Efficacy and safety of mometasone furoate nasal spray in nasal polyposis

BACKGROUND: Studies have suggested that topical corticosteroids are effective in the treatment of nasal polyps; however, this has yet to be confirmed in a large, robust clinical trial. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the efficacy and safety of mometasone furoate nasal spray (MFNS) for nasal polyposis. METHODS: A total of 354 subjects with bilateral nasal polyps and clinically significant congestion/obstruction participated in this multinational, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled study. Subjects received MFNS 200 microg once or twice daily or placebo for 4 months. Coprimary endpoints were (1) change from baseline to last assessment in physician-evaluated bilateral polyp grade score and (2) change from baseline averaged over month 1 in subject-assessed nasal congestion/obstruction. ANOVA was used for all efficacy endpoints, except for change in bilateral polyp grade score, for which baseline polyp grade was added as a covariate. RESULTS: Compared with placebo, MFNS 200 microg administered once or twice daily produced significantly greater reductions in bilateral polyp grade score (P < .001, P = .010, respectively) and congestion/obstruction (P = .001, P < .001), as well as improvement in loss of smell (P < .001, P = .036), anterior rhinorrhea (P < .001 for both), and postnasal drip (P < .001, P = .001) over month 1. MFNS 200 microg twice daily was superior to MFNS 200 microg once daily in reducing congestion/obstruction (P = .039), and there were more improvers in the MFNS 200 microg twice daily group (P = .035). MFNS was well tolerated in both groups. CONCLUSION: MFNS 200 mug, once or twice daily, was safe and significantly superior to placebo in reducing polyp grade (size and extent) and improving congestion/obstruction and return of sense of smell. MFNS is an effective medical treatment for nasal polyposis and may reduce or delay the need for surgery.     

Nasal allergies and beyond: a clinical review of the pharmacology, efficacy, and safety of mometasone furoate

Mometasone furoate nasal spray (MFNS; Nasonex^®, Schering-Plough Corporation, Kenilworth, NJ, USA) is an effective and well-tolerated intranasal corticosteroid approved for the prophylactic treatment of seasonal allergic rhinitis, and the treatment of perennial allergic rhinitis. MFNS is a potent molecule with a rapid onset of action and excellent safety and efficacy profiles. Having recently received approval for the treatment of nasal polyposis, data indicate that MFNS may also be effective in rhinosinusitis.     

Onset of action of mometasone furoate nasal spray (NASONEX) in seasonal allergic rhinitis

BACKGROUND: Mometasone furoate nasal spray (MFNS, NASONEX ), is a new synthetic corticosteroid with considerable efficacy in the treatment of seasonal and perennial rhinitis and less than 0.1% systemic absorption. This study was designed to evaluate the time of onset of action of MFNS. The subjects were evaluated over the course of 2 weeks during the spring allergy season. METHODS: The effects of MFNS 200 microg given once daily for 2 weeks were evaluated in a randomized, multicenter, double-blind, placebo-controlled study in 201 patients with seasonal allergic rhinitis. Clinically significant onset of action was assessed prospectively by special patient diary cards kept during the first 3 days of treatment. RESULTS: By 12 h after initial dosage (the earliest evaluation), 28% of patients in the MFNS group experienced clinically significant relief, compared with 13% of those given placebo (P = 0.01). Median time to at least moderate symptom relief in patients who received MFNS was 35.9 h, compared with more than 72 h in patients given placebo (P<0.01). By 72 h, 64% of the patients receiving MFNS experienced at least moderate relief, compared with 40% of those treated with placebo (P<0.01). Both patient and physician ratings of symptom severity, response to treatment, and overall condition of rhinitis indicated significant (P<0.01) superiority of MFNS over placebo. MFNS was well tolerated, with adverse events comparable to placebo. CONCLUSIONS: MFNS provided rapid onset of clinically significant symptom relief in patients with seasonal allergic rhinitis.     

