Active clinical trials for "Rhinitis"

Background: Nasal allergen challenge (NAC) is useful to study the pathophysiology of rhinitis, and multiple challenges may more adequately approximate natural exposure. Objective: To determine the effect of 4 consecutive daily NAC, on clinical and inflammatory parameters in rhinitics with or without asthma.

Multicenter clinical trial, phase III, controlled by active medicine, open, randomized, enroll 962 children, 2 to 12 years old, that suffer acute inflammation upper airway characterized by non-productive cough, daytime/nighttime, with duration for at least 3 and no more than 5 consecutive days (without systemic/topic use of medication during this period) followed by nasal congestion, with or without associate other nasal symptoms (sneezing, runny nose, nasal itching and/or mouth breathing). The subjects will be allocated in 2 parallel groups, and will receive the medicines of study, according of the randomization.

Objectives: A) To gather pharmacodynamic measurements and assess blood levels of the active ingredients in AHIST over the dosage interval period of 12 hours. Hypothesis: Hysteresis curves plotting each active ingredient's blood levels over a 12-hour dosage interval will substantiate S5 Symptom Diary scores (IE: evidentiary therapeutic window data); B) To report subjective scores by subjects rating the efficacy of a single dose AHIST in relieving nasal congestion, rhinorrhea, nasal itching, sneezing, and post-nasal drip over a 12-hour dosage interval. Hypothesis: Greater than 66% of subjects will document clinically significant relief over a 12-hour period from one dose of AHIST; C) Report any side effects or adverse drug reactions and rate the severity of any incidence. Hypothesis: Not more than one patient will have an adverse event significant enough to warrant withdrawal; side effects will be mild with the most frequently reported side effect occurring in less than 10% of patients-drowsiness.

The purpose of this study is to see how a combination spray of azelastine and fluticasone (antihistamine and steroid) compares with a steroid nasal spray (fluticasone) alone in allergic rhinitis i.e. does azelastine permit the use of lesser steroid dose (steroid sparing effect) to achieve the same benefit.

The four respiratory drugs being researched in this study have been approved by the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) and are currently available by prescription at your drug store. One of the drugs is for the treatment of asthma alone, one is for treatment of SAR alone, and one is for treatment of both SAR and asthma. In addition, you will also receive one asthma rescue drug (albuterol) that is to be used for any breakthrough asthma symptoms that you may experience throughout the study. The purpose of this study is to see how well your asthma and SAR are controlled when taking one of the medicine combinations

The purpose of this study is to identify an effective dose of allergen-specific immunotherapy for short ragweed (Ambrosia artemisiifolia) administered by an oral/sublingual route.

Allergic rhinitis is defined as the symptoms of sneezing, nasal itching, airflow obstruction, and, mostly, clear nasal discharge caused by IgE-mediated reactions against inhaled allergens and involving mucosal inflammation driven by T cells (Th2) auxiliary type 2. pollens and molds, as well as allergens from perennial interiors, such as dust mites, pets, pests, and some molds. The pattern of dominant allergens depends on the geographic region and degree of urbanization, but the general prevalence of sensitization to allergens does not vary among census districts in the United States. This research proposes to study a separate antihistamine in a nasal spray. It is important to note that this antihistamine is available without prescription (OTC) and has been studied intranasal since the 1950s1

Hay fever affects 1 in 4 of the UK population and has significant effects on the quality of life of sufferers. Allergy to grass pollen is the most common cause. A detailed understanding of the mechanisms involved during allergic reactions to pollens in hay fever sufferers may provide improvements in diagnosis, drug treatment and assessment of their response to treatment. Controlled exposures to allergens such as grass pollen can provide important information on the mechanisms of allergic inflammation and may be used to assess the success of anti-allergy treatments. Nasal allergen challenge (NAC) is a useful tool in the investigation of allergic rhinitis, including grass pollen-induced seasonal allergic rhinitis (hay fever). NAC is performed by installation of a very small amount of grass pollen extract into the nose in order to reproduce mild and short-lived symptoms such as nasal itch, sneezing, runny nose and nasal congestion that you experience in a more severe form during natural exposure to grass pollen during the summer. Nasal allergen challenge has allowed us to explore the mechanism of hay fever and to provide a rapid and reliable method for investigating new potential treatments for hay fever. Nasal allergen Challenge is a very well-standardised and safe procedure that has been performed within the department of Allergy and Clinical Immunology at Imperial College and Royal Brompton Hospital for many years. Unfortunately the grass pollen extract ('Aquagen') that we have routinely used for nasal challenge has been discontinued and is therefore no longer available. The present study involves testing an alternative source of the grass pollen extract in the form of 'Grazax' which is a freeze-dried tablet that is highly standardised and should enable us to give an identical amount of grass pollen extract for the purpose of nasal challenge. We plan a 'head-to-head' comparison of the two extracts in nasal challenge in order to confirm that the two sources of allergen are equivalent thereby enabling us to use Grazax as the source of grass pollen extract for our nasal challenge studies in the future.

The purpose of this study is to assess the effect on various biomarkers of treatment with MK-8237 in participants with allergic rhinitis or rhinoconjunctivitis. In Part 1 of the study healthy participants undergo nasal allergen challenge (NAC) with house dust mite (HDM) extract in order to verify the operational performance of NAC and associated sample collection methods. Part 2, the main study, is a placebo controlled, double blind study of participants with HDM-induced allergic rhinitis or rhinoconjunctivitis. The primary hypotheses are that the changes from baseline in post-allergen challenge HDM-specific Immunoglobulin G4 (IgG4) and Immunoglobulin E blocking factor (IgE-BF) are greater after treatment with MK-8237 than after treatment with placebo.

Leukotrienes play critical roles in the inflammatory process in allergic rhinitis and bronchial asthma, therefore, anti-leukotriene therapy is part of treatment for asthma. However, not all allergic rhinitis accompanied with or without asthma treated with anti-leukotriene were effective. So it is critical to develop a method to identify the response subgroup. In this study, it is assumed that nasal physiological responsiveness to leukotriene nasal provocation test (NPT) is able to gain evidence on the effect of leukotriene on the development of allergic rhinitis and asthma, and is helpful to the use of anti-leukotriene agent. The purpose of the study is to establish the methodology and diagnostic value of leukotriene D4 (LTD4) nasal provocation.