Background Moderate-to-severe allergic rhinitis (AR) is a challenge to treat, with many patients using multiple therapies and achieving limited symptom control. More effective therapies must be ...developed and tested in well-controlled, randomized, prospective studies with a direct comparison to current standards. Objectives The aim of these studies was to investigate the efficacy of MP29-02 (a novel formulation of azelastine and fluticasone propionate FP) in patients with moderate-to-severe seasonal allergic rhinitis (SAR) and to compare its efficacy with 2 first-line therapies (ie, intranasal azelastine and intranasal FP) in this population. Methods Three thousand three hundred ninety-eight patients (≥12 years old) with moderate-to-severe SAR were enrolled into 3 multicenter, randomized, double-blind, placebo- and active-controlled, parallel-group trials (MP4002 NCT00651118, MP4004 NCT00740792, and MP4006 NCT00883168). Each trial was conducted for 14 days during different allergy seasons. The primary efficacy variable was the sum of the morning and evening change from baseline in reflective total nasal symptom score (range, 0-24) over the treatment period. Outcomes for the meta-analysis included efficacy according to disease severity and time to response in relevant responder criteria. Results In the meta-analysis MP29-02 reduced the mean reflective total nasal symptom score from baseline (−5.7 SD, 5.3) more than FP (−5.1 SD, 4.9, P < .001), azelastine (−4.4 SD, 4.8, P < .001), or placebo (−3.0 SD, 4.2, P < .001). This benefit was observed from the first day of assessment, with improvement in each individual nasal symptom, even in the patients with the most severe disease. MP29-02 achieved response consistently days earlier and showed greater efficacy in patients with moderate-to-severe rhinitis than FP and azelastine. Conclusions MP29-02 represents a novel therapy that demonstrated superiority to 2 first-line therapies for AR. Patients with moderate-to-severe SAR achieved better control, and their symptoms were controlled earlier with MP29-02 than with recommended medications according to guidelines.
Allergic rhinitis (AR), a chronic inflammatory disease of the upper airway, is one of the most common chronic diseases in the United States and is estimated to affect up to 60 million people. ...Pediatric Allergies in America is the largest and most comprehensive survey to date of pediatric patients and parents of patients with allergy, as well as health care providers (HCPs), regarding AR in children and its treatment. The goals of the survey were to determine the prevalence of AR in the US pediatric population and to collect information on what effect the condition has on patients in terms of symptom burden, quality of life, productivity, disease management, and pharmacologic treatment. This national survey screened 35,757 households to identify 500 children with HCP-diagnosed nasal allergies and 504 children without nasal allergies who were between the ages of 4 and 17 years. Parents of young children, as well as children 10 to 17 years of age, were questioned about the condition and its treatment. In parallel, 501 HCPs were interviewed. This survey has captured previously unavailable data on the prevalence of nasal allergies and their most common and most bothersome symptoms, on the effect of nasal allergies on the quality of life of children, and on medication use, including both over-the-counter and prescription medications, and has identified factors affecting satisfaction with treatment. The Pediatric Allergies in America survey also identifies distinct areas for improvement in the management of AR in children. In fact, based on the results of this survey, it appears that HCPs overestimate patients' and parents' satisfaction with disease management and the benefit of medications used for the treatment of nasal allergies in children. Findings from this national survey have identified important challenges to the management of AR, suggesting that its burden on children in the United States has been significantly underestimated.
Rhinosinusitis (RS) affects approximately 1 in 7 adults in the United States, and its effect on quality of life, productivity, and finances is substantial. During the past 10 years, several expert ...panels from authoritative bodies have published evidence-based guidelines for the diagnosis and management of RS and its subtypes, including acute viral RS, acute bacterial RS, chronic RS (CRS) without nasal polyposis, CRS with nasal polyposis, and allergic fungal RS. This review examines and compares the recommendations of the Rhinosinusitis Initiative, the Joint Task Force on Practice Parameters, the Clinical Practice Guideline: Adult Sinusitis, the European Position Paper on Rhinosinusitis and Nasal Polyps 2007, and the British Society for Allergy and Clinical Immunology. Points of consensus and divergent opinions expressed in these guidelines regarding classification, diagnosis, and management of adults with acute RS (ARS) and CRS and their various subtypes are highlighted for the practicing clinician. Key points of agreement regarding therapy in the guidelines for ARS include the efficacy of symptomatic treatment, such as intranasal corticosteroids, and the importance of reducing the unnecessary use of antibiotics in ARS; however, guidelines do not agree precisely regarding when antibiotics should be considered as a reasonable treatment strategy. Although the guidelines diverge markedly on the management of CRS, the diagnostic utility of nasal airway examination is acknowledged by all. Important and relevant data from MEDLINE-indexed articles published since the most recent guidelines were issued are also considered, and needs for future research are discussed.
