A comparison of the clinical efficacy and safety of intranasal fluticasone propionate and antihistamines in the treatment of rhinitis.

Abstract

Adequate management of allergic rhinitis is needed to avoid its considerable adverse social, clinical, and economic impact. Both topical intranasal steroids and oral or topical antihistamines are recognised as effective treatments for this condition. In comparative studies, however, intranasal steroids and, in particular, fluticasone propionate aqueous nasal spray (FPANS), have afforded consistently better symptomatic relief, and have a greater beneficial effect on quality of life. Furthermore, the addition of an antihistamine to FPANS therapy has generally produced little further benefit. Intranasal administration is associated with a low systemic absorption of fluticasone propionate and, following regular use of FPANS, placebo, or an oral antihistamine, no significant differences were seen between treatment groups in plasma or urinary cortisol. Overall, therefore, the data indicate that FPANS is superior to second-generation antihistamines in the management of allergic rhinitis.

• Authors: A Foresi
• Journal: Allergy (Allergy) Vol. 55 Suppl 62 Pg. 12-4 ( 2000) ISSN: 0105-4538 [Print] Denmark
• PMID: 10929863 (Publication Type: Comparative Study, Journal Article, Review)

Chemical References

• Androstadienes
• Anti-Allergic Agents
• Anti-Inflammatory Agents
• Histamine H1 Antagonists
• Loratadine
• Fluticasone

Topics

• Administration, Intranasal
• Androstadienes (therapeutic use)
• Anti-Allergic Agents (therapeutic use)
• Anti-Inflammatory Agents (therapeutic use)
• Clinical Trials as Topic
• Fluticasone
• Histamine H1 Antagonists (therapeutic use)
• Humans
• Loratadine (therapeutic use)
• Rhinitis, Allergic, Seasonal (drug therapy)