Perennial Nonallergic Rhinitis Research Articles

Low-dose capsaicin (0.01 mM) nasal spray is equally effective as the current standard treatment for idiopathic rhinitis: A randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial

Low-dose capsaicin (0.01 mM) nasal spray is equally effective as the current standard treatment for idiopathic rhinitis: A randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial

Nasal Cytology as a Diagnostic Tool for Local Allergic Rhinitis.

Background Local allergic rhinitis (LAR) is characterized by chronic rhinitis with localized nasal allergic response to allergens in the absence of systemic immunoglobulin (IgE)-mediated disease assessed by skin prick test (SPT) or specific serum IgE level. Nasal provocation test (NPT) is the gold standard for the diagnosis of LAR. Nasal eosinophilia is a known inflammatory marker in allergic rhinitis. We hypothesized that nasal eosinophilia can be used as a screening tool for LAR. Objective To determine the applicability of nasal eosinophilia as a diagnostic tool for LAR. Methods Forty-eight perennial nonallergic rhinitis (NAR) patients with SPT negative were recruited. Nasal cytology analysis was performed. NPTs with 3 allergens (mixed mites, mixed cockroaches, and Bermuda grass) were performed to diagnose LAR. Nasal symptoms combined with nasal patency were used to determine the results of NPT. The sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value, and negative predictive value of nasal eosinophilia as a diagnostic tool of LAR were calculated. Results LAR was diagnosed in 41.6% of the NAR patients. Nasal eosinophilia was found in 58% of the NAR patients. The sensitivity of nasal eosinophilia for diagnosing LAR was 80%, the specificity was 57.14%, the positive predictive value was 57.14%, and the negative predictive value was 80%. The most common allergen of LAR was mixed mites. Conclusion Nasal eosinophilia on nasal cytology was a good screening tool for diagnosing LAR because of its high sensitivity and simplicity of the procedure. Unfortunately, the low specificity of nasal eosinophilia makes the NPT necessary for confirmation of LAR.

Nonselective chemokine levels in nasal secretions of patients with perennial nonallergic and allergic rhinitis.

An increased production of several chemoattractants, responsible for guiding the eosinophilic inflammatory process, has been reported in chronic rhinitis. The aim of this study was to evaluate nasal secretion levels of monocyte chemoattractant protein-1 (MCP-1), MCP-3, and regulated on activation normal T cell expressed and secreted (RANTES) and to correlate those levels with nasal symptoms and degree of eosinophilia in patients with nonallergic rhinitis with eosinophilia syndrome (NARES) and perennial allergic rhinitis (PAR). Fourteen patients with PAR and 14 NARES patients were recruited for this cross-sectional study. Fourteen healthy subjects were included as controls. The concentrations of MCP-1, MCP-3, and RANTES in nasal secretions were measured using enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA). Eosinophil counts were performed by percentage of differential granulocyte counts during cytological examination of scraped nasal mucosa obtained from the inferior turbinate. Therefore, we scored rhinitis patients according to nasal symptom score. We found significantly higher concentrations of MCP-1 (p < 0.0001), MCP-3 (p = 0.018), and RANTES (p < 0.0001) in nasal fluid of NARES patients compared to patients with PAR. In PAR patients, we found positive correlation between RANTES levels and nasal symptom score and eosinophil counts. In patients with NARES, the concentrations of MCP-1 and RANTES were associated with nasal symptom score and percentage of eosinophils. NARES is characterized by higher degree of eosinophilic inflammation than PAR. RANTES correlates well with the level of eosinophilic inflammation in both diseases. The measurement of chemokine levels in nasal secretions could be useful in evaluating the degree of chronic nasal inflammation.

Kinetic oscillation stimulation as treatment of non-allergic rhinitis: an RCT study

Conclusion: Kinetic oscillation stimulation (KOS) of nasal mucosa at low frequency seems to be a possibly effective and safe short-term treatment of non-allergic nasal stuffiness. Objective: To assess the relief of rhinitis symptoms, especially stuffiness, by comparing active treatment, i.e. KOS at low frequency of the nasal mucosa, with placebo. Methods: Patients were randomized to active or placebo treatment in this double-blinded parallel design study. Treatment with an inflatable oscillating catheter was administered on day 0, and symptom scores (stuffiness, secretion, and itching) were graded daily until day 14. An overall grading of symptoms from 1 week before treatment and during 14 days thereafter was made at day 14. Eighty-six patients (52 with non-allergic perennial rhinitis, NAR; 34 with rhinitis medicamentosa, RM) were randomized, and 71 were evaluated (active treatment, n = 35; placebo, n = 36). Results: Patients with either NAR or RM who received active treatment reported reduced symptom scores by some measures, e.g. median RQSS stuffiness measure fell from 2 to 1 on a scale from 0 to 3 during the week following treatment. No significant effect was observed for patients treated with placebo. Mild side effects were reported.

