Literature DB >> 12775135

Fluticasone propionate aqueous nasal spray provided significantly greater improvement in daytime and nighttime nasal symptoms of seasonal allergic rhinitis compared with montelukast.

Paul H Ratner1, William C Howland, Raiqua Arastu, Edward E Philpot, Kristofer C Klein, Charlotte A Baidoo, Melissa A Faris, Kathleen A Rickard.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: The safety and efficacy of intranasal corticosteroids for the treatment of allergic rhinitis is well documented in the literature. Additionally, an expert panel has concluded that intranasal corticosteroids are the first line of therapy when obstruction is a major component of rhinitis. Montelukast is a leukotriene receptor antagonist recently approved for the treatment of seasonal allergic rhinitis (SAR).
OBJECTIVE: This randomized, double-blind, double-dummy, parallel-group study was conducted to compare the effectiveness of a 15-day course of intranasal fluticasone propionate 200 microg, once daily (FP200QD), to oral montelukast 10 mg, once daily (MON10QD), in relieving daytime and nighttime nasal symptoms associated with SAR.
METHODS: The intent-to-treat (ITT) analysis population consisted of 705 eligible males and females (> or = 15 years) with SAR randomized to either FP200QD (N = 353) or MON10QD (N = 352). The primary efficacy endpoint was the mean change from baseline in subject-rated daytime total nasal symptom scores (the sum of four individual scores: nasal congestion, itching, rhinorrhea, and sneezing), evaluated via visual analog scales, and averaged over weeks 1 to 2. Secondary endpoints included the four daytime individual nasal symptom scores, the nighttime total, and individual nasal symptom scores (each evaluated on a four-point scale from 0 to 3).
RESULTS: Statistically significant differences favoring FP200QD over MON10QD were observed for the mean change from baseline in daytime total nasal symptom scores (P < 0.001), daytime individual nasal symptom scores (P < 0.001), nighttime total (P < 0.001), and all individual nasal symptom scores (P < or = 0.002) over the 15-day treatment period. FP200QD and MON10QD were both well tolerated.
CONCLUSIONS: The results of this well controlled study demonstrated that FP200QD was consistently superior to MON10QD with regard to every efficacy endpoint evaluated, including daytime and nighttime nasal congestion, in subjects with SAR.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2003        PMID: 12775135     DOI: 10.1016/S1081-1206(10)61847-9

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Ann Allergy Asthma Immunol        ISSN: 1081-1206            Impact factor:   6.347


  17 in total

Review 1.  Anti-leukotriene agents compared to inhaled corticosteroids in the management of recurrent and/or chronic asthma in adults and children.

Authors:  Bhupendrasinh F Chauhan; Francine M Ducharme
Journal:  Cochrane Database Syst Rev       Date:  2012-05-16

Review 2.  Hay fever in adolescents and adults.

Authors:  Aziz Sheikh; Sukhmeet Singh Panesar; Sarah Salvilla; Sangeeta Dhami
Journal:  BMJ Clin Evid       Date:  2009-11-18

Review 3.  Nasal obstruction, the airway, and the athlete.

Authors:  Laura H Fisher; Michael J Davies; Timothy J Craig
Journal:  Clin Rev Allergy Immunol       Date:  2005-10       Impact factor: 8.667

4.  International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis.

Authors:  Sarah K Wise; Sandra Y Lin; Elina Toskala; Richard R Orlandi; Cezmi A Akdis; Jeremiah A Alt; Antoine Azar; Fuad M Baroody; Claus Bachert; G Walter Canonica; Thomas Chacko; Cemal Cingi; Giorgio Ciprandi; Jacquelynne Corey; Linda S Cox; Peter Socrates Creticos; Adnan Custovic; Cecelia Damask; Adam DeConde; John M DelGaudio; Charles S Ebert; Jean Anderson Eloy; Carrie E Flanagan; Wytske J Fokkens; Christine Franzese; Jan Gosepath; Ashleigh Halderman; Robert G Hamilton; Hans Jürgen Hoffman; Jens M Hohlfeld; Steven M Houser; Peter H Hwang; Cristoforo Incorvaia; Deborah Jarvis; Ayesha N Khalid; Maritta Kilpeläinen; Todd T Kingdom; Helene Krouse; Desiree Larenas-Linnemann; Adrienne M Laury; Stella E Lee; Joshua M Levy; Amber U Luong; Bradley F Marple; Edward D McCoul; K Christopher McMains; Erik Melén; James W Mims; Gianna Moscato; Joaquim Mullol; Harold S Nelson; Monica Patadia; Ruby Pawankar; Oliver Pfaar; Michael P Platt; William Reisacher; Carmen Rondón; Luke Rudmik; Matthew Ryan; Joaquin Sastre; Rodney J Schlosser; Russell A Settipane; Hemant P Sharma; Aziz Sheikh; Timothy L Smith; Pongsakorn Tantilipikorn; Jody R Tversky; Maria C Veling; De Yun Wang; Marit Westman; Magnus Wickman; Mark Zacharek
Journal:  Int Forum Allergy Rhinol       Date:  2018-02       Impact factor: 3.858

Review 5.  Latest developments in the management of allergic rhinitis.

Authors:  Alvin M Sanico
Journal:  Clin Rev Allergy Immunol       Date:  2004-12       Impact factor: 8.667

Review 6.  Intranasal steroids in the treatment of allergy-induced rhinorrhea.

Authors:  Robert A Nathan
Journal:  Clin Rev Allergy Immunol       Date:  2011-08       Impact factor: 8.667

7.  Treatment of congestion in upper respiratory diseases.

Authors:  Eli O Meltzer; Fernan Caballero; Leonard M Fromer; John H Krouse; Glenis Scadding
Journal:  Int J Gen Med       Date:  2010-04-08

8.  Comparison of Oral Montelukast and Intranasal Fluticasone in Patients with Asthma and Allergic Rhinitis.

Authors:  Apar Jindal; Subramanian Suriyan; Suresh Sagadevan; Meenakshi Narasimhan; Aruna Shanmuganathan; Viswambhar Vallabhaneni; Ragulan Rajalingam
Journal:  J Clin Diagn Res       Date:  2016-08-01

Review 9.  The role of antileukotriene drugs in management of rhinitis and rhinosinusitis.

Authors:  Mitchell H Grayson; Phillip E Korenblat
Journal:  Curr Allergy Asthma Rep       Date:  2007-06       Impact factor: 4.806

Review 10.  Montelukast in the treatment of allergic rhinitis: an evidence-based review.

Authors:  Anjuli Nayak; Ronald B Langdon
Journal:  Drugs       Date:  2007       Impact factor: 9.546

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.