Cervical actinomycosis. A rare differential diagnosis of parotid tumor]

BACKGROUND: Allergic rhinitis is usually treated with oral antihistamines or nasal steroids. Topically active nasal antihistamine is a new treatment modality for allergic rhinitis. The efficacy in comparison to well established topical treatment alternatives is not fully known. OBJECTIVE: To compare the efficacy of intranasally administered azelastine to budesonide, at their respectively recommended dosage, on the symptoms of perennial rhinitis patients. METHODS: A placebo-controlled, randomized, parallel group study was conducted to compare the efficacy and tolerability of intranasal budesonide aqueous suspension (256 microg once daily) with azelastine hydrochloride nasal spray (280 microg twice daily (560 microg/day)) and with placebo in the treatment of perennial allergic rhinitis. The 195 patients (with at least a 2-year history of perennial allergic rhinitis) recorded individual nasal symptom scores, the degree of symptom control achieved and any adverse events experienced over a 2-week baseline period and a 6-week treatment period. RESULTS: Following treatment, the reductions in mean combined and individual nasal symptom scores from baseline values were significantly greater in the budesonide group compared with the placebo group (P < .0001 for all variables except runny nose P = .01). In patients treated with budesonide, there were also significantly larger reductions from baseline values in combined nasal symptom scores (P < .01) and in scores for all individual nasal symptoms (P < or = .05) compared with those treated with azelastine. The reductions from baseline in both combined and individual nasal symptom scores did not differ between azelastine and placebo. The study medications were well tolerated, producing no unexpected or serious treatment-related adverse events. CONCLUSION: A once-daily dose of 256 microg of intranasal budesonide aqueous suspension is significantly more effective at relieving the symptoms of perennial allergic rhinitis compared with a twice daily dose of 280 microg of azelastine nasal spray.     

Fluticasone propionate nasal spray is more effective and has a faster onset of action than placebo in treatment of rhinitis medicamentosa

BACKGROUND: Controversy still exists about the treatment of rhinitis medicamentosa and treatment has never been objectively evaluated. OBJECTIVE: To study the effect of fluticasone propionate aqueous nasal spray compared to placebo nasal spray in the treatment of rhinitis medicamentosa. METHODS: A parallel randomized, double-blind study was conducted to evaluate the treatment of rhinitis medicamentosa. Two groups containing 10 patients with rhinitis medicamentosa in each group stopped their overuse of nasal vasoconstrictor spray immediately and were treated with either fluticasone propionate nasal spray once daily 200 micrograms, or placebo nasal spray for 14 days. The nasal mucosal swelling was recorded with rhinostereometry, acoustic rhinometry and a peak inspiratory flow meter. Nasal stuffiness was estimated on a visual analogue scale in the morning and in the evening of each day. RESULTS: The mucosal swelling decreased after 7 and 14 days of treatment with fluticasone propionate as well as placebo, but the reduction was significantly greater after treatment with fluticasone propionate. The symptom scores for nasal stuffiness showed a marked reduction during the treatment period in both groups, but there was a faster onset of symptom reduction after treatment with fluticasone propionate. CONCLUSION: Fluticasone propionate is more effective and has a faster onset of action than placebo in the treatment of rhinitis medicamentosa. An adequate treatment of these patients consists of a combination of vasoconstrictor withdrawal and a topical corticosteroid to alleviate the withdrawal process.     

Fluticasone propionate aqueous nasal spray is safe and effective for children with seasonal allergic rhinitis

