and nasal glucocorticosteroids, the dose that will achieve the optimal benefit/risk ratio is the lowest dose that controls symptoms and prevents exacerbations requiring treatment with oral glucocorticosteroids. This optimal dose needs to be determined on an individual basis and is likely to vary as disease severity changes over time.

Effect of budesonide aqueous nasal spray on hypothalamic-pituitary-adrenal axis function in children with allergic rhinitis

BACKGROUND

Intranasal corticosteroids are safe and effective for treating allergic rhinitis in adults. Since children may receive more systemic corticosteroid on a dose-per-weight basis than adults, the safety of corticosteroid therapy in pediatric patients is an important issue.

OBJECTIVE

To determine the effects of treatment with budesonide aqueous nasal spray using the recommended once-daily dose for adults and children 6 years and older on hypothalamic-pituitary-adrenal (HPA) axis function in pediatric patients with allergic rhinitis.

METHODS

In a 6-week, multicenter, double-blind, placebo-controlled study, 78 patients aged 2 to 5 years with allergic rhinitis were treated with budesonide aqueous nasal spray (64 microg/d) or placebo. Mean change in morning plasma cortisol levels from baseline to study end 0, 30, and 60 minutes after low-dose (10-microg) cosyntropin stimulation and mean change in the difference from 0 to 30 minutes and from 0 to 60 minutes after cosyntropin stimulation were used to evaluate HPA axis function.

RESULTS

Mean change from baseline to study end in plasma cortisol levels 0, 30, and 60 minutes after cosyntropin stimulation and the difference from 0 to 30 minutes and from 0 to 60 minutes were not significantly different between the treatment and placebo groups (P > .05 for all). At the end of the study, 3 budesonide aqueous nasal spray and 6 placebo patients were classified as having subnormal HPA axis function. The safety and tolerability profile of budesonide aqueous nasal spray was comparable to that of placebo.

CONCLUSIONS

Administration of budesonide aqueous nasal spray for 6 weeks was well tolerated and safe and had no measurable suppressive effects on HPA axis function in patients aged 2 to 5 years with allergic rhinitis.

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

Intranasal corticosteroids and intranasal antihistamines are efficacious topical therapies in the treatment of allergic rhinitis. This review addresses their relative roles in the management of this disease, focusing on their safety and tolerability profiles. The intranasal route of administration delivers drug directly to the target organ, thereby minimising the potential for the systemic adverse effects that may be evident with oral therapy. Furthermore, the topical route of delivery enables the use of lower doses of medication. Such therapies, predominantly available as aqueous formulations following the ban of chlorofluorocarbon propellants, have minimal local adverse effects. Intranasal application of therapy can induce sneezing in the hyper-reactive nose, and transient local irritation has been described with certain formulations. Intranasal administration of corticosteroids is associated with minor nose bleeding in a small proportion of recipients. This effect has been attributed to the vasoconstrictor activity of the corticosteroid molecules, and is considered to account for the very rare occurrence of nasal septal perforation. Nasal biopsy studies do not show any detrimental structural effects within the nasal mucosa with long-term administration of intranasal corticosteroids. Much attention has focused on the systemic safety of intranasal application. When administered at standard recommended therapeutic dosage, the intranasal antihistamines do not cause significant sedation or impairment of psychomotor function, effects that would be evident when these agents are administered orally at a therapeutically relevant dosage. The systemic bioavailability of intranasal corticosteroids varies from <1% to up to 40-50% and influences the risk of systemic adverse effects. Because the dose delivered topically is small, this is not a major consideration, and extensive studies have not identified significant effects on the hypothalamic-pituitary-adrenal axis with continued treatment. A small effect on growth has been reported in one study in children receiving a standard dosage over 1 year, however. This has not been found in prospective studies with the intranasal corticosteroids that have low systemic bioavailability and therefore the judicious choice of intranasal formulation, particularly if there is concurrent corticosteroid inhalation for asthma, is prudent. There is no evidence that such considerations are relevant to shorter-term use, such as in intermittent or seasonal disease. Intranasal therapy, which represents a major mode of drug delivery in allergic rhinitis, thus has a very favourable benefit/risk ratio and is the preferred route of administration for corticosteroids in the treatment of this disease, as well as an important option for antihistaminic therapy, particularly if rapid symptom relief is required.

