Nicotine restores olfactory function by activation of prok2R/Akt/FoxO3a axis in Parkinson's disease.

BACKGROUND: Olfactory dysfunction occurs frequently in Parkinson's disease (PD). In this study, we aimed to explore the potential biomarkers and underlying molecular pathways of nicotine for the treatment of olfactory dysfunction in 1-methyl-4-phenyl-1, 2, 3, 6-tetrahydropyridine (MPTP)-induced PD mice. METHODS: MPTP was introduced into C57BL/6 male mice to generate a PD model. Regarding in vivo experiments, we performed behavioral tests to estimate the protective effects of nicotine in MPTP-induced PD mice. RNA sequencing and traditional molecular methods were used to identify molecules, pathways, and biological processes in the olfactory bulb of PD mouse models. Then, in vitro experiments were conducted to evaluate whether nicotine can activate the prok2R/Akt/FoxO3a signaling pathway in both HEK293T cell lines and primary olfactory neurons treated with 1-methyl-4-phenylpyridinium (MPP+). Next, prok2R overexpression (prok2R+) and knockdown (prok2R-) were introduced with lentivirus, and the Akt/FoxO3a signaling pathway was further explored. Finally, the damaging effects of MPP+ were evaluated in prok2R overexpression (prok2R+) HEK293T cell lines. RESULTS: Nicotine intervention significantly alleviated olfactory and motor dysfunctions in mice with PD. The prok2R/Akt/FoxO3a signaling pathway was activated after nicotine treatment. Consequently, apoptosis of olfactory sensory neurons was significantly reduced. Furthermore, prok2R+ and prok2R- HEK293T cell lines exhibited upregulation and downregulation of the Akt/FoxO3a signaling pathway, respectively. Additionally, prok2R+ HEK293T cells were resistant to MPP+-induced apoptosis. CONCLUSIONS: This study showed the effectiveness and underlying mechanisms of nicotine in improving hyposmia in PD mice. These improvements were correlated with reduced apoptosis of olfactory sensory neurons via activated prok2R/Akt/FoxO3a axis. These results explained the potential protective functions of nicotine in PD patients.

Integrating the patient's voice into the research agenda for treatment of chemosensory disorders.

World-wide some 658 million people were infected with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) and millions suffer from chemosensory impairment associated with long COVID. Current treatments for taste and smell disorders are limited. Involving patients has the potential to catalyze the dynamic exchange and development of new ideas and approaches to facilitate biomedical research and therapeutics. We assessed patients' perceptions of the efficacy of treatments for chemosensory impairment using an online questionnaire completed by 5,815 people in the US Logistic regression determined variables predictive of reported treatment efficacy for patients aged 18 to 24, 25 to 39, 40 to 60, and 60+ yrs. who were treated with nasal steroids, oral steroids, zinc, nasal rinse, smell training, theophylline, platelet-rich plasma, and Omega 3. The most consistent predictor was age, with the majority of those 40 to 60 and 60+ reporting that nasal steroids, oral steroids, zinc, nasal rinse, and smell training were only slightly effective or not effective at all. Many of these treatment strategies target regeneration and immune response, processes compromised by age. Only those under 40 reported more than slight efficacy of steroids or smell training. Findings emphasize the need to include patients of all ages in clinical trials. Older adults with olfactory impairment are at increased risk for Alzheimer's disease (AD). We speculate that olfactory impairment associated with long COVID introduces the potential for a significant rise in AD. Long COVID-associated chemosensory impairment increases the urgency for translational and clinical research on novel treatment strategies. Suggestions for high-priority areas for epidemiological, basic, and clinical research on chemosensory impairment follow.

Treatment of COVID-19 Associated Olfactory Dysfunction: A Systematic Review.

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: COVID -19 associated olfactory dysfunction is widespread, yet effective treatment strategies remain unclear. This article aims to provide a comprehensive systematic review of therapeutic approaches and offers evidence-based recommendations for their clinical application. RECENT FINDINGS: A living Cochrane review, with rigorous inclusion criteria, has so far included 2 studies with a low certainty of evidence. In this systematic review we list clinical data of 36 randomised controlled trials (RCTs) and non-randomised studies published between Jan 1, 2020 and Nov 19, 2023 regarding treatment options for COVID-19 associated olfactory dysfunction. Nine treatment groups were analysed, including olfactory training, local and systemic corticosteroids, platelet-rich plasma (PRP), calcium chelators, vitamin supplements including palmitoylethanolamide with luteolin, insulin, gabapentin and cerebrolysin. Primary objective was the effect of the studied treatments on the delta olfactory function score (OFS) for objective/psychophysical testing. Treatments such as PRP and calcium chelators demonstrated significant improvements on OFS, whereas olfactory training and corticosteroids did not show notable efficacy for COVID-19 associated olfactory dysfunction.