INTRODUCTION: Fluticasone propionate aqueous nasal spray, a new topical corticosteroid preparation, is effective when given as 200 micrograms once daily in patients (> 12 years of age) with seasonal allergic rhinitis. STUDY OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the efficacy and safety of fluticasone proprionate aqueous nasal spray in children aged 4 to 11 years with seasonal allergic rhinitis. STUDY DESIGN: Multicenter, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, parallel-group. PATIENTS: Two hundred fifty children aged 4 to 11 years with moderate-to-severe nasal symptoms, a positive skin test reaction to a late-summer or autumn allergen, a history of seasonal allergic rhinitis, and documentation of an unsatisfactory response to conventional treatment. INTERVENTIONS: Children were randomly assigned to receive fluticasone propionate, either 100 micrograms or 200 micrograms, or placebo, given by intranasal spray once daily in the morning for 14 days. MEASUREMENTS AND RESULTS: Severity of nasal symptoms (obstruction, rhinorrhea, itching, and sneezing) was recorded on visual analog scales by investigators at weekly visits and by patients (or adult guardian) daily in the evening. According to investigator and patient ratings, both fluticasone propionate 100 micrograms/d and 200 micrograms/d lowered total nasal symptom scores when compared with placebo. Both dosages of fluticasone propionate were more effective than placebo on the basis of investigator-rated overall clinical evaluation of efficacy at the end of treatment, with significant improvement (as opposed to moderate or mild improvement, no change or worsening) noted in 21% to 29% of the active-treatment groups vs 9% in the placebo group. There were no significant differences between the two fluticasone propionate dosages in any efficacy measurement. Morning plasma cortisol concentrations and frequency of drug-related adverse events were similar in the fluticasone propionate and placebo groups. CONCLUSION: In children as young as 4 years, 100 micrograms of fluticasone propionate aqueous nasal spray given once daily is as effective as 200 micrograms given once daily, the usual adult dose for the treatment of seasonal allergic rhinitis. Both fluticasone propionate dosages were well tolerated and neither dosage appears to interfere with the hypothalamic-pituitary-adrenal axis in children.     

Intranasal fluticasone propionate is more effective than terfenadine tablets for seasonal allergic rhinitis

BACKGROUND: We compared the efficacy and tolerability of the intranasal corticosteroid fluticasone propionate with that of the antihistamine terfenadine in patients with seasonal allergic rhinitis. METHODS: Two hundred thirty-two adults and adolescents with seasonal allergic rhinitis received intranasal fluticasone propionate (200 micrograms once daily), terfenadine tablets (60 mg twice daily), or placebo for 2 weeks in a double-blind, randomized, parallel-group study. Main outcome measures were clinician- and patient-rated individual and total nasal symptom scores (based on ratings of nasal obstruction, sneezing, nasal itching, and rhinorrhea); clinician-rated overall response to therapy; changes in nasal inflammatory cell counts; adverse events; and morning plasma cortisol concentrations. RESULTS: Both clinician- and patient-rated total and individual nasal symptom scores were significantly lower in the fluticasone group than in either the terfenadine group or the placebo group at nearly every measured time point throughout the treatment period. After 2 weeks of therapy, clinician-rated total nasal symptom scores decreased by 49% in the fluticasone group compared with 27% in the terfenadine group and 19% in the placebo group. In general, therapy with terfenadine was not statistically distinguishable from that with placebo based on patient-rated total or individual nasal symptom scores. According to clinician ratings, 64% of fluticasone-treated patients compared with 49% and 44% of patients treated with terfenadine and placebo, respectively, experienced significant or moderate improvement. A greater percentage of fluticasone-treated patients compared with either terfenadine- or placebo-treated patients experienced reductions in intranasal eosinophil and basophil counts after 2 weeks of therapy. No unusual or serious drug-related adverse events were reported. Morning plasma cortisol concentrations after 2 weeks of therapy did not differ among groups. CONCLUSION: Fluticasone aqueous nasal spray, a well-tolerated corticosteroid preparation that can be administered once daily, is more effective than terfenadine tablets or placebo in controlling symptoms of seasonal allergic rhinitis.     

The efficacy of fluticasone propionate aqueous nasal spray for allergic rhinitis and its relationship to topical effects

