Effects of Long-Term Sertraline Use on Pediatric Growth and Development: The Sertraline Pediatric Registry for The Evaluation of Safety (SPRITES).

Objective: To describe the results of the Sertraline Pediatric Registry for The Evaluation of Safety (SPRITES) outcome measures of cognitive, emotional, and physical development following long-term treatment with sertraline (for up to 3 years) in children and adolescents aged 6-16 years. Methods: SPRITES was a long-term, multicenter, open-label, prospective observational study designed to compare physical and psychological development in pediatric patients exposed to sertraline (with or without psychotherapy) or psychotherapy alone in usual care settings. Data were summarized descriptively, and outcomes were evaluated using a marginal structural model. Results: Between April 2012 and September 2020, 941 patients across 44 U.S. sites participated in the study. At baseline, 695 participants were exposed to sertraline (physician prescribed) with or without psychotherapy, and 245 participants were exposed to psychotherapy alone. Of these, 432 participants (46.0%) completed the full 3-year study follow-up. No significant changes across time were found in standardized height, BRIEF (Behavior Rating Inventory of Executive Function), Trails B, and Tanner stage based on cumulative sertraline exposure or exposure since the last visit. Change in mean standardized weight across time was positively associated with both cumulative sertraline exposure (p = 0.02) and exposure since the last visit (p = 0.029). The mean changes from baseline across time in standardized weight were standard deviations of 0.02, 0.03, 0.16, and 0.17 at months 3, 6, 30, and 36, respectively. However, this finding was not observed in the mean change across time in standardized body mass index, which was not statistically significant. Conclusions: Results are consistent with normal development. Although a statistically significant finding for standardized weight was observed in comparative analyses, the magnitude of the change is small and observed at higher doses of sertraline only. No other significant differences were observed between the "sertraline" group and the "no pharmacological therapy" group on other primary outcome measures. ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT01302080.

Azelastine nasal spray and desloratadine tablets in pollen-induced seasonal allergic rhinitis: a pharmacodynamic study of onset of action and efficacy.

OBJECTIVE: To assess the efficacy and onset of action of azelastine nasal spray and desloratadine tablets in patients with allergen-induced seasonal allergic rhinitis (SAR). RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: 46 adult patients with a history of SAR were exposed to a controlled grass pollen concentration for 6 h in the Vienna Challenge Chamber (VCC) in each treatment period according to a randomised, double-blind (double-dummy), three-period, three-sequence crossover design (wash-out period of 12 days). Single doses of study medication (one puff nasal spray into each nostril of azelastine, 0.2 mg, or placebo before swallowing one encapsulated tablet of desloratadine, 5 mg) were administered 2 h after the start of the allergen challenge. Results of subjective and objective assessments were recorded throughout the challenge. RESULTS: Efficacy of azelastine nasal spray was significantly superior compared to desloratadine tablets (p = 0.005) and placebo (p < 0.001). Desloratadine was significantly better than placebo (p < 0.001). Decrease both in Major Nasal Symptom Score (MNSS) and in Total Nasal Symptom Score (TNSS) was fastest after azelastine treatment. Improvement of nasal symptom severity was most pronounced after azelastine treatment for all nasal symptoms including nasal congestion. Onset of action was 15 min for azelastine compared to 150 min for desloratadine. Both active preparations were safe and well tolerated. CONCLUSIONS: This study confirms the usefulness of azelastine nasal spray for the symptomatic treatment of seasonal allergic rhinitis. Concerning onset of action in particular, the results favour the topical treatment over systemic therapy.