Efficacy of forskolin as a promising therapy for chronic olfactory dysfunction post COVID-19.

PURPOSE: Olfactory dysfunction is increasingly common among COVID-19 patients, impacting their well-being. Reports have demonstrated decreased levels of cyclic adenosine monophosphate and cyclic guanosine monophosphate among patients with chronic olfactory dysfunction. A prospective randomized clinical trial was developed to demonstrate the efficacy of an oral forskolin regimen treatment, an adenylyl cyclase activator that raises intracellular levels of cyclic adenosine monophosphate, for the treatment of olfactory dysfunction following COVID-19, compared to placebo regimen. METHODS: The study enrolled 285 participants with persistent olfactory dysfunction post COVID-19 infection, randomly assigning them to receive either placebo capsules (n = 120) or oral forskolin capsules (n = 165). Follow-up was conducted to track progress, with 18 participants from the placebo group and 12 from the forskolin group lost during this period. Olfactory function was assessed using the "Sniffin' Sticks" test, measuring threshold, discrimination and identification scores before and after treatment. RESULTS: Subjects administered forskolin capsules demonstrated a significant enhancement in their composite TDI (threshold, discrimination and identification) score, suggesting a notable amelioration in olfactory functionality. Moreover, the discrimination and identification scores notably improved within the forskolin group. Conversely, no significant alterations were observed in the threshold scores. CONCLUSION: This study suggests that forskolin can contribute potentially to improve chronic olfactory dysfunction post COVID-19. TRIAL REGISTRATION: DFM-IRB00012367-23-10-001.

Mepolizumab improves sense of smell in severe chronic rhinosinusitis with nasal polyps: SYNAPSE.

BACKGROUND: Loss of smell is one of the most bothersome and difficult-to-treat symptoms in patients with severe chronic rhinosinusitis with nasal polyps (CRSwNP). METHODOLOGY: SYNAPSE was a 52-week Phase III study of 4-weekly mepolizumab (100 mg subcutaneously) plus standard of care in adults with severe bilateral CRSwNP. This post hoc analysis assessed changes from baseline to study end in loss of smell visual analogue scale (VAS) symptom score, in patients stratified by several baseline clinical characteristics. SinoNasal Outcomes Test (SNOT)-22 sense of smell/taste item and University of Pennsylvania Smell Identification Test (UPSIT) scores were also assessed. RESULTS: SYNAPSE enrolled 407 patients (mepolizumab=206; placebo=201) with impaired sense of smell at baseline. Improvements from baseline to study end in loss of smell VAS score were greater with mepolizumab versus placebo (treatment difference: -0.37) and most notable in patients with fewer or more recent prior surgeries (treatment difference: 1 vs 2 vs more than 2 prior surgeries,-1.29 vs -0.23 vs -0.07; =3 years since last surgery, -.89 vs 0.22). Approximately 25% of patients had baseline UPSIT scoresavailable; among those scoring =19 by study end. The SNOT-22 sense of smell/taste item score improved with mepolizumab versus placebo. CONCLUSIONS: Mepolizumab treatment improved patients' perceived sense of smell, as measured by loss of smell VAS score and SNOT-22 sense of smell/taste item score in patients with severe refractory CRSwNP.

Screening olfaction under dupilumab in chronic rhinosinusitis with nasal polyps.