Mometasone furoate monohydrate nasal spray for the treatment of nasal congestion in allergic rhinitis

Allergic rhinitis (AR) affects an estimated 20–40 million Americans annually. It is a multifaceted condition comprising a range of symptoms, including nasal congestion, arguably the most bothersome symptom. Of the various types of medications available for the treatment of AR, intranasal corticosteroids are considered the most effective. Mometasone furoate nasal spray is an intranasal corticosteroid with anti-inflammatory properties. It is indicated for the treatment of the nasal symptoms of seasonal AR and perennial AR in adults and children, for the prophylaxis of nasal symptoms of seasonal AR and for the treatment of nasal polyps. Numerous clinical trials have demonstrated that mometasone furoate nasal spray effectively relieves nasal congestion in adults and children with AR, while providing excellent safety and tolerability.     

Efficacy of mometasone furoate nasal spray in the treatment of allergic rhinitis. Meta-analysis of randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, clinical trials

Rationale: Several randomized, double‐blind, placebo‐controlled clinical trials have demonstrated the efficacy of mometasone furoate nasal spray (MFNS) in the treatment of allergic rhinitis (AR) thus allowing for a meta‐analysis to determine the overall treatment effect. Methods: A comprehensive search of the MEDLINE, LILACS, SCOPUS, and the Cochrane Library databases up to 31 October, 2007 was carried out. Randomized, double‐blind, placebo‐controlled, clinical trials evaluating the efficacy of MFNS in patients with AR compared to placebo were included. Total nasal symptom scores (TNSS), individual nasal symptoms, total non‐nasal symptom scores (TNNSS) and nasal airflow were analysed as the standardized mean difference (SMD). Meta‐analysis was performed with the random or the fixed effect models depending on heterogeneity, by using revman 5 software. Data synthesis: Sixteen of the 113 identified articles met the inclusion criteria. For MFNS efficacy on TNSS, 2998 participants were analysed: 1534 received MFNS and 1464 placebo. Mometasone furoate nasal spray was associated with a significant reduction in TNSS (SMD ?0.49, 95% CI: ?0.60 to ?0.38; P < 0.00001; I² = 50.1%). A significant effect on SMD for nasal stuffiness/congestion (?0.41; 95% CI: ?0.56 to ?0.27), rhinorrhoea (?0.44; 95% CI: ?0.66 to ?0.21), sneezing (?0.40; 95% CI: ?0.57 to ?0.23) and nasal itching (?0.39; 95% CI: ?0.53 to ?0.25) was also demonstrated. Mometasone furoate nasal spray treated subjects also showed a significant reduction in TNNSS (?0.30; 95% CI: ?0.43 to ?0.18). The proportion of patients with adverse events was similar for MFNS and placebo (0.99; 95% CI: 0.81–1.20; P = 0.91). Conclusions: This meta‐analysis provides a level Ia evidence for the efficacy of MFSN in the treatment of AR vs placebo. Adverse events frequency was similar in both groups.     

Once daily fluticasone furoate nasal spray is effective in seasonal allergic rhinitis caused by grass pollen

BACKGROUND: Fluticasone furoate is a new enhanced-affinity glucocorticoid with a unique combination of pharmacodynamic and physicochemical properties suitable for topical activity. METHODS: In this multicentre, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, parallel-group study, patients [adults and adolescents >or=12 years of age with seasonal allergic rhinitis (SAR)] received once-daily (od) treatment for 2 weeks with either fluticasone furoate nasal spray 110 microg (n = 141) or placebo nasal spray (n = 144) administered in a unique, side-actuated device. Efficacy measures included total nasal symptom score (TNSS) and total ocular symptom score (TOSS). Patients also reported their overall response to therapy and rated their quality of life using the Rhinoconjunctivitis Quality of Life Questionnaire (RQLQ). RESULTS: Fluticasone furoate significantly improved the mean change from baseline in daily reflective TNSS compared with placebo (treatment difference of -1.757; P < 0.001). Fluticasone furoate was also significantly more effective in improving the morning predose instantaneous TNSS (treatment difference of -1.898; P < 0.001) and daily reflective TOSS (treatment difference of -0.741; P = 0.001). A significant treatment effect was observed as early as day 1. Compared with placebo-treated patients, fluticasone furoate-treated patients showed significantly greater improvements in overall evaluation of response to therapy (P < 0.001), as well as in overall RQLQ score (P < 0.001). Fluticasone furoate was well tolerated. CONCLUSION: Fluticasone furoate nasal spray 110 mug od was effective in improving the nasal symptoms of SAR. It also produced significant improvements in ocular symptoms.     