Safety and Tolerability of Treatments for Allergic Rhinitis in Children

Allergic rhinitis is a common condition in adults and children and can have a large impact on patients' health and quality of life. The aim of current allergic rhinitis therapies is to treat the subjective symptoms and to improve objective measures of the disease. Of the available treatment options for paediatric allergic rhinitis, the newer oral antihistamines and intranasal corticosteroids are first-line treatments.First-generation antihistamines are associated with unwanted adverse effects such as cardiotoxicity, sedation and impairment of psychomotor function. Despite results from studies using first-generation antihistamines demonstrating impairment of cognitive and academic function in children, many of these agents are still commonly given to patients. The newer antihistamines, developed with the aim of being more specific for the histamine H(1) receptor and of overcoming these adverse effects, are the medication of choice in patients with mild intermittent allergic rhinitis. For children <12 years of age, three newer oral antihistamines are currently available: cetirizine, loratadine and fexofenadine. A lack of adverse effects with these antihistamines has been demonstrated in children using EEG and psychomotor performance tests, and in clinical studies. However, issues of receptor selectivity and the potential for CNS adverse effects still remain, and further studies are warranted.Intranasal corticosteroids are the most effective anti-inflammatory agents used for the treatment of paediatric allergic rhinitis; however, the safety of these compounds remains controversial. The safety implications associated with corticosteroids are long-term, dose-related systemic effects, such as suppression of adrenocortical function, growth and bone metabolism, and the extent of these effects is influenced by a number of factors including corticosteroid type, pharmacokinetic profile, mode of delivery and delivery device. Topical corticosteroids were introduced to reduce the systemic effects seen with the long-term use of oral agents. The intranasal corticosteroids currently available for the treatment of paediatric allergic rhinitis - beclometasone, budesonide, flunisolide, fluticasone propionate, mometasone and triamcinolone - have short half-lives and rapid first-pass hepatic metabolism; however, their pharmacokinetics vary in terms of systemic absorption, potency, binding affinity, lipophilicity, volume of distribution, and half-life. A number of studies - utilising hypothalamic-pituitary-adrenal axis function tests such as plasma cortisol levels, 24-hour urinary-free cortisol tests; stimulation tests with corticotropin (adrenocorticotropic hormone), lypressin, and corticotropin-releasing hormone; and growth assessment studies using knemometry and stadiometry - have indicated that these intranasal corticosteroids are well-tolerated in paediatric patients and do not significantly affect growth. The wealth of clinical data and the recommendations from evidence-based guidelines suggest that both antihistamines and intranasal corticosteroids have good safety profiles in children. Nevertheless, growth should be regularly monitored in children receiving intranasal corticosteroids. Other treatments such as immunotherapy, local chromones and decongestants can also be beneficial in managing paediatric allergic rhinitis, and therapies should be considered on an individual basis.

Features of mometasone furoate nasal spray and its utility in the management of allergic rhinitis

Mometasone furoate aqueous nasal spray (NS; Nasonex, Schering Corporation), is a synthetic corticosteroid approved for the prophylaxis and treatment of seasonal allergic rhinitis (SAR) and the treatment of perennial allergic rhinitis (PAR) in patients >or= 12 years of age, and for the treatment of SAR and PAR in children as young as 2 years of age. Studies demonstrate that mometasone furoate NS is a potent, clinically effective and well-tolerated intranasal corticosteroid with negligible systemic activity and which offers the convenience of once-daily dosing.

Effective dose range of mometasone furoate nasal spray in the treatment of acute rhinosinusitis

BACKGROUND

Mometasone furoate nasal spray (MFNS) 400 microg, twice daily, as adjunctive treatment with oral antibiotic significantly improved symptoms of recurrent rhinosinusitis.

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the effectiveness and safety of MFNS 200 microg, twice daily, and 400 microg, twice daily, compared with placebo as adjunctive treatment with oral antibiotic for acute rhinosinusitis.

METHODS

In this multicenter, double-blind, placebo-controlled study, 967 outpatients with computed tomographic scan-confirmed moderate to severe rhinosinusitis received amoxicillin/clavulanate potassium (Augmentin, GlaxoSmithKline, Research Triangle Park, NC) 875 mg, twice daily, for 21 days with adjunctive twice daily MFNS 200 microg, MFNS 400 microg, or placebo nasal spray. Patients recorded scores of six rhinosinusitis symptoms and any adverse events twice daily. Pre- and postcosyntropin-stimulation plasma cortisol levels were measured in a subset of patients at selected study sites.

RESULTS

Treatment with MFNS 200 microg or 400 microg, twice daily, produced significantly greater improvements in total symptoms score (primary efficacy variable) day 1 to day 15 average (50% and 51%, respectively) than placebo (44%, P < or = 0.017). Both doses of MFNS produced significant total symptoms score improvement over placebo by day 4, and maintained efficacy over the entire 21-day study. Relief of individual symptoms showed a similar pattern. Both doses of MFNS were well tolerated, and adverse events were similar to that of placebo. Cosyntropin stimulation showed no evidence of hypothalamic-pituitary-adrenal axis suppression.

CONCLUSIONS

As adjunctive therapy to oral antibiotic treatment, MFNS at doses of 200 microg or 400 microg, twice daily, was well tolerated and significantly more effective in reducing the symptoms of rhinosinusitis than antibiotic therapy alone.