To describe the economic burden of allergic rhinitis treatment and current guidelines for treatment.
Review articles and original research were retrieved from MEDLINE, OVID, PubMed (1950-November ...2009), personal files of articles, and bibliographies of located articles that addressed the topic of interest.
Articles were selected for their relevance to the burden of allergic rhinitis and current guidelines for treatment. Publications included reviews, treatment guidelines, and clinical studies.
Despite the common symptoms of allergic rhinitis, its impact on patient quality of life, and the huge cost to society and individuals of treatment, including pharmacotherapy, many patients do not adhere to their medication regimens because the medications do not adequately address their symptoms or are otherwise problematic for them to use.
The economic impact of allergic rhinitis is substantial; the total direct medical cost of allergic rhinitis is approximately $3.4 billion, with almost half of this cost attributable to prescription medications. Multiple treatment options are available, and these were reviewed to provide an update on effectiveness and adverse effects that may affect patient adherence.
Background Data comparing the treatment effect of allergy immunotherapy and pharmacotherapy are lacking. Objective We sought to indirectly compare the treatment effect of sublingual immunotherapy ...(SLIT)-tablets with pharmacotherapy for seasonal allergic rhinitis (SAR) and perennial allergic rhinitis (PAR). Methods Pooled data from randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trials for the clinical development programs of selected allergic rhinitis treatments were evaluated. Total nasal symptom scores (TNSSs) relative to placebo were compared. Subjects scored symptoms daily during entire pollen seasons in 6 timothy grass SLIT-tablet trials (n = 3094) and 2 ragweed SLIT-tablet trials (n = 658) and during the last 8 weeks of treatment in 2 house dust mite (HDM) SLIT-tablet trials (n = 1768). Subjects scored symptoms daily in 7 montelukast (10 mg, n = 6799), 9 desloratadine (5 mg, n = 4455), and 8 mometasone furoate nasal spray (MFNS; 200 μg daily, n = 2140) SAR or PAR trials. SLIT-tablet trials allowed rescue medication use, whereas most pharmacotherapy trials did not. A fixed-effect meta-analysis method estimated differences in on-treatment average TNSSs. Results In grass and ragweed SLIT-tablet trials, overall improvement in TNSSs relative to placebo was 16.3% and 17.1%, respectively. In HDM SLIT-tablet trials, TNSS overall improvement relative to placebo was 16.1%. In the montelukast, desloratadine, and MFNS trials, TNSS overall improvement relative to placebo was 5.4%, 8.5%, and 22.2%, respectively, for SAR trials, and 3.7%, 4.8%, and 11.2%, respectively, for PAR trials. Conclusions Although comparisons were limited by study design heterogeneity and use of rescue medications in SLIT-tablet trials, effects on nasal symptoms with timothy grass and ragweed SLIT-tablets were nearly as great as with MFNS and numerically greater than with montelukast and desloratadine for SAR. HDM SLIT-tablet effects were numerically greater than all pharmacotherapies for PAR. SLIT-tablets offer the additional benefit of long-term efficacy.
In patients with severe asthma, tiotropium improves lung function and exacerbation risk when added to high-dose inhaled corticosteroids plus long-acting β2 agonists. We aimed to assess the safety and ...efficacy of tiotropium in patients with moderate asthma who were symptomatic despite treatment with medium-dose inhaled corticosteroids.