Long-term safety of fluticasone furoate nasal spray in adults and adolescents with perennial allergic rhinitis

BACKGROUND: Fluticasone furoate is a novel-enhanced affinity glucocorticoid and its long-term safety must be assessed. This study was designed to assess the safety and tolerability of 12-month intranasal administration of fluticasone furoate in adult and adolescent patients with perennial allergic rhinitis (PAR). METHODS: In this randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, parallel-group study, 806 patients with PAR were randomized to once daily (od) fluticasone furoate nasal spray 110 microg (n = 605) or vehicle placebo nasal spray (n = 201) for 12 months, following a 7- to 14-day screening period. Safety was assessed by monitoring adverse events (AEs), 24-h urinary cortisol excretion, nasal and ophthalmic examinations, electrocardiograms and clinical laboratory tests. Plasma concentrations of fluticasone furoate were determined from blood samples. RESULTS: Fluticasone furoate was well tolerated. The incidence of most AEs was similar to that observed with placebo, with the exception of epistaxis, which was more frequently reported on active treatment. There were no clinically meaningful differences between fluticasone furoate and placebo in terms of safety assessments, including mean changes in ophthalmic parameters and 24-h urine cortisol excretion. Plasma concentrations of fluticasone furoate were not quantifiable in the majority of patients following intranasal administration. CONCLUSIONS: Long-term (12-month) administration of fluticasone furoate 110 microg od revealed an AE profile typical of the intranasal corticosteroid class in both adult and adolescent patients with PAR, with no evidence of clinically relevant systemic corticosteroid exposure.     

Effective dose range of mometasone furoate nasal spray in the treatment of acute rhinosinusitis.

BACKGROUND: Mometasone furoate nasal spray (MFNS) 400 microg, twice daily, as adjunctive treatment with oral antibiotic significantly improved symptoms of recurrent rhinosinusitis. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the effectiveness and safety of MFNS 200 microg, twice daily, and 400 microg, twice daily, compared with placebo as adjunctive treatment with oral antibiotic for acute rhinosinusitis. METHODS: In this multicenter, double-blind, placebo-controlled study, 967 outpatients with computed tomographic scan-confirmed moderate to severe rhinosinusitis received amoxicillin/clavulanate potassium (Augmentin, GlaxoSmithKline, Research Triangle Park, NC) 875 mg, twice daily, for 21 days with adjunctive twice daily MFNS 200 microg, MFNS 400 microg, or placebo nasal spray. Patients recorded scores of six rhinosinusitis symptoms and any adverse events twice daily. Pre- and postcosyntropin-stimulation plasma cortisol levels were measured in a subset of patients at selected study sites. RESULTS: Treatment with MFNS 200 microg or 400 microg, twice daily, produced significantly greater improvements in total symptoms score (primary efficacy variable) day 1 to day 15 average (50% and 51%, respectively) than placebo (44%, P < or = 0.017). Both doses of MFNS produced significant total symptoms score improvement over placebo by day 4, and maintained efficacy over the entire 21-day study. Relief of individual symptoms showed a similar pattern. Both doses of MFNS were well tolerated, and adverse events were similar to that of placebo. Cosyntropin stimulation showed no evidence of hypothalamic-pituitary-adrenal axis suppression. CONCLUSIONS: As adjunctive therapy to oral antibiotic treatment, MFNS at doses of 200 microg or 400 microg, twice daily, was well tolerated and significantly more effective in reducing the symptoms of rhinosinusitis than antibiotic therapy alone.     