Allergic rhinitis.

Allergic rhinitis is a very frequent disease with a prevalence of 15-20%. Symptoms are most pronounced in young people while, for some unknown reason, the elderly become clinically hyposensitized. Pollen is the cause of seasonal allergic rhinitis, and house dust mite and animals are the main causes of perennial allergic rhinitis. Histamine is the main cause of sneezing and hypersecretion, while other mediators probably also play a role in nasal blockage. In polyposis, a local denervation is an important cause of vascular leakage, edema and polyp formation. Antihistamines have a positive effect on sneezing and hypersecretion, but not on blockage. As they have a quick onset of action they are useful in patients with mild and occasional symptoms. A nasal steroid is preferable in patients with persistent symptoms, since it is more effective on all nasal symptoms. Short-term use of a systemic steroid can be a valuable adjunct to topical treatment, especially in nasal polyposis, when there is a temporary failure of topical treatment in a blocked nose. A nasal vasoconstrictor can be added for short-term treatment, and an ipratropium spray can be beneficial in perennial non-allergic rhinitis, when watery secretion is the dominant symptom. Immunotherapy can be added in allergic rhinitis, when pharmacotherapy is insufficient. This chapter is based on the author's personal experience with allergic rhinitis, as a patient, a doctor and a researcher. Therefore, it is not a balanced review and the references will be highly selected as they largely consist of the author's own publications. As the text is mainly based on personal research, steroids are described in detail, while, with regard to immunotherapy, the reader is referred to another chapter. In addition to allergic rhinitis, nasal polyposis will be described. It was formerly believed to be an allergic disease, but we now know that it is not. However, with regard to histopathology and drug responsiveness this disease is very similar to allergic rhinitis.

Effect of Intranasal Azelastine on Substance P Release in Perennial Nonallergic Rhinitis Patients

Rhinitis symptoms can be produced or augmented by neural mechanisms. Azelastine, a pharmacologic agent with potent H1-receptor blocking activity can inhibit the release of various mediators implicated in the pathogenesis of nasal hyperresponsiveness. The therapeutic benefits of topical intranasal azelastine on symptoms of perennial nonallergic rhinitis (NAR) are in part because of an impact on neural mechanisms. Assessment of changes in the concentration of substance P (SP) in nasal lavage fluid before and after saline hypertonic challenge may be a means of assessing the effect of intranasal azelastine on neuropeptide release and severity of rhinitis symptoms. Twenty-three patients with perennial NAR (negative skin-prick tests with inhalant allergens and concentration of total IgE in the normal range) were studied. Thirteen of 23 patients were treated with intranasal azelastine 0.15% spray at a dosage of 2 sprays (137 micrograms/spray) twice daily for 10 days. The control group consisted of 10 untreated patients with rhinitis. Nasal provocation using 4.5% saline solution was after 15 minutes by lavage before and after 10 days of treatment with intranasal azelastine. The concentration of SP in nasal lavage fluid was determined by enzyme immunoassay methods. Nasal lavage fluid baseline concentrations of SP were similar in both groups. After azelastine treatment, significantly greater concentrations of SP were seen in nasal lavage fluid 15 minutes after hypertonic saline challenge in the untreated patients (56.8 ± 13.8 pg/mL) in comparison with azelastine-treated patients (44.5 ± 16.5 pg/mL; p < 0.05). Total vasomotor rhinitis symptoms scores were substantially reduced in the azelastine-treated subjects compared with the control group. Azelastine intranasal spray reduces SP release into nasal lavage fluid of NAR patients immediately after hypertonic nasal saline challenge. Reduction of neuropeptide release may be an important aspect of the clinical efficacy of topical azelastine in perennial NAR patients.

