Non‐allergic rhinitis: Position paper of the European Academy of Allergy and Clinical Immunology

This EAACI position paper aims at providing a state‐of‐the‐art overview on nonallergic rhinitis (NAR). A significant number of patients suffering from persistent rhinitis are defined as nonallergic noninfectious rhinitis (NANIR) patients, often denominated in short as having NAR. NAR is defined as a symptomatic inflammation of the nasal mucosa with the presence of a minimum of two nasal symptoms such as nasal obstruction, rhinorrhea, sneezing, and/or itchy nose, without clinical evidence of endonasal infection and without systemic signs of sensitization to inhalant allergens. Symptoms of NAR may have a wide range of severity and be either continuously present and/or induced by exposure to unspecific triggers, also called nasal hyperresponsiveness (NHR). NHR represents a clinical feature of both AR and NAR patients. NAR involves different subgroups: drug‐induced rhinitis, (nonallergic) occupational rhinitis, hormonal rhinitis (including pregnancy rhinitis), gustatory rhinitis, senile rhinitis, and idiopathic rhinitis (IR). NAR should be distinguished from those rhinitis patients with an allergic reaction confined to the nasal mucosa, also called “entopy” or local allergic rhinitis (LAR). We here provide an overview of the current consensus on phenotypes of NAR, recommendations for diagnosis, a treatment algorithm, and defining the unmet needs in this neglected area of research.     

Optimizing treatment options

Full and accurate diagnosis of allergic rhinitis is important as a basis for treatment decisions, as many nasal disorders have similar signs and symptoms. Optimal allergen avoidance is the starting point of treatment, so causative allergens need to be identified. Oral antihistamines are effective in relieving the majority of symptoms of allergic rhinitis and allergic conjunctivitis, but provide only partial relief from nasal congestion. Topical α-adrenergic decongestants help to relieve congestion, but prolonged use leads to rhinitis medicamentosa. Systemic decongestants are less effective than topical agents and their use is limited by systemic and central side-effects. The value of leukotriene antagonists has yet to be fully evaluated. Intranasal ipratropium bromide helps to control watery secretions, and an aerosol may be more effective than an aqueous solution. Topical glucocorticosteroids, such as triamcinolone, are the most potent and effective agents available for treating allergic rhinitis. The available evidence indicates that there is very little systemic absorption. Sodium cromoglycate is effective in allergic rhinitis, though less so than topical steroids, and has the least adverse effects among the antiallergic agents. Immunotherapy can be effective and may be indicated in individuals who cannot avoid the causative allergen. Special considerations apply to the treatment of allergic rhinitis in elderly or pregnant patients. Finally, patients with long-standing allergic conditions should be re-assessed regularly.     

Azelastine nasal spray for the treatment of allergic and nonallergic rhinitis

Rhinitis affects millions of people around the world, places a huge burden on the economy and reduces patients’ health-related quality of life. Azelastine nasal spray is a second-generation antihistamine, indicated for the treatment of allergic and nonallergic rhinitis in both adults and children. It offers a rapid onset of action (15 min) and flexibility of both dose (i.e., one or two sprays/nostril twice daily) as well as dosage (i.e., fixed or as needed). Compared with other agents used to treat allergic rhinitis, azelastine nasal spray exhibits superior efficacy to oral antihistamines (e.g., desloratadine and cetirizine), other intranasal antihistamines (e.g., levocabastine) and the intranasal corticosteroid mometasone furoate, and comparable efficacy to the potent intranasal corticosteroid fluticasone propionate (FP). Combination therapy with intranasal FP has the potential to enhance clinical benefit, as the combination of azelastine and FP nasal sprays reduce symptoms in allergic rhinitis patients more than either agent alone. Azelastine nasal spray has an excellent safety profile.     