Once-daily mometasone furcate aqueous nasal spray (Nasonex™) in seasonal allergic rhinitis: an active- and placebo-controlled study

Mometasone furoate aqueous nasal spray (Nasonex™) was compared with beclomethasone dipropionate (BDP) aqueous nasal spray in a double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled, double-dummy, parallel-group study of adults with moderate to severe seasonal allergic rhinitis. Patients allergic to at least one tree and/or grass aeroallergen received one of the following regimens for up to 4 weeks: mometasone furoate 100 μg once daily [OD] ( n = 126) or 200 μg OD ( n = 126), BDP 200 μg twice daily ( n = 126), or only placebo spray ( n = 123). Physician-rated nasal and total symptom scores, and global evaluation of overall condition and therapeutic response by physicians and patients, showed that the three active treatments were equally effective, and all three were significantly superior to placebo at most time points. Overall, mometasone furoate 200 μg OD demonstrated somewhat greater numerical, but not statistical, superiority to mometasone furoate 100 μg OD at the earliest evaluation time point. At the end of treatment, complete or marked relief was obtained in 77% of patients with mometasone furoate 100 μg/day, 79% with mometasone furoate 200 μg/day, and 74% with BDP, compared with 54% of placebo vehicle control patients. Mometasone furoate and BDP were equally well tolerated. It was concluded that mometasone furoate adequately controls symptoms of moderate to severe seasonal allergic rhinitis, offers the advantage of OD treatment, and is well tolerated.     

The role of patient training in the management of seasonal rhinitis and asthma: clinical implications

BACKGROUND: Allergic rhinitis is an inflammatory disease often associated with bronchial asthma. Intranasal corticosteroids and oral antihistamines are the first-choice drugs. Patient training is relevant to asthma management, but little is known about its impact on rhinitis. We evaluated the role of patient training in the treatment of allergic rhinitis and its effects on nasal and bronchial symptoms. METHODS: One hundred and one patients (M/F = 62/39, age range 12-62 years) with pollen-induced rhinitis (32 with concomitant mild asthma) were enrolled. They were randomized into three groups: A (n = 30) with drug therapy alone, B (n = 35) with drug therapy plus training on the use of nasal spray, and C (n = 36) the same as B plus a lesson on rhinitis and asthma. All patients received mometasone furoate nasal spray for 8 weeks as regular therapy, plus rescue medications on demand. Symptoms and drug consumption were evaluated during the pollen season. RESULTS: The rate of noncompliance/dropout was highest in the untrained patients (P = 0.001). No difference in nasal symptoms was seen among the three groups. On the other hand, group C had significantly fewer asthma symptoms (P = 0.02) and less albuterol use (P = 0.005) than group A. Moreover, the trained group globally used less rescue medication than the other groups (P = 0.02). CONCLUSIONS: Detailed training of patients seems to improve compliance with treatment, reduce concomitant asthma symptoms, and reduce the use of symptomatic drugs.     

Fluticasone furoate nasal spray: a single treatment option for the symptoms of seasonal allergic rhinitis

BACKGROUND: Fluticasone furoate (USAN-approved name) is a novel, enhanced-affinity glucocorticoid administered in a unique side-actuated device for the management of seasonal allergic rhinitis (SAR). OBJECTIVE: We sought to evaluate the efficacy and safety of once-daily fluticasone furoate nasal spray, 110 microg, in patients aged 12 years or older with fall SAR. METHODS: Patients (n = 299) received fluticasone furoate or placebo for 2 weeks in this double-blind, parallel-group randomized study. Patients evaluated nasal and ocular symptoms using a 4-point categoric scale. Efficacy was assessed on the basis of the mean change from baseline in reflective and instantaneous total nasal symptom scores and reflective total ocular symptom scores. RESULTS: Fluticasone furoate produced significantly greater improvements than placebo in daily reflective total nasal symptom score (-1.473, P < .001; primary end point), morning predose instantaneous total nasal symptom score (-1.375, P < .001), daily reflective total ocular symptom score (-0.600, P = .004), and patient-rated overall response to therapy (P < .001). The onset of therapeutic effect occurred at 8 hours after initial administration. Fluticasone furoate was well tolerated. CONCLUSION: Fluticasone furoate, 110 microg once daily, was effective and well tolerated for the treatment of nasal symptoms of SAR in patients aged 12 years and older. Treatment also produced significant improvements in ocular symptoms. Fluticasone furoate was fast acting, as indicated by an 8-hour onset of action, and provided 24-hour symptom control. CLINICAL IMPLICATIONS: New treatments for the bothersome symptoms of SAR are needed. One such treatment, fluticasone furoate nasal spray, provides effective relief of the symptom profile of SAR.     