Positive Bronchial Challenges to D. Pteronyssinus in Asthmatic Subjects in Absence of Systemic Atopy

RATIONALE: Studies show evidence of positive responses to nasal challenge to allergens in subjects with rhinitis without systemic atopy (negative skin testing and serum specific IgE) and demonstrate inflammatory changes and local production of IgE. We present 2 cases of positive bronchial challenges to d. Pteronyssinus in subjects with asthma and no systemic atopy METHODS: Two subjects with mild-moderate perennial non-allergic asthma (ANA) and rhinitis, suggestive symptoms of allergy to dust mites, negative skin testing and specific IgE to d. Pteronyssinus were evaluated. Six subjects with allergic asthma (AA) due to d. Pteronyssinus and 2 healthy subjects were included as controls. Bronchial challenge was performed with d. Pteronyssinus extract at 4 μg/ml of Der. p1. Serial metacholine challenge and induced sputum were performed prior to and 24 hours after challenge. Cell populations were evaluated by flow cytometry RESULTS: All ANA and AA cases had immediate positive response to d. pteronyssinus with ≥20% fall in FEV1. All ANA/AA subjects had positive methacholine challenge, and PC20 decreased in both groups 24 hours after allergen challenge (n.s), negative in controls (PC20 > 16 mg/ml). Sputum ECP was higher in AA after challenge compared to ANA and controls. However, in both ANA cases % of sputum eosinophils increased after challenge. Sputum and serum basophils were higher in AA and ANA compared with controls. CONCLUSIONS: We report two cases of positive bronchial responses to d. pteronyssinus in subjects with suggestive symptoms but with no evidence of systemic atopy. Further studies are required to increase the number of cases.

Proposed diagnostic standard using visual analogue scale and acoustic rhinometry in nasal provocation test in allergic patients

Objective The authors aimed to analyze symptom change after nasal provocation and acoustic rhinometry results of a larger number of allergic rhinitis patients and also aimed to propose a new diagnostic threshold by investigating the difference between patients with allergic and non-allergic perennial rhinitis. Methods The authors checked symptom change and performed acoustic rhinometry before and after nasal provocation in 208 patients (114 males and 94 females, 19–58 years old) with allergic rhinitis and 222 patients (116 males and 106 females, 20–74 years old) clinically diagnosed with non-allergic perennial rhinitis (control group). Then the authors compared VAS (visual analogue scale), TNV (total nasal volume), MCA (minimal cross-sectional area), length of MCA and change of these values between allergic patients group and control group, to propose the new diagnostic standard. Results The change of symptom score and number of sneezing after nasal provocation were significantly different between allergic patient and control group. The basal TNV, MCA, length of MCA, and changes of these values were also significantly different. By drawing the ROC (receiver operator characteristic) curve and evaluating the sensitivity and specificity for each criteria, we could set the diagnostic criteria as follows: (1) symptom change: more than 2 points in the case of nasal obstruction and more than 1 point for the case of rhinorrhea or itching, (2) more than 24.5% change of the TNV, and (3) more than 20% change of the MCA. Conclusion VAS change and acoustic rhinometry in nasal provocation test could be a valuable tool in diagnosing allergic rhinitis with high sensitivity and specificity.

The Sinus Headache Explained

The concept of a sinus headache is problematic from neurology, allergology, and rhinology perspectives. It may be considered the final neurological diagnosis of exclusion when criteria for other craniofacial pain syndromes are not met. The International Headache Society definition implicates the presence of acute sinusitis, but this requirement is often not met in practice or with a patient's perception of the term. Otorhinolaryngologists have a similar exasperation with this cephalgia but tend to attribute idiopathic, nonallergic rhinopathy as the cause. Allergists often see patients who claim to have a sinus headache but instead have perennial allergic rhinitis or nonallergic rhinitis. A fresh perspective is required to determine the characteristics, differential diagnosis, and veracity of the sinus headache. We recommend using the term with caution only if the clinical picture meets the criteria for acute sinusitis-induced headache.