Fluticasone propionate aqueous nasal spray is an intranasal corticosteroid for the treatment of patients with allergic rhinitis. This double-masked, double-dummy, parallel-group study was conducted to confirm that the efficacy of fluticasone propionate nasal spray is attributable to topical rather than systemic effects. A total of 304 patients with documented seasonal allergic rhinitis were randomly assigned to receive fluticasone propionate nasal spray 200 micrograms once daily (n = 77), oral fluticasone propionate 5 mg once daily (n = 73), oral fluticasone propionate 10 mg once daily (n = 77), or placebo (n = 77) for 14 days. Plasma fluticasone propionate concentrations were determined at baseline and after 14 days of treatment (day 15). Nasal symptoms were recorded daily by patients and assessed weekly by clinicians. On day 15, more patients in the oral fluticasone propionate 5-mg or 10-mg groups, compared with patients in the fluticasone propionate nasal spray group or the placebo group, had detectable plasma fluticasone propionate concentrations, and mean concentrations were higher in the oral fluticasone propionate groups. Both clinician- and patient-rated total and individual nasal symptom scores for obstruction, rhinorrhea, sneezing, and itching were significantly lower in the fluticasone propionate nasal spray group compared with either of the oral fluticasone propionate groups or the placebo group. With few exceptions, oral fluticasone propionate (5 mg or 10 mg) was not significantly different from placebo on any measures of efficacy. These findings indicate that the efficacy of fluticasone propionate nasal spray (200 micrograms once daily) in the treatment of allergic rhinitis results from direct topical effects rather than from indirect effects after systemic absorption.     

Preseasonal intranasal immunotherapy in birch-alder allergic rhinitis. A double-blind study

A double-blind, placebo-controlled study was carried out to test the clinical efficacy and safety of local nasal immunotherapy (LNIT) in powder form. Twenty-two patients suffering from allergic rhinitis strictly associated with early spring symptoms, with positive skin prick tests and RAST for birch-alder, all responders to a specific nasal provocation test (NPT), received randomly active or placebo treatment for 4 months. Immunotherapy consisted of administration of a set of capsules containing progressively increasing amounts of birch (Betula pendula) and speckled alder (Alnus incana) allergens in powder form with controlled granulometry. The active (birch-alder) and placebo (lactose) group completed the treatment according to a similar schedule. During the pollen season (March-April), the patients who took the active treatment reported less sneezing and rhinorrhea than the placebo group, on the basis of a symptoms score, and the differences were statistically significant; the need for drugs (terfenadine) was also significantly reduced. These findings agreed well with the results of specific NPT after the treatment; only patients in the active group had a higher threshold dose of nasal specific reactivity to birch-alder allergens than in tests before the LNIT.     

Onset of action of aqueous beclomethasone dipropionate nasal spray in seasonal allergic rhinitis

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 < or = 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.     

Lack of hypothalamic-pituitary-adrenal axis suppression with once-daily or twice-daily beclomethasone dipropionate aqueous nasal spray administered to patients with allergic rhinitis

The potential for a newly developed, double-strength (0.084%) beclomethasone dipropionate (BDP) aqueous (AQ) nasal suspension to produce effects associated with exposure to systemic corticosteroids was assessed by the plasma cortisol response to cosyntropin stimulation induced by a 6-hour intravenous infusion of 250 micrograms of cosyntropin in 500 mL of normal saline. Sixty-four patients with allergic rhinitis were enrolled in this study. Patients were randomly assigned to one of the following four treatment groups: (1) BDP AQ Forte (0.084%) nasal spray 336 micrograms once daily; (2) BDP AQ (0.042%) nasal spray 168 micrograms twice daily; (3) placebo nasal spray twice daily; or (4) oral prednisone 10 mg once daily in the morning. After 36 consecutive days of treatment, there was a significant (P < 0.01) difference in the plasma cortisol response to cosyntropin stimulation between the prednisone and placebo groups; however, there were no significant differences between the BDP AQ Forte or the BDP AQ groups compared with the placebo group. Secondary analyses comparing BDP AQ Forte administered as 336 micrograms once daily with BDP AQ administered as 168 micrograms twice daily showed no significant differences in plasma cortisol responses to cosyntropin stimulation. No serious adverse events were reported. Adverse events consisted of headache, pharyngitis, or nasal irritation, with headache being reported most frequently. These adverse events were similarly distributed among active treatment groups and were similar to placebo. No clinically relevant changes were observed in any treatment group in findings on clinical laboratory tests, physical examination, or electrocardiography. Vital signs, obtained daily, were consistent with values observed in healthy individuals. No patient exhibited signs of oral candidiasis. All patients met the plasma cortisol concentration criteria for discharge relative to expected hypothalamic-pituitary-adrenal axis function. In conclusion, there were no significant differences in plasma cortisol responses to cosyntropin stimulation between groups of patients with allergic rhinitis treated with either BDP AQ Forte (0.084%) nasal spray 336 micrograms once daily or BDP AQ (0.042%) nasal spray 168 micrograms twice daily compared with the placebo group. These results indicate that the dosing regimens of BDP AQ nasal suspensions used in this study lack systemic effects and are safe and well tolerated.     

