Explore the vast range of titles available.

[This corrects the article DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0334162.].

Allergic rhinitis is a very common disorder that affects people of all ages, peaking in the teenage years. It is frequently ignored, underdiagnosed, misdiagnosed, and mistreated, which not only is detrimental to health but also has societal costs. Although allergic rhinitis is not a serious illness, it is clinically relevant because it underlies many complications, is a major risk factor for poor asthma control, and affects quality of life and productivity at work or school. Management of allergic rhinitis is best when directed by guidelines. A diagnostic trial of a pharmacotherapeutic agent could be started in people with clinically identified allergic rhinitis; however, to confirm the diagnosis, specific IgE reactivity needs to be recorded. Documented IgE reactivity has the added benefit of guiding implementation of environmental controls, which could substantially ameliorate symptoms of allergic rhinitis and might prevent development of asthma, especially in an occupational setting. Many classes of drug are available, effective, and safe. In meta-analyses, intranasal corticosteroids are superior to other treatments, have a good safety profile, and treat all symptoms of allergic rhinitis effectively. First-generation antihistamines are associated with sedation, psychomotor retardation, and reduced academic performance. Only immunotherapy with individually targeted allergens has the potential to alter the natural history of allergic rhinitis. Patients' education is a vital component of treatment. Even with the best pharmacotherapy, one in five affected individuals remains highly symptomatic, and further research is needed in this area.

Although both nasal steroids and macrolide antibiotics have been recommended for the treatment of chronic rhinosinusitis without nasal polyps (CRSsNPs), whether there is any difference in their clinical efficacy remains unexplored. In addition, few studies have investigated their clinical efficacy in a Chinese population living in China, who present distinct inflammatory patterns compared with white patients in western countries. This study compares the efficacy of mometasone furoate and clarithromycin treatment in CRSsNP in Chinese adults in a preliminary prospective, open-label, randomized trial. Forty-three CRSsNP patients were randomized to receive mometasone furoate nasal spray at 200 μg (n = 21) or clarithromycin tablet at 250 mg (n = 22) once daily for 12 weeks. Patients were assessed before the treatment and after 4, 8, and 12 weeks after treatment. Subjective symptoms were scored on a visual analog scale. Endoscopy physical findings were scored according to Lanza-Kennedy scoring system. Moreover, smoking and atopic status and coexistence of allergic rhinitis (AR) and asthma were recorded. Before the treatment, no significant difference in symptoms and nasal endoscopic physical findings were found between mometasone furoate and clarithromycin group. As early as 4 weeks after dosing, a significant reduction of total symptom scores, nasal obstruction, headache, rhinorrhea and overall burden scores, and mucosal swelling and nasal discharge scores were observed in both groups. No significant difference in symptom or endoscopic scores was observed between these two groups at any posttreatment observation time point. The coexistence of AR was correlated with lower scores of mucosal edema and nasal secretion in the mometasone furoate group after 12-week treatment. Mometasone furoate and clarithromycin show a comparable clinical effect for CRSsNPs in Chinese adults. Mometasone furoate is more effective in improving edema and secretion for CRSsNP patients with concomitant AR.

Background/Objectives: Probiotics are defined as ‘living micro-organisms that when administered in adequate amounts confer a health benefit to the host’. Different probiotic strains have been investigated for beneficial effects on allergic disorders. The purpose of the current study was to evaluate the effect of orally administering the probiotic Nestlé culture collection (NCC)2818 Bifidobacterium lactis strain on immune parameters and nasal symptom scores in subjects suffering from seasonal allergic rhinitis (SAR). Subjects/Methods: The study was a double-blinded, parallel, randomized placebo-controlled trial conducted during the peak of the pollen season. Adult subjects with clinical history of SAR and positive skin prick test to grass pollen were recruited. The subjects received B. lactis NCC2818 or placebo for 8 weeks and completed symptom questionnaires every week. Whole blood was collected at baseline (V1), 4 weeks (V2) and 8 weeks (V3) to measure immune parameters. Results: Concentrations of Th-2 cytokines, secreted by stimulated blood lymphocytes, were significantly lower in the probiotic group compared with the placebo group at V3 (interleukin (IL)-5, P =0.016; IL-13, P =0.005). Total nasal symptom scores were significantly lower in the second month of the study (weeks 5–8) in the probiotic group compared with the placebo group ( P =0.03). Also, percentages of activated CD63 expressing basophils were significantly lower in the probiotic group at V2 ( P =0.02). Conclusions: Oral administration of the probiotic NCC2818 mitigates immune parameters and allergic symptoms during seasonal exposure. These promising results warrant that B. lactis NCC2818 be investigated further in large-scale trials for management of respiratory allergy.

Although formerly regarded as a nuisance disease, allergic rhinitis (AR) has a considerable effect on quality of life and can have significant consequences if left untreated. The total burden of this disease lies not only in impaired physical and social functioning but also in a financial burden made greater when considering evidence that AR is a possible causal factor in comorbid diseases such as asthma or sinusitis. Compared with matched controls, patients with AR have an approximate twofold increase in medication costs and 1.8-fold the number of visits to health practitioners. Hidden direct costs include the treatment of comorbid asthma, chronic sinusitis, otitis media, upper respiratory infection, and nasal polyposis. Nasal congestion, the most prominent symptom in AR, is associated with sleep-disordered breathing, a condition that can have a profound effect on mental health, including increased psychiatric disorders, depression, anxiety, and alcohol abuse. Furthermore, sleep-disordered breathing in childhood and adolescence is associated with increased disorders of learning performance, behavior, and attention. In the United States, AR results in 3.5 million lost workdays and 2 million lost schooldays annually. Patients struggle to alleviate their misery, frequently self-adjusting their treatment regimen of over-the-counter and prescription medications because of lack of efficacy, deterioration of efficacy, lack of 24-hour relief, and bothersome side effects. Ironically, health care providers overestimate patient satisfaction with therapy. Therefore, improvement in patient-practitioner communication may enhance patient adherence with prescribed regimens.