Diagnosis and Management of Chronic Rhinosinusitis in Adults

Chronic rhinosinusitis (CRS) is characterized by mucosal inflammation affecting both the nasal cavity and paranasal sinuses; its causes are potentially numerous, disparate, and frequently overlapping. The more common conditions that are associated with CRS are perennial allergic and nonallergic rhinitis, nasal polyps, and anatomical mechanical obstruction (septum/turbinate issues). Other less common etiologies include inflammation (eg, from superantigens), fungal sinusitis or bacterial sinusitis with or without associated biofilm formation, gastroesophageal reflux, smoke and other environmental exposures, immune deficiencies, genetics, and aspirin-exacerbated respiratory disease. A diagnosis of CRS is strongly suggested by a history of symptoms (eg, congestion and/or fullness; nasal obstruction, blockage, discharge, and/or purulence; discolored postnasal discharge; hyposmia/anosmia; facial pain and/or pressure) and their duration for > 3 months. A definitive diagnosis requires physical evidence of mucosal swelling or discharge appreciated during physical examination coupled with CT imaging if inflammation does not involve the middle meatus or ethmoid bulla. Multivariant causation makes the diagnosis of CRS and selection of treatment complex. Furthermore, various types of health care providers including ear, nose, and throat (ENT) specialists, allergists, primary care physicians, and pulmonologists treat CRS, and each is likely to have a different approach. A structured approach to the diagnosis and management of CRS can help streamline and standardize care no matter where patients present for evaluation and treatment. A 2008 Working Group on CRS in Adults, supported by the American Academy of Otolaryngic Allergy (AAOA), developed a series of algorithms for the differential diagnosis and treatment of CRS in adults, based on the evolving understanding of CRS as an inflammatory disease. The algorithms presented in this paper address an approach for all CRS patients as well as approaches for those with nasal polyps, edema observed on nasal endoscopy, purulence observed on nasal endoscopy, an abnormal history and physical examination, and an abnormal history and normal physical examination.

Capsaicin treatment of idiopathic rhinitis: The new panacea?

The management of patients with perennial nonallergic or idiopathic rhinitis is difficult. Diagnosis and treatment are hampered by several factors. First, the diagnosis is made by exclusion of other nasal diseases. As a consequence, idiopathic rhinitis is not defined according to clear-cut criteria. A commonly accepted phenotype of idiopathic rhinitis does not exist. Second, the pathophysiology of idiopathic rhinitis is not yet fully elucidated. In contrast with allergic rhinitis, inflammation does not appear to play an important role in idiopathic rhinitis. Recent studies indicate a neural dysregulation of the nasal mucosa. Additionally, the available therapeutic arsenal comprising both pharmacotherapy and surgery is at best partially efficacious in these patients. The efficacy of repeated capsaicin application has been established in several randomized controlled trials. This treatment modality may be the first step to more specific and better treatment options for patients with idiopathic rhinitis that is unresponsive to standard treatment.

Intranasal Corticosteroids for Nasal Polyposis

Nasal polyposis, occurring in about 2% of the general population, is the ultimate form of inflammation of the upper airways. For unknown reasons, polyps develop preferentially in subtypes of inflammatory diseases and are associated with perennial non-allergic rhinitis, asthma, intolerance of aspirin (acetylsalicylic acid)/NSAIDs, allergic fungal rhinosinusitis, cystic fibrosis, and primary ciliary dyskinesia. In contrast to common beliefs, IgE-mediated allergy does not seem to play an etiological role in nasal polyposis.The polyps originate from the mucosa around the clefts of the lateral nasal wall, especially in the region of the ostiomeatal complex. The factors that determine the localization of the disease to a few square centimeters of the airways are not known.Polyps are edematous bags covered by respiratory epithelium and contain very few nerves, blood vessels, and glands that have undergone cystic degeneration. They contain degranulated mast cells, have a very high concentration of histamine, and are characteristically infiltrated by eosinophils. These cells accumulate due to the release of proinflammatory cytokines (in particular, interleukin-5).Nasal polyposis is preceded by a prolonged history of rhinitis accompanied by severe and persistent nasal blockage; typically, the sense of smell is seriously impaired when polyps develop. The diagnosis is based on anterior rhinoscopy or, preferably, endoscopy.Nasal polyposis is medically treatable. Surgical treatment is carried out when medication fails. Intranasal corticosteroids reduce rhinitis symptoms, improve nasal breathing, reduce the size of polyps, and prevent, in part, their recurrence, but this treatment has little effect on the sense of smell. Intranasal corticosteroids can, as basic long-term therapy, be used alone in mild cases or together with systemic corticosteroids and/or surgery in severe cases. Systemic corticosteroids administered for 2-3 weeks have a beneficial effect on all observed symptoms and pathology, including the sense of smell. When nasal blockage is a problem in spite of medical treatment, surgery is recommended. Simple polypectomy can be performed, but endoscopic surgery is recommended in more severe and persistent cases.