Intranasal Steroids in the Treatment of Allergy-Induced Rhinorrhea

While nasal congestion has been identified as one of the most bothersome and prevalent symptoms of allergic rhinitis, it is underappreciated that many patients find rhinorrhea also to be bothersome. Rhinorrhea as a symptom of allergic rhinitis virtually never occurs alone; about 97% of patients with allergic rhinitis suffer from at least two symptoms, a finding that underscores the advantage of treating a broad range of symptoms with a single medication. Along with sneezing and nasal obstruction, rhinorrhea is a classic acute symptom of allergic rhinitis; it appears as a late-phase symptom as well. In this review, the characterization and epidemiology of rhinorrhea, the pathophysiology of rhinorrhea in allergic rhinitis, the roles played by mediators in early- and late-phase rhinorrhea, the prevalence and impact of this symptom, and the efficacy and safety of available treatment options are all discussed in context of relevant literature. A review of the clinical studies assessing the efficacy of intranasal corticosteroids (INS) for rhinorrhea is presented. Many clinical studies and several meta-analyses conclusively demonstrate that, in addition to being safe and well-tolerated, INS are more effective than other agents (including oral and intranasal antihistamines) across the spectrum of AR symptoms, including rhinorrhea and nasal congestion.     

Rhinitis in adults

Rhinitis is a very common disorder caused by inflammation or irritation of nasal mucosa. Dominant symptoms are nasal obstruction; however, in some patients, runny nose, excessive sneezing or nasal itch may be the most bothersome symptoms. The most common causes of nasal inflammation are viral infections and allergic response to airborne allergens. Response to irritants may cause similar symptoms, although signs of inflammation may not always be present. Viral rhinitis is lasting up to 10 days and it is part of the common cold syndrome. In short-lived rhinitis, lasting for 7 to 10 days, sometimes it is not easy to differentiate between the potential causes of the disorder, if general symptoms of infection like fever and malaise are not present. In long-living rhinitis, it is important to differentiate between infectious, allergic, non-allergic non-infectious rhinitis, and chronic rhinosinusitis. Itch and ocular symptoms are more common in allergic rhinitis, while other symptoms like nasal obstruction, rhinorrhea and sneezing may affect patients with allergic and non-allergic rhinitis. Patients with allergic rhinitis often have symptoms after exposure to irritants, temperature and humidity changes, like patients with non-allergic rhinitis, and such exposure may sometimes cause more severe symptoms than exposure to allergens. Sensitivity to a non-specific trigger is usually called non-specific nasal hyperreactivity. Allergic rhinitis occurs due to immunoglobulin E (IgE) interaction with allergen in contact with nasal mucosa in a sensitized patient. Sensitization to certain airborne allergen, like pollens, dust, molds, animal dander, etc. usually occurs in families with allergy background, which is helpful in making diagnosis in patients who have rhinitis in a certain period of the year, or aggravation of nasal symptoms occurs in the environment typical of certain allergen. The diagnosis is clinically confirmed by proving sensitivity to certain allergen on skin prick test, and by proving specific antibody IgE in patient serum. Allergic rhinitis is categorized according to sensitivity to allergens that occur seasonally, like pollens, or to allergens that are present all year round, like house dust mite, molds and animal dander, into seasonal and perennial allergic rhinitis. Allergy to pollens causes the same mechanism of inflammation in response to allergens, which is the result of allergen binding to specific IgE antibody; however, patients with pollen allergy usually complain more of sneezing and runny nose, whereas patients with allergy to perennial allergens more often complain of obstruction, with the episodes of sneezing and runny nose occurring only when exposed to higher concentrations of allergens (house cleaning, around pets). Treatment includes avoidance of allergens, medical treatment and immunotherapy (allergy vaccines, tablets with allergens). Avoidance of allergens means reduction of environmental allergen load to the respiratory system including workplace, which is not easy to accomplish. Medical treatment is usually necessary to control symptoms, and it includes antihistamines, nasal or in tablets, and nasal glucocorticoids (steroids). Antihistamines should be second generation, which do not cause sedation, and such treatment shows more efficacy on runny nose, sneezing and nasal itch than on nasal stuffiness. Nasal steroids are more potent in improving nasal patency than antihistamines, and are at least as potent in the control of all other nasal and ocular symptoms. Nasal patency may be improved by nasal or oral decongestants, but such treatment should be reduced to as short period as possible, since after several days of using nasal decongestants rebound congestion may occur and patients will need nasal decongestants to improve nasal airways even when allergens are not around anymore.     