Effects of intranasal corticosteroids on the hypothalamic-pituitary-adrenal axis in children

In adults, morning plasma cortisol levels are twice that of late afternoon and evening values. In children, a delay in the time of onset in peak cortisol levels has been observed in those treated with inhaled corticosteroids. Consequently, the single morning cortisol level has a low sensitivity for detecting adrenal insufficiency in children. It is not clear which test is best for detection of clinically relevant hypothalamic-pituitary-adrenal (HPA) axis suppression in children; 24-hour plasma cortisol is a good test because it measures biologically active, free cortisol levels for the entire day and is noninvasive. For research purposes, the 24-hour integrated concentration plasma cortisol test is preferred. Studies that have looked at HPA axis suppression with intranasal corticosteroids indicate that overall, intranasal corticosteroids have minimal effect on the HPA axis. A review of the literature reveals one study in which there was a decreased output of urinary cortisol during treatment with either budesonide or fluticasone propionate in adults. Other studies of fluticasone propionate or budesonide have shown no effect on the HPA axis in children. Beclomethasone dipropionate was shown to affect urinary cortisol output in one study of healthy volunteers. However, in a long-term study in children, no effect on the HPA axis was found. Mometasone furoate has been extensively studied in more than 20 trials of adults and children. No effects on the HPA axis were detected in either children or adults. It is unlikely that children are more sensitive to corticosteroids than are adults. There seems to be little point in performing routine monitoring of adrenal function in children who are treated with intranasal corticosteroid treatment.

Safety and efficacy of mometasone furoate aqueous nasal spray in children with allergic rhinitis: results of recent clinical trials

Intranasal mometasone furoate (MF) has been extensively studied in adults and has been found to be safe and effective therapy for the treatment of allergic rhinitis. Several studies have now been conducted on pediatric patients. In all, 990 pediatric patients given mometasone furoate nasal spray (MFNS) have been studied in phase I, II, and III clinical trials. In a dose-ranging study, 5 doses of nasal spray (25, 100, and 200 microg MFNS daily and 168 microg beclomethasone dipropionate daily) were compared with placebo. The 100- and 200-microg daily doses of MFNS were found to be more effective than 168 microg beclomethasone dipropionate or 25 microg MFNS given daily. MFNS (100 microg once daily) was chosen as the appropriate dose. In clinical efficacy and safety trials, MFNS was given to 381 patients 3 to 11 years of age for 4 weeks (357 patients received 100 microg MFNS daily for 6 months) and was found to decrease symptom scores from baseline significantly better than placebo. The long-term safety of MFNS was also studied in 166 patients treated for one year; no significant changes in intraocular pressure were detected. Cosyntropin stimulation showed no decreases in cortisol. In adults, nasal mucosa showed improvement in appearance of epithelium and reduction of inflammatory infiltrates, and there were no signs of nasal atrophy.

Efficacy of fluticasone nasal spray for pediatric obstructive sleep apnea

OBJECTIVE

We tested the hypothesis that a 6-week course of a nasal glucocorticoid spray would decrease the severity of obstructive sleep apnea in children with adenotonsillar hypertrophy.

STUDY DESIGN

We conducted a randomized, triple-blind, placebocontrolled, parallel-group trial of nasal fluticasone propionate versus placebo in 25 children aged 1 to 10 years with obstructive sleep apnea proven on polysomnography. The primary outcome was the change from baseline in the frequency of mixed and obstructive apneas and hypopneas.

RESULTS

Thirteen children received fluticasone, and 12 received placebo. The mixed/obstructive apnea/hypopnea index decreased from 10.7 +/- 2.6 (SE) to 5.8 +/- 2.2 in the fluticasone group but increased from 10.9 +/- 2.3 to 13.1 +/- 3.6 in the placebo group, P =.04. The mixed/obstructive apnea/hypopnea index decreased in 12 of 13 subjects treated with fluticasone versus 6 of 12 treated with placebo, P =.03. The frequencies of hemoglobin desaturation and respiratory movement/arousals also decreased more in the fluticasone group. Changes from baseline in tonsillar size, adenoidal size, and symptom score were not significantly different between groups.

CONCLUSION

Nasal fluticasone decreased the frequency of mixed and obstructive apneas and hypopneas, suggesting that topical corticosteroids may be helpful in ameliorating pediatric obstructive sleep apnea.

Added relief in the treatment of acute recurrent sinusitis with adjunctive mometasone furoate nasal spray. The Nasonex Sinusitis Group

BACKGROUND

Intranasal glucocorticoids are effective in the treatment of allergic rhinitis. Their effectiveness as an anti-inflammatory adjunct in the treatment of acute recurrent sinusitis has not been adequately established in a controlled clinical study.