Chronic Upper Airway Cough Syndrome Secondary to Rhinosinus Diseases (Previously Referred to as Postnasal Drip Syndrome): ACCP Evidence-Based Clinical Practice Guidelines

To review the literature on postnasal drip syndrome (PNDS)-induced cough and the various causes of PNDS. Hereafter, PNDS will be referred to as upper airway cough syndrome (UACS). MEDLINE search (through May 2004) for studies published in the English language since 1980 on human subjects using the medical subject heading terms "cough," "causes of cough," "etiology of cough," "postnasal drip," "allergic rhinitis," "vasomotor rhinitis," and "chronic sinusitis." Case series and prospective descriptive clinical trials were selected for review. Also, any references from these studies that were pertinent to the topic were obtained. In multiple prospective, descriptive studies of adults, PNDS due to a variety of upper respiratory conditions has been shown either singly or in combination with other conditions, to be the most common cause of chronic cough. The symptoms and signs of PNDS are nonspecific, and a definitive diagnosis of PND-induced cough cannot be made from the medical history and physical examination findings alone. Furthermore, the absence of any of the usual clinical findings does not rule out a response to treatment that is usually effective for PND-induced cough. The differential diagnosis of PNDS-induced cough includes allergic rhinitis, perennial nonallergic rhinitis, postinfectious rhinitis, bacterial sinusitis, allergic fungal sinusitis, rhinitis due to anatomic abnormalities, rhinitis due to physical or chemical irritants, occupational rhinitis, rhinitis medicamentosa, and rhinitis of pregnancy. Because of a high prevalence of upper respiratory symptoms associated with gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD), GERD may occasionally mimic PNDS. A crucial unanswered question is whether the conditions listed above actually produce cough through a final common pathway of PND or whether, in fact, in some circumstances they cause irritation or inflammation of upper airway structures that directly stimulate cough receptors and produce cough independently of or in addition to any associated PND. PNDS (ie, UACS) secondary to a variety of rhinosinus conditions is the most common cause of chronic cough. Because it is unclear whether the mechanisms of cough are the PND itself or the direct irritation or inflammation of the cough receptors located in the upper airway, the guideline committee has decided that, pending further data that address this difficult question, the committee unanimously recommends that the term upper airway cough syndrome be used in preference to postnasal drip syndrome when discussing cough associated with upper airway conditions.

Effect of intranasal corticosteroid therapy for perennial nonallergic rhinitis and perennial allergic rhinitis

RATIONALE: The efficacy of intranasal corticosteroids for the treatment of allergic rhinitis has been reported. But the efficacy of intranasal corticosteroids has not been compared between perennial nonallergic rhinitis(PNAR) and perennial allergic rhinitis(PAR).

A study to determine if rhinitis sufferers understand what is meant by perennial nonallergic rhinitis

Rationale Perennial nonallergic rhinitis (PNAR) affects about 35 million people in the U.S., and often causes sufferers to seek more effective treatment of their nasal symptoms. However, PNAR may not be well understood by the patient, and may be confused with other conditions such as allergic rhinitis, resulting in patients not receiving the most appropriate therapy. Therefore, a questionnaire was developed to determine whether wording describing PNAR affects the patient's identification of the disease. Methods 600 self-reported rhinitis sufferers completed a web-based survey instrument. They were randomized to answer one of three questions: “do you suffer from perennial nonallergic rhinitis,” “do you suffer from nasal symptoms caused by year round environmental factors,” or “do you suffer from perennial nonallergic rhinitis, that is, nasal symptoms caused anytime during the year by things like smoke, pollution or strong odors?” They completed the questionnaire by stating either yes, no or don't know what this is. Results Nearly three in five (59%) of rhinitis sufferers when questioned could not answer if they suffered from PNAR. However, 82% of respondents when questioned were able to answer when the PNAR description included examples of triggers. Conclusions To seek out appropriate care for a disease, it is imperative that patients understand it and are able to discuss it with their healthcare provider. When a descriptive explanation of PNAR was evaluated, over four-fifths of the respondents comprehended the question. Clear, consumer-friendly description of PNAR may assist in the patient asking the right questions and receiving appropriate care.

Allergy: a global problem. Quality of life.

Allergy: a global problem. Quality of life.

The editors' choice

The editors' choice

Furosemide: progress in understanding its diuretic, anti-inflammatory, and bronchodilating mechanism of action, and use in the treatment of respiratory tract diseases.