Oral antihistamines for the symptom of nasal obstruction in persistent allergic rhinitis – a systematic review of randomized controlled trials

BACKGROUND: Oral antihistamines are recommended by a World Health Organisation working group as a first-line pharmacological treatment in mild persistent allergic rhinitis. There is, however, uncertainty with respect to their effectiveness for a common symptom, that of nasal obstruction. OBJECTIVE: To test the null hypothesis that oral antihistamines have no effect on the symptom of nasal obstruction in a clinical setting in patients with persistent allergic rhinitis. METHODS: Protocol based review of double-blind randomized controlled trials of oral antihistamine (i.e. drugs considered to act as a histamine receptor type-1 antagonist) vs. placebo. A search was carried out for published and unpublished trials. Individuals had to be age 12 years or older (with a diagnosis confirmed by skin prick tests, IgE blood tests or nasal allergen challenge), experiencing their normal allergen exposure. A symptom score for nasal obstruction had to be recorded. Predetermined quality criteria were applied. Treating their data as 4-point scores, a meta-analysis was carried out for studies, which provided enough data to be pooled. RESULTS: Meta-analysis found a weighted mean difference of -0.52 in favour of treatment for patient-assessed symptom scores (95% confidence interval (CI)-0.73,-0.31, P<0.00001), and of -0.33 in favour of treatment for healthcare worker assessed scores (95% CI -0.49, -0.16, P = 0.0001). CONCLUSION: Oral antihistamines cause statistically significant improvement in the symptom of nasal obstruction in patients with persistent allergic rhinitis.     

Management of rhinitis – the specialist's opinion

The aim of the guidelines in the International Consensus Report on the Diagnosis and Management of Rhinitis was to aid general practitioners (GPs) in the treatment of mild or moderate cases of seasonal allergic rhinitis (SAR), perennial allergic rhinitis (PAR) and non-allergic rhinitis. After the initial strategy of allergen avoidance, GPs have several medications at their disposal. For mild or occasional symptoms of SAR, an oral H₁-antihistamine or topical antihistamines or chromones are advised. For moderate symptoms, a topical nasal steroid can be used with or without an oral H₁-antihistamine supplemented if necessary with a topical antihistamine or chromone eyedrops. For PAR, patients should be advised on how to minimize their exposure to house-dust mite (HDM) allergens. For intermittent symptoms, an oral H₁-antihistamine and an occasional oral decongestant can be used. For persistent symptoms, a topical nasal steroid is advised, possibly supplemented with an antihistamine. For non-allergic rhinitis, irritant factors should be identified and avoided if possible. Topical or oral decongestants can be used for intermittent symptoms. Topical ipratropium bromide is useful for drying up watery rhinorrhea. For moderate symptoms, either a topical nasal steroid or topical ipratropium bromide should be used. For all the conditions, if treatment proves ineffective and symptoms are severe, then a specialist referral is appropriate. Investigations are conducted to identify causative allergens. Further treatment options include immunotherapy and minimal invasive surgery. A large clinical study is ongoing to validate the guidelines and enable the development of simpler therapeutic options according to symptom severity. In the meantime, the current guidelines provide a valuable guide to both the GP and the specialist.     

Paediatric rhinitis: position paper of the European Academy of Allergy and Clinical Immunology

