If you are experiencing problems downloading PDF or HTML fulltext, our helpdesk recommend clearing your browser cache and trying again. If you need help in clearing your cache, please click here . Still need help? Email help@ingentaconnect.com

Open Access Two-week comparison study of olopatadine hydrochloride nasal spray 0.6% versus azelastine hydrochloride nasal spray 0.1% in patients with vasomotor rhinitis

 Download
(HTML 51.6kb)
 
or
 Download
(PDF 785.7kb)
 
Download Article:

Abstract:

Olopatadine hydrochloride nasal spray 0.6% (OLO) and azelastine nasal spray 137 micrograms (AZE) are effective in treating allergic rhinitis and AZE is indicated for nonallergic vasomotor rhinitis (VMR). This study evaluates the relative safety and efficacy of OLO and AZE in patients with VMR. This randomized, double-blind, parallel-group, multicenter study compared OLO (an investigational use) with AZE over 14 days in patients (n = 129) ≥12 years of age with chronic VMR. Efficacy included the severity of nasal symptom scores. Safety included adverse events (AEs) and nasal examinations. Patient perceptions of treatment satisfaction and changes in allergy condition were determined using the Treatment Satisfaction Questionnaire for Medication and Patient Global Assessment scores. In the OLO and AZE groups, reflective scores for individual nasal symptoms (nasal congestion, rhinorrhea, postnasal drip, and sneezing) and total nasal VMR symptom scores decreased significantly from baseline to day 14 (p < 0.05). No significant between-group differences were observed (p > 0.05). No serious AEs were reported in either group. Overall, 22 and 20 AEs were reported in the OLO and AZE groups, respectively. The most common AE was taste disturbance, reported by three (5.3%) and six (10.3%) patients in the OLO and AZE groups, respectively. Patients in both groups reported similar treatment satisfaction scores and a majority of patients in both groups perceived an overall improvement in their rhinitis condition. OLO has a similar efficacy and safety profile to AZE for the management of VMR in patients ≥12 years of age.

Keywords: Allergic rhinitis; antihistamine; azelastine; efficacy; intranasal spray; nasal spray; olopatadine; perennial nonallergic rhinitis; safety; vasomotor rhinitis

Document Type: Research Article

DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.2500/aap.2011.32.3439

Affiliations: Allergy and Asthma Care, Germantown, Tennessee, USA

Publication date: March 1, 2011

More about this publication?
  • Allergy and Asthma Proceedings is a peer reviewed publication dedicated to distributing timely scientific research regarding advancements in the knowledge and practice of allergy, asthma and immunology. Its primary readership consists of allergists and pulmonologists.

    The goal of the Proceedings is to publish articles with a predominantly clinical focus which directly impact quality of care for patients with allergic disease and asthma.

    Featured topics include asthma, rhinitis, sinusitis, food allergies, allergic skin diseases, diagnostic techniques, allergens, and treatment modalities. Published material includes peer-reviewed original research, clinical trials and review articles.

    Articles marked "F" offer free full text for personal noncommercial use only.

    The journal is indexed in Thomson Reuters Web of Science and Science Citation Index Expanded, plus the National Library of Medicine's PubMed service.
  • Editorial Board
  • Information for Authors
  • Submit a Paper
  • Information for Advertisers
  • Reprint Requests
  • ingentaconnect is not responsible for the content or availability of external websites
Related content

Tools

Favourites

Share Content

Access Key

Free Content
Free content
New Content
New content
Open Access Content
Open access content
Subscribed Content
Subscribed content
Free Trial Content
Free trial content
Cookie Policy
X
Cookie Policy
ingentaconnect website makes use of cookies so as to keep track of data that you have filled in. I am Happy with this Find out more