Accumulated experimental and clinical data suggest that adrenocorticosteroids and/or endogenous ouabain-like substances may play an important role in the mechanism of furosemide diuretic action. It was reported that the drug is highly bound in the adrenals, lungs, kidney, spleen, and liver. In patients with liver cirrhosis, furosemide exerted a markedly decreased natriuretic effect compared with normal subjects, and the plasma levels of circulating endothelin and atrial natriuretic factor (ANF) were significantly elevated. In neonates, after administration of furosemide, the urinary excretion of endothelin-1 and aldosterone increased markedly, and it is known that endothelin may release ANF and aldosterone in a dose-dependent manner. Furosemide was used to stimulate zona glomerulosa, whereas ANF decreased the production of steroids in zona glomerulosa and fasciculata cell culture owing to stimulation by various factors. Because the concomitant use of ANF and furosemide appeared to be diuretically effective in newborns after cardiac surgery, one may suggest that furosemide competes with ANF for its effects on the adrenals. Furosemide administered by inhalation exerted a protective effect on allergic and perennial nonallergic rhinitis and was effective in preventing the postsurgical recurrence of nasal polyposis. The drug can also be used as an antiasthmatic agent. In preterm ventilator-dependent infants with chronic lung disease, aerosolized furosemide improved pulmonary function with no marked effect on diuresis. In adults and children with asthma, furosemide exerted a protective effect against bronchoconstriction induced by several indirect stimuli similar to that of disodium cromoglycate or nedocromil. Aerosolized furosemide had a preventive effect also on bronchoconstriction induced by inhaled lysine acetylsalicylate in patients with aspirin-sensitive asthma. In high-dose beclomethasone-dependent asthma, inhaled lysine acetylsalicylate and furosemide exerted a mutually potentiating antiasthmatic activity, allowing considerable sparing of the inhaled steroid. It is proposed that this effect may be explained by the corticosteroid-sparing action of lysine released from the lysine acetylsalicylate molecule because similar beneficial effects were also obtained after the concomitant use of epsilon-aminocaproic acid (whose chemical structure is almost the same as that of lysine) and prednisone. Furosemide exhibited an anti-inflammatory effect through inhibition of production and release of cytokines interleukin (IL)-6, IL-8, and tumor necrosis factor-alpha from peripheral mononuclear cells, which may have a beneficial effect on local inflamed tissue imbalance in the ratio of different cytokines, thus improving the sensitivity of target cells to endogenous glucocorticosteroids.

Intranasal fluticasone propionate is effective for perennial nonallergic rhinitis with or without eosinophilia

Although response to intranasal corticosteroid therapy has been reported in patients with nonallergic rhinitis with eosinophilic syndrome (NARES), efficacy specifically in non-NARES patients has not been fully characterized. To evaluate the efficacy of intranasal fluticasone propionate (FP) in the treatment of patients with perennial nonallergic rhinitis, with and without nasal eosinophilia. Data from 983 patients in three randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled PNAR trials were integrated. Patients received a total daily dose of FP 200 microg (n = 332), FP 400 microg (n = 325), or placebo (n = 326) for 28 days. Patients were > or =12 years of age with perennial rhinitis and negative skin tests to all allergens relevant to the geographic region. Nasal eosinophils were evaluated using a five-point scale. Patients were classified as non-NARES with a point score of 0 (n = 674; 69%); patients with a point score between I and 4 were classified as NARES (n = 309; 31%). Efficacy of FP was evaluated by the mean change in total nasal symptom score (TNSS), a sum of patient ratings of nasal obstruction, postnasal drip, and rhinorrhea. Patients with either NARES or non-NARES had similar statistically significant improvement with FP 200 microg or 400 microg compared with placebo; thus, the total group comprising both varieties of rhinitis responded to FP. In the total population, both FP treatment groups showed significantly greater improvement in TNSS compared with placebo during each week of treatment (P < or = 0.002), with mean changes in TNSS for day 22 to day 28 ranging from -84 and -85 in the FP 200 microg and FP 400 microg groups, respectively, to -64 in the placebo group. The three study treatment groups had similar proportions of non-NARES (68 to 69%) and NARES (31 to 32%) patients at baseline. In the non-NARES subgroup, mean changes in TNSS for each treatment group were similar to changes seen in the total population. In the NARES subgroup, mean changes in TNSS for the FP 200 microg and placebo groups were similar to changes seen in the total population; mean change in TNSS for the FP 400 microg group was somewhat greater than changes seen in the total population. Intranasal FP is an effective treatment for perennial nonallergic rhinitis with or without nasal eosinophilia (NARES or non-NARES).

Mometasone Furoate Nasal Spray in the Treatment of Perennial Non-allergic Rhinitis: A Nordic, Multicenter, Randomized, Double-blind, Placebo-controlled Study

Mometasone Furoate Nasal Spray in the Treatment of Perennial Non-allergic Rhinitis: A Nordic, Multicenter, Randomized, Double-blind, Placebo-controlled Study