Rhinitis is a common problem in childhood and adolescence and impacts negatively on physical, social and psychological well‐being. This position paper, prepared by the European Academy of Allergy and Clinical Immunology Taskforce on Rhinitis in Children, aims to provide evidence‐based recommendations for the diagnosis and therapy of paediatric rhinitis. Rhinitis is characterized by at least two nasal symptoms: rhinorrhoea, blockage, sneezing or itching. It is classified as allergic rhinitis, infectious rhinitis and nonallergic, noninfectious rhinitis. Similar symptoms may occur with other conditions such as adenoidal hypertrophy, septal deviation and nasal polyps. Examination by anterior rhinoscopy and allergy tests may help to substantiate a diagnosis of allergic rhinitis. Avoidance of relevant allergens may be helpful for allergic rhinitis (AR). Oral and intranasal antihistamines and nasal corticosteroids are both appropriate for first‐line AR treatment although the latter are more effective. Once‐daily forms of corticosteroids are preferred given their improved safety profile. Potentially useful add‐on therapies for AR include oral leukotriene receptor antagonists, short bursts of a nasal decongestant, saline douches and nasal anticholinergics. Allergen‐specific immunotherapy is helpful in IgE‐mediated AR and may prevent the progression of allergic disease. There are still a number of areas that need to be clarified in the management of rhinitis in children and adolescents.     

Pathophysiology of nasal obstruction and meta-analysis of early and late effects of levocetirizine

Nasal obstruction, also referred to as congestion, blockage or stuffiness, is a crucial symptom in allergic rhinitis (AR) and may affect sleep as well as quality of life. Early- and late-phase-allergic reactions both contribute to nasal obstruction, although it primarily represents a major symptom in the chronic allergic reaction. A complex network of inflammatory and neurogenic phenomena relates to chronic nasal obstruction, including the subepithelial accumulation of inflammatory cells, particularly mast cells and eosinophils, and the release of neuropeptides. Nasal obstruction is a difficult-to-treat symptom. Vasoconstrictors (decongestants) and intranasal corticosteroids, due to their anti-inflammatory properties, have mainly been used for relieving the nasal passages from the congested mucosa. However, there is accumulating evidence recently that the latest-generation potent antihistamines have decongestant properties in AR. This paper aims to review the pathophysiologic background of nasal obstruction and the evidence for an antihistamine, levocetirizine, in relieving nasal congestion. A meta-analysis on the early and late effects of levocetirizine on nasal obstruction under artificial and natural allergen exposure conditions is presented, demonstrating convincingly that levocetirizine shows a consistent effect on nasal obstruction as early as over the first 2 h and sustained over 6 weeks.     

Minimal persistent inflammation in allergic rhinitis: implications for current treatment strategies

Patients with allergic rhinitis have traditionally been placed into ‘seasonal’ and ‘perennial’ categories, which do not account for the subclinical inflammatory state that exists in many patients. In subjects with seasonal and perennial allergic rhinitis, even subthreshold doses of allergen have been found to cause inflammatory cell infiltration in the nasal mucosa, including increases in expression of cellular adhesion molecules, nasal and conjunctival eosinophilia, and other markers of inflammation, which do not result in overt allergy symptoms. This state – which has been termed ‘minimal persistent inflammation’– may contribute to hyperreactivity and increased susceptibility to development of clinical symptoms as well as common co‐morbidities of allergic rhinitis, such as asthma. Treating overt allergy symptoms as well as this underlying inflammatory state requires agents that have well‐established clinical efficacy, convenient administration, potent anti‐inflammatory effects and proven long‐term safety, so that long‐term continuous administration is feasible. Of the three major classes of commonly used allergic rhinitis medications – intranasal corticosteroids, anti‐histamines, and anti‐leukotrienes – intranasal corticosteroids appear to represent the most reasonable therapeutic option in patients who would benefit from continuous inhibition of persistent inflammation.     

Fluticasone propionate aqueous nasal spray compared with oral loratadine in patients with seasonal allergic rhinitis*