BACKGROUND: Chronic rhinosinusitis with nasal polyps (CRSwNP) frequently leads to olfactory dysfunction. This study aimed to assess the impact of dupilumab on CRSwNP patients, focusing on olfactory outcomes and potential correlations with other clinical factors. METHODS: CRSwNP patients eligible for dupilumab therapy received subcutaneous Dupixent® injections every two weeks (300mg/2ml dupilumab). The 12-item Sniffin' Sticks Test (SST-12), fractional exhaled nitric oxide (FeNO) and Nasal Polyp Score (NPS) were assessed at baseline and after one, three, and six months. Patients also completed the Sino-Nasal Outcome Test (SNOT-22) weekly. RESULTS: 26 CRSwNP patients were included. After one month, dupilumab led to substantial reductions in FeNO, SNOT scores, andNPS, whereas SST-12 scores improved significantly only after three months. A shift toward normosmia occurred, with 81% achieving normosmia after six months, and a drop in anosmia prevalence to 9.5%. Significant negative correlations between olfaction (SST-12) and polyp severity (NPS) at baseline and after six months were found, while no significant correlations were observed between SST-12 and FeNO or SNOT scores. Age did not correlate with olfaction. CONCLUSIONS: Dupilumab demonstrated efficacy in restoring olfaction in CRSwNP patients. Reaching normosmia in over 80% ofpatients after six months of treatment underscores the drug's effectiveness in managing this challenging symptom.

Steroid responsiveness predicts olfactory function recovery in dupilumab treated CRSwNP.

BACKGROUND: There is no known predictor for olfactory function recovery with dupilumab treatment in chronic rhinosinusitis with nasal polyps (CRSwNP). This study assessed whether patient-reported recovery of olfactory function on oral corticosteroids (OCS) is a prognostic factor. METHODS: Retrospective analysis of pre-biological OCS-responsiveness on olfactory functioning (OCS-responsive or OCS-unresponsive; OCS-r and OCR-u, respectively) as predictor for olfactory functioning after 6 months of dupilumab therapy for severe CRSwNP. RESULTS: 212 CRSwNP patients treated with dupilumab were divided between OCS-r (reported improvement of olfactory function with OCS before dupilumab treatment, n = 152), and OCS-u (OCS-unresponsive; no such improvement, n = 60). Olfactory function was tested with Sniffin's Sticks Identification Test (12 pens; SSIT-12). At baseline, both groups had a median SSIT-12 score of 3 / 12 indicating anosmia. Hyposmia and normosmia rates were also comparable (5.9% and 3.3% in OCS-r, respectively; 5.0% and 1.7% in OCS-u, respectively). After 6 months of dupilumab treatment, OCS-r showed higher olfactory scores (median SSIT-12: 8/12; 52.6% hyposmia and 17.8% normosmia) than OCS-u (median SSIT-12: 5/12; 31.7% hyposmia and 3.3% normosmia). The positive predictive value of OCS-responsiveness on scoring <7 (normosmia/hyposmia) on the SSIT-12 after 6 months of dupilumab treatment was 70.4%. Conversely, the negative predictive value of OCS-unresponsiveness on scoring <7 (anosmia) on the SSIT-12 after 6 months of dupilumab treatment was 65.0%. CONCLUSION: Patients who report olfactory function improvement on OCS have a higher chance of recovery of olfactory function during the first six months of treatment with dupilumab than patients who do not.

Treatment of COVID-19 olfactory dysfunction with olfactory training, palmitoylethanolamide with luteolin, or combined therapy: a blinded controlled multicenter randomized trial.

PURPOSE: Few evidence-based therapies are available for chronic olfactory dysfunction after COVID-19. This study investigated the relative efficacy of olfactory training alone, co-ultramicronized palmitoylethanolamide with luteolin (um-PEA-LUT, an anti-neuroinflammatory supplement) alone, or combined therapy for treating chronic olfactory dysfunction from COVID-19. METHODS: This double-blinded controlled, placebo-controlled multicenter randomized clinical trial was conducted in 202 patients with persistent COVID-19 olfactory dysfunction of > 6 month duration. After a screening nasal endoscopy, patients were randomized to: (1) olfactory training and placebo; (2) once daily um-PEA-LUT alone; (3) twice daily um-PEA-LUT alone; or (4) combination of once daily um-PEA-LUT with olfactory training. Olfactory testing (Sniffin' Sticks odor identification test) was performed at baseline and at 1, 2, and 3 months. The primary outcome was recovery of over three points on olfactory testing, with outcomes compared at T0, T1, T2 and T3 across groups. Statistical analyses included one-way ANOVA for numeric data and chi-square for nominal data. RESULTS: All patients completed the study, and there were no adverse events. At 90 days, odor identification scores improved by > 3 points in 89.2% of patients receiving combined therapy vs. 36.8% receiving olfactory training with placebo, 40% receiving twice daily um-PEA-LUT alone, and 41.6% receiving once daily um-PEA-LUT alone (p < 0.00001). Patients receiving treatment with um-PEA-LUT alone demonstrated subclinical improvement (< 3 point odor identification improvement) more often than patients receiving olfactory training with placebo (p < 0.0001.) CONCLUSIONS: Olfactory training plus once daily um-PEA-LUT resulted in greater olfactory recovery than either therapy alone in patients with long-term olfactory function due to COVID-19. TRIAL REGISTRATION: 20112020PGFN on clinicaltrials.gov. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: 1b (Individual Randomized Clinical Trial).

