Background: Cromolyn sodium is a nonsteroidal inhaled antiinflammatory agent for the treatment of asthma, As with other pressurized aerosol medications, the metered-dose inhaler (MDI) formulation currently contains chlorofluorocarbon (CFC) propellants, Because of their harmful effects on the environment CFCs are now generally banned from production and use, Alternative propellants under production for MDIs include derivatives of hydrofluoroalkane (HFA). This study uses HFA-227 in an MDI formulation of cromolyn sodium.Objectives: The objectives of the study were (1) to examine the efficacy and safety of an HFA formulation of cromolyn sodium (Intal) MDI and (2) to compare the HFA formulation with the CFC formulation.Methods: A multicenter, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, parallel study with two active groups (HFA-cromolyn sodium [n = 113] and CFC-cromolyn sodium [n = 107]) and a placebo-treated group (n = 105).Results: Patients treated with either formulation of cromolyn sodium MDI showed a statistically significant (p < 0.05) improvement of 12% to 18% compared with placebo in symptom summary score, daytime asthma symptoms, and albuterol use. No statistically significant differences were observed in pulmonary function. Patient and physician opinions of overall effectiveness favored HFA-cromolyn sodium over placebo (p = 0.01), with no other significant between-treatment differences. No statistically significant differences existed among groups in the incidence of treatment-related adverse events.Conclusion: The HFA formulation of cromolyn sodium MDI is a well-tolerated and active alternative treatment for asthma patients aged 12 years and more.

Background: Topical nasal corticosteroids are rapidly gaining acceptance as first-line therapy for seasonal allergic rhinitis, but there is a desire for effective corticosteroids with an improved safety profile over existing products.Objective: A multicenter, double-blind dose ranging study was conducted to compare the activity and tolerance of four doses of mometasone furoate nasal spray (tradename Nasonex) and placebo in adult patients with seasonal allergic rhinitis.Methods: Four hundred eighty patients with seasonal allergic rhinitis were enrolled and randomized to receive mometasone furoate nasal spray 50 mu g (n = 96), 100 mu g (n = 95), 200 mu g (n = 98) or 800 mu g (n = 95), or placebo vehicle (n = 95) once daily for 28 days.Results: All of the doses of mometasone furoate nasal spray showed activity in reducing the severity of rhinitis. The 200-mu g dose reduced total nasal symptom scores and total symptom scores throughout the study (P <.05 versus placebo vehicle). The 50-mu g dose and the 100-mu g dose showed less consistent activity at early timepoints (days 3 and 7), while the 800 mu g dose did not provide significant additional benefits over the 200-mu g dose. All dose levels were well tolerated.Conclusion: The results of this trial indicate that 200 mu g once daily is the optimum dose of mometasone furoate nasal spray for the treatment of seasonal allergic rhinitis.

Background: Cysteinyl leukotrienes mediate signs and symptoms of asthma. In a double-blind, placebo-controlled, crossover study, a new potent and specific cysteinyl leukotriene (LTD(4)) receptor antagonist, montelukast (MK-0476), was evaluated for tolerability and clinical efficacy in patients with chronic asthma (receiving and not receiving inhaled corticosteroids).Methods: Twenty-nine nonsmoking patients with asthma (15 treated concomitantly with inhaled corticosteroids) with FEV(1) percent predicted values between 50% to 80% received MK-0476, 200 mg, or placebo three times daily for 10 1/3 days (31 doses) in a random, crossover manner, after a 2-week, open, baseline period. Comparisons in FEV(1) (mean percent change from baseline after the first and last dose), mean daily daytime asthma and nocturnal awakening scores, and mean daily beta-agonist use were made between treatment periods.Results: Montelukast, compared with placebo, caused improvements in FEV(1) (mean percentage point difference of the percentage change from baseline) 3 and 4 hours after dosing on day 1 (hour 3, 9.0%; 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.53, 18.72; hour four, 10.9%; 95% CI -0.25, 20.20) and day 11 (hour 3, 14.0%; 95% CI 0.76, 31.43; hour 4, 13.4%; 95% CI 1.24, 28.83). Reductions were observed in mean daily beta-agonist use (1.0 puff/day [95% CI -1.61, -0.26]), mean daytime symptom scores, and nocturnal awakenings over the 10 1/3 day treatment period. There were no important differences between the groups receiving and those not receiving inhaled corticosteroids. Montelukast was well tolerated with no serious clinical adverse events reported.Conclusions: In this study Montelukast, 200 mg, administered three times daily for 10 1/3 days, compared with placebo, was generally well tolerated and resulted in significant improvement in chronic asthma, irrespective of the presence of inhaled corticosteroids.

Beclomethasone dipropionate nasal spray is widely used in the treatment of seasonal allergic rhinitis; however, the time of onset of action has not been determined. This study assessed the onset of action, level of relief, and efficacy of beclomethasone nasal spray in patients with seasonal allergic rhinitis. In a double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled, parallel-group, multicenter, 7-day study, symptomatic patients were administered two inhalations of beclomethasone dipropionate (n = 80) or placebo (n = 81) into each nostril twice daily. Patients assessed the onset of action and level of relief at 6, 24, and 48 hours and at days 3 and 7. Investigators evaluated symptoms at days 0, 3, and 7 and response to therapy at days 3 and 7. The difference in the cumulative number of patients reporting relief of symptoms was statistically significant in favor of beclomethasone dipropionate by hour 24 (P = 0.05). Patients in the beclomethasone dipropionate group experienced a greater level of relief than patients receiving placebo at hour 24, and improvement increased over the 7-day study compared with a decrease in relief in the placebo group. Beclomethasone dipropionate was significantly more effective than placebo in reducing symptoms (P ≤ 0.02), and patients in the beclomethasone dipropionate group showed a more favorable response to treatment than did patients in the placebo group (P < 0.01). Adverse events were minor in both groups. Beclomethasone dipropionate nasal spray produced significant onset of relief of symptoms the first day of treatment; improvement was sustained and increased over the course of the study.

