Intranasal Phototherapy Research Articles

Effects of Combined Visible and Infrared Light Rhinophototherapy in Patients With Allergic Rhinitis.

Intranasal phototherapy offers an alternative treatment method for patients with allergic rhinitis who cannot benefit from intranasal corticosteroids and oral antihistamines. Different wavelengths have been tried with promising results. In this present study, we aimed to investigate the effects of visible light-infrared light phototherapy on clinical improvements together with its cytologic effects in patients with allergic rhinitis. Patients with confirmed allergic rhinitis were given a 4-week course of intranasal phototherapy treatment. Weekly symptom questionnaires were applied to monitor clinical effects. Nasal lavage specimens were obtained before the start and at the completion of the 4-week therapy. Fluorescence-activated cell sorting analyses of CD16+, CD24+, and CD 45+ cells were performed. Statistical analyses are performed of weekly changes in symptoms and cell counts. CD45+CD16highCD24+ neutrophil count in nasal lavages decreased significantly whereas CD45+CD16dim/-CD24+ eosinophil counts significantly increased and CD45+ granulocyte counts remained unchanged. Symptom scores including nasal itching, nasal discharge, nasal obstruction, sneezing, eye itching, throat itching, and ear itching all statistically decreased compared to baseline at the end of 4 weeks. Four-week course of intranasal phototherapy with visible and infrared light leads to clinical improvement in allergic rhinitis patients.

Effect of rhinophototherapy on nasal congestion in patients with seasonal allergic rhinitis.

SUMMARYObjectiveThe aim of the present study was to objectively and subjectively evaluate the effects of adding rhinophototherapy to intranasal beclomethasone dipropionate to treat nasal congestion in patients with seasonal allergic rhinitis.MethodSeventy-five seasonal allergic rhinitis patients were randomly divided into two groups. Patients in Group 1 received intranasal beclomethasone dipropionate for two weeks and patients in Group 2 had rhinophototherapy added to the same medical therapy as Group 1. The effectiveness of treatments was evaluated with the Rhinoconjunctivitis Quality of Life Questionnaire (RQLQ), Nasal Obstruction Symptom Evaluation scale (NOSE) questionnaires and active anterior rhinomanometry.ResultsAfter treatment, significant improvement was observed in Group 2 vs Group 1 in terms of RQLQ (p = 0.011) and NOSE (p = 0.001) scores. In Group 2, significant differences were observed between before and after treatment for inspiratory total nasal resistance (p = 0.004). However, no significant differences vs. baseline were observed in Group 1.ConclusionOur study shows that adding intranasal phototherapy with a combination of UVA, UVB and visible light therapy to nasal beclomethasone dipropionate treatment objectively improves nasal patency in patients with seasonal allergic rhinitis.

Open, prospective, multicenter study on postoperative intranasal phototherapy in nasal polyposis.

The therapeutic effect of ultraviolet (UV) light is generally attributed to its immunosuppressive and immunomodulatory effects. Since chronic inflammation is the major factor in the development of nasal polyposis, we have previously used mixed ultraviolet-visible light (mUV-VIS, Rhinolight®) phototherapy for the treatment of nasal polyps. In the present open, multicenter study, our aim was to delineate whether mUV-VIS applied postoperatively in vivo together with intranasal steroid treatment could reduce the recurrence of nasal polyps. After functional endoscopic sinus surgery, one group of patients received mUV-VIS light together with standard intranasal steroid (mometason furoate 2×200 μg) application for a 12-week treatment period, whereas the other patient group obtained only intranasal steroid for the same duration. We recorded nasal endoscopy images and obtained demographical and clinical data, total nasal score (TNS), and nasal obstruction symptom evaluation (NOSE). We performed acoustic rhinometry and measured nasal inspiratory peak flow. Follow-up was 12months. We found that the recurrence of nasal polyps was significantly diminished, and based on video-endoscopic measurements, the size and grade of recurrent polyps were significantly smaller in the phototherapy-receiving group. Nasal obstruction values and NOSE were significantly better throughout the follow-up period in the mUV-VIS light-treated group than in the intranasal steroid monotreatment group. Rhinophototherapy together with standard nasal steroid application may have a supportive role in the treatment of recurrent bilateral nasal polyps.