The effectiveness and safety of fluticasone propionate aqueous nasal spray (200 μg once daily for 4 weeks) were compared with those of loratadine (10 mg once daily for 4 weeks) in 114 adults and adolescents with seasonal allergic rhinitis in this multicenter, double-blind, double-dummy, randomized, parallel-group study. Patients recorded their nasal symptoms (nighttime and daytime obstruction, sneezing, itching, rhinorrhea, and overall discomfort) using a 4-point scale (0=no symptoms, 3=very frequent symptoms) in daily diaries. Clinicians assessed patients' nasal symptoms (nighttime and daytime obstruction, sneezing, itching, and rhinorrhea) using a 4-point scale at every scheduled visit. Clinicians and patients assessed the overall effectiveness of treatment at the end of the study. Fluticasone propionate improved clinician-rated total nasal symptom scores (defined as the sum of five nasal symptoms) more than loratadine at the 2-week and 4-week assessments (P≥0.008). Clinicians gave fluticasone propionate better global ratings than loratadine (P=0.04). After 4 weeks of treatment, between-group differences in clinician-rated individual nasal symptoms favored fluticasone propionate (P<0.05), with the exception of nasal itching (P=0.11). These findings were confirmed by between-group differences in the percentages of symptom-free days calculated from patient-recorded daily diary-card data. Both treatments were well tolerated. The incidence of adverse events between groups was similar. Fluticasone propionate aqueous nasal spray 200 μg administered once daily in the morning was more effective than loratadine 10 mg administered once daily for the treatment of seasonal allergic rhinitis.     

Pharmacologic rationale for treating allergic and nonallergic rhinitis

Allergic rhinitis (AR) and perennial nonallergic rhinitis (PNAR) represent conditions affecting millions of individuals across the world. Although the diagnosis of AR might be presumptively based on the types of symptoms and the history of allergen triggers, confirmation requires documentation of specific IgE reactivity. In contrast, PNAR is a condition with similar symptomatology but in which the patient has no identifiable specific allergic sensitivities. This review presents the diverse options of currently available pharmacologic agents for the treatment of AR and PNAR, including intranasal corticosteroids, H1-antihistamines, decongestants, cromolyn sodium, antileukotrienes, anticholinergics, capsaicin, anti-IgE, and intranasal saline. Furthermore, appropriate stepped-up, stepped-down pharmacotherapeutic algorithms are described for the various forms of rhinitis.     

Objective assessments of allergic and nonallergic rhinitis in young children

Background:  Allergic and nonallergic rhinitis are common childhood disorders.
Objective:  To study nasal eosinophilia and nasal airway patency in young children with allergic and nonallergic rhinitis to assess the pathology behind such diagnoses.
Methods:  We investigated 255 children at six years of age from the Copenhagen Prospective Study on Asthma in Childhood birth cohort assessing rhinitis history, specific immunoglobulin E relevant to rhinitis symptoms, nasal eosinophilia and nasal airway patency by acoustic rhinometry before and after decongestion. Associations were studied in a multivariate graphical model corrected for gender, height and nasal steroid usage.
Results:  Allergic rhinitis was significantly and directly associated with irreversible nasal airway obstruction (reduced decongested nasal airway patency) ( P  =   0.004), whereas nonallergic rhinitis was not. Both allergic rhinitis ( P  =   0.000) and nonallergic rhinitis ( P  =   0.014) were directly and significantly associated with nasal eosinophilia, but this association was stronger for allergic rhinitis.
Conclusion:  Allergic rhinitis and nonallergic rhinitis are of different pathologies as suggested from their different associations not only to allergy but importantly also to irreversible nasal airway obstruction and eosinophilic inflammation. Allergic rhinitis was significantly associated with nasal eosinophilia and irreversible nasal airway obstruction suggesting chronic inflammation and structural remodeling of the nasal mucosa in children at the age of 6 years. Nonallergic rhinitis exhibited no change in the nasal airway patency, but some nasal mucosal eosinophilia albeit less than children with allergic rhinitis.     

