Efficacy of fluticasone furoate nasal spray vs. placebo for the treatment of ocular and nasal symptoms of allergic rhinitis: a systematic review
Article first published online: 1 DEC 2010
© 2010 Blackwell Publishing Ltd
Clinical & Experimental Allergy
Volume 41, Issue 2, pages 160–170, February 2011
How to Cite
Rodrigo, G. J. and Neffen, H. (2011), Efficacy of fluticasone furoate nasal spray vs. placebo for the treatment of ocular and nasal symptoms of allergic rhinitis: a systematic review. Clinical & Experimental Allergy, 41: 160–170. doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2222.2010.03654.x
- Issue published online: 13 JAN 2011
- Article first published online: 1 DEC 2010
Cite this as: G. J. Rodrigo and H. Neffen,Clinical & Experimental Allergy, 2011 (41) 160–170.
Background Although previous data suggest that intranasal fluticasone furoate (FF) improves ocular symptoms of allergic rhinitis (AR), it presents serious limitations that question its results and conclusions. Therefore, an independent systematic review with meta-analysis is required to confirm and clarify the magnitude of the effect of FF.
Methods This review compared the efficacy of intranasal FF to placebo on ocular and nasal symptoms in patients with AR. Primary outcomes were reflective and instantaneous total ocular symptom scores (rTOSS and iTOSS), and reflective and instantaneous total nasal symptom scores (rTNSS and iTNSS). Secondary outcomes included the assessment of response to therapy, quality of life (QoL), and adverse effects.
Results Sixteen trials (5.348 patients) were selected. Seven studies included seasonal AR patients and nine studies, perennial AR patients. Intranasal FF significantly improved rTOSS and iTOSS scores compared with placebo in patients with seasonal (weighted mean difference [WMD] −0.54, 95% CI, −0.70 to −0.37, and −0.59, 95% CI, −0.76 to −0.43) and perennial AR (−0.33, 95% CI, −0.31 to −0.05, and −0.38, 95% CI, −0.69 to –0.07). Intranasal FF was also significantly more effective in improving rTNSS and iTNSS scores in seasonal (WMD=−1.14, 95% CI, −1.57 to −0.72, and −1.32, 95% CI, −1.64 to −1.01) and perennial AR patients (−0.83, 95% CI, −1.08 to −0.59, and −0.90, 95% CI, −1.33 to −0.48). Finally, there were greater improvements in response to therapy and QoL with a favourable safety profile.
Conclusions and Clinical Relevance Intranasal FF showed a consistent ocular and nasal efficacy along with improvement in QoL in AR patients. This review provides significant evidence that treatment with FF nasal spray at a dose of 110 mcg once daily is effective in relieving ocular and nasal symptoms in adolescents and adults with AR.