Efficacy and safety of GSP301 nasal spray in children aged 6 to 11 years with seasonal allergic rhinitis.

BACKGROUND: GSP301 nasal spray is a fixed-dose combination of the antihistamine olopatadine hydrochloride and the corticosteroid mometasone furoate. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the efficacy, safety, and tolerability of GSP301 in pediatric patients (aged ≥6 to <12 years) with seasonal allergic rhinitis (SAR). METHODS: This double-blind, randomized, parallel-group study randomized 446 eligible patients 1:1 (GSP301 [olopatadine hydrochloride 665 µg and mometasone furoate 25 µg] or placebo) as 1 spray/each nostril twice daily for 14 days. The primary end point was change from baseline in average morning and evening subject-reported 12-hour reflective Total Nasal Symptom Score (rTNSS) over a 14-day treatment period analyzed using mixed-effect model repeated measures. Additional assessments included instantaneous Total Nasal Symptom Score, Pediatric Rhinoconjunctivitis Quality of Life Questionnaire, reflective Total Ocular Symptoms Score, instantaneous Total Ocular Symptoms Score, individual symptoms, Physician-assessed Nasal Symptom Score, and adverse events. RESULTS: GSP301 showed clinically meaningful and statistically significant improvement in rTNSS vs placebo (-0.6; 95% confidence interval, -0.9 to -0.2; P = .001). Statistically significant improvements favoring GSP301 were shown for all individual rTNSS symptoms, instantaneous Total Nasal Symptom Score, and most of its individual symptoms, Physician-assessed Nasal Symptom Score (P = .01), and Pediatric Rhinoconjunctivitis Quality of Life Questionnaire (P < .001). For ocular symptoms, numerical improvements favoring GSP301 were observed, with statistical significance achieved only for reflective "tearing/watering eyes" (P = .04). Treatment-emergent adverse events occurred in 12.0% and 10.4% of patients in the GSP301 and placebo groups, respectively. One subject (0.5%) (placebo group) experienced a serious adverse event (suspected viral meningitis) that was not related to the study treatment and was resolved. CONCLUSION: GSP301 was well tolerated and efficacious for treating SAR symptoms in pediatric patients and showed a favorable safety profile. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT03463031.

Safety of house dust mite sublingual immunotherapy standardized quality tablet in children allergic to house dust mites.

BACKGROUND: Sublingual immunotherapy (SLIT) tablets could be an important alternative to subcutaneous immunotherapy for house dust mite (HDM) allergy in children. OBJECTIVE: To characterize the safety, tolerability, and duration of local adverse events (AEs) of an HDM SLIT tablet (MK-8237; Merck, ALK Abellò, and Torii) in North American children 12 to 17 years old with HDM allergic rhinitis with and without conjunctivitis and with or without asthma. METHODS: In this phase 1, multicenter, double-blinded, randomized trial (NCT01678807), children received placebo, HDM SLIT tablet 6 standardized quality (SQ) HDM, or 12 SQ-HDM once daily for 28 days. The primary end point was the proportion of subjects with treatment-emergent AEs receiving active treatment vs placebo. The secondary end point was the proportion of subjects who discontinued owing to AEs. RESULTS: In total 195 subjects were randomized. The 2 HDM SLIT tablet doses were well tolerated. No anaphylactic reactions, systemic allergic reactions, AEs requiring epinephrine, serious AEs, or local swellings in the mouth or throat assessed as severe were reported. The proportion of subjects with treatment-emergent AEs was 54% with 6 SQ-HDM and 57% with 12 SQ-HDM (nonsignificant vs 43% with placebo). Local AEs were the most commonly reported treatment-emergent AEs. On day 1, the median duration of individual local AEs ranged from 1 to 43 minutes. The proportion of subjects who discontinued owing to AEs was 0%, 6.2%, and 6.2%, and who experienced treatment-related AEs was 25%, 45%, and 52% for the placebo, 6 SQ-HDM, and 12 SQ-HDM groups, respectively. CONCLUSION: The 6 and 12 SQ-HDM doses of the HDM SLIT tablet MK-8237 were well tolerated, and local AEs were of short duration. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov, identifier NCT01678807.

A randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled study assessing the safety and tolerability of regadenoson in subjects with asthma or chronic obstructive pulmonary disease.

