COMPARISON OF ONCE-DAILY MOMETASONE FUROATE (NASONEX) AND FLUTICASONEPROPIONATE AQUEOUS NASAL SPRAYS FOR THE TREATMENT OF PERENNIAL RHINITIS

Citation
M. Mandl et al., COMPARISON OF ONCE-DAILY MOMETASONE FUROATE (NASONEX) AND FLUTICASONEPROPIONATE AQUEOUS NASAL SPRAYS FOR THE TREATMENT OF PERENNIAL RHINITIS, Annals of allergy, asthma, & immunology, 79(4), 1997, pp. 370-378
Citations number
21
Categorie Soggetti
Immunology,Allergy
ISSN journal
10811206
Volume
79
Issue
4
Year of publication
1997
Pages
370 - 378
Database
ISI
SICI code
1081-1206(1997)79:4<370:COOMF(>2.0.ZU;2-#
Abstract
Background: Mometasone furoate (Nasonex), in a new once-daily aqueous nasal spray formulation, has been shown to be as effective and well-to lerated as twice-daily beclomethasone dipropionate aqueous nasal spray in treating symptoms of seasonal allergic rhinitis and perennial rhin itis. Objective: To compare the effectiveness and tolerability of mome tasone furoate to placebo and to fluticasone propionate aqueous nasal spray, all treatments administered once-daily, in patients with perenn ial rhinitis. Methods: This was a 3-month, randomized, double-blind, d ouble dummy, parallel group study in 550 patients, aged 12 to 77 years , at 25 centers in Canada, Latin America, and Europe. Patients allergi c to at least one perennial allergen, with confirmed allergy history, skin test positivity, and moderate to severe symptomatology, were elig ible to receive one of the following treatments, once daily in the mor ning: mometasone furoate 200 mu g, fluticasone propionate 200 mu g, or placebo. The primary efficacy variable was the change from baseline i n total AM plus PM diary nasal symptom score over the first 15 days of treatment. Results: Four hundred fifty-nine patients were valid for e fficacy, For the primary efficacy variable, mometasone furoate was sig nificantly (P <.01) more effective than placebo and was not statistica lly different from fluticasone propionate (percent reductions from bas eline were 37, 39, and 22 for mometasone furoate, fluticasone propiona te, and placebo, respectively). Generally, similar trends were seen fo r physician-evaluated total nasal symptoms, and patient-rated and phys ician-rated overall condition and response to therapy. Overall, mometa sone furoate was at least as effective as fluticasone propionate at eq uivalent doses, There was no evidence of tachyphylaxis, All treatments were well tolerated. Conclusion: Mometasone furoate and fluticasone p ropionate adequately controlled symptoms of perennial rhinitis and wer e well tolerated.