Comparative study of sensory attributes of two antihistamine nasal sprays: Olopatadine 0.6% and azelastine 0.1%

Allergy and Asthma Proceedings

Volumn 29, Issue 6, 2008, Pages 659-668

  Meltzer, Eli O ^a   Garadi, Rekha ^b   LaForce, Craig ^c   Chadwick, Stephen J ^d   Berger, William E ^e   Gross, Gary ^f   Edwards, Michael R ^b   Crenshaw, Krista ^b   Wall, G Michael ^b  

^a ALLERGY AND ASTHMA MEDICAL GROUP AND RESEARCH CENTER   (United States)

^b ALCON RESEARCH LTD   (United States)

^c North Carolina Clinical Research   (United States)

^d ENTA Allergy Head and Neck Institute   (United States)

^e UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA   (United States)

^f Pharmaceutical Research and Consulting Inc   (United States)

Author keywords

Aftertaste; Allergic rhinitis; Azelastine; Likelihood of use; Nasal allergies; Nasal spray; Olopatadine; Sensory attribute; Taste; Treatment satisfaction

Indexed keywords

ANTIHISTAMINIC AGENT; AZELASTINE; NOSE SPRAY; OLOPATADINE; ANTIALLERGIC AGENT; DIBENZOXEPIN DERIVATIVE; PHTHALAZINE DERIVATIVE;

ADOLESCENT; ADULT; ALLERGIC RHINITIS; ARTICLE; CLINICAL TRIAL; CONTROLLED CLINICAL TRIAL; CONTROLLED STUDY; CROSSOVER PROCEDURE; DOUBLE BLIND PROCEDURE; DRUG TOLERABILITY; DRUG USE; FEMALE; HUMAN; MAJOR CLINICAL STUDY; MALE; MULTICENTER STUDY; ODOR; PATIENT SATISFACTION; RANDOMIZED CONTROLLED TRIAL; SENSORY EVALUATION; TASTE PREFERENCE; UNSPECIFIED SIDE EFFECT; COMPARATIVE STUDY; INTRANASAL DRUG ADMINISTRATION; MIDDLE AGED; PATHOPHYSIOLOGY; PERENNIAL RHINITIS; SMELLING; TASTE;

ADMINISTRATION, INTRANASAL; ADOLESCENT; ADULT; ANTI-ALLERGIC AGENTS; CROSS-OVER STUDIES; DIBENZOXEPINS; DOUBLE-BLIND METHOD; FEMALE; HUMANS; MALE; MIDDLE AGED; OLFACTORY PERCEPTION; PHTHALAZINES; RHINITIS, ALLERGIC, PERENNIAL; SMELL; TASTE; YOUNG ADULT;

EID: 61749104342     PISSN: 10885412     EISSN: 15396304     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.2500/aap.2008.29.3181     Document Type: Article

References (29)

