4.0 Article

Mometasone Furoate Nasal Spray Relieves the Ocular Symptoms of Seasonal Allergic Rhinoconjunctivitis

Journal

JOURNAL OF NIPPON MEDICAL SCHOOL
Volume 79, Issue 3, Pages 182-189

Publisher

MEDICAL ASSOC NIPPON MEDICAL SCH
DOI: 10.1272/jnms.79.182

Keywords

intranasal corticosteroids; seasonal allergic rhinoconjunctivitis; perennial allergic rhinitis; substance P; tear

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Background: Recent studies have examined the effects of intranasal corticosteroids (INSs) in relieving the ocular symptoms of seasonal allergic rhinoconjunctivitis (SAR) and perennial allergic rhinitis. However, because most of these studies were based on subjective assessments by patients, the associated factors and mechanism of action are unknown. Methods: A single-center, randomized, double-blind, parallel-group study was carried out in which patients with SAR were randomly assigned to an INS mometasone furoate nasal spray (MFNS) group or to a placebo group and treated once daily for 4 weeks. Substance P concentrations in tears were measured, ocular and nasal symptoms were recorded by patients in an allergy diary, and findings were recorded by an ophthalmologist. Results: There was no significant difference between treatment groups in the mean change from baseline of substance P concentration in tears after 4 weeks of treatment, but the mean change tended to increase in the placebo group and tended to decrease in the MFNS group (P = 0.089). All ocular and nasal symptom scores, except eye tearing, were significantly lower in the MFNS group than in the placebo group. Furthermore. substance P concentrations were strongly correlated with ocular and nasal symptom scores. Conclusions: In patients with SAR. INSs tend to decrease the substance P concentration in tears, which is correlated with the severity of ocular and nasal symptoms. (J Nippon Med Sch 2012; 79: 182-189)

Authors

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

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.0
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available