Therapeutic options of post-COVID-19 related olfactory dysfunction: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Olfactory dysfunction is a typical post-COVID-19 presentation, affecting patients' quality of life. There are currently multiple treatment options in this group of patients such as oral and intranasal corticosteroids, olfactory training, oral vitamin-mineral supplementation, amongst others. This meta-analysis aims to consolidate existing evidence for current therapies in patients with persistent olfactory dysfunction related to COVID-19 infection and evaluate the possible role of corticosteroid add-on therapy in olfactory training. METHODOLOGY: A systematic review and meta-analysis to study current treatments/interventions for olfactory dysfunction in post-COVID-19 infection were conducted. Data were pooled for the meta-analysis. The outcomes include subjective or objective olfactory assessment major and minor adverse reactions. RESULTS: Eleven studies (1414 participants) were included in this review, with six studies (916 participants) then assessed for the meta-analysis. Combined treatment of intranasal corticosteroid (INCS) with olfactory training (OT) has no benefit over OT monotherapy from both a VAS score improvement and identification component of Sniffin' Sticks test standpoint. In addition, there were no differences in improvement of TDI score between combined oral corticosteroid (OCS) with OT therapy compared to OT alone. Olfactory function was, however, significantly improved after OT. CONCLUSION: There were no significant differences in the improvement of olfactory scores in combination INCS+OT or OCS+OT therapies compared to OT monotherapy. However, there is improvement in olfactory function after OT.

Therapies for Olfactory Dysfunction - an Update.

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: Olfactory dysfunction is a prevalent condition affecting 5-15% of the general population, with significant impact on quality of life. This review summarizes the most recent and relevant literature in the treatment of olfactory dysfunction. RECENT FINDINGS: Current evidence supports the short-term use of topical corticosteroids and systemic therapy. These treatments may occur in conjunction with olfactory training, which is well supported by the literature. While there are several additional treatments currently under investigation, meaningful conclusions are not yet able to be made regarding their efficacy. The treatment of olfactory dysfunction is targeted at the suspected etiology when possible. After normal aging, chronic rhinosinusitis, post-infectious sequelae including as a result SARS-CoV-2 infection (COVID-19), and head trauma are the most common causes. Current evidence supports the short-term use of topical corticosteroids and systemic therapy. Several additional treatments are under investigation but recommendations for their use cannot currently be made.

Smell Changes and Efficacy of Nasal Theophylline (SCENT) irrigation: A randomized controlled trial for treatment of post-viral olfactory dysfunction.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the efficacy and safety of intranasal theophylline saline irrigation on olfactory recovery in patients with post-viral olfactory dysfunction (PVOD). METHODS: Between May 2019 and April 2020, we conducted a double-blinded, placebo-controlled randomized clinical trial of adults with 6-36 months of PVOD. Patients were randomized to nasal theophylline saline irrigation or placebo saline irrigation twice a day for 6 weeks. The primary outcome was the Global Rating of Smell Change. Secondary outcomes were changes in the University of Pennsylvania Smell Identification Test (UPSIT) and Questionnaire of Olfactory Disorders-Negative Statements (QOD-NS). RESULTS: Twenty-two patients (n = 12, theophylline; n = 10, placebo) completed the study. Slightly more patients in the theophylline group (33%) reported improved smell compared to the placebo group (30%, difference 3.3%, 95% CI -35.6% to 42.3%). The median differences in pre- and post-treatment UPSIT and QOD-NS change between the two groups were 1 (95% CI -3 to 5) and -10 (95% CI -15 to -4), respectively in favor of theophylline. Three patients receiving theophylline and 2 receiving placebo had clinically meaningful improvements on the UPSIT (difference 5%, 95% CI -30% to 40%). There were no adverse events, and serum theophylline levels were undetectable in 10/10 patients. CONCLUSIONS: While safe, there were no clinically meaningful differences in olfactory change between the two groups except for olfaction-related quality of life, which was better with theophylline. The imprecise estimates suggest future trials will need substantially larger sample sizes or treatment modifications, such as increasing the theophylline dose, to observe larger treatment effects.