BACKGROUND: Adenosine receptor stress agents for myocardial perfusion imaging (MPI) may cause A(2B) and/or A(3) receptor-mediated bronchoconstriction, of particular concern to physicians testing patients with asthma or chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). METHODS: A Phase 4, randomized, double-blind study (NCT00862641) assessed the safety of the selective A(2A) receptor agonist, regadenoson, compared with placebo in subjects with asthma or COPD who represented likely candidates for MPI. RESULTS: Overall, 356 and 176 subjects with asthma and 316 and 151 subjects with COPD received regadenoson and placebo, respectively. The percentage of subjects experiencing a >15% decrease in FEV(1) from baseline to any assessment up to 24 hours post-baseline was not statistically significantly different between the regadenoson and the placebo groups in the asthma or COPD stratum. Dyspnea, the most frequent respiratory adverse event, occurred with higher incidence (P < .0001) in the regadenoson group than the placebo group in the asthma (10.7% vs 1.1%) and COPD (18.0% vs 2.6%) strata. No subjects experienced severe bronchoconstriction, although the occurrence of such reactions with adenosine receptor agonists cannot be ruled out, such that caution is advised. CONCLUSIONS: This information may be helpful to physicians selecting a pharmacologic stress agent for MPI in patients with asthma or COPD.

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.

Safety of fixed-dose loratadine/montelukast in subjects with allergic rhinitis.

The safety of loratadine (second-generation antihistamine) and montelukast (leukotriene receptor antagonist) as monotherapies is well documented. Safety of the fixed-dose, single-tablet therapy loratadine/montelukast (L/M; SCH 445761, containing loratadine [10 mg]/montelukast [10 mg]), for treatment of the symptoms of allergic rhinitis in >3800 subjects is described. Safety data from 19 randomized clinical studies in which subjects were administered L/M are presented. Adverse events (AEs) were defined as any unfavorable and unintended sign, symptom, or laboratory data, including onset of new illness and exacerbation of preexisting conditions. Only AEs with an onset during the treatment period (i.e., treatment emergent) are summarized. Safety was also assessed via clinical laboratory evaluations and monitoring of vital signs and electrocardiogram (ECG). Overall, the incidence of AEs reported with L/M in the 19 studies was low and comparable with placebo, loratadine monotherapy, and montelukast monotherapy. The most frequently reported AE across all studies was headache. Most AEs were not severe and the duration of such events was short lived. Three AEs (headache [4.5%], fatigue [1.2%], and pharyngolaryngeal pain [1.2%]), regardless of relation to treatment, were reported by >1% of subjects in the L/M treatment group of multiple-dose, placebo-controlled studies. There were no clinically significant changes in clinical laboratory analyses or in vital signs, physical findings, or ECG found to be clinically relevant. Administration of the fixed-dose, single-tablet formulation of L/M was well tolerated. In these clinical studies, the safety of L/M was comparable with placebo, loratadine, and montelukast.

Asthma 2008: targeting immunoglobulin E to achieve disease control.

Traditionally, practice guidelines have recommended a step-wise approach to treatment based on asthma severity and lung function. However, increasing evidence suggests that asthma may not be adequately controlled in many patients with moderate-to-severe disease despite aggressive therapy, and that regularly evaluating the level of asthma control achieved in individual patients may be more effective than disease severity in guiding treatment decisions. This is reflected in updated asthma guidelines from the National Asthma Education and Prevention Program, which advocate regular assessment of asthma control in terms of the current impairment and future risk associated with the disease. Guideline-recommended options for patients with persistent, moderate-to-severe immunoglobulin E (IgE)-mediated asthma have recently been enhanced by the inclusion of omalizumab. This change is based on growing evidence for the central role of IgE in airway inflammation and asthma and the clinical effectiveness of blocking IgE with omalizumab, a recombinant humanized monoclonal antibody. Omalizumab significantly reduced asthma exacerbations and improved lung function and symptoms in randomized controlled studies of patients inadequately controlled on inhaled corticosteroids plus long-acting beta(2)-agonist therapy; these benefits for reducing asthma impairment and risk were maintained during steroid dose reductions. Omalizumab is well tolerated, although patients should be monitored for possible rare anaphylactic reactions.

A review of the clinical efficacy and safety of MP-AzeFlu, a novel intranasal formulation of azelastine hydrochloride and fluticasone propionate, in clinical studies conducted during different allergy seasons in the US.

A novel intranasal formulation of azelastine HCl (AZE, an antihistamine) and fluticasone propionate (FP, a corticosteroid) in a single spray (MP-AzeFlu [Dymista®]) was studied in four randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trials of patients with seasonal allergic rhinitis conducted in the US. Study sites were distributed so that all major US geographic regions and the prevalent pollens within these regions were represented. Spring and summer studies included patients aged 12 years and older with allergy to grass and tree pollens. Fall studies enrolled patients with allergy to weeds, in particular ragweed. In addition, a study was conducted during the winter months in patients with allergy to mountain cedar pollen in TX, USA. Regardless of allergy season or prevalent pollen, MP-AzeFlu improved nasal symptoms of allergic rhinitis (AR) to a significantly greater degree than AZE or FP, two treatments that currently are recommended as the first-line AR therapy. MP-AzeFlu improved all individual AR symptoms and was significantly better than FP and AZE for nasal congestion relief, which is generally accepted as the most bothersome symptom for AR patients. The onset of action was within 30 minutes. MP-AzeFlu also provided clinically important improvement in the overall Rhinoconjunctivitis Quality of Life Questionnaire score and significantly improved ocular symptoms of rhinitis compared to placebo. Favorable characteristics of the MP-AzeFlu formulation as well as superior clinical efficacy make it an ideal intranasal therapy for AR.

Bronchodilation with mometasone furoate/formoterol fumarate administered by metered-dose inhaler with and without a spacer in children with persistent asthma.

BACKGROUND: The bronchodilatory effect of mometasone furoate/formoterol fumarate (MF/F) administered by metered-dose inhaler (MDI) with or without a spacer has not been evaluated previously in children aged 5-11 years. METHODS: This was a randomized, multicenter, placebo-controlled, single-dose, four-period crossover study. Children with persistent asthma aged 5-11 years participated in this study. Subjects used inhaled corticosteroids with/without long-acting beta-2 agonists for 12 weeks before enrollment and at screening had forced expiratory volume in 1 sec (FEV1 ) ≥70% predicted. Subjects received MF/F MDI 100/10 µg with/without spacer (AeroChamber Plus® with Flow-Vu® Anti-Static Valved Holding Chamber), F-Dry Powder Inhaler (F-DPI) 10 µg, and placebo MDI with/without spacer in separate treatment periods. The primary endpoint was FEV1 area under the curve from 0 to 12 hr (AUC0-12hr ) for the comparison of MF/F with spacer versus placebo. Secondary measurements included MF/F without spacer versus placebo, as well as MF/F with spacer versus MF/F without spacer, and F-DPI versus placebo. Analysis was performed with an analysis of covariance model for a crossover study. RESULTS: Data from 87 subjects were analyzed. MF/F with spacer demonstrated a larger change in mean FEV1 AUC0-12hr versus placebo (115 vs. -9 mL), with a treatment difference of 124 mL (95% CI 94-154, P < 0.001). Similarly, MF/F without spacer versus placebo resulted in a 102 mL difference in mean-adjusted FEV1 AUC0-12hr (95% CI 73-131, P < 0.001), whereas the difference between MF/F with spacer versus MF/F without spacer was 22 mL (95% CI -8 to 52, P = 0.144). The difference between F-DPI versus placebo was 106 mL (95% CI 77-135, P < 0.001). No unexpected adverse events were observed. CONCLUSIONS: In this trial, MF/F MDI 100/10 µg demonstrated significant bronchodilation in children aged 5-11 years regardless of the use of a spacer. No difference in bronchodilation was observed between MF/F MDI and F-DPI.

Mometasone furoate nasal spray plus oxymetazoline nasal spray: short-term efficacy and safety in seasonal allergic rhinitis.

BACKGROUND: Allergic rhinitis (AR) and associated congestion adversely affect patients' lives. The intranasal corticosteroid mometasone furoate nasal spray (MFNS) is effective for AR symptoms including nasal congestion, and the intranasal decongestant oxymetazoline (OXY) is effective against nasal congestion, but the combination has not been fully studied. This study was designed to assess the efficacy of the combination of MFNS and OXY for the relief of seasonal allergic rhinitis (SAR) symptoms. METHODS: This phase 2 controlled clinical trial randomized adolescent and adult subjects (≥12 years; 2-year SAR) to MFNS q.d. (200 µg) + 3 sprays/nostril of OXY 0.05% (MFNS + OXY3); MFNS q.d. + 1 spray/nostril of OXY (MFNS + OXY1); MFNS q.d.; OXY b.i.d.; or placebo for 15 days, with 1-week follow-up. Coprimary end points were change from baseline in morning/evening (A.M./P.M.) instantaneous (NOW) total nasal symptom score (TNSS) over days 1-15 and AUC (AUC[0-4 hr]) change from baseline in day 1 congestion. RESULTS: In 705 subjects, both combinations reduced A.M./P.M. NOW TNSS over days 1-15 significantly more than OXY b.i.d. or placebo (p ≤ 0.002). Mean standardized AUC(0-4 hr) day 1 congestion change from baseline was significantly greater in combination and OXY b.i.d. groups (MFNS + OXY3, -0.92; MFNS + OXY1, -0.80; OXY b.i.d., -1.06) versus placebo (-0.57) and MFNS q.d. (-0.63). Combinations and MFNS q.d. were significantly effective for A.M./P.M. NOW TNSS over each weekly period; OXY b.i.d. was superior to placebo in week 1. Adverse events (AEs) were few and similar across treatments; one MFNS q.d. and one placebo subject experienced a serious AE, with neither considered treatment related. CONCLUSION: Combining MFNS with OXY relieves SAR symptoms, including congestion, with faster onset of action than MFNS q.d. and better sustained efficacy than OXY b.i.d.

