Dataset Information

Safety and efficacy of Nasya/Prevalin in reducing symptoms of allergic rhinitis.

ABSTRACT: Nasya/Prevalin is a natural, drug-free nasal spray for treatment and prevention of allergic rhinitis. Because of its thixotropic property, it forms a barrier on the nasal mucosa, preventing allergen contact. This study assesses the clinical efficacy and safety of Nasya/Prevalin in a nasal provocation test with house dust mite allergens.In this randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial, 20 subjects suffering from allergic rhinitis because of house dust mite allergens received a single dose of Nasya/Prevalin or saline spray before allergen challenge. Total nasal symptom score and total ocular symptom score were assessed 15, 30, 60, 75, 90, 120 and 240?min after challenge. Further, the appearance of the mucosa was examined by rhinoscopy.A single treatment with Nasya/Prevalin led to a significant reduction of TNSS at 60, 75 and 90?min after dust mite allergen challenge as compared with placebo (pVCAS ?=?0.021, pVCAS ?=?0.035, pVCAS ?=?0.036, respectively). Mucosa changes assessed by the rhinoscopic score (on swelling, secretion and colour) were significantly worse in the placebo group compared with the Nasya/Prevalin group (P?=?0.033). Nasya/Prevalin was well tolerated, and the safety was comparable with placebo.Treatment with Nasya/Prevalin was effective in preventing allergic reactions induced by dust mite allergen challenge.

SUBMITTER: Stoelzel K

PROVIDER: S-EPMC4235399 | biostudies-literature | 2014 Oct

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Safety and efficacy of Nasya/Prevalin in reducing symptoms of allergic rhinitis.

Stoelzel Katharina K Bothe Gordana G Chong Pee Win PW Lenarz Minoo M

The clinical respiratory journal 20131223 4

<h4>Background</h4>Nasya/Prevalin is a natural, drug-free nasal spray for treatment and prevention of allergic rhinitis. Because of its thixotropic property, it forms a barrier on the nasal mucosa, preventing allergen contact. This study assesses the clinical efficacy and safety of Nasya/Prevalin in a nasal provocation test with house dust mite allergens.<h4>Methodology/principal</h4>In this randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial, 20 subjects suffering from allergic rhinitis because ...[more]

PMID: 24279907

Similar Datasets

Project description:Bilastine is a non-sedating second generation H1 oral antihistamine (OAH) for treating allergic rhinitis (AR) patients. The effect of bilastine has not previously been evaluated in a meta-analysis. The aim of this review was to determine the efficacy and safety of bilastine in treating AR. An electronic literature search was performed using Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), MEDLINE, Science Direct and Google Scholar up to March 2021. Randomized controlled trials comparing bilastine with placebo and standard pharmacotherapy were included. The included studies must have diagnosis of AR established by clinicians and the outcomes must have a minimum of 2 weeks of follow-up period. The primary outcomes assessed were total symptom score (TSS), nasal symptom score (NSS) and non-nasal symptom score (NNSS). The secondary outcomes were discomfort due to rhinitis, quality of life (QOL) and adverse events. The risk of bias and quality of evidence for all studies were appraised. The meta-analysis was done using Review Manager 5.3 software based on the random-effects model. The search identified 135 records after removal of duplicates. Following screening and review of the records, fifteen full-text articles were assessed for eligibility. Five trials involving 3,329 patients met the inclusion criteria. Bilastine was superior to placebo in improving TSS, NSS, NNSS, rhinitis discomfort score and QOL but has comparable efficacy with other OAHs in TSS, NSS, NNS, rhinitis discomfort score and QOL. There was no difference in adverse effects when bilastine was compared against placebo and other OAHs except for somnolence. Bilastine has fewer incidence of somnolence compared to cetirizine. The overall quality of evidence ranged from moderate to high quality. Bilastine is effective and safe in treating the overall symptoms of AR with comparable efficacy and safety with other OAHs except somnolence. Whilst bilastine has similar efficacy to cetirizine, somnolence is notably less in bilastine.