Therapeutic diminution of Interleukin-10 with intranasal theophylline administration in hyposmic patients.

OBJECTIVE: To determine changes in nasal mucus Interleukin-10 (IL-10) before and after intranasal theophylline treatment in hyposmic patients, and the relationship of these changes to orally administered theophylline treatment. DESIGN: IL-10 was measured in nasal mucus samples of 17 normal subjects and 39 patients with hyposmia of multiple etiologies by use of a sensitive spectrophotometric ELISA assay. Hyposmia is defined clinically by standardized evaluation of impaired olfactometry, as well as subjectively self reported by the patient. RESULTS: Prior to treatment, IL-10 levels in nasal mucus were increased in hyposmic patients compared to controls. Following intranasal theophylline administration, over half of treated patients experienced a decrease of nasal mucus IL-10 toward control levels, correlated with a significant improvement in taste and smell function. Patients who increased with intranasal administration, similar to previously reported oral administration, showed no significant improvement in taste or smell function. CONCLUSIONS: Nasal mucus IL-10 decreased in patients treated with intranasal theophylline. Mechanisms of action include phosphodiesterase and nuclear factor kappa-B inhibition, correlated with an improvement in both olfaction and gustation. IL-10 is induced by therapeutic and systemic administration of theophylline as with oral dosage, but reduced by lower and localized treatment.

Effect of intra-nasal nitrilotriacetic acid trisodium salt in lowering elevated calcium cations and improving olfactory dysfunction in COVID-19 patients.

PURPOSE: An association between COVID-19 and olfactory dysfunction has been noted in many patients worldwide. The olfactory adaptation process leads to an increase in intracellular calcium cation levels. Nitrilotriacetic acid trisodium salt has high selective chelation for calcium cations from olfactory mucus. The aim of this work is to test the effect of an intranasal nitrilotriacetic acid trisodium salt to lower the elevated calcium cations in COVID-19 patients with relevant symptoms of olfactory dysfunction. METHODS: Fifty-eight COVID-19 adult patients with relevant symptoms of olfactory dysfunction were enrolled in a prospective randomized controlled trial. They received a nasal spray containing either 0.9% sodium chloride or 2% nitrilotriacetic acid trisodium salt. Olfactory function was assessed before and after treatment using the Sniffin' Sticks test. Quantitative analysis of calcium cation concentration in nasal secretions was performed using a carbon paste ion-selective electrode. RESULTS: After the application of nitrilotriacetic acid trisodium salt compared to sodium chloride, a significant improvement from functional anosmia to healthy normosmia with significant decrease in calcium cation concentration was observed. CONCLUSIONS: Further collaborative research is needed to fully investigate the effect of an intranasal nitrilotriacetic acid trisodium salt in the treatment of olfactory disorders.

Clinical Olfactory Working Group consensus statement on the treatment of postinfectious olfactory dysfunction.

BACKGROUND: Respiratory tract viruses are the second most common cause of olfactory dysfunction. As we learn more about the effects of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2), with the recognition that olfactory dysfunction is a key symptom of this disease process, there is a greater need than ever for evidence-based management of postinfectious olfactory dysfunction (PIOD). OBJECTIVE: Our aim was to provide an evidence-based practical guide to the management of PIOD (including post-coronavirus 2019 cases) for both primary care practitioners and hospital specialists. METHODS: A systematic review of the treatment options available for the management of PIOD was performed. The written systematic review was then circulated among the members of the Clinical Olfactory Working Group for their perusal before roundtable expert discussion of the treatment options. The group also undertook a survey to determine their current clinical practice with regard to treatment of PIOD. RESULTS: The search resulted in 467 citations, of which 107 articles were fully reviewed and analyzed for eligibility; 40 citations fulfilled the inclusion criteria, 11 of which were randomized controlled trials. In total, 15 of the articles specifically looked at PIOD whereas the other 25 included other etiologies for olfactory dysfunction. CONCLUSIONS: The Clinical Olfactory Working Group members made an overwhelming recommendation for olfactory training; none recommended monocycline antibiotics. The diagnostic role of oral steroids was discussed; some group members were in favor of vitamin A drops. Further research is needed to confirm the place of other therapeutic options.