Background There is an important heterogeneity of the clinical research done to date for allergen immunotherapy (AIT). We plan to assess the safety and efficacy of a house dust mite (HDM) polymerized allergen extract mixture for allergic rhinoconjunctivitis (AR) according to both the EMA and European Academy of Allergy and Clinical Immunology (EAACI) guidelines for the clinical development of products for the treatment of AR. Methods We will perform a double-blind, placebo-controlled, randomized parallel group phase III clinical trial to assess the clinical efficacy and safety of a polymerized Dermatophagoides pteronyssinus and Dermatophagoides farinae allergen extract mixture (Beltavac®) to treat perennial AR in children and adults. Patients with moderate or severe rhinitis symptoms, either associated or not with asthma and confirmed HDM sensitization and without relevant concomitant conditions that may interfere with the planned evaluations test are eligible. Patients will be randomized in a 1:1 ratio to either the active AIT or placebo. The experimental group will receive 12 monthly AIT doses via subcutaneous route with a potency of 2 RC/ml per allergen. The expected sample size is 250 patients from 16 sites in Spain. The main efficacy outcome is the Combined Symptom and Medication Score (CSMS) for rhinitis. It will be patients’ self-assessed and collected through a phone App developed ad hoc for the study to improve the patient adherence and the quality of data. Main secondary outcomes include expanded CSMS for rhinoconjunctivitis symptoms, control of rhinitis, specific IgE and IgG 4 values, quality of life, and the number of adverse reactions. Health-related direct and indirect costs will be also evaluated. Finally, several exploratory parameters will be used to assess the severity of asthma. Discussion This phase III clinical trial will be of interest to contribute to the scientific evidence about the efficacy and safety of AIT with allergoids. Our working hypothesis is that the investigational product in patients with AR associated or not with asthma is superior to placebo in providing a clinically significant improvement according to the standards defined by the EAACI. This trial will also supply valuable information about patients reported outcomes using health technology for rhinoconjunctivitis and asthma assessment. Trial registration EudraCT 2018–003427-11. Date on which this record was first entered in the: 2021–06-14.

Introduction Although rhinitis is among the most common diseases worldwide, rhinitis prevalence in the general adult population is unclear and definitions differ widely. Objective To summarize the literature on rhinitis prevalence in the general adult population and to assess: (1) the prevalence according to different rhinitis definitions overall and in different regions of the world, and (2) the evolution of rhinitis prevalence over time. Methods We conducted an extensive literature review of publications including rhinitis prevalence using Pubmed and Scopus databases up to October 2020. We classified the definitions into three categories: unspecified rhinitis, allergic rhinitis (AR), and nonallergic rhinitis (NAR). Results Among 5878 articles screened, 184 articles were included, presenting 156 different definitions of rhinitis. Rhinitis prevalence ranged from 1% to 63%. The overall median prevalences of unspecified rhinitis, AR and NAR were 29.4%, 18.1% and 12.0%, and they varied according to the geographical location. Rhinitis prevalence tended to increase over time. Conclusions This review highlights the great heterogeneity of the definitions. The majority of studies had focused on AR, while only a few epidemiological data exist on NAR. We found geographical variability in rhinitis prevalence. Most of studies reported an increase of rhinitis prevalence over the last decades.

Allergic rhinitis (AR) is a prevalent chronic respiratory problem in the United States associated with significant comorbidities and health care costs. Recent surveys suggest that mixed rhinitis (MR), which refers to patients with nonallergic AR (NAR) and AR, is a specific rhinitis subtype that may represent between 50 and 70% of all AR patients although the true prevalence of these conditions has not been confirmed. It is important to make a clear distinction between these chronic rhinitis (CR) phenotypes as symptom triggers; response to treatment and prevalence of comorbidities such as sinusitis may be significantly different. Incorporating patient centric questionnaires that can reliably characterize AR, MR, and NAR phenotypes will improve our ability to further investigate the natural history/epidemiology, mechanisms, and development of novel therapies for NAR-related CR subtypes.

Asthma and allergic rhinitis are common health problems that cause major illness and disability worldwide. The prevalence of allergic rhinitis is estimated to range from 10% to 20% in the USA and Europe. Multiple factors contribute to the wide range of reported prevalence rates. These include type of prevalence rate reported (current or cumulative), study selection criteria, age of participants, differences in survey methods, varied geographic locations and socioeconomic status, any of which are significant enough to confound direct comparison between studies. There is no standard set of diagnostic criteria for allergic rhinitis. In most studies, the criteria for diagnosis are based on the subject’s reporting, solely by questionnaire and rarely confirmed by skin testing. In addition, most studies focus on hay fever, leaving perennial allergic rhinitis underestimated. Sinus imaging is generally not performed and, therefore, rhinosinusitis not differentiated. Some investigators report ‘current’ prevalence while others report ‘cumulative’ or ‘lifetime’ prevalence. Epidemiologic studies have consistently shown that asthma and rhinitis often coexist in the same patients. The prevalence of asthma is <2% in subjects without rhinitis while it varies from 10% to 40% in patients with rhinitis. Furthermore, the majority of patients with asthma experience rhinitis, which is a factor in the risk for asthma. Despite recognition that allergic rhinitis and asthma are global health problems, there are insufficient epidemiologic data and more data are needed with regard to their etiologic risk factors and natural history. This aim of this review is to enable the reader to discuss prevalence, risk factors and prognosis of allergic rhinitis and asthma.