4.2 Review

Clinical effectiveness of fluticasone furoate nasal spray for perennial allergic rhinitis in children: a comprehensive review

Publisher

CAMBRIDGE UNIV PRESS
DOI: 10.1017/S026646232300034X

Keywords

Allergic rhinitis; children; fluticasone furoate; intranasal corticosteroids

Ask authors/readers for more resources

The clinical effectiveness of fluticasone furoate nasal spray (FFNS) versus placebo was assessed in children with perennial allergic rhinitis. The results showed that FFNS produced a statistically significant reduction in reflective total nasal symptoms scores (rTNSS) compared to placebo in long-term treatment studies, but the reduction did not reach the minimal clinically important difference. Safety outcomes with FFNS were similar to placebo. Overall, FFNS does not produce a meaningful clinical effect on nasal symptoms in children with perennial allergic rhinitis.
ObjectiveTo assess the clinical effectiveness of fluticasone furoate nasal spray (FFNS) versus placebo on nasal symptoms and safety in children with perennial allergic rhinitis (AR). MethodsA comprehensive review was conducted with data obtained from Medline and Embase databases up to April 2023. The population of interest was patients aged 2-12 years with perennial AR. The selection was limited to randomized controlled trials (RCTs), comparing FFNS with placebo. Outcomes of interest included the reflective total nasal symptoms scores (rTNSS) and safety. To assess the minimal clinically important difference for rTNSS, the Cohen's guideline was used. If the pooled standardized mean difference (SMD) and the lower limit of the 95 percent confidence interval (CI) exceeded the threshold of -0.20, effects were considered clinically significant. ResultsThree RCTs (959 pediatric patients) were selected. One study evaluated the short-term use of FFNS, another evaluated the long-term use of FFNS, and another evaluated both the short-term and long-term use of FFNS. FFNS produced a statistically significant reduction over placebo in rTNSS (SMD -0.18; 95 percent CI -0.35 to -0.01, p = 0.03) in long-term treatment studies, but not in short-term treatment studies. However, since the mean reduction did not reach the minimum clinically important difference (SMD -0.20), these results were considered clinically not relevant. Safety outcomes with FFNS were similar to placebo. ConclusionsThe currently available evidence suggests that FFNS, 110 mu g once daily, compared to placebo, does not produce a meaningful clinical effect on nasal symptom in children with perennial AR.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.2
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available