We did two 24-week, replicate, randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled, parallel-group, active-comparator trials at 233 sites in 14 countries. Eligible patients were aged 18-75 years with symptomatic asthma and a pre-bronchodilator forced expiratory volume in 1 s (FEV1) of 60-90% predicted despite use of medium-dose inhaled corticosteroids, and had never smoked or were ex-smokers for 1 year or more with 10 pack-years or less. Patients were randomly assigned (1:1:1:1), with computer-generated pseudorandom numbers, to receive once-daily tiotropium 5 μg or 2·5 μg, twice-daily salmeterol 50 μg, or placebo, while maintaining inhaled corticosteroids. Patients and study investigators were masked to treatment allocation. Prespecified co-primary endpoints, assessed at week 24 in the full analysis set, were peak FEV1 response, measured within the first 3 h after evening dosing; trough FEV1 response; and responder rate assessed according to the seven-question Asthma Control Questionnaire (ACQ-7). These studies are registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, numbers NCT01172808 and NCT01172821.
Between Aug 24, 2010, and Nov 13, 2012, we randomly assigned 2103 patients to the tiotropium 5 μg group (n=519), the tiotropium 2·5 μg group (n=520), the salmeterol group (n=541), or the placebo group (n=523); 1972 (94%) patients completed the study. Peak and trough FEV1 responses were significantly greater with tiotropium and salmeterol than with placebo and were similar in both studies. With pooled data, difference versus placebo in peak FEV1 was 185 mL (95% CI 146-223) in the tiotropium 5 μg group, 223 mL (185-262) in the tiotropium 2·5 μg group, and 196 mL (158-234) in the salmeterol group (all p<0·0001); difference in trough FEV1 was 146 mL (95% CI 105-188), 180 mL (138-221), and 114 mL (73-155; all p<0·0001), respectively. There were more ACQ-7 responders in the tiotropium 5 μg (OR 1·32, 95% CI 1·02-1·71; p=0·035) and 2·5 μg (1·33, 1·03-1·72; p=0·031) groups, and the salmeterol group (1·46, 1·13-1·89; p=0·0039), than in the placebo group. 48 (2%) of 2100 patients had serious adverse events (tiotropium 5 μg n=11, tiotropium 2·5 μg n=12, salmeterol n=11, placebo n=14).
Once-daily tiotropium add-on to medium-dose inhaled corticosteroids reduces airflow obstruction and improves asthma control in patients with moderate symptomatic asthma. Patterns of response with both tiotropium doses were similar to those of salmeterol, and all active compounds had good safety and tolerability. Tiotropium is a safe and effective bronchodilator, and an alternative to salmeterol in this patient population.
Boehringer Ingelheim.
Background The D-prostanoid receptor and the chemoattractant receptor homologous molecule expressed on TH 2 cells (CRTH2) are implicated in asthma pathogenesis. AMG 853 is a potent, selective, orally ...bioavailable, small-molecule dual antagonist of human D-prostanoid and CRTH2. Objective We sought to determine the efficacy and safety of AMG 853 compared with placebo in patients with inadequately controlled asthma. Methods Adults with moderate-to-severe asthma were randomized to placebo; 5, 25, or 100 mg of oral AMG 853 twice daily; or 200 mg of AMG 853 once daily for 12 weeks. All patients continued their inhaled corticosteroids. Long-acting β-agonists were not allowed during the treatment period. Allowed concomitant medications included short-acting β-agonists and a systemic corticosteroid burst for asthma exacerbation. The primary end point was change in total Asthma Control Questionnaire score from baseline to week 12. Secondary and exploratory end points included FEV1 , symptom scores, rescue short-acting β-agonist use, and exacerbations. Results Among treated patients, no effect over placebo (n = 79) was observed in mean changes in Asthma Control Questionnaire scores at 12 weeks (placebo, −0.492; range for AMG 853 groups n = 317, −0.444 to −0.555). No significant differences between the active and placebo groups were observed for secondary end points. The most commonly reported adverse events were asthma, upper respiratory tract infection, and headache; 9 patients experienced serious adverse events, all of which were deemed unrelated to study treatment by the investigator. Conclusion AMG 853 as an add-on to inhaled corticosteroid therapy demonstrated no associated risks but was not effective at improving asthma symptoms or lung function in patients with inadequately controlled moderate-to-severe asthma.
Seasonal allergic rhinoconjunctivitis (SARC) affects ≥16% of the US population annually. Telephone and in-office surveys have demonstrated negative effects of allergic rhinitis (AR) symptoms on ...sleep, daily activities, productivity, concentration, and emotions.