Clinical advantages of dual activity in allergic rhinitis

Symptoms of allergic rhinitis include sneezing; itching of the eyes, nose, and throat; nasal obstruction; and rhinorrhoea; they may be seasonal or perennial, depending on the causative allergen. The major symptom of perennial allergic rhinitis is nasal obstruction. Sneezing and rhinorrhoea are often present, but are less troublesome than in seasonal allergic rhinitis. Symptom relief is a priority in allergic rhinitis because patients have a severely impaired quality of life. The nasal vascular system is complex. Histamine acts on postcapillary venules during both the immediate and late phase of reactivity and causes plasma extravasation. Other inflammatory mediators can also induce this reaction. Thus, histamine antagonists that also have some additional antiallergic properties have advantages in the treatment of allergic rhinitis. Mizolastine is a second-generation antihistamine that has been shown, in experimental studies, to possess 5-lipoxygenase inhibitory properties in addition to its H₁-receptor antagonistic activity. In the treatment of seasonal allergic rhinitis, mizolastine 10 mg/day has been shown to be effective in reducing nasal and ocular symptoms. It has been shown to be significantly more effective than placebo with a greater percentage of responders. Another study has shown that symptoms of seasonal allergic rhinitis in mizolastine-treated patients were reduced more significantly than in cetirizine-treated patients on the second and third days of treatment. In perennial allergic rhinitis, mizolastine significantly improved symptoms of nasal obstruction compared with placebo and also significantly reduced nasal membrane colour, nasal secretions, and mucosal swelling as shown by rhinoscopy. These effects were maintained over a 5-month treatment period. Mizolastine has also been shown to be at least as effective as loratadine, and in one trial even superior in the treatment of perennial allergic rhinitis.     

Comparative efficacy of azelastine nasal spray and terfenadine in seasonal and perennial rhinitis

The efficacy and tolerability of intranasal azelastine (0.14 mg/nostril twice daily) and oral terfenadine (60 mg twice daily) were compared under double-blind conditions in two 6-week, multicenter, parallel-group studies, including 167 patients suffering from seasonal and 52 patients suffering from perennial allergic rhinitis. In both studies, patients were symptomatic on entry and showed significant improvement on both treatments within the first 8 d of therapy, showing little further improvement with continued treatment. Symptoms most pronounced on entry – nasal itching, rhinorrhea, sneezing, and nasal obstruction – responded best to treatment (response rates 80–90%). Objective signs such as mucosal swelling and conjunctivitis improved in a manner parallel to symptoms. In perennial rhinitis, azelastine showed a trend to a superior relief of rhinorrhea and nasal obstruction, whereas terfenadine showed a trend toward better control of sneezing and nasal itchiness. No clinically relevant or statistically significant differences between treatments could be identified. The incidence of adverse effects of possible causal relationship to therapy was low. The most frequent effects in azelastine-treated patients were related to application site disorders, e.g., nasal irritation. Results indicate that with the dose used azelastine nasal spray is an effective treatment for both seasonal and perennial allergic rhinitis.     

Idiopathic rhinitis, the ongoing quest

The term rhinitis in daily practice is used for nasal dysfunction causing symptoms-like nasal itching, sneezing, rhinorrhea and or nasal blockage. Chronic rhinitis can roughly be classified into allergic, infectious or nonallergic/noninfectious. When allergy, mechanical obstruction and infections have been excluded as the cause of rhinitis, a number of poorly defined nasal conditions of partly unknown aetiology and pathophysiology remain. The differential diagnosis of nonallergic noninfectious rhinitis is extensive. Although the percentage of patients with nonallergic noninfectious rhinitis with a known cause has increased the last decades, still about 50% of the patients with nonallergic noninfectious rhinitis has to be classified as suffering from idiopathic rhinitis (IR), or rather e causa ignota. Specific immunological, clinical and sometimes radiological and functional tests are required to distinguish known causes. Research to the underlying pathophysiology of IR has moved from autonomic neural dysbalans to inflammatory disorders (local allergy), the nonadrenergic noncholinergic (NANC) sensory peptidergic neural system and central neural hyperaesthesia, still without solid ground or proof. This review summarizes the currently known causes for nonallergic noninfectious rhinitis and possible treatments. Also possible pathophysiological mechanisms of IR are discussed.     

