A Patient Preference Study that Evaluated Fluticasone Furoate and Mometasone Furoate Nasal Sprays for Allergic Rhinitis

Abstract

Background:Corticosteroid nasal sprays are the mainstay of treatment for allergic rhinitis. These sprays have sensory attributes such as scent and/or odor, taste and aftertaste, and run down the throat and/or the nose, which, when unpleasant, can affect patient preference for, and compliance with, treatment.Objective:This study examined patient preference for fluticasone furoate nasal spray (FFNS) or mometasone furoate nasal spray (MFNS) based on their sensory attributes after administration in patients with allergic rhinitis.Methods:This was a multicenter, randomized, double-blind, cross-over study. Patient preferences were determined by using three questionnaires (Overall Preference, Immediate Attributes, and Delayed Attributes).Results:Overall, 56% of patients stated a preference for FFNS versus 32% for MFNS (p < 0.001); the remaining 12% stated no preference. More patients stated a preference for FFNS versus MFNS for the attributes of “less drip down the throat” (p < 0.001), “less run out of the nose” (p < 0.05), “more soothing” (p < 0.05), and “less irritating” (p < 0.001). More patients responded in favor of FFNS versus MFNS for the immediate attributes, “run down the throat” (p < 0.001), and “run out of the nose” (p < 0.001), and, in the delayed attributes, “run down the throat” (p < 0.001), “run out of the nose” (p < 0.01), “presence of aftertaste” (p < 0.01), and “no nasal irritation” (p < 0.001).Conclusion:Patients with allergic rhinitis preferred FFNS versus MFNS overall and based on a number of individual attributes, including “less drip down the throat,” “less run out of the nose,” and “less irritating.” Greater preference may improve patient adherence and thereby improve symptom management of the patient's allergic rhinitis.

Managing Allergic Rhinitis in the Pharmacy: An ARIA Guide for Implementation in Practice

“…All of the available intranasal corticosteroids are efficacious in controlling symptoms, although mometasone furoate, fluticasone propionate and fluticasone furoate are generally preferred [62] because they have negligible bioavailability and less potential to cause side effects. Pricing, cultural barriers, specific country regulations and availability, and even patient preference [63,64] for oral vs. nasal treatment all mean that INCS may not necessarily be available or the most desirable treatment for all patients, such as those with a predisposition to high intraocular pressure (glaucoma). Oral H 1 -antihistamines are still largely used by many patients and may be sufficient to control mild AR.…”

Intranasal Nanoparticulate Systems as Alternative Route of Drug Delivery

“…Identifying what is expected or is critical for patients and reflecting these aspects during research and development is the first step to achieve patient acceptance and the required therapeutic outcome. This field has been ignored for many years, but as the effects of customers' preferences increase, it should be considered more as part of R&D thinking [247][248][249].…”

Evaluation of Intranasal Corticosteroid Sensory Attributes and Patient Preference for Fluticasone Furoate for the Treatment of Allergic Rhinitis

“…Of the studies comparing FFNS with an active comparator, 3 studies compared FFNS with fluticasone propionate nasal spray, 20,24,25 and 2 with mometasone furoate nasal spray. 26,27 Overall, FFNS was significantly preferred over the other 2 INCs for a majority of sensory attributes (Table). Regardless of the presence or absence of active ingredient, the device performance in delivering on its design intent, improving upon the sensory attributes, was positively demonstrated.…”