Histopathological responses in the CNS following inoculation with a non-neurovirulent mutant (1716) of herpes simplex virus type 1 (HSV 1): relevance for gene and cancer therapy

OBJECTIVE: To determine the efficacy of intranasally administered immunoglobulin in preventing symptoms of rhinitis in children. METHODS: Forty children ages 1 to 4 years who attended day-care centers in Turku, Finland, were enrolled in the double blind, placebo-controlled study. The children were randomly assigned to receive treatment with immunoglobulin, composed mainly of immunoglobulin A, or placebo, both administered as nasal sprays twice daily for 8 weeks. During this medication period and an additional 8-week follow-up period, the parents recorded the symptoms of the children daily in the diaries provided. One child who met an exclusion criterion was withdrawn from the study after a few days of medication. RESULTS: During the 8-week medication period the 19 children in the immunoglobulin group had 42% fewer days with rhinitis than the 20 children receiving placebo (mean, 10.8 vs. 18.7 days; P=0.004). The total numbers of episodes of rhinitis in the immunoglobulin and placebo groups were 33 and 51, respectively. No significant differences were observed between the groups during the postmedication follow-up period. CONCLUSIONS: Intranasal administration of immunoglobulin appears to be an effective method to prevent symptoms of rhinitis in children, and further studies of this approach are needed.     

The role of partial splenectomy in children with thalassemia

AIM OF THE STUDY: To study the changes in nasal reactivity in patients with rhinitis medicamentosa during treatment with placebo or fluticasone propionate, in order to better understand the mechanisms of nasal congestion in such patients. STUDY DESIGN: A parallel, double-blind study. Twenty patients with rhinitis medicamentosa were randomized to either placebo or fluticasone treatment during 14 days. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Nasal mucosa reactivity was studied with a histamine challenge model using three concentrations of histamine to challenge the nasal mucosa (1, 2 and 4 mg histamine/ml). Recordings of the nasal mucosa response were made 5 min after each challenge, using rhinostereometry and acoustic rhinometry, before and after the period of treatment. RESULTS: The fluticasone group had a significantly increased histamine sensitivity after treatment, unlike the placebo group who had an unchanged or slightly decreased histamine sensitivity after treatment. CONCLUSIONS: The results of this study support the theory that the nasal obstruction in rhinitis medicamentosa is due to interstitial oedema rather than to vasodilatation. On the first day of vasoconstrictor withdrawal, the inferior concha was congested and oedematous with a limited capacity to respond to histamine challenge. However, after 14 days of treatment with a corticosteroid nasal spray, the oedema was reduced and the increase in histamine sensitivity reflected the persistence of nasal hyperrreactivity. In the placebo group, histamine sensitivity remains unchanged with the measuring technique we used. This probably indicates that oedema was still present after treatment.     

Long-term follow-up of nasal immunotherapy to Parietaria: clinical and local immunological effects

BACKGROUND: Local nasal immunotherapy (LNIT) with extracts in powder has been demonstrated clinically effective and devoid of side-effects in several controlled trials; nevertheless, no data concerning the long-term effects of LNIT are presently available. METHODS: In a recent double-blind, placebo-controlled study of LNIT to Parietaria pollen we observed, by means of specific nasal provocation test (SNPT) that LNIT is able to modify the local allergic inflammatory response. In the present study we followed up the same patients in open fashion for 2 further years. RESULTS: The results confirmed the clinical efficacy of LNIT and showed that it is strictly dependent on pre-seasonal administration: in fact, after LNIT discontinuation a clinical relapse was observed. A certain long-lasting protective effect on SNPT parameters (nasal symptoms and neutrophils infiltration) was also observed, whereas an increase of eosinophils count and ICAM-1 expression on nasal epithelial cells appeared as possible markers of clinical relapse. CONCLUSION: The present study suggests that pre-seasonal LNIT can be taken in consideration in selected subjects as prophylactic treatment for pollen-induced rhinitis. In addition, the results obtained provide informations about the duration of clinical efficacy and add data about the local allergic inflammation and its modulation.     

Mometasone furoate. A review of its intranasal use in allergic rhinitis

Mometasone furoate is a synthetic corticosteroid which has been evaluated for intranasal use in the treatment of adults and children with allergic rhinitis. In several large, well-controlled clinical trials, mometasone furoate 200 micrograms administered once daily as an aqueous intranasal spray was significantly more effective than placebo in controlling the symptoms associated with moderate to severe seasonal or perennial allergic rhinitis. Mometasone furoate was as effective as twice-daily beclomethasone dipropionate or once-daily fluticasone propionate in the treatment of perennial allergic rhinitis, and was as effective as twice-daily beclomethasone dipropionate and slightly more effective than once-daily oral loratadine in the treatment of seasonal allergic rhinitis. Mometasone furoate was also as effective as twice-daily beclomethasone dipropionate or once-daily budesonide, and significantly more effective than placebo in the prophylaxis of seasonal allergic rhinitis. The onset of action of mometasone furoate was approximately 7 hours in patients with seasonal allergic rhinitis. Mometasone furoate was as well tolerated as beclomethasone dipropionate, fluticasone propionate and budesonide in clinical trials, with an overall incidence of adverse events similar to placebo. Adverse events were generally mild to moderate and of limited duration. The most common adverse events associated with mometasone furoate therapy were nasal irritation and/or burning, headache, epistaxis and pharyngitis. Intranasal or oral mometasone furoate had no detectable effect on hypothalamic-pituitary-adrenal axis function in studies of < or = 1 year in duration. CONCLUSIONS: Mometasone furoate is a well tolerated intranasal corticosteroid with minimal systemic activity and an onset of action of < or = 7 hours. It is effective in the prophylaxis and treatment of seasonal allergic rhinitis and the treatment of perennial allergic rhinitis in patients with moderate to severe symptoms.     

Naltrexone and alcohol dependence. Role of subject compliance

BACKGROUND: Two previous double-blind, placebo-controlled studies demonstrated that naltrexone (50 mg/d) reduces alcohol drinking in alcohol-dependent subjects. In both studies, treatment compliance was excellent. However, a robust treatment effect size for naltrexone relative to placebo has been shown for compliant subjects but not for subjects who missed research visits. The goal of this study was to determine the effectiveness of naltrexone in subjects who received psychosocial treatment in a more naturalistic setting with respect to the role of treatment attendance and medication compliance. METHODS: Ninety-seven alcohol-dependent subjects were randomly assigned to receive either naltrexone (n = 48) or matching placebo (n = 49) for 12 weeks. All subjects received individual counseling (twice per week for the first month followed by once per week). RESULTS: Overall, naltrexone showed only modest effects in reducing alcohol drinking for the 12 weeks of treatment. However, naltrexone treatment efficacy improved across a variety of outcome measures for subjects who completed treatment and were highly compliant with taking medication. CONCLUSIONS: Naltrexone is clinically effective relative to placebo in individuals who comply with the treatment protocol and take medication. The modest treatment effects in the entire sample suggest that the clinical efficacy of naltrexone could be improved by enhancing treatment compliance.     

Levocabastine versus cetirizine for perennial allergic rhinitis in children

OBJECTIVE: To compare the efficacy and safety of levocabastine nasal spray asid cetirizine oral for the treatment of perennial allergic rhinitis in children. MATERIAL AND METHODS: In this randomized, prospective experimental, open clinical trial. We studied 30 children with ages between 6 and 16 years with perennial allergic rhinitis. Group 1, 17 subjects (7 female, 10 male) received cetirizine once daily, 5 mg children weientig less dian 30 k asid 10 mg in children weighing more trw' 30 k during 15 days. Group 2, 13 subjects (7 male, 6 female) received levocabastine 2 puffs BID on each nostril during tbe same time. A nasal symptoms score, nasal peal: flow vid eosinophils in a nasal smear were performed before and after treatment. RESULTS: There were no statistical differences in age, weight, height and arid duration of symptoms. Both groups showed improvement of symptoms via nasal peak flow with no differences between them (intergroup); nasal eosinophils remained unchanged. We for third statistical differences pre vid postreatment in each group (intragroup): Group 1, nasal congestion p = 0.002, ocular itch p = 0.01, sneezing p = 0.007, nasal secretion p = 0.01, nasal itch O = 0.009, total points O = 0.0005. Group 2, nasal congestion O = 0.02, ocular itch p = 0.05, sneezing p = 0.01, nasal secretion p = 0.01, nasal itch p = 0.04, total points p = 0.005. Significant differences were found in nasal peal' flow in Group 1 (p = 0.01) but no differences in eosinophils between file two groups. Side effects: 3 subjects in Group 1 (drowsiness, 1 appetite increase said 1 rhinorrea with epistaxis) vide 1 in Group 2 sensation of facial edema. CONCLUSION: Bofil drugs are effective the clinical relief of symptoms of perennial allergic rhinitis in children vied levocabastine has less side effects.     