Efficacy of topical steroids for the treatment of olfactory disorders caused by COVID-19: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

OBJECTIVES: The aim of this study was to assess the effect of topical steroids on acute-onset olfactory dysfunction in patients infected with COVID-19. DESIGN AND SETTING: Systematic review and meta-analysis of cohort studies. PARTICIPANTS: Patients infected with COVID-19. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: PubMed, Embase, the Web of Science, SCOPUS, Cochrane database and Google Scholar were searched for articles up to September 2021. We analysed studies comparing the improvement of olfactory dysfunction between topical steroid treatment and control groups (placebo or no treatment). In addition, we performed a subgroup analysis by study type. RESULTS: The improvement of olfactory score at 2 (standardised mean difference [SMD] = 0.7272, 95% confidence interval = [0.3851, 1.0692], p < .0001, I2  = 62.1%) and 4 weeks post-treatment (SMD = 1.0440 [0.6777, 1.4102], p < .0001, I2  = 61.2%) was statistically greater in the treatment than control group. However, there was no significant difference (odds ratio [OR] = 1.4345 [0.9525, 2.1604], p = .0842, I2  = 45.4%) in the incidence of fully recovery from anosmia/hyposmia between the treatment and control groups. In subgroup analysis, there were no significant differences in the improvement of olfactory score at 4 weeks post-treatment (OR = 0.6177 [0.1309, 1.1045] vs. 0.1720 [0.8002, 1.5438], p = .0761) or the incidence of full recovery from anosmia/hyposmia (OR = 1.8478 [0.6092, 5.6053] vs. 1.3784 [0.8872, 2.1414], p = .8038) between randomised and non-randomised controlled trials. CONCLUSIONS: Although this meta-analysis found that topical steroids improved the acute-onset olfactory dysfunction caused by COVID-19, there was no difference in the rate of full olfactory recovery between treated and control patients.

Smell and taste in idiopathic blepharospasm.

The pathophysiology of blepharospasm is incompletely understood. Current concepts suggest that blepharospasm is a network disorder, involving basal ganglia, thalamus, cortex, and, possibly, the cerebellum. Tracing, imaging, and clinical studies revealed that these structures are also concerned with olfaction and taste. Because of this anatomical overlap, dysfunction of the chemical senses in blepharospasm is expected. Injections of botulinum toxin into the eyelid muscles are the first-line treatment of blepharospasm. Yet, the effects of botulinum toxin on the chemical senses have not been systematically assessed. To contribute to a better understanding of blepharospasm, olfactory and gustatory abilities were assessed in 17 subjects with blepharospasm and 17 age-/sex-matched healthy controls. Sniffin Sticks were used to assess odor threshold, odor discrimination, and odor identification. Results of these three Sniffin Sticks subtests were added to the composite olfactory score. The Taste Strips were applied to assess taste. In an adjacent study, we assessed the sense of smell and taste in eight subjects with blepharospasm before and 4 weeks after botulinum toxin treatment. Subjects with blepharospasm had significantly lower (= worse) scores for odor threshold and for the composite olfactory score than healthy controls, while odor discrimination, odor identification, and the composite taste score were not different between groups. The adjacent study revealed that botulinum toxin did not impact the chemical senses. In this study, subjects with blepharospasm had a lower (= worse) odor threshold than healthy controls. As olfaction is important in daily life, findings justify further research of olfaction in blepharospasm.

Taste and smell disturbances in cancer patients: a scoping review of available treatments.

PURPOSE: Taste and smell disturbances in patients affected by cancer are very common, but often under-recognized symptoms. If not addressed properly, they may impact nutritional status, food enjoyment, and quality of life. Treatment tools available for clinicians to manage chemosensory alterations are limited and are often based on personal clinical experiences. The aim of this study was to assess current oncological and palliative care literature through a scoping review, in order to identify available treatments for taste and smell alterations in cancer patients. METHODS: Medline, Embase, CINAHL, ProQuest Dissertations and Theses, and Google Scholar were searched from inception until January 2020, with subject headings relevant to the domains of chemosensory alterations, palliative, and cancer care. A total of 10,718 English and French language publications were reviewed, yielding 43 articles on the researched topic. RESULTS: The heterogeneity of selected articles led to difficulties in interpretation and analysis of the available evidence. Included publications differed in study design, population sample, anticancer treatments, and measures of assessment for taste and smell disturbances. A broad variety of treatment options were described including zinc and polaprezinc, radio-protectors, vitamins and supplements, anti-xerostomia agents, active swallowing exercises, nutritional interventions, delta-9-tetrahydrocannabinol, and photobiomodulation. CONCLUSION: This scoping review identifies the current state of knowledge regarding chemosensory alterations within supportive cancer care. Despite not reaching firm conclusions, this article offers therapeutic venues to further explore in larger and more methodologically sound studies.

