Cargando…

Comparative study of the efficacy and safety of intranasal azelastine hydrochloride and fluticasone furoate in the treatment of allergic rhinitis

BACKGROUND: Allergic rhinitis (AR) is characterized by nasal itch, sneezing, watery or mucous rhinorrhea, nasal obstruction, and nasal or pharyngeal irritation. If untreated, AR can impair patients' quality of life (QOL). Azelastine hydrochloride (AH), histamine receptor antagonists, has anti-i...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Chennakeshavaraju, Nandish, Narayana, Sarala, Mohiyuddin, Azeem S. M.
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Wolters Kluwer - Medknow 2020
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7745787/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33354149
http://dx.doi.org/10.4103/jfcm.JFCM_103_20
_version_ 1783624672310460416
author Chennakeshavaraju, Nandish
Narayana, Sarala
Mohiyuddin, Azeem S. M.
author_facet Chennakeshavaraju, Nandish
Narayana, Sarala
Mohiyuddin, Azeem S. M.
author_sort Chennakeshavaraju, Nandish
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: Allergic rhinitis (AR) is characterized by nasal itch, sneezing, watery or mucous rhinorrhea, nasal obstruction, and nasal or pharyngeal irritation. If untreated, AR can impair patients' quality of life (QOL). Azelastine hydrochloride (AH), histamine receptor antagonists, has anti-inflammatory and mast cell stabilizing properties. Fluticasone furoate (FF) is an anti-inflammatory agent with action on mast cells, eosinophils, neutrophils, macrophages, and lymphocytes. This study compares the efficacy and safety of these medications in AR. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Patients in the study had been clinically diagnosed with AR. In each group, there were 75 randomized patients who were to receive either FF (27.5 μg/spray) or AH (0.10%) intranasally twice daily. Assessment in terms of symptoms (total nasal symptom score), signs (endoscopic staging), QOL, eosinophil count, and sensory attributes was done at baseline, day 7, and day 15. Adverse effects were recorded, and the cost incurred was analyzed. Paired and umpaired t-test were used to compare symptom scores, QOL scores, and absolute eosinophil count within and between the groups, respectively. RESULTS: The total number of patients was 150 (76 males and 74 females); the mean age for FF group was 26.23 ± 5.2 years, and 26.96 ± 4.8 years for AH group. By day 7, there was a reduction of all scores in both medications, but the reduction in reduction was highly significant with FF (P = 0.001). There was a significant reduction (P = 0.001) in absolute eosinophil count both in blood and nasal smears by day 15 in both the groups; the reduction was significant (P = 0.001) with fluticasone. Adverse reactions were reported by 33.3% of patients receiving FF and 28% patients receiving AH. CONCLUSION: Fluticasone furoate produced sustained relief of symptoms, signs, and sensory attributes with a greater reduction in eosinophil count in comparison with AH in patients with allergic rhinitis.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-7745787
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2020
publisher Wolters Kluwer - Medknow
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-77457872020-12-21 Comparative study of the efficacy and safety of intranasal azelastine hydrochloride and fluticasone furoate in the treatment of allergic rhinitis Chennakeshavaraju, Nandish Narayana, Sarala Mohiyuddin, Azeem S. M. J Family Community Med Original Article BACKGROUND: Allergic rhinitis (AR) is characterized by nasal itch, sneezing, watery or mucous rhinorrhea, nasal obstruction, and nasal or pharyngeal irritation. If untreated, AR can impair patients' quality of life (QOL). Azelastine hydrochloride (AH), histamine receptor antagonists, has anti-inflammatory and mast cell stabilizing properties. Fluticasone furoate (FF) is an anti-inflammatory agent with action on mast cells, eosinophils, neutrophils, macrophages, and lymphocytes. This study compares the efficacy and safety of these medications in AR. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Patients in the study had been clinically diagnosed with AR. In each group, there were 75 randomized patients who were to receive either FF (27.5 μg/spray) or AH (0.10%) intranasally twice daily. Assessment in terms of symptoms (total nasal symptom score), signs (endoscopic staging), QOL, eosinophil count, and sensory attributes was done at baseline, day 7, and day 15. Adverse effects were recorded, and the cost incurred was analyzed. Paired and umpaired t-test were used to compare symptom scores, QOL scores, and absolute eosinophil count within and between the groups, respectively. RESULTS: The total number of patients was 150 (76 males and 74 females); the mean age for FF group was 26.23 ± 5.2 years, and 26.96 ± 4.8 years for AH group. By day 7, there was a reduction of all scores in both medications, but the reduction in reduction was highly significant with FF (P = 0.001). There was a significant reduction (P = 0.001) in absolute eosinophil count both in blood and nasal smears by day 15 in both the groups; the reduction was significant (P = 0.001) with fluticasone. Adverse reactions were reported by 33.3% of patients receiving FF and 28% patients receiving AH. CONCLUSION: Fluticasone furoate produced sustained relief of symptoms, signs, and sensory attributes with a greater reduction in eosinophil count in comparison with AH in patients with allergic rhinitis. Wolters Kluwer - Medknow 2020 2020-09-25 /pmc/articles/PMC7745787/ /pubmed/33354149 http://dx.doi.org/10.4103/jfcm.JFCM_103_20 Text en Copyright: © 2020 Journal of Family and Community Medicine http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/4.0 This is an open access journal, and articles are distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 License, which allows others to remix, tweak, and build upon the work non-commercially, as long as appropriate credit is given and the new creations are licensed under the identical terms.
spellingShingle Original Article
Chennakeshavaraju, Nandish
Narayana, Sarala
Mohiyuddin, Azeem S. M.
Comparative study of the efficacy and safety of intranasal azelastine hydrochloride and fluticasone furoate in the treatment of allergic rhinitis
title Comparative study of the efficacy and safety of intranasal azelastine hydrochloride and fluticasone furoate in the treatment of allergic rhinitis
title_full Comparative study of the efficacy and safety of intranasal azelastine hydrochloride and fluticasone furoate in the treatment of allergic rhinitis
title_fullStr Comparative study of the efficacy and safety of intranasal azelastine hydrochloride and fluticasone furoate in the treatment of allergic rhinitis
title_full_unstemmed Comparative study of the efficacy and safety of intranasal azelastine hydrochloride and fluticasone furoate in the treatment of allergic rhinitis
title_short Comparative study of the efficacy and safety of intranasal azelastine hydrochloride and fluticasone furoate in the treatment of allergic rhinitis
title_sort comparative study of the efficacy and safety of intranasal azelastine hydrochloride and fluticasone furoate in the treatment of allergic rhinitis
topic Original Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7745787/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33354149
http://dx.doi.org/10.4103/jfcm.JFCM_103_20
work_keys_str_mv AT chennakeshavarajunandish comparativestudyoftheefficacyandsafetyofintranasalazelastinehydrochlorideandfluticasonefuroateinthetreatmentofallergicrhinitis
AT narayanasarala comparativestudyoftheefficacyandsafetyofintranasalazelastinehydrochlorideandfluticasonefuroateinthetreatmentofallergicrhinitis
AT mohiyuddinazeemsm comparativestudyoftheefficacyandsafetyofintranasalazelastinehydrochlorideandfluticasonefuroateinthetreatmentofallergicrhinitis