Sergančiųjų alerginiu rinitu gyvenimo kokybės ir klinikinių simptomų pokytis taikant intranazalinę fototerapiją

Žinoma, kad fototerapija teigiamai veikia imuninius procesus gleivinėje. Yra duomenų, kad intranazalinė fototerapija (IF), skleidžianti UV-A (25 proc.), UV-B (5 proc.) ir regimąją šviesą (70 proc.), gali būti veiksminga gydant alerginį rinitą (AR) nepriklausomai nuo simptomus sukėlusio alergeno, taip pat gali būti taikoma ieškant alternatyvų medikamentiniam gydymui. Tyrimo tikslas. Įvertinti intranazalinės fototerapijos poveikį klinikiniams alerginio rinito simptomams ir gyvenimo kokybei pacientų, sergančių nuolatiniu AR. Tyrimo metodai. Tyrimas atliktas Lietuvos sveikatosmokslų universiteto ligoninės Kauno klinikų Imunologijos ir alergologijos klinikoje. Jame dalyvavo sergantieji nuolatiniu vidutinio sunkumo arba sunkiu AR (ARIA diagnostiniai kriterijai). Alerginis įsijautrinimas patvirtintas odos dūrio mėginiais ir (arba) specifinio imunoglobulino E (Ig E) antikūnų įkvėpiamiems alergenams nustatymu kraujo serume. IF procedūros kartotos tris kartus per savaitę, dviejų savaičių laikotarpiu didinant dozę. Standartinis AR gydymas tyrimo metu nebuvo tęstas. Prieš ir po IF gydymo gyvenimo kokybė vertinta pagal E. Juniper adaptuotą klausimyną (angl. the Rhinoconjunctivitis Quality of Life Questionnaire, standardized version, RQLQ(s)), įvertintas bendrasis nosies simptomų balas (angl. Total Nasal Symptom Score, TNSS). Kiekvienos procedūros metu, naudojant vizualinę atitikmens skalę (angl. Visual Analogue Scale, VAS), įvertintas AR klinikinių simptomų sunkumas. Tyrimo rezultatai. 73 proc. tiriamųjų IF poveikį įvertino teigiamai. Nustatyta, kad po IF gydymo pagerėjo tiriamųjų gyvenimo kokybė, nes statistiškai reikšmingai sumažėjo Klausimyno (RQLQ(s)) visų poskalių balai. Po gydymo statistiškai reikšmingai sumažėjo visi TNSS skalės balai: nosies užgulimas, rinorėja, čiaudulys, miego sutrikimai, bendrieji simptomai. VAS skalės balai po gydymo taip pat sumažėjo statistiškai reikšmingai. Išvados. Intranazinė fototerapija gali palengvinti AR simptomus ir pagerinti pacientų gyvenimo kokybę.

Effectiveness of Additional Intranasal Phototherapy through Decrease Score of Nose Symptom and Eosinophil Mucosa on Persistent Allergic Rhinitis

Background: Allergic rhinitis (AR) is a common atopic disease but the available treatment has limited used and success rate. It has been suggested that intranasal phototherapy represents an alternative choice in the treatment of AR. Objective: This study aimed to analyze the effect of additional intranasal phototherapy to loratadine therapy compared with single loratadine therapy in order to decrease total nasal symptoms score (TNSS) and nasal mucosa eosinophil count in persistent AR patients. Method: Fifty-four persistent AR patients were divided into two treatment groups: group A and B treated with 10 mg loratadine once a day with additional intranasal phototherapy at 660 nm. 4.4 minutes 3 times a day for group B. Evaluation was based on TNSS and nasal mucosa eosinophil countpre and post 14 days of treatment. Result: The study conducted from July to August 2014 demonstrated significant average of TNSS decrease on group B compared to group A (p = 0.002). Also significant average of eosinophil mucosa nasal count decrease on group B compared to group A (p = 0.049). Both group A and B showed the smallest score of TNSS pre-therapy was 4 vs 6, however the highest score was 6 vs 12. Group A and B showed the smallest score of TNSS post-therapy was 0 vs 0, however the highest score was 8 vs 7. Conclusion: Additional intranasal phototherapy to loratadine therapy showed more effective compared with single loratadine therapy in order to decrease TNSS and nasal mucosa eosinophil count in persistent AR patients

