AIMS: To evaluate the role of AMP nasal challenge as a measure of short-term treatment response in patients receiving intranasal corticosteroids. Adenosine monophosphate (AMP) challenge has been shown to be a good inflammatory surrogate in the lower airways, but it has not been properly evaluated as a nasal challenge test. METHODS:Fourteen patients with perennial allergic rhinitis (PAR) were randomized to receive 2 weeks treatment with placebo (PL) or 200 microg intranasal mometasone furoate (MF) once daily in a randomized single-blind crossover study. AMP (25-800 mg ml-1) and histamine (0.25-8 mg ml-1) nasal challenge testing were performed after each treatment period with 30% decrease in minimal cross-sectional area (MCA). Domiciliary symptom data were collected. RESULTS: There was a significant (P < 0.05) improvement in PC30 MCA and nasal volume with AMP but not with histamine comparing MF vs PL. This amounted to a 2.8 (95% CI 1.5, 4.0) and 0.7 (95% CI -0.5, 1.9) doubling-dose change for AMP and histamine challenges, respectively. There were significant (P < 0.05) improvements in nasal symptoms and quality of life. CONCLUSIONS:AMP nasal challenge using acoustic rhinometry may be a useful test to assess short-term treatment response in patient with PAR.
RCT Entities:
AIMS: To evaluate the role of AMP nasal challenge as a measure of short-term treatment response in patients receiving intranasal corticosteroids. Adenosine monophosphate (AMP) challenge has been shown to be a good inflammatory surrogate in the lower airways, but it has not been properly evaluated as a nasal challenge test. METHODS: Fourteen patients with perennial allergic rhinitis (PAR) were randomized to receive 2 weeks treatment with placebo (PL) or 200 microg intranasal mometasone furoate (MF) once daily in a randomized single-blind crossover study. AMP (25-800 mg ml-1) and histamine (0.25-8 mg ml-1) nasal challenge testing were performed after each treatment period with 30% decrease in minimal cross-sectional area (MCA). Domiciliary symptom data were collected. RESULTS: There was a significant (P < 0.05) improvement in PC30 MCA and nasal volume with AMP but not with histamine comparing MF vs PL. This amounted to a 2.8 (95% CI 1.5, 4.0) and 0.7 (95% CI -0.5, 1.9) doubling-dose change for AMP and histamine challenges, respectively. There were significant (P < 0.05) improvements in nasal symptoms and quality of life. CONCLUSIONS:AMP nasal challenge using acoustic rhinometry may be a useful test to assess short-term treatment response in patient with PAR.
Authors: E M Tomaz; M F Ferreira; M A Spínola; M L Oliveira; M H Clode; A G Palma-Carlos Journal: Allergy Asthma Proc Date: 1997 Sep-Oct Impact factor: 2.587
Authors: Daniel K C Lee; Catherine M Jackson; Patricia C Soutar; Thomas C Fardon; Brian J Lipworth Journal: Br J Clin Pharmacol Date: 2004-06 Impact factor: 4.335