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.     

Efficacy and tolerability of fluticasone propionate nasal drops 400 μg once daily compared with placebo for the treatment of bilateral polyposis in adults

BACKGROUND: Chronic eosinophilic rhinosinusitis underlies a range of respiratory disorders including nasal polyposis. Surgical and medical methods are used to control polyps, with topical steroids commonly being used for their anti-inflammatory properties. Fluticasone propionate nasal drops (FPND) is a formulation developed specifically for an effective and well tolerated corticosteroid treatment of nasal polyposis. OBJECTIVES: To assess efficacy and tolerability of FPND in the treatment of bilateral nasal polyposis in adults. METHODS: This multicentre, randomized, parallel-group study compared FPND 400 microgram once daily (o.d.) with placebo for 12 weeks in adult patients with mild to moderate bilateral polyposis. The primary efficacy endpoint was visual assessment of polyp size by the physician at monthly clinic visits. Nasal blockage, rhinitis, peak nasal inspiratory flow (PNIF), olfactory function and requirement for polypectomy were also assessed at visits. The patients kept diary card records of symptoms, PNIF, and use of rescue antihistamine. Additional safety data were provided by a 12-week open extension, when all patients received FPND 400 microgram o.d. RESULTS: After 12 weeks double-blind treatment with FPND (n = 52) or placebo (n = 52), polyp size was reduced in 27% and 16% of patients, respectively; clinical reduction of nasal blockage significantly favoured FPND over placebo (55% vs 22%; P = 0.002), and clinic PNIF had increased significantly with FPND (by 52 L/min vs -3 L/min for placebo; P < 0.001). Diary card measurements showed significant benefits of FPND vs placebo for daily PNIF, nasal blockage, rhinitis and use of loratadine rescue medication. Both treatments were well tolerated and no serious adverse events occurred during randomized treatment. Epistaxis was more frequent with FPND than placebo but was generally mild and did not result in withdrawals. Mean serum cortisol levels did not change significantly with either treatment. CONCLUSION: This study showed FPND 400 microgram o.d. to be an effective and well tolerated treatment for bilateral nasal polyposis in adults.     

United airways again: high prevalence of rhinosinusitis and nasal polyps in bronchiectasis

Background: Although various relationships between the lower and upper airways have been found, the association of bronchiectasis with chronic rhinosinusitis and nasal polyps has not been thoroughly evaluated. This study was undertaken to examine the association of idiopathic and postinfective bronchiectasis with chronic rhinosinusitis and nasal polyposis. Methods: In a prospective study, 56 patients with idiopathic and 32 with postinfective bronchiectasis were evaluated for chronic rhinosinusitis and nasal polyposis by using EP³OS criteria and assessing: symptoms score, nasal endoscopy, sinonasal and chest CT scan, nasal and lung function and nasal and exhaled NO. Results: Most bronchiectasis patients (77%) satisfied the EP³OS criteria for chronic rhinosinusitis, with anterior (98.5%) and posterior (91%) rhinorrhea and nasal congestion (90%) being the major symptoms. Patients presented maxillary, ethmoidal and ostiomeatal complex occupancy with a total CT score of 8.4 ± 0.4 (0–24). Using endoscopy, nasal polyps with a moderate score of 1.6 ± 0.1 (0–3) were found in 25% of patients. Nasal NO was significantly lower in patients with nasal polyposis (347 ± 62 ppb) than in those without them (683 ± 76 ppb; P < 0.001), and inversely correlated (R = ?0.36; P < 0.01) with the ostiomeatal complex occupancy. In the chest CT scan, patients with chronic rhinosinusitis showed a higher bronchiectasis severity score (7.2 ± 0.5; P < 0.001) than patients without (3.7 ± 0.7). The prevalence of chronic rhinosinusitis, nasal polyps and other outcomes were similar in idiopathic and postinfective bronchiectasis. Conclusions: The frequent association of chronic rhinosinusitis and nasal polyposis with idiopathic and postinfective BQ supports the united airways concept, and it suggests that the two type of bronchiectasis share common etiopathogenic mechanisms.