BACKGROUND: The new aqueous formulation of triamcinolone acetonide (TAA) was compared with loratadine in patients with seasonal allergic rhinitis. OBJECTIVE: The primary objective of the study was to compare the safety and efficacy of TAA aqueous with loratadine in relieving the symptoms of seasonal allergic rhinitis. METHODS:A total of 351 patients were enrolled into this 4-week, double-blind, double-dummy, randomized, parallel group study. Patients received either TAA aqueous nasal spray (220 microg) or loratadine (10 mg) once daily. Efficacy variables were rhinitis symptom changes from baseline, physician global evaluations, and the patient dropout rate due to insufficient treatment effect. Safety and quality of life also was evaluated. RESULTS: Both TAA aqueous-treated and loratadine-treated patients had improvement in symptoms as early as day 1. Overall, TAA aqueous was significantly (P < .05) more effective than loratadine in reducing total nasal symptoms and individual symptoms of nasal congestion, nasal itch, and sneezing. Ocular symptoms improved from baseline in both groups. There was no statistically significant difference between groups based on physician global evaluation. A similar number of patients in each group discontinued the study due to ineffective treatment. Triamcinolone acetonide aqueous patients maintained a significantly (P < .05) better quality of life in three of the dimensions (activity, nasal symptoms, and practical problems) and for overall quality of life. There were no differences between the two treatment groups in the incidence of adverse events, none of which were clinically significant. CONCLUSIONS: Both TAA aqueous and loratadine were effective and well-tolerated in the treatment of patients with seasonal allergic rhinitis. Triamcinolone acetonide aqueous was significantly (P < .05) more effective than loratadine in controlling nasal symptoms of seasonal allergic rhinitis and maintaining a better quality of life for the patients.
RCT Entities:
BACKGROUND: The new aqueous formulation of triamcinolone acetonide (TAA) was compared with loratadine in patients with seasonal allergic rhinitis. OBJECTIVE: The primary objective of the study was to compare the safety and efficacy of TAA aqueous with loratadine in relieving the symptoms of seasonal allergic rhinitis. METHODS: A total of 351 patients were enrolled into this 4-week, double-blind, double-dummy, randomized, parallel group study. Patients received either TAA aqueous nasal spray (220 microg) or loratadine (10 mg) once daily. Efficacy variables were rhinitis symptom changes from baseline, physician global evaluations, and the patient dropout rate due to insufficient treatment effect. Safety and quality of life also was evaluated. RESULTS: Both TAA aqueous-treated and loratadine-treated patients had improvement in symptoms as early as day 1. Overall, TAA aqueous was significantly (P < .05) more effective than loratadine in reducing total nasal symptoms and individual symptoms of nasal congestion, nasal itch, and sneezing. Ocular symptoms improved from baseline in both groups. There was no statistically significant difference between groups based on physician global evaluation. A similar number of patients in each group discontinued the study due to ineffective treatment. Triamcinolone acetonide aqueous patients maintained a significantly (P < .05) better quality of life in three of the dimensions (activity, nasal symptoms, and practical problems) and for overall quality of life. There were no differences between the two treatment groups in the incidence of adverse events, none of which were clinically significant. CONCLUSIONS: Both TAA aqueous and loratadine were effective and well-tolerated in the treatment of patients with seasonal allergic rhinitis. Triamcinolone acetonide aqueous was significantly (P < .05) more effective than loratadine in controlling nasal symptoms of seasonal allergic rhinitis and maintaining a better quality of life for the patients.
Authors: Alexander V Karaulov; Natalia Nenasheva; Yury Smolkin; Aleksandr Maslakov; Luiz Lucio Journal: Int Arch Allergy Immunol Date: 2021-09-06 Impact factor: 2.749