1. Salzano FA, d'Angelo L, Motta S, et al. Allergic rhinoconjunctivitis: Diagnostic and clinical assessment. Rhinology 30:265-275, 1992.
2. Hollingsworth HM. Allergic rhinoconjunctivitis: Current therapy. Hosp Pract (1995) 31:61-62, 65-67, 71-73, 1996.
3. Greiner AN. Allergic rhinitis: Impact of the disease and considerations for management. Med Clin North Am 90:17-38, 2006.
4. Prenner BM, and Schenkel E. Allergic rhinitis: Treatment based on patient profiles. Am J Med 119:230-237, 2006.
5. Juniper EF, Stahl E, Doty RL, et al. Clinical outcomes and adverse effect monitoring in allergic rhinitis. J Allergy Clin Immunol 115(suppl 1):S390-S413, 2005.
6. Galant SP, and Wilkinson R. Clinical prescribing of allergic rhinitis medication in the preschool and young school-age child: What are the options? BioDrugs 15:453-463, 2001.
7. Marple BF, Fornadley JA, Patel AA, et al. American Academy of Otolaryngic Allergy Working Group on Allergic Rhinitis. Keys to successful management of patients with allergic rhinitis: Focus on patient confidence, compliance, and satisfaction. Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg 136(suppl):S107-S124, 2007.
8. Yanni JM, Stephens DJ, Miller ST, et al. The in vitro and in vivo ocular pharmacology of olopatadine (AL-4943A), an effective anti-allergic/ antihistaminic agent. J Ocul Pharmacol Ther 12:389-400, 1996.
9. Leonardi A, and Abelson MB. Double-masked, randomized, placebo-controlled clinical study of the mast cell-stabilizing effects of treatment with olopatadine in the conjunctival allergen challenge model in humans. Clin Ther 25:2539-2552, 2003.
10. Sharif NA, Xu SX, Miller ST, et al. Characterization of the ocular antiallergic and antihistaminic effects of olopatadine (AL-4943A), a novel drug for treating ocular allergic diseases. J Pharmacol Exp Ther 278:1252-1261, 1996.
11. Ohmori K, Hasegawa K, Tamura T, et al. Properties of olopatadine hydrochloride, a new antiallergic/antihistaminic drug. Arzneimittel-Forschung 54:809-829, 2004.
12. Ohmori K, Hayashi K, Kaise T, et al. Pharmacological, pharmacokinetic and clinical properties of olopatadine hydrochloride, a new antiallergic drug. Jpn J Pharmacol 88:379-397, 2002.
13. Ratner PH, Hampel FC, Amar NJ, et al. Safety and efficacy of olopatadine hydrochloride nasal spray for the treatment of seasonal allergic rhinitis to mountain cedar. Ann Allergy Asthma Immunol 95:474-479, 2005.
14. Meltzer EO, Hampel FC, Ratner PH, et al. Safety and efficacy of olopatadine hydrochloride nasal spray for the treatment of seasonal allergic rhinitis. Ann Allergy Asthma Immunol 95:600-606, 2005.
15. Patel D, Garadi R, Brubaker M, et al. Onset and duration of action of nasal sprays in seasonal allergic rhinitis patients: Olopatadine hydrochloride versus mometasone furoate monohydrate. Allergy Asthma Proc 28:592-599, 2007.
16. Patel P, Roland PS, Marple BF, et al. An assessment of the onset and duration of action of olopatadine nasal spray. Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg 137:918-924, 2007. Erratum in 138:258, 2008.
17. Yawn B. Comparison of once-daily intranasal corticosteroids for the treatment of allergic rhinitis: Are they all the same? Med-GenMed 8:3, 2006.
18. Herman H. Once-daily administration of intranasal corticosteroids for allergic rhinitis: A comparative review of efficacy, safety, patient preference, and cost. Am J Rhinol 21:70-79, 2007.
19. Khanna P, and Shah A. Assessment of sensory perceptions and patient preference for intranasal corticosteroid sprays in allergic rhinitis. Am J Rhinol 19:316-321, 2005.
20. Meltzer EO, Bardelas J, Goldsobel A, and Kaiser H. A preference evaluation study comparing the sensory attributes of mometasone furoate and fluticasone propionate nasal sprays by patients with allergic rhinitis. Treat Respir Med 4:289-296, 2005.
21. Meltzer EO. Intranasal steroids: Managing allergic rhinitis and tailoring treatment to patient preference. Allergy Asthma Proc 26:445-451, 2005.
22. Mohar D, Ratner P, Shah S, et al. Olopatadine nasal spray 0.6% is superior to vehicle and non-inferior to azelastine nasal spray 01% when dosed twice daily for the treatment of seasonal allergic rhinitis. J Allergy Clin Immunol 121:S49, 2008.
23. Ratner P, Mohar D, Drake, M, et al. Comparative safety of olopatadine, azelastine, and placebo nasal sprays in patients with seasonal allergic rhinitis. Presented at the American College of Allergy, Asthma, and Immunology Annual Meeting, Philadelphia, PA, November 2006 (Abs P203).
24. The Medical Letter on Drugs and Therapeutics. Azelastine nasal spray for allergic rhinitis. The Medical Letter, Inc., 39:45-47, 1997.
25. MedPointe Pharmaceuticals. Astelin package insert. MedPointe Healthcare, Inc., Somerset, NJ; 2006.
26. Stokes M, Amorosi SL, Thompson D, et al. Evaluation of patients' preferences for triamcinolone acetonide aqueous, fluticasone propionate, and mometasone furoate nasal sprays in patients with allergic rhinitis. Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg 131:225-231, 2004.
27. Meltzer EO, Hadley J, Blaiss M, et al. Development of questionnaires to measure patient preferences for intranasal corticosteroids in patients with allergic rhinitis. Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg 132:197-207, 2005.
28. Shah RS, Miller C, Pethick N, et al. Two multicenter, randomized, single-blind, single-dose crossover studies of specific attributes of budesonide aqueous nasal spray and fluticasone propionate nasal spray. Clin Ther 25:2198-2214, 2003.
29. Bachert C, and El-Akkad T. Patient preferences and sensory comparisons of three intranasal corticosteroids for the treatment of allergic rhinitis. Ann Allergy Asthma Immunol 89:292-297, 2002.