View clinical trials related to Rhinitis.
Filter by:Correct methods and compliance of intranasal corticosteroid (INCS) is very important for the treatment of allergic rhinitis (AR). The animated cartoon-aided teaching of INCS administration was created to decrease workload of health care professionals. The aim of this study is to compare the achievement of the children with AR in using INCS between the group which were instructed by animated cartoon-aided teaching or oral presentation without demonstration.
The investigators aimed to evaluate by the Sniffin' Sticks test the effects on olfactory functions of nasal steroids and leukotriene antagonists used for allergic rhinitis.Thirty patients with seasonal were included in this study. Patients were randomly divided into three groups of 10 patients; group 1 received montelukast sodium and mometasone furoate therapy, group 2 received only montelukast, and group 3 only mometasone furoate. Patients' olfactory functions were determined using the Sniffin' Sticks olfactory test before and after a month treatments. Threshold, discrimination, identification, and TDI values were not significantly different among the groups before treatment. For Group 1 and Group 3 patients, there were statistically significant differences in threshold, discrimination, identification, and TDI values before and after treatment (p < 0.05) (Wilcoxon signed ranks analysis) For Group 2 patients, the before and after treatment values of threshold, discrimination, identification, and TDI showed no significant differences (p > 0.05). According to the findings of our study, MF is superior to montelukast in improving olfactory function. Although montelukast has been shown to be effective against AR symptoms, its effect on olfactory function was not demonstrated in this study.
There is increasing evidence that the effectiveness of allergy immunotherapy to control symptoms of rhinoconjunctivitis is related to the cumulative dose of allergen or allergoid administered during a single regimen of subcutaneous (SC) injections or of sublingual administration. Two new cumulative doses of the Grass MATA MPL 10200 and 18200 SU (Standardized Units) are being developed to compare with the current dose of 5100 SU. The purpose of this study is to evaluate the tolerability and safety of these two new cumulative dose regimens of Grass MATA MPL compared with placebo in patients with seasonal allergic rhinoconjunctivitis (SAR) due to grass pollen, to enable selection of the best dose to go into a larger scale study to assess the efficacy and safety of the higher cumulative doses.
ASIT naïve patients sensitized to grass pollens will be recruited for the study. All of them will be instructed to treat bothersome in-season symptoms when they appear (on as needed, pro re nata basis) with rescue medication. They will be given 5 different options and will be informed about the effects of each of them in order to make their optimal choice for different symptoms and their combination: local decongestant (xylomethazoline, when congestion is leading), local antihistamine (azelastine, when itching, sneezing and rhinorhea a predominant), nasal corticosteroid (momethasone, when all nasal symptoms are pressing and no adequate relief is obtained form the other 2 local treatments), oral antihistamine (bilastine, when itching and sneezing persist despite the local treatments) and oral corticosteroid (prednisolone, when any or all symptoms become unbearable despite the other suggested treatments). Patients who are reluctant to use immunotherapy or who are too late to initiate it will be randomized to be treated with the listed medications on as needed basis, the nasally applied formulations will be followed by either HPMC to prolong and enhance their effect (Group HPMC) or placebo (lactose powder) (Group Placebo) to serve as control. Patients indicated and willing to carry out ASIT will be treated according to the standard protocol with grass allergens sublingually (Staloral #688) and will receive rescue medication (Group Immunotherapy).
The purpose of this study is to assess safety, tolerability and demonstrate a dose response signal using Total Symptom Score (TSS), based on challenges with grass pollen in an Environmental Exposure Chamber (EEC), followed by estimation of the minimum effective dose of SUBLIVAC FIX Phleum (SP) after 10 months of treatment compared to placebo. The study has 4 treatment groups: 3 different doses of SP and placebo will be tested.
Objectives: Allergic Rhinitis (AR) is a global health problem. 10-25% of population worldwide is affected by AR. Oral/intranasal H1-antihistamine, decongestants, leukotriene receptor antagonists, intranasal corticosteroids are the pillars in the management of AR.Materials and methods: Seventy patients with allergic rhinitis participated in a prospective, randomized, double-blind, parallel, active controlled, comparative 4 week trial. The patients between age group of 18-65 years of either gender having moderate-severe intermittent or mild persistent allergic rhinitis were included. The study inclusion criteria required the subjects with Total Nasal Symptom Score (TNSS) of 5 or higher. The patients were randomly divided into two treatment groups with montelukast-levocetrizine (10 mg and 5 mg) in one group and montelukast-fexofenadine (10 mg and 120 mg) in another group. TNSS parameter was the main effectiveness parameter.
Allergen challenge facilities have been utilized for many years in clinical drug trials studying onset of action, proof of concept, duration of action, and efficacy. Each facility has somewhat different design characteristics and pollen dispersal technologies. Facilities are located in disparate geographic areas and have populations of participants who are sensitized to allergens unique to that area. Therefore, facilities have operated as single sites with little effort to evaluate facility comparability or to attempt standardization across facilities. The purpose of this study is to compare the two sites and assess whether the sites are able to achieve similar symptom scores.
This is an open label trial of mouse allergenic extract administered by subcutaneous injection in adults with asthma and mouse sensitivity. The study is designed to evaluate: - the safety of this therapy when given by injection - biomarkers of the immune response and - whether the therapy would be effective in treating allergic asthma.
The purpose of this study was to verify whether there were differences in health-related quality of life of patients with allergic rhinitis treated with bilastine 20 mg compared to those treated with loratadine 10 mg.
The main purpose of the treatment of persistent allergic rhinitis is to improve symptoms and patients' quality of life and prevent the development of asthma. Therapeutic strategies also target a reduction of pro-inflammatory mediators released from activated cells, including mast cells and epithelial cells. The presence of allergic inflammation in nasal mucosa may increase the risk of asthma occurrence, especially in patients with persistent allergic rhinitis. H1 antihistamines are widely recommended in all types of allergic rhinitis, regardless of symptom severity or persistence. They control all of the symptoms, but to a lesser extent nasal congestion. New generation agents, such as levocetirizine and desloratadine, possess anti-inflammatory properties, reducing allergic inflammation.