Project description:IntroductionThe safety and efficacy of fluticasone furoate nasal spray (FFNS) for the symptoms of seasonal and perennial allergic rhinitis have been previously demonstrated in several clinical studies. The objective of this pilot study was to compare the efficacy and safety of FFNS 110 mcg once daily with placebo in patients with irritant (non-allergic) rhinitis triggered predominantly by air pollution.MethodsThis was a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, 4-week study of subjects in Thailand with irritant rhinitis who received either FFNS 110 mcg (N=53) or placebo (N=49) once-daily. Subjects with a ≥2 year history of air pollution as their predominant rhinitis trigger, negative skin test to local seasonal/perennial allergens, positive histamine skin test, and normal sinus radiograph were enrolled if they met minimum reflective total nasal symptom score (rTNSS) ≥4.5 (maximum=9) and a nasal congestion score of ≥2 (maximum =3). All were assessed for nasal eosinophilia at study entry and completion. Air quality was monitored throughout the study. The primary efficacy endpoint was the mean change from baseline over the treatment period in daily rTNSS, the average of the morning and evening rTNSS. The key secondary measure was the mean change from baseline over the entire treatment period in morning pre-dose instantaneous total nasal symptom score (iTNSS).ResultsThe Air Quality Index (AQI) during the study generally did not reach unhealthy levels. Baseline daily rTNSS scores were similar between treatment groups (FFNS=6.7; placebo=6.4). The least square mean change from baseline in rTNSS was -2.17 and -2.10 for FFNS and placebo, respectively, with a difference of -0.065 (p=0.845). Gradual improvements were seen in both treatment groups for iTNSS; however, the treatment difference (-0.075) was not statistically significant (p=0.827). Additionally, there were no statistically significant differences between treatment groups for AM and PM rTNSS, individual nasal symptoms, daily reflective, AM and PM reflective and AM pre-dose instantaneous total ocular symptom scores (TOSS) or individual ocular symptom scores. Nasal cytology at baseline found more than two-thirds of subjects had <20% eosinophils. Adverse events were few and similar between groups and noted as mild in intensity.ConclusionSubjects receiving FFNS had similar improvement to placebo in their rhinitis symptoms. The lack of a treatment effect may be in part due to the overall good air quality present throughout the study or an insufficient dose or duration of FFNS. The safety findings showed FFNS 110 mcg once daily to be well tolerated.

Project description:BackgroundMany previous studies have shown the potential therapeutic effect of acupuncture for allergic rhinitis. Most of these studies, however, were limited by the short duration of observations and lack of sham acupuncture as the control group. Our preliminary experiments showed that the use of a warm needling achieved a much more persistent effect in the treatment of allergic rhinitis (AR) compared with simple acupuncture therapy. Hence, we have designed a multicenter, randomized controlled trial (RCT) in which the first-line medication loratadine will be used as the control group, and the effect of warm needling therapy will be evaluated through long-term observation.Methods/designThe trial is designed as a multicenter, parallel-group, randomized, single-blinded (outcome assessors), non-inferiority trial. A total of 98 patients with persistent AR will be randomly assigned into two groups. Patients in the treatment group will be treated with warm needling at GV14 and acupuncture at EX-HN3, ST2, LI20, EX-HN8, GV23, LU7, LU5 and LI4 three times a week, for a total of 4 weeks. Patients in the control group will be treated with oral loratadine 10 mg/day for 4 weeks. The primary outcome will be the change in the Total Nasal Symptom Score (TNSS) from baseline to that at 6 months after treatment during the follow-up period. The secondary outcomes will include the Total Non-nasal Symptom Score and the Rhinoconjunctivitis Quality of Life Questionnaire, changes in the TNSS from baseline to that at 2 and 4 weeks during treatment, and 3 months after treatment during the follow-up period. Outcomes will be measured at 2 and 4 weeks, and 3 and 6 months after treatment. Any side effects of treatment will be observed and recorded.DiscussionWe expect that the study results will provide evidence to determine the effects of warm needling compared with loratadine. Our final goal of the study is to evaluate the difference in the short-term and long-term effects between the two therapeutic methods, especially the long-term effect of warm needling.Trial registrationClinicalTrials.gov NCT02339714 . Registered on 14 January 2015.

Dataset Information

Safety and efficacy of Nasya/Prevalin in reducing symptoms of allergic rhinitis.

Publications

Safety and efficacy of Nasya/Prevalin in reducing symptoms of allergic rhinitis.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets