Biologics for chronic rhinosinusitis

Chong, Lee Yee; Piromchai, Patorn; Sharp, Steve; Snidvongs, Kornkiat; Philpott, Carl; Hopkins, Claire; Burton, Martin J

doi:10.1002/14651858.cd013513.pub2

Cited by 37 publications

(28 citation statements)

References 93 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…In a recent Cochrane review evaluating nasal irrigation for allergic rhinitis, the researchers performed a subgroup analysis for the type of irrigation device. However, there was heterogeneity among the studies that were reviewed, and the results were inconclusive [3, 13, 14].…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Nasal saline irrigation is a common procedure to relieve nasal symptoms in upper respiratory tract infection such as nasopharyngitis (common cold) and rhinosinusitis [1-3]. The physician usually prescribes normal saline along with the appropriate medications (e.g., antihistamines, nasal steroids, or antibiotics) to treat these conditions [1, 4, 5].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Syringe with Nasal Applicator versus Syringe Alone for Nasal Irrigation in Acute Rhinosinusitis: A Matched-Pair Randomized Controlled Trial

Piromchai¹,

Phannikul²,

Thanaviratananich³

2021

Biomed Hub

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background/Aims: Nasal saline irrigation is a common procedure to relieve nasal symptoms in upper respiratory tract diseases. There is no consensus on the recommended nasal saline delivery devices. The objectives of this study were to evaluate efficacy, satisfaction, adherence, and adverse effects in patients with acute upper respiratory tract diseases using a syringe with a nasal applicator for nasal irrigation. Methods: Patients with acute nasopharyngitis, acute rhinitis, or acute rhinosinusitis were randomly allocated to use either (1) a syringe with a nasal applicator or (2) a syringe alone to irrigate one nostril. After the patients had completed irrigation with the allocated device in one nostril, they were instructed to perform nasal irrigation using the other device in the other nostril. All patients were instructed to use a syringe with a nasal applicator at home. The efficacy, satisfaction scores, adherence, and adverse effects were recorded. Results: Sixty-four patients were enrolled. The mean age of the patients was 33.95 years (18–59 years). The mean duration of symptoms was 4.80 days. None of the enrolled patients regularly performed nasal irrigation. Forty-two had acute nasopharyngitis, 10 had acute rhinitis, and 12 had acute rhinosinusitis. At baseline, the mean overall efficacy score for the syringe with a nasal applicator was 8.17 ± 1.43, and that for the syringe alone was 5.95 ± 2.02 (MD 2.23, p < 0.001, 95% CI 1.75–2.70). At 1 week, the syringe with the nasal applicator had significantly higher scores in 3 of 4 domains, including symptom relief, ease of use, and patients’ willingness to recommend the device to others, compared to baseline (p < 0.05). None of the enrolled patients had epistaxis, retained/dislodged the applicator during irrigation, or experienced an allergic reaction to the applicator after 1 week of nasal irrigation. Conclusion: Use of a syringe with an applicator for nasal irrigation yielded high scores in overall efficacy.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Syringe with Nasal Applicator versus Syringe Alone for Nasal Irrigation in Acute Rhinosinusitis: A Matched-Pair Randomized Controlled Trial

Piromchai¹,

Phannikul²,

Thanaviratananich³

2021

Biomed Hub

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…In Chong’s systematic review and meta-analysis, there were three small studies with 65 participants (Gavaert 2013, Pinto 2010 and NCT01066104) evaluated omalizumab. 13 Their results also showed that there were very uncertain about the effect of omalizumab on disease-specific HRQoL, SAEs, the extent of disease (CT scan scores), generic HRQoL and adverse effects. NCT01066104 19 included in Chong’s review was unpublished data, so it was excluded in our study according to our inclusion criteria.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…But they found very little information or insufficient evidence about the use of omalizumab and cannot determine whether it was effective or not. 12 13 Currently, some well-designed RCTs about omalizumab for CRSwNP were published, 14 Open access provide us with some evidence. Therefore, this systematic review was conducted to evaluate the efficacy and safety of omalizumab vs placebo in adult patients with CRSwNP, and identify evidence gaps that will guide future research on omalizumab for CRSwNP.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Efficacy and safety of omalizumab in chronic rhinosinusitis with nasal polyps: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials

Yuan

Qiu

et al. 2021

BMJ Open

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

ObjectivesTo assess the efficacy and safety of omalizumab for chronic rhinosinusitis with nasal polyps (CRSwNP) and to identify evidence gaps that will guide future research on omalizumab for CRSwNP.DesignSystematic review and meta-analysis.Data sourcesA comprehensive search was performed in PubMed, Embase, Web of Science and the Cochrane Library on 13 October 2020.Eligibility criteriaRandomised controlled trials (RCTs) comparing omalizumab with placebo, given for at least 16 weeks in adult patients with CRSwNP.Data extraction and synthesisTwo independent authors screened search results, extracted data and assessed studies using the Cochrane risk of bias tool. Data were pooled using the inverse-variance method and expressed as mean differences (MDs) with 95% CIs. Heterogeneity was assessed by the χ2 test and the I2 statistic.ResultsA total of four RCTs involving 303 participants were identified. When comparing omalizumab to placebo, there was a significant difference in Nasal Polyps Score (MD=−1.20; 95% CI −1.48 to −0.92), Nasal Congestion Score (MD=−0.67; 95% CI −0.86 to −0.48), Sino-Nasal Outcome Test-22 (MD=−15.62; 95% CI −19.79 to −11.45), Total Nasal Symptom Score (MD=−1.84; 95% CI −2.43 to −1.25) and reduced need for surgery (risk ratio (RR)=5.61; 95% CI 1.99 to 15.81). Furthermore, there was no difference in the risk of serious adverse events ((RR=1.40; 95% CI 0.29 to 6.80), adverse events (RR=0.83; 95% CI 0.60 to 1.15) and rescue systemic corticosteroid (RR=0.52; 95% CI 0.17 to 1.61).ConclusionsThis was the first meta-analysis that identified omalizumab significantly improved endoscopic, clinical and patient-reported outcomes in adults with moderate to severe CRSwNP and it was safe and well tolerated.PROSPERO registration numberCRD42020207639.

show abstract

“…Although a number of currently prescribed pharmaceutical agents bear either the OCF 3 or OCF 2 H motif in their aromatic systems, for example Sonidegib® (anticancer drug), Riluzole® (anticonvulsant drug) Pantoprazole® (anti‐inflammatory drug), and Roflumilast® (anti‐inflammatory drug; Figure b), access to these analogues often requires installation of the OCF 3 and OCF 2 H groups at an early stage of a multistep synthetic sequence . The lack of late‐stage tri‐ and difluoromethoxylation strategies results in laborious synthetic efforts for the preparation of a handful of structurally related analogues and limits the number of derivatives for structure–activity relationship studies .…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Synthesis of Tri‐ and Difluoromethoxylated Compounds by Visible‐Light Photoredox Catalysis

2019

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Trifluoromethoxy (OCF3) and difluoromethoxy (OCF2H) groups are fluorinated structural motifs that exhibit unique physicochemical characteristics. Incorporation of these substituents into organic molecules is a highly desirable approach used in medicinal chemistry and drug discovery processes to alter the properties of a parent compound. Recently, tri‐ and difluoromethyl ethers have received increasing attention and several innovative strategies to access these valuable functional groups have been developed. The focus of this Minireview is the use of visible‐light photoredox catalysis in the synthesis of tri‐ and difluoromethyl ethers. Recent photocatalytic strategies for the formation of O−CF3, C−OCF3, O−CF2H, and C−OCF2H bonds as well as other transformations leading to the construction of ORF groups are discussed herein.

show abstract

Biologics for chronic rhinosinusitis

Abstract: Biologics for chronic rhinosinusitis.

Cited by 37 publications

References 93 publications

Syringe with Nasal Applicator versus Syringe Alone for Nasal Irrigation in Acute Rhinosinusitis: A Matched-Pair Randomized Controlled Trial

Syringe with Nasal Applicator versus Syringe Alone for Nasal Irrigation in Acute Rhinosinusitis: A Matched-Pair Randomized Controlled Trial

Efficacy and safety of omalizumab in chronic rhinosinusitis with nasal polyps: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials

Synthesis of Tri‐ and Difluoromethoxylated Compounds by Visible‐Light Photoredox Catalysis

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About