The objective of this study was to assess the patient-perceived burden of SARC in relation to newer treatments, increased access to treatments, and changing management protocols.
An online survey of symptom experience, impact on daily life, and management was conducted in US respondents who suffer (or whose child suffers) from SARC symptoms.
A total of 1001 surveys were completed: 500 adults (≥18 years old) and 501 children (12-17 years old, documented by their parents). Similar to earlier AR surveys, SARC symptoms negatively affected the patient's (and family's) quality of life, and were most severe in the spring. Before being treated, >50% of respondents reported daily symptoms during their season; 75% to 80% considered their symptoms moderate to severe. Patients saw a variety of health care professionals (including pharmacists) and used over-the-counter and prescription medications for symptoms. Those using prescription medications were generally more satisfied with treatment and less likely to switch or discontinue treatment. Nasal and/or ocular symptoms drove adherence, seeing a health care professional, and reviewing and/or changing treatment.
The majority of patients with SARC report moderate-to-severe symptoms that significantly impair their quality of life. However, patients appear to be taking more responsibility for their (child's) condition, and patient expectations for therapy are increasingly being met. Continued efforts will be needed to examine the contribution of better information and/or increased access to and availability of medications to control the disease.
Background The Rhinitis Control Assessment Test (RCAT) is a brief, patient-completed tool to evaluate rhinitis symptom control. Objective We sought to test the reliability, validity, and ...responsiveness of RCAT and to estimate a cut-point score and minimal important difference (MID). Methods A total of 402 patients 12 years of age and older with allergic or nonallergic rhinitis were enrolled in a noninterventional study. Patients completed the RCAT (6 items; score range, 6-30) and had Total Nasal Symptom Scores (TNSSs) measured at baseline and 2 weeks later. Physicians completed a global assessment of rhinitis symptom control (Physician's Global Assessment) and disease severity. Internal consistency, test-retest reliability, convergent validity, known-groups validity, and responsiveness were evaluated. The MID was determined by using distribution- and anchor-based methods. Content validity of the RCAT was assessed in individual interviews with a separate group of 58 adult patients. Results Internal consistency and test-retest reliability of RCAT scores were 0.77 and 0.78, respectively. Convergent validity correlation between RCAT and TNSS scores was 0.57, and that between RCAT and Physician's Global Assessment scores was 0.34. Mean RCAT scores differed significantly ( P < .001) across patient groups, differing in TNSS (F = 72.7), Physician's Global Assessment score (F = 28.6), and disease severity (F = 34.1) in the hypothesized direction. Results suggested a cut-point score of 21 or less can be used to identify patients who are experiencing rhinitis symptom control problems. The preliminary estimate of the MID was 3 points. Patients found RCAT items comprehensive, easy to understand, and relevant. Conclusion The RCAT demonstrated adequate reliability, validity, and responsiveness and was deemed acceptable and appropriate by patients. This tool can facilitate the detection of rhinitis symptom control problems, and its brevity supports its usefulness in clinical care.
Background Direct correlation of assessments of a validated composite measure such as the Asthma Control Questionnaire (ACQ) and risk of exacerbation has not been previously demonstrated in a ...randomized controlled trial. Objective To evaluate the ability of the ACQ score over time to predict risk of a future asthma exacerbation. Methods This analysis included data from a 12-week placebo-controlled trial (N = 292) of AMG 317, an IL-4 receptor α antagonist, in patients with moderate to severe atopic asthma. At baseline, patients had an ACQ score ≥1.5. Exacerbations were defined as requirement for systemic corticosteroids. A Cox proportional hazards model was used, with ACQ score as the time-dependent covariate. The analysis was repeated for individual components of the ACQ. Results Each 1-point increase in ACQ was associated with a 50% increased risk of exacerbation (hazard ratio, 1.50; 95% CI, 1.03-2.20) for the following 2-week period. Evaluation of individual ACQ components also demonstrated a similar trend, though each to a lesser degree than the full composite ACQ. Conclusion Although based on a retrospective analysis, with small number of exacerbations, these findings support the utility of the composite ACQ score measurement to predict risk of future exacerbation in clinical trials and clinical practice. The composite ACQ score measurement was found to be a better predictor of future risk than individual ACQ components.
PDF