Suppression of human melanoma metastasis following introduction of chromosome 6 is independent of NME1 (Nm23)

BACKGROUND: Nasal immunotherapy with single allergen extracts, following premedication with cromolyn, has been reported to be effective in treating seasonal and perennial allergic rhinitis. METHODS: We conducted a double-blind, placebo-controlled study to assess the efficacy, tolerability, and mechanism of action of nasal immunotherapy for allergic rhinitis caused by weed pollens from three unrelated families. Twenty-seven weed-allergic patients underwent baseline nasal provocation and titrated skin test with a mixed weed extract containing ragweed, sage, and Chenopod extracts. Patients were randomized to receive either mixed weed extract or placebo. Nasal immunotherapy was self-administered daily to alternate nostrils preceded by 5.2 mg intranasal cromolyn. Beginning with 1:2500 wt/vol the concentration was increased to 1:10 wt/vol over an average period of 36 days. The maintenance dose (1:10 wt/vol) was administered daily for 12 to 16 weeks through the weed pollen season. Patients recorded nasal and eye symptoms and the use of rescue medications throughout the study. A nasal lavage for cytokine levels and nasal scraping with Rhinoprobe for nasal cytology were performed at the peak of the weed season. Nasal provocation and titrated skin tests with mixed weed extract were repeated after the weed season. Nasal lavage and scraping were also performed before and 24 hours after the final nasal provocation. RESULTS: During the peak weeks of the weed season the group receiving mixed weed extract by nasal instillation, compared with those treated with placebo, had significantly lower total nasal symptom scores, total eye symptom scores, and symptom medication scores. There were no significant differences in the nasal cytology or cytokines levels between the two groups, except for elevated IL-10 in the nasal lavage in the treated group at the peak of the season. Nasal symptoms and medication use were higher preseasonally in the active treatment group. CONCLUSION: Nasal immunotherapy with aqueous mixed weed extract administered with cromolyn sodium pretreatment for 17 to 21 weeks was effective in reducing both nasal and ocular symptoms of weed pollen-induced allergic rhinitis. There were increased nasal symptoms in the treated group preseasonally.     

Effect of nicotine nasal spray on smoking cessation. A randomized, placebo-controlled, double-blind study

BACKGROUND: Nicotine replacement therapies have proved to be of value in smoking cessation. However, not all smokers can use the nicotine gum or nicotine patch owing to side effects. In addition, the absorption of nicotine from these formulas is slow compared with smoking. A nicotine nasal spray delivers nicotine more rapidly. The objective of this study was to evaluate the efficacy and safety of the nicotine nasal spray for smoking cessation. METHODS: Subjects were recruited through advertisements in newspapers and among patients referred to the smoking cessation clinic at Sahlgren's Hospital, G?teborg, Sweden. Two hundred forty-eight smokers were treated in small groups with eight counseling sessions over 6 weeks. At their first group session, subjects were randomized to a group receiving nicotine spray (n = 125), 0.5 mg of nicotine per single spray, or to a placebo group (n = 123). The procedure was double blind. Success rates were measured up to 12 months. The nonsmoking status was verified by expired carbon monoxide less than 10 ppm. RESULTS: Significantly more subjects in the nicotine group were continuously abstinent for 12 months than in the placebo group (27% vs 15%; odds ratio, 2.16; 95% confidence interval, 1.15 to 4.12). Ten of the 34 abstinent subjects in the nicotine group used the spray for 1 year. Mild or moderate side effects were rather frequent for both sprays, but they were significantly more for the nicotine spray. Subjects with high scores (> 7) on Fagerstr?m's tolerance questionnaire had a significantly lower success rate with placebo than with the nicotine spray. For subjects with low scores, there was no difference. CONCLUSION: Nicotine nasal spray in combination with group treatment is an effective aid to smoking cessation.     