OBJECTIVE

The purpose of this study was to test the hypothesis that intranasal corticosteroid treatment produces additional relief in the treatment of acute sinusitis with oral antibiotics.

METHODS

Patients who were 12 years old and older with a history of recurrent sinusitis were treated while experiencing a new episode of acute sinusitis, which was diagnosed by symptoms and confirmed by computed tomography scan of the paranasal sinuses. Patients were treated for 21 days with amoxicillin clavulanate potassium and randomized to receive concurrent mometasone furoate nasal spray (MFNS; Nasonex [400 microg, twice daily]; n = 200 patients) or placebo spray (twice daily; n = 207 patients). Symptom scores for headache, facial pain, congestion, purulent rhinorrhea, postnasal drip, and cough were recorded at baseline and throughout treatment.

RESULTS

Baseline symptom scores showed a moderate level of symptom severity comparable in both groups. Patient-recorded twice daily symptom scores showed that adjunctive treatment with MFNS caused a significantly greater decrease in total symptom score (primary efficacy variable) and in individual scores of inflammatory symptoms associated with the obstruction process (headache, congestion, and facial pain) compared with placebo. Symptoms associated with the secretory processes were improved to a lesser degree. Therapy-related local adverse events were not significantly different between groups.

CONCLUSION

The addition of intranasal corticosteroid, MFNS 400 microg twice daily, to antibiotics significantly reduces symptoms of acute sinusitis compared with antibiotic treatment alone.

Absence of growth retardation in children with perennial allergic rhinitis after one year of treatment with mometasone furoate aqueous nasal spray

OBJECTIVE

Intranasal corticosteroids are used widely for the treatment of allergic rhinitis because they are effective and well tolerated. However, their potential to suppress growth of pediatric subjects with allergic rhinitis continues to be a concern, particularly in light of reports of growth suppression after treatment with intranasal beclomethasone dipropionate or intranasal budesonide (see the article by Skoner et al in this month's issue). A 1-year study of prepubertal patients between 3 and 9 years of age with perennial allergic rhinitis was conducted to assess the effects on growth of mometasone furoate aqueous nasal spray (MFNS), a new once-daily (QD) intranasal corticosteroid with negligible bioavailability.

METHODS

This was a randomized, placebo-controlled, double-blind, multicenter study. Ninety-eight subjects were randomized to treatment with either MFNS 100 microg QD or placebo for 1 year. Each subject's height was required to be between the 5th and 95th percentile at baseline, and skeletal age at screening was required to be within 2 years of chronological age, as determined by left wrist x-rays. Washout periods for medications that affect either childhood growth or allergic rhinitis symptoms were established based on estimated period of effect, and these medications were prohibited during the study. However, short courses of either oral prednisone lasting no longer than 7 days or low-potency topical dermatologic corticosteroids lasting no longer than 10 days were permitted if necessary. Height was measured with a calibrated stadiometer at baseline and at 4, 8, 12, 26, 39, and 52 weeks, and the primary safety variable was the change in standing height. The rate of growth was also calculated for each subject as the slope (linear regression) of the change in height from baseline using data from all visits of subjects who had at least 2 visits. Hypothalamic-pituitary-adrenocortical- (HPA)-axis function was assessed via cosyntropin stimulation testing at baseline and at 26 and 52 weeks. All analyses were based on all randomized subjects (intent-to-treat principle). The change from baseline in standing height was analyzed by a 2-way analysis of variance that extracted sources of variation attributable to treatment, center, and treatment-by-center interaction.

RESULTS

Demographic characteristics were similar at baseline. Eighty-two subjects completed the study (42 in the MFNS group and 40 in the placebo group), and 93% of subjects achieved at least 80% compliance with therapy. After 1 year of treatment, no suppression of growth was seen in subjects treated with MFNS, and mean standing heights were similar for both treatment groups at all time points. For the primary safety variable (change in height from baseline), both treatment groups were similar at all time points except for weeks 8 and 52. Subjects treated with MFNS had a slightly greater mean increase in height than subjects treated with placebo at these time points: the change in height was 6.95 cm versus 6.35 cm at the 1-year time point. However, the rate of growth (.018 cm/day) averaged for all time points over the course of the study was similar for both treatment groups. Additional analyses found that MFNS did not retard growth in any sex or age subgroup of subjects. The use of exogenous corticosteroids other than the study drug was also similar among the 2 treatment groups. Results from cosyntropin stimulation testing confirmed the absence of systemic effects of MFNS. The change from baseline in the difference between prestimulation and poststimulation levels was similar for both treatment groups after 1 year of treatment, with no evidence of HPA-axis suppression in MFNS-treated subjects at any time point. Incidences of treatment-related adverse events were similar for both treatment groups, with 16% of MFNS-treated subjects reporting adverse events, compared with 22% of placebo-treated subjects.

CONCLUSIONS

(ABSTRACT TRUNCATED)