Efficacy and safety of endonasal phototherapy in the treatment of adult allergic rhinitis: A Meta-analysis

Objective:To perform a systematic review of the efficacy and safety of endonasal phototherapy in the treatment of AR, and to provide evidence of evidence-based medicine for clinical application. Method:Databases were from PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library, Chinese Academic Journal Full-text Database (CNKI) and Wanfang database. A randomized controlled trial (RCT) or clinical study literature on intranasal phototherapy for adult AR is available, and the deadline is March 2017. Based on the literature inclusion and exclusion criteria, the related literatures were selected and the quality was evaluated by using the Cochrane inclusion bias assessment table. Meta-analysis was performed with Revman 5.3 software. For continuous outcomes, the weighted mean difference (WMD) and its 95% confidence intervals (CI) were calculated, forest maps and funnel plots were drew. For uncontinuous outcomes, the odds ratio (OR) and its 95%CI were calculated, and forest maps and funnel plots were drew. The efficacy included total nasal symptom scores (TNSS), rhinoconjunctivitis quality of life questionnaire (RQLQ) and palate itching scores, and the safety was assessed by incidence rate of severe drying and mild drying of nasal mucosa. Result:A total of 12 articles were selected, including 5 RCT and 7 clinical studies, and there were 615 adult AR patients. The Meta-analysis shows that endonasal phototherapy significantly reduced the TNSS, RQLQ and palate itching scores, the incidence rate of mild drying of nasal mucosa was higher in comparison with pretreated values, and the difference was statistically significant (P<0.05). The rate of severe drying of nasal mucosa was higher, but the difference was not statistically significant (P>0.05). It also shows that endonasal phototherapy significantly reduced the TNSS, RQLQ and palate itching scores, and the rate of mild drying of nasal mucosa was higher in comparison with placebo and antihistamines groups, and the difference was statistically significant. The rate of severe drying of nasal mucosa was higher, but the difference was not statistically significant. Conclusion:Endonasal phototherapy can improve the symptoms of TNSS, RQLQ and palate itching score in patients, and the safety is also confirmed.Patients who are not satisfied with symptom relief may choose to use it.

Rhinophototherapy in persistent allergic rhinitis

Previous published results have revealed that Rhinolight® intranasal phototherapy is safe and effective in intermittent allergic rhinitis. The present objective was to assess whether phototherapy is also safe and effective in persistent allergic rhinitis. Thirty-four patients with persistent allergic rhinitis were randomized into two groups; twenty-five subjects completed the study. The Rhinolight® group was treated with a combination of UV-B, UV-A, and high-intensity visible light, while the placebo group received low-intensity visible white light intranasal phototherapy on a total of 13 occasions in 6weeks. The assessment was based on the diary of symptoms, nasal inspiratory peak flow, quantitative smell threshold, mucociliary transport function, and ICAM-1 expression of the epithelial cells. All nasal symptom scores and nasal inspiratory peak flow measurements improved significantly in the Rhinolight® group relative to the placebo group and this finding persisted after 4weeks of follow-up. The smell and mucociliary functions did not change significantly in either group. The number of ICAM-1 positive cells decreased non-significantly in the Rhinolight® group. No severe side-effects were reported during the treatment period. These results suggest that Rhinolight® treatment is safe and effective in persistent allergic rhinitis.

