Dataset Information

A patient preference study that evaluated fluticasone furoate and mometasone furoate nasal sprays for allergic rhinitis.

ABSTRACT:

Background

Corticosteroid nasal sprays are the mainstay of treatment for allergic rhinitis. These sprays have sensory attributes such as scent and/or odor, taste and aftertaste, and run down the throat and/or the nose, which, when unpleasant, can affect patient preference for, and compliance with, treatment.

Objective

This study examined patient preference for fluticasone furoate nasal spray (FFNS) or mometasone furoate nasal spray (MFNS) based on their sensory attributes after administration in patients with allergic rhinitis.

Methods

This was a multicenter, randomized, double-blind, cross-over study. Patient preferences were determined by using three questionnaires (Overall Preference, Immediate Attributes, and Delayed Attributes).

Results

Overall, 56% of patients stated a preference for FFNS versus 32% for MFNS (p < 0.001); the remaining 12% stated no preference. More patients stated a preference for FFNS versus MFNS for the attributes of "less drip down the throat" (p < 0.001), "less run out of the nose" (p < 0.05), "more soothing" (p < 0.05), and "less irritating" (p < 0.001). More patients responded in favor of FFNS versus MFNS for the immediate attributes, "run down the throat" (p < 0.001), and "run out of the nose" (p < 0.001), and, in the delayed attributes, "run down the throat" (p < 0.001), "run out of the nose" (p < 0.01), "presence of aftertaste" (p < 0.01), and "no nasal irritation" (p < 0.001).

Conclusion

Patients with allergic rhinitis preferred FFNS versus MFNS overall and based on a number of individual attributes, including "less drip down the throat," "less run out of the nose," and "less irritating." Greater preference may improve patient adherence and thereby improve symptom management of the patient's allergic rhinitis.

SUBMITTER: Yanez A

PROVIDER: S-EPMC5244277 | biostudies-literature | 2016 Jan

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

A patient preference study that evaluated fluticasone furoate and mometasone furoate nasal sprays for allergic rhinitis.

Yanez Anahi A Dimitroff Alex A Bremner Peter P Rhee Chae-Seo CS Luscombe Graham G Prillaman Barbara A BA Johnson Neil N

Allergy & rhinology (Providence, R.I.) 20160101 4

<h4>Background</h4>Corticosteroid nasal sprays are the mainstay of treatment for allergic rhinitis. These sprays have sensory attributes such as scent and/or odor, taste and aftertaste, and run down the throat and/or the nose, which, when unpleasant, can affect patient preference for, and compliance with, treatment.<h4>Objective</h4>This study examined patient preference for fluticasone furoate nasal spray (FFNS) or mometasone furoate nasal spray (MFNS) based on their sensory attributes after ad ...[more]

PMID: 28683244

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundIntranasal corticosteroids are the most efficacious anti-inflammatory medications for allergic rhinitis (AR). However, the efficacy and safety of intranasal corticosteroids in children have not yet been subject to specific research in China. The aim of this study was to investigate the efficacy and safety of fluticasone furoate nasal spray (FFNS) in a Chinese pediatric population.MethodsIn this phase 4 randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, multicenter study, pediatric AR patients aged 2-12 years were randomized 1:1:1, receiving either FFNS 55 µg or 110 µg or placebo. Electronic diary cards were completed to record symptoms, rescue medication use, and treatment compliance. Anterior rhinoscopy and overall response to therapy were evaluated and recorded.ResultsPatients treated with FFNS at either dose experienced a significantly greater reduction in daily reflective total nasal symptom score compared with placebo. This was maintained in a younger subset of patients (2-6 years). Drug-related adverse events occurred in <20% of patients in all groups. FFNS was well tolerated at both doses.ConclusionsThis study demonstrates favorable efficacy and safety profiles for FFNS 55 µg or 110 µg in Chinese pediatric populations (2-12 years), supporting its use in clinical treatment for AR children, including younger children aged 2-6 years.ImpactThe aim of this study was to investigate the efficacy and safety of intranasal fluticasone furoate in Chinese pediatric allergic rhinitis. This research not only addresses the deficiency in efficacy and safety data for intranasal corticosteroids in very young patients (aged 2-6 years) worldwide but also demonstrates that fluticasone furoate nasal spray shows a favorable benefit/risk profile at different dose levels. Our data will be of interest to the broad readership of Pediatric Research and will positively contribute to the dialog regarding the treatment of allergic rhinitis in children aged 2-6 years.

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.

Dataset Information

A patient preference study that evaluated fluticasone furoate and mometasone furoate nasal sprays for allergic rhinitis.

Background

Objective

Methods

Results

Conclusion

Publications

A patient preference study that evaluated fluticasone furoate and mometasone furoate nasal sprays for allergic rhinitis.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets