Project description:Background:Local and systemic glucocorticoids are mainstay therapies for chronic rhinosinusitis. With respect to local glucocorticoids, nasal spray is used extensively, but some patients do not benefit from short-course treatment. Recently, some clinicians have focused on the effects of high-dose local glucocorticoids in chronic rhinosinusitis with nasal polyps (CRSwNP), such as treatment using nasal irrigation, transnasal nebulization, and nose-dripping therapy (nasal drop) with high-dose budesonide. However, there are little data comparing the effect of short-course high-dose local glucocorticoids with regular nasal spray and oral steroids in the treatment of preoperative CRSwNP patients. Furthermore, the appropriate use of different types of glucocorticoids in different endotypes of CRSwNP remains unclear. Methods:This randomized controlled clinical research study was performed at a single academic center. Patients who satisfied the criteria of chronic rhinosinusitis with bilateral nasal polyps were randomly assigned in a 1:1:1 ratio to receive oral methylprednisolone, 24 mg/d and budesonide nasal spray, 256 ?g/d, or intranasal budesonide suspension, 1 mg/d and budesonide nasal spray, 256 ?g/d, or budesonide nasal spray, 256 ?g/d for one week. Symptoms, endoscopic scores, and tissue and blood inflammatory cells were recorded before and after the study. Adverse events were recorded by clinicians. Results:A total of 127 patients with CRSwNP underwent randomization. The total nasal symptoms scores (TNSS) decreased significantly in all groups compared to those at baseline. The assessment of the reduction in TNSS demonstrated that the change was significantly greater in the nasal drop group than in the nasal spray group (-7.47 vs -4.10, P = 0.032), and it was also greater in the oral steroid group than in the nasal spray group (-7.30 vs -4.10, P = 0.039). A similar trend also appeared in the reduction in Sinonasal-Outcome Test 22 (SNOT-22). After treatment, a significantly reduction in NP score was observed in the nasal drop group (-0.82) and oral steroid group (-0.85) compared with that in the nasal spray group (-0.10), and there was no significant difference between the nasal drop and oral steroid groups (P = 0.98). While calculating the percentage of patients who were sensitive to glucocorticoid treatment, there was 10.26% in the nasal spray group, 47.37% in the nasal drop group, and 52.50% in the oral steroid group that were sensitive to glucocorticoid treatment. The reduction in NP score was more significant in patients with eosinophilic CRSwNP in the nasal drop group and oral steroid group than in the nasal spray group. However, in patients with non-eosinophilic CRSwNP, the change in NP size was similar in the different treatment groups. Conclusion:Budesonide suspension nasal drop can significantly improve the quality of life and reduce the endoscopic score following short-course treatment, and the treatment effect of nasal drop was better than that of regular nasal spray. Budesonide nasal suspension can be used as a regular treatment for eosinophilic CRSwNP and can be an alternative choice for patients with a high percentage of tissue eosinophil infiltration who cannot use oral glucocorticoids.
Project description:Research in immunology has brought great progress in knowledge of inflammatory processes in the last 2 decades, which also has an impact on the upper airways. Our understanding of the pathophysiology of chronic rhinosinusitis developed from a rather mechanistic point of view with a focus on narrow clefts and mucociliary clearance to the appreciation of a complex network of immunological pathways forming the basis of disease. We today differentiate various forms of inflammation, we start to understand complex immune-regulatory networks and the reasons for their failure, and have already developed innovative approaches for therapy for the most severely ill subjects. Due to this new knowledge in inflammation and remodeling processes within mucosal tissue, specifically on the key driving factors, new diagnostic tools and therapeutic approaches for chronic rhinosinusitis have developed; the differentiation of endotypes based on pathophysiological principles will be crucial for the use of innovative therapies, mostly humanized monoclonal antibodies. Several hundred of those antibodies are currently developed for various indications and will impact our specialty as well as pneumology to a great extent.
Project description:Chronic rhinosinusitis (CRS) is an inflammatory disorder of the nose and sinuses. Because fungi were postulated as a potential cause of CRS in the late 1990s, contrasting articles have advocated and refuted the use of antifungal agents in its management. Although good research shows an interaction of the immune system with fungus in CRS, e.g., allergic fungal sinusitis (AFS), this does not imply that fungi are the cause of CRS or that antifungals will be effective in management. This study was designed to assess the potential advantage of either topical or systemic antifungal therapy in the symptomatic treatment of CRS to aid physicians in making informed decisions about treating patients with CRS.A systematic review of the literature was performed with meta-analysis. All studies obtained from searches were reviewed and trials meeting the eligibility criteria were selected. CRS was defined using either the European Position Paper on Rhinosinusitis and Nasal Polyps or American Academy of Otolaryngology-Head and Neck Surgery criteria. Authors were contacted and original data were used for data analysis.Five studies investigating topical antifungals and one investigating systemic antifungals met the inclusion criteria. All trials were double blinded and randomized. Pooled meta-analysis showed no statistically significant benefit of topical or systemic antifungals over placebo. Symptoms scores statistically favored the placebo group for this outcome. Adverse event reporting was higher in the antifungal group.Reported side-effects of antifungal therapies may outweigh any potential benefits of treatment based on this meta-analysis and the authors therefore do not advocate the use antifungal treatment in the management of CRS.
Project description:Because of the inflammatory mechanisms of most chronic upper airway diseases such as rhinitis and chronic rhinosinusitis, systemic steroids have been used for their treatment for decades. However, it has been very well documented that-potentially severe-side-effects can occur with the accumulation of systemic steroid courses over the years. A consensus document summarizing the benefits of systemic steroids for each upper airway disease type, as well as highlighting the potential harms of this treatment is currently lacking. Therefore, a panel of international experts in the field of Rhinology reviewed the available literature with the aim of providing recommendations for the use of systemic steroids in treating upper airway disease.
Project description:BackgroundOral immunotherapy (OIT) leads to suppression of mast cell and basophil degranulation along with changes in the adaptive immune response.ObjectivesThis study aimed to determine how rapidly these effects occur during OIT and more broadly, the kinetics of basophil and mast cell suppression throughout the course of therapy.MethodsTwenty participants, age 4 to 12 years, were enrolled in a peanut OIT trial and assessed for desensitization and sustained unresponsiveness after 9 months of therapy. Blood was collected 5 times in the first month and then intermittently throughout to quantify immunoglobulins and assess basophil activation by CD63, CD203c, and phosphorylated SYK (pSYK).ResultsTwelve of 16 participants that completed the trial were desensitized after OIT, with 9 achieving sustained unresponsiveness after discontinuing OIT for 4 weeks. Basophil hyporesponsiveness, defined by lower CD63 expression, was detected as early as day 90. pSYK was correlated with CD63 expression, and there was a significant decrease in pSYK by day 250. CD203c expression remained unchanged throughout therapy. Interestingly, although basophil activation was decreased across the cohort during OIT, basophil activation did not correlate with individual clinical outcomes. Serum peanut-specific IgG4 and IgA increased throughout therapy, whereas IgE remained unchanged.ConclusionsSuppression of basophil activation occurs within the first 90 days of peanut OIT, ultimately leading to suppression of signaling through pSYK.
Project description:BackgroundShort-course antiretroviral therapy (ART) in primary human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) infection may delay disease progression but has not been adequately evaluated.MethodsWe randomly assigned adults with primary HIV infection to ART for 48 weeks, ART for 12 weeks, or no ART (standard of care), with treatment initiated within 6 months after seroconversion. The primary end point was a CD4+ count of less than 350 cells per cubic millimeter or long-term ART initiation.ResultsA total of 366 participants (60% men) underwent randomization to 48-week ART (123 participants), 12-week ART (120), or standard care (123), with an average follow-up of 4.2 years. The primary end point was reached in 50% of the 48-week ART group, as compared with 61% in each of the 12-week ART and standard-care groups. The average hazard ratio was 0.63 (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.45 to 0.90; P=0.01) for 48-week ART as compared with standard care and was 0.93 (95% CI, 0.67 to 1.29; P=0.67) for 12-week ART as compared with standard care. The proportion of participants who had a CD4+ count of less than 350 cells per cubic millimeter was 28% in the 48-week ART group, 40% in the 12-week group, and 40% in the standard-care group. Corresponding values for long-term ART initiation were 22%, 21%, and 22%. The median time to the primary end point was 65 weeks (95% CI, 17 to 114) longer with 48-week ART than with standard care. Post hoc analysis identified a trend toward a greater interval between ART initiation and the primary end point the closer that ART was initiated to estimated seroconversion (P=0.09), and 48-week ART conferred a reduction in the HIV RNA level of 0.44 log(10) copies per milliliter (95% CI, 0.25 to 0.64) 36 weeks after the completion of short-course therapy. There were no significant between-group differences in the incidence of the acquired immunodeficiency syndrome, death, or serious adverse events.ConclusionsA 48-week course of ART in patients with primary HIV infection delayed disease progression, although not significantly longer than the duration of the treatment. There was no evidence of adverse effects of ART interruption on the clinical outcome. (Funded by the Wellcome Trust; SPARTAC Controlled-Trials.com number, ISRCTN76742797, and EudraCT number, 2004-000446-20.).