Efficacy, safety, and optimal dose selection of beclomethasone dipropionate nasal aerosol for seasonal allergic rhinitis in adolescents and adults.

OBJECTIVE: Some patients with allergic rhinitis (AR) may prefer nonaqueous intranasal corticosteroid aerosols because of unwanted attributes of aqueous formulations. The mandatory removal of chlorofluorocarbon-propelled nonaqueous aerosols from the market limited available treatment options. To fulfill this unmet need, a nonaqueous, hydrofluoroalkane-propelled beclomethasone dipropionate (BDP) nasal aerosol was developed and approved for treatment of AR nasal symptoms. As part of the development program, this dose-ranging study evaluated three doses of BDP nasal aerosol to determine the optimally safe and effective dose for adolescent and adult patients (≥12 years old) with seasonal AR (SAR). METHODS: After a 7 to 21 day placebo run-in period, eligible patients with SAR were randomly assigned to once-daily BDP nasal aerosol 80 µg, 160 µg, 320 µg, or placebo. The primary endpoint was the change from baseline in average a.m. and p.m. patient-reported reflective total nasal symptom scores (rTNSS) over 2 weeks. Safety and tolerability were also assessed. A potential study limitation could be lack of objective assessment of AR symptoms. RESULTS: Significant improvements were seen in average a.m. and p.m. rTNSS (least squares [LS] mean treatment difference, -0.63; 95% CI: -1.13, -0.13; p = 0.013) as well as in average a.m. and p.m. instantaneous TNSS (iTNSS; LS mean treatment difference, -0.60; 95% CI: -1.09, -0.11; p = 0.016) with BDP nasal aerosol 320 µg/day compared with placebo. Although there were numerical improvements from baseline in patient-reported rTNSS and iTNSS with BDP nasal aerosol 80 µg and 160 µg, these doses did not achieve statistical significance compared with placebo. BDP nonaqueous nasal aerosol was well tolerated at all doses tested, with a safety profile comparable to that of placebo. CONCLUSIONS: These data indicate that 320 µg/day of BDP nasal aerosol is the optimally safe and effective dose for the treatment of SAR in adolescent and adult patients. Trial registration NCT: #NCT00854360.

Role of long-acting beta2-adrenergic agonists in asthma management based on updated asthma guidelines.

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: This review examines the role of long-acting beta2-adrenergic agonists in the management of asthma, particularly focusing on recommendations in the newly revised Global Initiative for Asthma (GINA) and National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute (NHLBI) asthma guidelines. RECENT FINDINGS: GINA guidelines recommend increasing inhaled corticosteroid doses in all children with asthma not controlled on low-dose inhaled corticosteroids before adding a long-acting beta2-adrenergic agonist, whereas NHLBI guidelines have different age-based recommendations for children. In patients younger than 5 years, NHLBI guidelines recommend increasing the inhaled corticosteroid dose before adding a long-acting beta2-adrenergic agonist; in children aged 5-11 years, equal weight is given to increasing the inhaled corticosteroid dose or including add-on therapy to low-dose inhaled corticosteroids. In adults and adolescents aged 12 years and older, GINA recommends adding long-acting beta2-adrenergic agonists to low-dose inhaled corticosteroids over increasing the inhaled corticosteroid dose. NHLBI guidelines give equal weight to these choices, with alternative, although not preferred, therapies including the addition of theophylline, zileuton, or leukotriene receptor antagonists to low-dose inhaled corticosteroids. SUMMARY: In the recently updated GINA and NHLBI asthma guidelines, long-acting beta2-adrenergic agonists are an important class of agents for the management of persistent asthma in patients whose asthma is not well controlled with inhaled corticosteroid monotherapy.

Long-term safety and asthma control with budesonide/formoterol versus budesonide pressurized metered-dose inhaler in asthma patients.

Safety concerns have been raised regarding the regular use of long-acting beta(2)-adrenergic agonists (LABAs) alone or with inhaled corticosteroids (ICSs). The purpose of this study was to examine the long-term safety of budesonide/formoterol pressurized metered-dose inhaler (pMDI). This 52-week, double-blind study (SD-039-0728; n=708) included patients >or=12 years of age with moderate to severe persistent asthma previously receiving ICSs. After 2 weeks on budesonide pMDI 320 microg twice daily (b.i.d.), patients were randomized 3:1:1 overall to budesonide/formoterol pMDI 640/18 microg b.i.d., budesonide/formoterol pMDI 320/9 microg b.i.d., or budesonide pMDI 640 microg b.i.d. The incidence of adverse events (AEs) was similar across the groups. Drug-related AEs (>or=2% overall) were oral candidiasis, tremor, and pharyngolaryngeal pain. No clinically meaningful differences in laboratory, electrocardiogram, or Holter monitor variables were observed. The percentage of patients with >or=1 asthma exacerbation was significantly lower (p=0.006) with budesonide/formoterol 640/18 (12.2%) and numerically lower with budesonide/formoterol 320/9 (14.4%) versus budesonide (21.8%). The number of asthma exacerbations per patient-treatment year was lower with budesonide/formoterol 640/18 (0.174; p=0.004) and budesonide/formoterol 320/9 (0.185; p=0.049) versus budesonide (0.315). Improvements in forced expiratory volume in 1 second and diary variables were significantly greater (p<0.001) with both budesonide/formoterol doses versus budesonide. Budesonide/formoterol 640/18 and 320/9 microg b.i.d. showed an acceptable safety profile relative to budesonide, with no significant or unexpected patterns of abnormalities observed by adding a LABA to budesonide for up to 1 year in this patient population. Improvements in asthma control were shown with both doses of budesonide/formoterol versus budesonide.

Formoterol dry-powder inhaler for the treatment of asthma and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease.

Formoterol, a long-acting beta2-adrenergic agonist, is used as an inhaled bronchodilator therapy for patients with asthma or for the prevention of exercise-induced bronchospasm in children and in chronic obstructive pulmonary disease. Formoterol has unique characteristics of rapid onset and sustained duration of action compared with other bronchodilators. In addition to its effectiveness as regular maintenance therapy in asthma and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, formoterol is also reported to be effective as an as-needed reliever therapy in patients with asthma. Formoterol is available in several different types of dry-powder inhalers and pressurized metered-dose inhalers.

Long-term safety and efficacy of intranasal ciclesonide in adult and adolescent patients with perennial allergic rhinitis.

BACKGROUND: Ciclesonide is a corticosteroid in development for allergic rhinitis that has been shown to be safe and effective in seasonal allergic rhinitis and perennial allergic rhinitis (PAR) trials of up to 6 weeks in duration. However, the long-term safety and efficacy of ciclesonide are unknown. OBJECTIVE: To demonstrate the long-term safety of intranasal ciclesonide, 200 microg once daily, in patients with PAR. METHODS: Patients (> or = 12 years old) with a 2-year or longer history of PAR were randomized in a double-blind fashion to receive ciclesonide, 200 microg, or placebo once daily in the morning for up to 52 weeks. Spontaneous and elicited adverse events were monitored throughout the study. Ear, nose, and throat examinations were performed to evaluate local tolerability. Additionally, 24-hour urinary free cortisol level, morning plasma cortisol level, intraocular pressure, and lens opacification were monitored to evaluate the systemic safety of intranasal ciclesonide. Ciclesonide efficacy was determined by measuring 24-hour reflective total nasal symptom scores. RESULTS: No clinically relevant differences were observed between the ciclesonide and placebo groups in adverse events, ear, nose, and throat examinations, or 24-hour urinary free or morning plasma cortisol levels. Similarly, no clinically relevant differences were found between treatment groups in intraocular pressure, visual acuity, or lens opacification. With regard to efficacy, ciclesonide achieved a significantly greater reduction in 24-hour reflective total nasal symptom score compared with placebo over more than 52 weeks (P < .001). CONCLUSION: In this study, intranasal ciclesonide, 200 microg once daily, was safe and effective for the long-term treatment of PAR, with no evidence of tachyphylaxis.