Interventions for the prevention of persistent post-COVID-19 olfactory dysfunction.

BACKGROUND: Loss of olfactory function is well recognised as a cardinal symptom of COVID-19 infection, and the ongoing pandemic has resulted in a large number of affected individuals with abnormalities in their sense of smell. For many, the condition is temporary and resolves within two to four weeks. However, in a significant minority the symptoms persist. At present, it is not known whether early intervention with any form of treatment (such as medication or olfactory training) can promote recovery and prevent persisting olfactory disturbance.  OBJECTIVES: To assess the effects (benefits and harms) of interventions that have been used, or proposed, to prevent persisting olfactory dysfunction due to COVID-19 infection. A secondary objective is to keep the evidence up-to-date, using a living systematic review approach.  SEARCH METHODS: The Cochrane ENT Information Specialist searched the Cochrane COVID-19 Study Register; Cochrane ENT Register; CENTRAL; Ovid MEDLINE; Ovid Embase; Web of Science; ClinicalTrials.gov; ICTRP and additional sources for published and unpublished studies. The date of the search was 16 December 2020. SELECTION CRITERIA: Randomised controlled trials including participants who had symptoms of olfactory disturbance following COVID-19 infection. Individuals who had symptoms for less than four weeks were included in this review. Studies compared any intervention with no treatment or placebo.  DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: We used standard Cochrane methodological procedures. Our primary outcomes were the presence of normal olfactory function, serious adverse effects and change in sense of smell. Secondary outcomes were the prevalence of parosmia, change in sense of taste, disease-related quality of life and other adverse effects (including nosebleeds/bloody discharge). We used GRADE to assess the certainty of the evidence for each outcome.  MAIN RESULTS: We included one study of 100 participants, which compared an intranasal steroid spray to no intervention. Participants in both groups were also advised to undertake olfactory training for the duration of the trial. Data were identified for only two of the prespecified outcomes for this review, and no data were available for the primary outcome of serious adverse effects. Intranasal corticosteroids compared to no intervention (all using olfactory training) Presence of normal olfactory function after three weeks of treatment was self-assessed by the participants, using a visual analogue scale (range 0 to 10, higher scores = better). A score of 10 represented "completely normal smell sensation". The evidence is very uncertain about the effect of intranasal corticosteroids on self-rated recovery of sense of smell (estimated absolute effect 619 per 1000 compared to 520 per 1000, risk ratio (RR) 1.19, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.85 to 1.68; 1 study; 100 participants; very low-certainty evidence).  Change in sense of smell was not reported, but the self-rated score for sense of smell was reported at the endpoint of the study with the same visual analogue scale (after three weeks of treatment). The median scores at endpoint were 10 (interquartile range (IQR) 9 to 10) for the group receiving intranasal corticosteroids, and 10 (IQR 5 to 10) for the group receiving no intervention (1 study; 100 participants; very low-certainty evidence). AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: There is very limited evidence regarding the efficacy of different interventions at preventing persistent olfactory dysfunction following COVID-19 infection. However, we have identified a small number of additional ongoing studies in this area. As this is a living systematic review, the evidence will be updated regularly to incorporate new data from these, and other relevant studies, as they become available.  For this (first) version of the living review, we identified a single study of intranasal corticosteroids to include in this review, which provided data for only two of our prespecified outcomes. The evidence was of very low certainty, therefore we were unable to determine whether intranasal corticosteroids may have a beneficial or harmful effect.

Interventions for the treatment of persistent post-COVID-19 olfactory dysfunction.