Purpose: To evaluate the efficacy and tolerability of intranasally administered fluticasone propionate, 200 mu g or 100 mu g (half the adult dosage) when administered once daily for 4 weeks to children with seasonal allergic rhinitis. Design and selling: Double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled, parallel-group clinical study in 10 pediatric outpatient centers. Subjects: Children (n = 249), 4 to 11 years of age, with moderate to severe symptoms of seasonal allergic rhinitis, positive skin test reaction to a local autumn allergen, and a history of seasonal allergic rhinitis. Measurements: Clinician- and patient-rated nasal symptom scores (obstruction, rhinorrhea, sneezing, itching), clinician-rated assessment of overall response to treatment, patient-rated nasal obstruction on awakening, and use of rescue medication. Clinicians questioned patients (or parents) regarding symptoms and adverse events. Morning plasma cortisol concentrations and 24-hour urinary excretion of cortisol and 17-ketogenic steroids were evaluated. Results: Intranasal fluticasone propionate, 200 mu g or 100 mu g once daily, was significantly more effective than placebo in the treatment of seasonal allergic rhinitis in children. Clinician- and patient-rated symptom scores indicated greater improvement in nasal symptoms, including nasal obstruction On awakening, among patients receiving intranasal fluticasone propionate. Overall response to treatment was also significantly greater in the active treatment groups. The two fluticasone propionate groups were not statistically different. Mean morning plasma cortisol concentrations and 24-hour urinary excretion of free cortisol and 17-ketogenic steroids were similar across all groups both before and after treatment. Conclusions: Intranasal fluticasone propionate, 100 mu g (half the adult dose) or 200 mu g given once daily for 4 weeks is effective and well tolerated in children 4 to II years of age with seasonal allergic rhinitis.

Although three effective topical treatments for allergic rhinitis are available, little information to assist the clinician in choosing among them has been reported. Therefore, we conducted a randomized clinical trial to compare beclomethasone nasal solution, flunisolide, and cromolyn with placebo in 120 patients with hay fever during the ragweed season of 1984. We found that all three agents were superior to placebo (P less than 0.001) and that the glucocorticoids were more effective than cromolyn (P less than 0.001). Surprisingly, we also found that these intranasal treatments considerably reduced the symptoms of seasonal asthma. Further study of this therapeutic advantage is needed.

On epidemiologic grounds, respirable particles from chilled-water air-conditioning systems in textile production plants have been implicated as a cause of hypersensitivity pneumonitis. We have purified the antigen from scum growing in this chilled water by antibody-affinity chromatography by use of IgG isolated from a pool of serum obtained from three workers with disease. Two patients with the disease, three coworkers without the disease, and two unexposed control subjects inhaled a dose of the purified antigen approximately equivalent to that amount calculated to be inhaled during an 8-hour work shift. Both workers with disease experienced fever, malaise, cough, and dyspnea 6 to 8 hours after the aerosol challenge. In these two patients the exposure evoked a transient decrease in circulating lymphocytes, predominantly T cells. Before challenge the patients' peripheral blood mononuclear cells demonstrated a blastogenic response to the antigen. The responding cells had disappeared from the circulation 24 hours after the challenge. Seventy-two hours after the challenge, mononuclear cells that were producing large amounts of specific IgG antibody appeared in the circulation. We conclude that the same antigen(s) that react with IgG antibody produced an acute episode of the disease, that specific antigen-recognition cells disappear from the peripheral blood after exposure to the antigen (presumably because they are attracted to the lung), and that antibody-forming cells appear in the peripheral blood approximately 2 days after a challenge. These antigen-specific reactions of circulating mononuclear cells may be specific for the disease, but studies on a larger number of cases are needed to be certain.

Avoidance is the key treatment of anaphylaxis if an allergen exists; thus, we have evaluated 102 patients with the initial diagnosis of idiopathic anaphylaxis with a battery of 79 food-antigen skin prick tests selected to include foods reported or suspected of provoking anaphylaxis. Only those patients whose episodes consisted of at least two of the following were included in the study: angioedema with or without hives, laryngeal edema leading to severe dyspnea, hypotension, or loss of consciousness. Detailed history, physical examination, and conventional laboratory tests ruled out known causes of anaphylaxis. Thirty-two patients (31%) had positive tests to one or more food antigens. In five of these patients, subsequently eating a food that elicited a positive test provoked an anaphylactic reaction. Two patients eliminated the foods completely, stopped having reactions, and refused challenge. In these seven patients, 10 different antigens provoked anaphylaxis: aniseed, cashew nut, celery, flaxseed, hops, mustard, mushroom, shrimp, sunflower, and walnut. We conclude that a battery of selected food-antigen skin prick tests provided a useful method for identifying an offending antigen in these patients and that some (7% in our series) cases of "idiopathic" anaphylaxis by history are not truly idiopathic.