4.2 Article Proceedings Paper

Safety of a novel intranasal formulation of azelastine hydrochloride and fluticasone propionate in children: A randomized clinical trial

期刊

ALLERGY AND ASTHMA PROCEEDINGS
卷 39, 期 2, 页码 110-116

出版社

OCEAN SIDE PUBLICATIONS INC
DOI: 10.2500/aap.2018.39.4116

关键词

-

类别

资金

  1. Mylan, Inc. (Canonsburg, PA)

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Background: The safety of a novel intranasal formulation of azelastine hydrochloride (AZE) and fluticasone propionate (FP) has been established in adults and adolescents with allergic rhinitis but not in children < 12 years old. Objective: To evaluate the safety and tolerability of an intranasal formulation of AZE and FP in children ages 4-11 years with allergic rhinitis. Methods: The study was a randomized, 3-month, parallel-group, open-label design. Qualified patients were randomized in a 3: 1 ratio to AZE/FP (n = 304) or fluticasone propionate (FP) (n = 101), one spray per nostril twice daily, and to one of three age groups: >= 4 to <6 years, >= 6 to <9 years, and >= 9 to <12 years. Safety was assessed by child-or caregiver-reported adverse events, nasal examinations, vital signs, and laboratory assessments. Results: The incidence of treatment-related adverse events (TRAEs) was low in both the AZE/FP (16%) and FP-only (12%) groups after 90 days' continuous use. Epistaxis was the most frequently reported TRAE in both groups (AZE/FP, 9%; FP, 9%), followed by headache (AZE/FP, 3%; FP, 1%). All other TRAEs in the AZE/FP group were reported by <= 1% of the children. The majority of TRAEs were of mild intensity and resolved spontaneously. Results of nasal examinations showed an improvement over time in both groups, with no cases of mucosal ulceration or nasal septal perforation. There were no unusual or unexpected changes in laboratory parameters or vital signs. Conclusion: The intranasal formulation of AZE and FP was safe and well tolerated after 3 months' continuous use in children with allergic rhinitis.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.2
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据