Differences between allergic and nonallergic rhinitis in a large sample of adolescents and adults

BACKGROUND: The aim of this study was to describe differences between allergic rhinitis (AR) and nonallergic rhinitis (NAR) in a large community-based sample of Danish adolescents and adults. METHODS: A total of 1,186 subjects, 14-44 years of age, who in a screening questionnaire had reported a history of airway symptoms suggestive of asthma and/or allergy, or who were taking any medication for these conditions were clinically examined. All participants were interviewed about respiratory symptoms and furthermore skin test reactivity, lung function and airway responsiveness were measured using standard techniques. RESULTS: A total of 77% of the subjects with rhinitis had AR, whereas 23% had NAR. Subjects with NAR were more likely to be females, OR = 2.05 (1.31-3.20), P = 0.002, to have persistent symptoms within the last 4 weeks, OR = 1.88 (1.23-2.89), P = 0.003, and to have recurring headaches, OR = 1.94, (1.12-3.37), P = 0.019. On the other hand, subjects with NAR were less likely to have airway hyperresponsiveness, OR = 0.40, (0.24-0.66), P < 0.001, food allergy, OR = 0.40, (0.19-0.36), P = 0.009 and to have been treated with antihistamines in the last 4 weeks, OR = 0.22, (0.13-0.38), P < 0.001 compared with subjects with AR. Subjects with AR were symptomatically worse within their season in terms of sneezing (P < 0.001) and itchy eyes (P < 0.001), compared to subjects with NAR, whereas nasal congestion and rhinorrhea were equally frequent in the two groups (P = 0.901 and P = 0.278, respectively). CONCLUSIONS: The proportion of subjects with NAR in an adolescent and adult population with rhinitis is around one-fourth. Women have NAR twice as often as men. In general, subjects with NAR have more persistent but equally severe symptoms compared to subjects with AR. However, subjects with AR have more sneezing and itchy eyes within their particular season of allergy compared to subjects with NAR.     

Allergic rhinitis in children

Allergic rhinitis is the most prevalent form of chronic rhinitis in children. It is driven by allergic inflammation and is commonly associated with other atopic diseases such as asthma and atopic eczema. The main allergens are primarily aeroallergens: house dust mite, and tree, grass and weed pollen. It is, however, not exceptional to experience symptoms of allergic rhinoconjunctivitis in conjunction with food allergy and oral food allergy syndrome, especially in infants and toddlers. Allergic rhinitis is often associated with allergic asthma, either preceding it, or developing later and making it more difficult to treat. The mainstay of treatment is exposure prophylaxis, antihistamines, leukotriene antagonists and intranasal corticosteroids. Allergic rhinitis is one of the prime indications for specific allergen immunotherapy, which may have a preventive effect on the development of asthma. Allergic rhinitis associated with intermittent or mild persistent asthma may be a good indication for concomitant combination treatment with antihistamines and leukotriene antagonists. Intranasal corticosteroids should not be withheld in more severe forms. Shortterm (up to 3 months) use of intranasal corticosteroids has not been associated with any significant local or systemic side effects.     

BSACI guideline for the diagnosis and management of allergic and non‐allergic rhinitis (Revised Edition 2017; First edition 2007)

This is an updated guideline for the diagnosis and management of allergic and non‐allergic rhinitis, first published in 2007. It was produced by the Standards of Care Committee of the British Society of Allergy and Clinical Immunology, using accredited methods. Allergic rhinitis is common and affects 10–15% of children and 26% of adults in the UK, it affects quality of life, school and work attendance, and is a risk factor for development of asthma. Allergic rhinitis is diagnosed by history and examination, supported by specific allergy tests. Topical nasal corticosteroids are the treatment of choice for moderate to severe disease. Combination therapy with intranasal corticosteroid plus intranasal antihistamine is more effective than either alone and provides second line treatment for those with rhinitis poorly controlled on monotherapy. Immunotherapy is highly effective when the specific allergen is the responsible driver for the symptoms. Treatment of rhinitis is associated with benefits for asthma. Non‐allergic rhinitis also is a risk factor for the development of asthma and may be eosinophilic and steroid‐responsive or neurogenic and non‐ inflammatory. Non‐allergic rhinitis may be a presenting complaint for systemic disorders such as granulomatous or eosinophilic polyangiitis, and sarcoidoisis. Infective rhinitis can be caused by viruses, and less commonly by bacteria, fungi and protozoa.