BACKGROUND: Olfactory dysfunction is an early and sensitive marker of COVID-19 infection. Although self-limiting in the majority of cases, when hyposmia or anosmia persists it can have a profound effect on quality of life. Little guidance exists on the treatment of post-COVID-19 olfactory dysfunction, however several strategies have been proposed from the evidence relating to the treatment of post-viral anosmia (such as medication or olfactory training). OBJECTIVES: To assess the effects (benefits and harms) of interventions that have been used, or proposed, to treat persisting olfactory dysfunction due to COVID-19 infection. A secondary objective is to keep the evidence up-to-date, using a living systematic review approach.  SEARCH METHODS: The Cochrane ENT Information Specialist searched the Cochrane COVID-19 Study Register; Cochrane ENT Register; CENTRAL; Ovid MEDLINE; Ovid Embase; Web of Science; ClinicalTrials.gov; ICTRP and additional sources for published and unpublished studies. The date of the search was 16 December 2020. SELECTION CRITERIA: Randomised controlled trials including participants who had symptoms of olfactory disturbance following COVID-19 infection. Only individuals who had symptoms for at least four weeks were included in this review. Studies compared any intervention with no treatment or placebo. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: We used standard Cochrane methodological procedures. Primary outcomes were the recovery of sense of smell, disease-related quality of life and serious adverse effects. Secondary outcomes were the change in sense of smell, general quality of life, prevalence of parosmia and other adverse effects (including nosebleeds/bloody discharge). We used GRADE to assess the certainty of the evidence for each outcome. MAIN RESULTS: We included one study with 18 participants, which compared the use of a 15-day course of oral steroids combined with nasal irrigation (consisting of an intranasal steroid/mucolytic/decongestant solution) with no intervention. Psychophysical testing was used to assess olfactory function at baseline, 20 and 40 days. Systemic corticosteroids plus intranasal steroid/mucolytic/decongestant compared to no intervention Recovery of sense of smell was assessed after 40 days (25 days after cessation of treatment) using the Connecticut Chemosensory Clinical Research Center (CCCRC) score. This tool has a range of 0 to 100, and a score of ≥ 90 represents normal olfactory function. The evidence is very uncertain about the effect of this intervention on recovery of the sense of smell at one to three months (5/9 participants in the intervention group scored ≥ 90 compared to 0/9 in the control group; risk ratio (RR) 11.00, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.70 to 173.66; 1 study; 18 participants; very low-certainty evidence). Change in sense of smell was assessed using the CCCRC score at 40 days. This study reported an improvement in sense of smell in the intervention group from baseline (median improvement in CCCRC score 60, interquartile range (IQR) 40) compared to the control group (median improvement in CCCRC score 30, IQR 25) (1 study; 18 participants; very low-certainty evidence). Serious adverse events andother adverse events were not identified in any participants of this study; however, it is unclear how these outcomes were assessed and recorded (1 study; 18 participants; very low-certainty evidence). AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: There is very limited evidence available on the efficacy and harms of treatments for persistent olfactory dysfunction following COVID-19 infection. However, we have identified other ongoing trials in this area. As this is a living systematic review we will update the data regularly, as new results become available. For this (first) version of the living review we identified only one study with a small sample size, which assessed systemic steroids and nasal irrigation (intranasal steroid/mucolytic/decongestant). However, the evidence regarding the benefits and harms from this intervention to treat persistent post-COVID-19 olfactory dysfunction is very uncertain.

Treatment of COVID-19-Related Olfactory Disorder Promoted by Kakkontokasenkyushin'i: A Case Series.

Olfactory disorders are one of the characteristic symptoms of the coronavirus disease of 2019 (COVID-19), which causes infection and inflammation of the upper and lower respiratory tract. To our knowledge, there are no treatments for COVID-19-related olfactory disorder. Here, we report five olfactory disorder cases in COVID-19, treated using the Japanese traditional (Kampo) medicine, kakkontokasenkyushin'i. We treated five patients with mild COVID-19 at an isolation facility using Kampo medicine, depending on their symptoms. Patients with the olfactory disorder presented with a blocked nose, nasal discharge or taste impairment. Physical examination using Kampo medicine showed similar findings, such as a red tongue with red spots and sublingual vein congestion, which presented as blood stasis and inflammation; thus, we prescribed the Kampo medicine, kakkontokasenkyushin'i. After administration, the numeric rating scale scores of the smell impairment improved within 3 days from 9 to 3 in case 1, from 10 to 0 in case 2, from 9 to 0 in case 3, from 5 to 0 in case 4, and from 9 to 0 within 5 days in case 5. Following the treatment, other common cold symptoms were also alleviated. Kakkontokasenkyushin'i can be used for treating nasal congestion, rhinitis, and inflammation in the nasal mucosa. The olfactory disorder in COVID-19 has been reportedly associated with inflammation and congestion, especially in the olfactory bulb and olfactory cleft. Kakkontokasenkyushin'i may be one of the treatment alternatives for the olfactory disorder with rhinitis in patients with COVID-19.