Allergic rhinitis: treatment based on patient profiles.

Allergic rhinitis is a common medical condition characterized by nasal, throat, and ocular itching; rhinorrhea; sneezing; nasal congestion; and, less frequently, cough. The treatment of allergic rhinitis should control these symptoms without adversely affecting daily activities or cognitive performance and should prevent sequelae such as asthma exacerbation or sinusitis. This review describes a stepwise approach to treatment of allergic rhinitis derived from a synthesis of clinical trial results, patient preferences, and real-world tolerability data. Key clinical considerations include frequency and intensity of symptoms, patient age, comorbidities, compliance with treatment regimens (influenced by formulation, route and frequency of administration), and effects on quality of life. Oral second-generation antihistamines, versus first-generation agents and inhaled corticosteroids, should be considered first-line treatment because they provide rapid relief of most allergic rhinitis symptoms without safety and tolerability issues. Additional therapeutic agents can then be added or substituted based on individual symptom response.

Combination therapy: appropriate for everyone?

The severity of asthma often varies throughout the course of the disease. At times the symptoms and underlying inflammation that are characteristic of asthma can worsen. Thus during an episode of viral-induced asthma or during a seasonal increase in asthma severity, a patient may be directed to increase his or her dosage of asthma controllers (i.e., inhaled corticosteroid) or add a long-acting bronchodilator (or other controller medications such as antileukotrienes) to manage symptoms, as recommended in guidelines published by the National Institutes of Health (NIH). Similarly, when symptoms are stable, decreasing dosages or discontinuing certain medications may be appropriate. The recent introduction of a combination product, of a long-acting bronchodilator formulated in the same dry powder device with an inhaled corticosteroid raises new challenges for the step care approach to asthma management recommended by the NIH in 1997. Although unquestionably more convenient for the patient, a combination formulation has the potential to decrease the flexibility required to successfully manage asthma over long periods. In addition, controversy exists regarding long-acting beta-agonists alone because their regular use may mask inflammation in the lung and decrease responsiveness to the bronchodilating effects of rescue medications (i.e., short-acting beta-agonists). The purpose of this article is to help physicians make informed therapeutic decisions for their patients with asthma. It focuses on the advantages and potential disadvantages of using combination products, which contain both an inhaled corticosteroid and a long-acting beta-agonist in the context of the NIH step care approach. Recent publications outlining the use of other add-on controller medications are also discussed.

Efficacy and safety of desloratadine in the treatment of perennial allergic rhinitis.

BACKGROUND: The evidence base for the use of H1-antihistamines in the treatment of perennial allergic rhinitis is considerably smaller than it is in the treatment of seasonal allergic rhinitis. OBJECTIVE: We hypothesized that desloratadine, a new, nonsedating selective H1-antihistamine, would be efficacious and safe in the treatment of perennial allergic rhinitis. METHODS: In a multicenter, randomized, placebo-controlled, double-blind, parallel-group study, 676 patients with symptomatic perennial allergic rhinitis were randomly assigned to 4 weeks of treatment with either 5 mg of desloratadine once daily or placebo. Efficacy was assessed by using a morning-evening instantaneous total symptom score (TSS), which was composed of scores for 4 individual nasal symptoms (rhinorrhea, itching, sneezing, and postnasal drip) and 3 individual nonnasal symptoms (itching eyes, watering eyes, and itching of the ears or palate). Secondary outcome measures included a morning-evening reflective TSS, total nasal and nonnasal symptoms scores, and individual symptom scores. Safety evaluations, including 12-lead electrocardiograms, were performed. RESULTS: Six hundred thirty-four patients completed the study. Desloratadine consistently diminished perennial allergic rhinitis symptoms, reducing the morning-evening instantaneous TSS (P =.005), the morning-evening reflective TSS (P =.007), the morning-evening reflective total nonnasal score (P =.023), and the individual nasal symptom scores for rhinorrhea, nasal itching, sneezing, and postnasal drip/drainage (P =.05 to P =.013) during weeks 1 through 4. Improvement in symptoms was observed after the first dose. Dropouts, and the type and frequency of adverse events (headache, viral infection, pharyngitis, and upper respiratory tract infection), were similar in both treatment groups. No clinically significant changes in QTc intervals were observed. CONCLUSIONS: Desloratadine rapidly and safely reduced the symptoms of perennial allergic rhinitis, and its efficacy did not diminish during 4 weeks of treatment.