Histopathological effects of intranasal phototherapy and nasal corticosteroids in allergic rhinitis in a rabbit model

Allergic rhinitis is one of the most common health problems and has a major effect on quality of life. Although new-generation antihistamines and nasal steroids are the main treatment options, complete resolution cannot be obtained in some patients. Besides common side effects such as nasal irritation and epistaxis, the use of these drugs is controversial in some patients, such as pregnant or breastfeeding women. These findings highlight the need for new treatment options. Although phototherapy has been successfully used in the treatment of atopic dermatitis, which is an IgE-mediated disease and shares several common pathogenic features with allergic rhinitis, there are limited studies about its role in the treatment of allergic rhinitis. In this study, we aimed to evaluate and compare the histopathological effects of intranasal phototherapy (Rhinolight) and nasal corticosteroid treatment on the nasal mucosa in allergic rhinitis in a rabbit model and we found that both treatment options significantly reduced inflammation in the nasal mucosa without increasing apoptosis of mucosal cells.

알레르기 비염의 비강 내 광치료에 관한 논문 경향 분석

Objective : The purpose of this study is to analyze research trends on the effects of intranasal phototherapy on allergic rhinitis. Methods : We searched potentially relevant studies using electronic databases, such as PubMed, OASIS, KMbase, and RISS. Our review of clinical research in allergic rhinitis was restricted to an analysis of papers published within the last 5 years. Independent reviewers extracted data using a standardized form. Results : In total, twenty four studies were included. Eleven studies were analyzed, and five randomized trials were identified. They suggested to be effective and no serious side-effects. Conclusions : Intranasal phototherapy can be effectively used as an alternative to the treatment of allergic rhinitis. Further studies are needed on this topic in order to demonstrate the effectiveness clearly.

Intranasal phototherapy versus azelastine in the treatment of seasonal allergic rhinitis

It has been suggested that intranasal phototherapy represents an alternative choice in the treatment of seasonal allergic rhinitis (SAR). Our aim was to compare the efficacy of intranasal phototherapy with that of azelastine in patients with SAR. Seventy seven patients were randomly assigned to the two treatment groups: Group A (phototherapy) and Group B (azelastine). Subjective and objective outcomes were represented by changes in Total Nasal Symptom Score (TNSS), Quality of life scores (Rhinoconjunctivitis Quality of Life Questionnaire - RQLQ), and nasal resistance. The study demonstrated that both azelastine and intranasal phototherapy are able to significantly improve TNSS, including individual nasal symptoms. Nevertheless, phototherapy reduced nasal obstruction better than azelastine (p=0.038). Both treatments were highly effective in improving RQLQ scores overall and in seven separate domains. Whether intranasal phototheraphy will be a standard treatment of SAR or not should be appraised in future studies and clinical trials.

Ultraviolet light and photodynamic therapy induce apoptosis in nasal polyps

Intranasal phototherapy has been found to be effective for the treatment of nasal polyposis (NP) therefore the aim was to investigate the apoptosis inducing effect of phototherapy in NP. In this ex vivo study nasal polyp tissue was surgically collected from 21 consecutive patients with chronic rhinosinusitis (CRS) associated with NP. The removed polyps were cut into pieces and tissue samples were irradiated in vitro by different doses of combined ultraviolet and visible light (UV/VIS: 280–650nm) and by selective ultraviolet and visible light (sUV/VIS: 295–650nm). Photodynamic therapy (PDT) was performed by presensitizing tissue samples with 5-delta-aminolevulinic acid (DALA) then irradiated with visible light (VIS: 395–650nm). Tunel assay was applied to detect apoptosis of epithelial and inflammatory cells in irradiated and control nasal polyp tissue samples. UV/VIS light significantly increased epithelial cell and subepithelial leukocyte apoptosis compared to control groups. PDT treatment showed the highest surface epithelial cell as well as subepithelial leukocyte apoptosis compared to all other groups. Intranasal phototherapy may serve as a new potential therapeutical method in treatment of NP.

Rhinophototherapy: gimmick or an emerging treatment option for allergic rhinitis?

Photodynamic therapy has been used in treating immune-mediated dermatological conditions such as psoriasis and atopic dermatitis. There are emerging reports on the efficacy of intranasal phototherapy in allergic rhinitis. The aim of this review was to assess intranasal phototherapy in the treatment of allergic rhinitis, with particular emphasis on clinical efficacy, scientific basis and safety. A structured search of the U.S. National Library of Medicine (PubMed), the Cochrane Collaboration library, Google Scholar and ISI Web of Knowledge database was undertaken using MeSH terms `phototherapy` and `rhinitis.` Fourteen full-text articles were available for review. Three different phototherapy medical devices were assessed: (1) Bionase(TM), (2) Allergy Reliever SN206 and (3) Rhinolight(®). Light wavelength used in these devices ranged from red light to ultraviolet. Clinical use of intranasal phototherapy appears to be safe and well tolerated. Most studies demonstrated symptomatic improvement and quality of life scores. No improvement in objective measures of nasal airflow was demonstrated. Beneficial effects of phototherapy on inflammatory markers remain equivocal. Phototherapy treatment results in DNA damage but does not appear to predispose to carcinogenesis. However, long-term prospective studies are required to verify this. The quality of published studies was variable and thus the current strength of recommending intranasal phototherapy is currently weak.

Histopathological evaluation of the effect of intranasal phototherapy on nasal mucosa in rabbits

Allergic rhinitis is a high-incidence allergic inflammation of the nasal airways that impacts quality of life. Of the numerous therapies used to treat allergic rhinitis, intranasal phototherapy has emerged as a promising new treatment modality for inflammatory airway disease. Phototherapy is widely used for the treatment of immune-mediated skin diseases because its profound immunosuppressive effect inhibits hypersensitivity reactions in the skin. Intranasal phototherapy using a combination of Ultraviolet-A (UVA) and Ultraviolet-B (UVB) plus Visible light (VIS) has been shown to suppress the clinical symptoms of allergic rhinitis, but limited data regarding its adverse effects on the nasal mucosa currently exists. In this study, we demonstrate that UV displays no harmful effects on the nasal mucosa cells of rabbits following 2 weeks of intranasal phototherapy.

Intranasal Phototherapy Is More Effective Than Fexofenadine Hydrochloride in the Treatment of Seasonal Allergic Rhinitis: Results of a Pilot Study

We recently showed that intranasal phototherapy represents an efficient therapeutic modality for the treatment of patients with seasonal allergic rhinitis (SAR). The aim of this pilot study was to compare the efficacy of intranasal phototherapy with that of the new generation antihistamine fexofenadine HCl in SAR. A randomized open study was conducted in patients with a history of moderate-to-severe ragweed-induced SAR. Thirty-one patients were randomly assigned to receive either intranasal irradiation three times a week for 2 weeks, or 180 mg fexofenadine HCl per day for 2 weeks. Each patient kept a diary of symptoms for nasal obstruction, nasal itching, rhinorrhea, sneezing and palate itching. Total nasal score (TNS), a sum of scores for nasal symptoms, was also calculated. In the rhinophototherapy group the individual scores significantly decreased compared with baseline for all of the parameters. In the fexofenadine HCl group none of the scores improved significantly at the end of the treatment except sneezing. TNS was significantly decreased in the rhinophototherapy group, but no significant change was observed in the fexofenadine HCl group after 2 weeks of treatment. In conclusion, we found that intranasal phototherapy is more efficient than fexofenadine HCl in reducing clinical symptoms for SAR.