Nicotine nasal spray with nicotine patch for smoking cessation: randomised trial with six year follow up

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the efficacy of using a nicotine patch for 5 months with a nicotine nasal spray for 1 year. DESIGN: Placebo controlled, double blind trial. SETTING: Reykjavik health centre. SUBJECTS: 237 smokers aged 22-66 years living in or around Reykjavik. INTERVENTIONS: Nicotine patch for 5 months with nicotine nasal spray for 1 year (n=118) or nicotine patch with placebo spray (n=119). Treatment with patches included 15 mg of nicotine for 3 months, 10 mg for the fourth month, and 5 mg for the fifth month, whereas nicotine in the nasal spray was available for up to 1 year. Both groups received supportive treatment. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE: Sustained abstinence from smoking. RESULTS: Sustained abstinence rates for the patch and nasal spray group and patch only group were 51% v 35% after 6 weeks (odds ratio 1.97, 95% confidence interval 1.17% to 3.32; P=0.011(chi2), 37% v 25% after 3 months (1.76, 1.01 to 3.08; P=0.045), 31% v 16% after 6 months (2.40, 1.27 to 4.50; P=0.005), 27% v 11% after 12 months (3.03, 1.50 to 6.14; P=0.001), and 16% v 9% after 6 years (2.09, 0.93 to 4.72; P=0.08) [corrected]. CONCLUSIONS: Short and long term abstinence rates show that the combination of using a nicotine patch for 5 months with a nicotine nasal spray for 1 year is a more effective method of stopping smoking than using a patch only. The low percentage of participants using the nasal spray at 1 year, and the few relapses during the second year, suggest that it is not cost effective to use a nasal spray for longer than 7 months after stopping a patch.     

The use of radiographs to evaluate shoulder pain in the ED

There is general agreement that the delivery of topical nasal medication by sprays is suboptimal. This study examines the distribution of spray to the anterior end of the middle turbinate as a guide to the distribution to the middle meatus by means of an endoscopic photographic comparison using dyed aqueous nasal spray. The technique was found to be reproducible. The effect of vigorously inhaling whilst spraying was studied by means of a randomized crossover trial and was found to have no significant effect. This technique could be used in conjunction with other means of assessing intranasal distribution when assessing improved topical nasal drug delivery systems.     

Naratriptan is effective and well tolerated in the acute treatment of migraine. Results of a double-blind, placebo-controlled, crossover study. The Naratriptan S2WA3003 Study Group

The efficacy and tolerability of naratriptan tablets (2.5 mg, 1 mg, and 0.25 mg) compared with placebo in the acute treatment of migraine were evaluated in a randomized, double-blind, four-period crossover study. Five hundred eighty-six assessable patients received naratriptan 2.5 mg, 595 received 1 mg, 591 received 0.25 mg, 602 received placebo. Headache relief (moderate or severe pain reduced to mild or none) 4 hours postdose was reported in 68% of patients after treatment with naratriptan 2.5 mg compared with 57% after 1 mg, 39% after 0.25 mg, and 33% after placebo (p < 0.001 naratriptan 2.5 mg and 1 mg versus placebo and 1 mg and 2.5 mg versus 0.25 mg). Headache relief was maintained 8, 12, and 24 hours postdose with no use of rescue medication or a second dose of study medication by significantly (p < 0.001) greater percentages of patients after treatment with naratriptan 2.5 mg or 1 mg compared with naratriptan 0.25 mg or placebo. Naratriptan was also more effective than placebo in reducing clinical disability and the incidences of nausea, photophobia, and phonophobia. The overall incidence of adverse events and the incidences of specific adverse events did not differ in the naratriptan groups compared with placebo. No clinically relevant changes in ECG, blood pressure, or laboratory findings were reported. These data demonstrate that naratriptan is effective and well tolerated for the acute treatment of migraine. The 2.5-mg dose was associated with superior efficacy, whereas its adverse event profile was similar to that of placebo.