Triamcinolone acetonide aqueous nasal spray versus loratadine in seasonal allergic rhinitis: efficacy and quality of life

Citation
J. Condemi et al., Triamcinolone acetonide aqueous nasal spray versus loratadine in seasonal allergic rhinitis: efficacy and quality of life, ANN ALLER A, 84(5), 2000, pp. 533-538
Citations number
9
Categorie Soggetti
Clinical Immunolgy & Infectious Disease
Journal title
ANNALS OF ALLERGY ASTHMA & IMMUNOLOGY
ISSN journal
10811206 → ACNP
Volume
84
Issue
5
Year of publication
2000
Pages
533 - 538
Database
ISI
SICI code
1081-1206(200005)84:5<533:TAANSV>2.0.ZU;2-C
Abstract
Background: The new aqueous formulation of triamcinolone acetonide (TAA) wa s compared with loratadine in patients with seasonal allergic rhinitis. Objective: The primary objective of the study was to compare the safety and efficacy of TAA aqueous with loratadine in relieving the symptoms of seaso nal allergic rhinitis. Methods: A total of 351 patients were enrolled into this 4-week, double-bli nd, double-dummy, randomized, parallel group study. Patients received eithe r TAA aqueous nasal spray (220 mu g) or loratadine (10 mg) once daily. Effi cacy variables were rhinitis symptom changes from baseline, physician globa l evaluations, and the patient dropout rate due to insufficient treatment e ffect. Safety and quality of life also was evaluated. Results: Both TAA aqueous-treated and loratadine-treated patients had impro vement in symptoms as early as day 1. Overall, TAA aqueous was significantl y (P <.05) more effective than loratadine in reducing total nasal symptoms and individual symptoms of nasal congestion, nasal itch, and sneezing. Ocul ar symptoms improved from baseline in both groups. There was no statistical ly significant difference between groups based on physician global evaluati on. A similar number of patients in each group discontinued the study due t o ineffective treatment. Triamcinolone acetonide aqueous patients maintaine d a significantly (P <.05) better quality of life in three of the dimension s (activity, nasal symptoms, and practical problems) and for overall qualit y of life. There were no differences between the two treatment groups in th e incidence of adverse events, none of which were clinically significant. Conclusions: Both TAA aqueous and loratadine were effective and well-tolera ted in the treatment of patients with seasonal allergic rhinitis. Triamcino lone acetonide aqueous was significantly (P <.05) more effective than lorat adine in controlling nasal symptoms of seasonal allergic rhinitis and maint aining a better quality of life for the patients.