Molecular response of nasal mucosa to therapeutic exposure to broad‐band ultraviolet radiation

Ultraviolet radiation (UVR) phototherapy is a promising new treatment for inflammatory airway diseases. However, the potential carcinogenic risks associated with this treatment are not well understood. UV-specific DNA photoproducts were used as biomarkers to address this issue. Radioimmunoassay was used to quantify cyclobutane pyrimidine dimers (CPDs) and (6–4) photoproducts in DNA purified from two milieus: nasal mucosa samples from subjects exposed to intranasal phototherapy and human airway (EpiAirway™) and human skin (EpiDerm™) tissue models. Immunohistochemistry was used to detect CPD formation and persistence in human nasal biopsies and human tissue models. In subjects exposed to broadband ultraviolet radiation, DNA damage frequencies were determined prior to as well as immediately after treatment and at increasing times post-treatment. We observed significant levels of DNA damage immediately after treatment and efficient removal of the damage within a few days. No residual damage was observed in human subjects exposed to multiple UVB treatments several weeks after the last treatment. To better understand the molecular response of the nasal epithelium to DNA damage, parallel experiments were conducted in EpiAirway and EpiDerm model systems. Repair rates in these two tissues were very similar and comparable to that observed in human skin. The data suggest that the UV-induced DNA damage response of respiratory epithelia is very similar to that of the human epidermis and that nasal mucosa is able to efficiently repair UVB induced DNA damage.

Pollen challenge study of a phototherapy device for reducing the symptoms of hay fever

ABSTRACTObjective: The objective was to investigate the effect of intranasal phototherapy delivered by a phototherapy device (allergy reliever SN-206) on symptoms of hay fever (seasonal rhinitis) due to grass pollen in adults. This registered class IIA medical device had been on sale for 15 months with no adverse effects reported but there had been no assessment of efficacy. Previous research had indicated that phototherapy could alleviate symptoms of allergic rhinitis but no double-blind, placebo-controlled trails had been done.Research design and methods: The trial is a double-blind, placebo-controlled grass pollen challenge conducted out of the pollen season, on 101 adult male and female hay fever sufferers. Subjects were assigned to placebo or active groups by stratified random sampling using responses to a baseline questionnaire. All subjects used active or placebo devices three times a day for 14 days before pollen challenge. Subjects were monitored for 2.5 h after challenge.Main outcome measures: Primary outcome measures were observed severity scores for sneezing, running eyes, running nose, and the amount of eosinophil cationic proteins (ECP) in nasal secretions. Secondary outcome measures were symptom scores by subject report (itching eyes, itching nose, itching throat, itching mouth/palate), and nasal peak inspiratory flow (PIFn) and peak expiratory flow (PEFn).Results: Significant reductions in severity of symptom scores were found for sneezing, running nose, running eyes and itchy mouth/palate (p ≤ 0.05). No significant differences were found in the results for itchy eyes, itchy nose, itchy throat, ECPs, PIFn and PEFn. No adverse events occurred.Conclusions: The results show that the device significantly reduced some hay fever symptoms. The study would have been improved if compliance was monitored electronically and if nasal congestion was monitored by report. The mode of action is unclear. The study does not consider long-term implications of the therapy.

Intranasal phototherapy is more effective than fexofenadine hydrochloride in the treatment of seasonal allergic rhinitis

Intranasal phototherapy is more effective than fexofenadine hydrochloride in the treatment of seasonal allergic rhinitis

Studies on the role of tumor necrosis factor alpha gene polymorphisms in the therapeutic response to intranasal UV phototherapy

Studies on the role of tumor necrosis factor alpha gene polymorphisms in the therapeutic response to intranasal UV phototherapy

Effects of intranasal phototherapy on nasal mucosa in patients with allergic rhinitis

Rationale Rhinophototherapy has been shown to be effective in the treatment of allergic rhinitis. Considering that phototherapy with ultraviolet light (UV) induces DNA damage, it is of outstanding importance to evaluate the damage and repair process in human nasal mucosa. Methods We have investigated eight patients undergoing intranasal phototherapy using a modified Comet assay technique and by staining nasal cytology samples for cyclobutane pyrimidine dimers (CPDs), which are UV specific photoproducts. Results Immediately after last treatment Comet assay of nasal cytology samples showed a significant increase in DNA damage compared to baseline. Ten days after the last irradiation a significant decrease in DNA damage was observed compared to data obtained immediately after finishing the treatment protocol. Difference between baseline and 10 days after last treatment was not statistically significant. Two months after ending therapy, DNA damage detected by Comet assay in patients treated with intranasal phototherapy was similar with that of healthy individuals. None of the samples collected before starting intranasal phototherapy stained positive for CPDs. In all samples collected immediately after last treatment strong positive staining for CPDs was detected. The number of positive cells significantly decreased 10 days after last treatment, but residual positive staining was present in all the examined samples. This finding is consistent with data reported in skin samples after UV irradiation. Cytology samples examined two months after ending therapy contained no CPD positive cells. Conclusion Our results suggest that UV damage induced by intranasal phototherapy is efficiently repaired in nasal mucosa.

Intranasal Phototherapy is an Effective Treatment in Allergic Rhinitis

RATIONALE: We have recently found that intranasal phototherapy using a combination of low dose UVB, UVA and visible light (mUV/VIS) improves allergic rhinitis. The aim of the present study was to provide further data on the efficacy of rhinophototherapy and to study the mechanism of action of mUV/VIS light.METHODS: In an open study, intranasal phototherapy was performed in 70 patients with ragweed-induced allergic rhinitis. Each intranasal cavity was irradiated 3 times a week for 2 weeks, using gradually increasing doses of mUV/VIS. Evaluation was based on clinical symptom scores. The effect of mUV/VIS light on T cell, eosinophil and basophil apoptosis was also evaluated in vitro using cell cultures.RESULTS: Intranasal phototherapy significantly decreased scores for sneezing (p < 0.001), rhinorrhea (p < 0.001), nasal itching (p < 0.001), nasal obstruction (p < 0.001) and total nasal score (p < 0.001). In the overall efficacy assessment 90% of the patients found that phototherapy significantly inhibited the clinical symptoms. Rhinophototherapy was tolerated well, the only side effect was dryness of the nasal mucosa, which was controlled with emollients. mUV/VIS irradiation induced a dose-dependent increase in apoptosis of memory T cells, naive T cells, eosinophils but not basophils.CONCLUSIONS: These data support that intranasal phototherapy is effective for the treatment of allergic rhinitis and the mechanism of action is at least partly attributed to apoptosis induction of cells with important role in the pathogenesis of the disease. RATIONALE: We have recently found that intranasal phototherapy using a combination of low dose UVB, UVA and visible light (mUV/VIS) improves allergic rhinitis. The aim of the present study was to provide further data on the efficacy of rhinophototherapy and to study the mechanism of action of mUV/VIS light. METHODS: In an open study, intranasal phototherapy was performed in 70 patients with ragweed-induced allergic rhinitis. Each intranasal cavity was irradiated 3 times a week for 2 weeks, using gradually increasing doses of mUV/VIS. Evaluation was based on clinical symptom scores. The effect of mUV/VIS light on T cell, eosinophil and basophil apoptosis was also evaluated in vitro using cell cultures. RESULTS: Intranasal phototherapy significantly decreased scores for sneezing (p < 0.001), rhinorrhea (p < 0.001), nasal itching (p < 0.001), nasal obstruction (p < 0.001) and total nasal score (p < 0.001). In the overall efficacy assessment 90% of the patients found that phototherapy significantly inhibited the clinical symptoms. Rhinophototherapy was tolerated well, the only side effect was dryness of the nasal mucosa, which was controlled with emollients. mUV/VIS irradiation induced a dose-dependent increase in apoptosis of memory T cells, naive T cells, eosinophils but not basophils. CONCLUSIONS: These data support that intranasal phototherapy is effective for the treatment of allergic rhinitis and the mechanism of action is at least partly attributed to apoptosis induction of cells with important role in the pathogenesis of the disease.