Comparison of ipratropium bromide 0.03% with beclomethasone dipropionate in the treatment of perennial rhinitis in children.

OBJECTIVE: To compare the safety and efficacy of ipratropium bromide 0.03% (IB) with beclomethasone dipropionate 0.042% (BDP) in the treatment of perennial rhinitis in children. METHODS: Thirty-three children with nonallergic perennial rhinitis (NAPR) and 113 with allergic perennial rhinitis (APR) were randomly assigned to either IB or BDP for 6 months in a single-blind, multicenter protocol in which the physician was blinded to treatment. At each visit, patients and physicians rated symptom control of rhinorrhea, nasal congestion, and sneezing. Patients also completed quality of life questionnaires at baseline and after 6 months of therapy. RESULTS: Both treatments showed a significant improvement in control of rhinorrhea, congestion, and sneezing compared with baseline over the 6 months of treatment (P < .05). Only for the control of sneezing was BDP consistently better than IB (P < .05). Among the patients given IB, 61% to 73% assessed the control of rhinorrhea as good or excellent on different study visit days, 43% to 60% similarly rated the control of nasal congestion, and 39% to 43% the control of sneezing. The results for BDP were 68% to 78% for the control of rhinorrhea, 55% to 72% for the control of nasal congestion, and 54% to 68% for the control of sneezing. Quality of life assessment documented that both drugs significantly reduced interference with daily activities and disturbance of mood due to rhinorrhea compared with baseline (P < .05). Both treatments were well tolerated with IB causing less nasal bleeding and irritation than BDP. CONCLUSIONS: Ipratropium bromide was safe and effective in controlling rhinorrhea and diminishing the interference by rhinorrhea in school attendance, concentration on school work, and sleep. Ipratropium bromide was as effective as BDP in the control of rhinorrhea and showed a relatively good effect on congestion. Patient and physician assessment favored BDP in the control of sneezing.

Ipratropium bromide nasal spray 0.03% and beclomethasone nasal spray alone and in combination for the treatment of rhinorrhea in perennial rhinitis.

BACKGROUND: Perennial rhinitis is a common condition that affects up to 10% to 20% of the population. Multiple agents are frequently administered since no single agent provides complete relief. Studies assessing the benefit/risk of combined therapy are important especially for newly approved agents such as ipratropium bromide nasal spray 0.03%, a topical anticholinergic agent, approved specifically for the treatment of rhinorrhea in allergic and non-allergic perennial rhinitis. OBJECTIVE: To compare the efficacy and safety of the combined use of ipratropium bromide nasal spray 0.03% (42 microg per nostril tid) and beclomethasone dipropionate nasal spray (84 microg per nostril bid) against that of either active agent alone for the treatment of rhinorrhea. DESIGN: Multicenter, 6-week, double-blind, randomized active- and placebo-controlled, parallel trial. SETTING: Allergist and general practitioner clinical practices. PATIENTS: Five hundred thirty-three patients with perennial rhinitis (279 allergic and 274 non-allergic), 8 to 75 years of age, who had at least a mild degree of severity of rhinorrhea for a minimum of 2 hours per day during the 1 week screening period as well as congestion or sneezing also of at least mild severity. INTERVENTION: Either (1) ipratropium bromide nasal spray 0.03% (42 microg per nostril tid) plus beclomethasone dipropionate nasal spray (84 microg per nostril bid), (2) ipratropium bromide nasal spray 0.03% (42 microg per nostril tid) alone, (3) beclomethasone dipropionate nasal spray (84 microg per nostril bid) alone, or (4) vehicle [matching placebo nasal spray for the ipratropium bromide (2 sprays per nostril tid)] or beclomethasone dipropionate (2 sprays per nostril bid). MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE: Severity and duration of rhinorrhea, and patient and physician global assessment of control of rhinorrhea. RESULTS: Ipratropium bromide nasal spray plus beclomethasone nasal spray was more effective than either active agent alone or vehicle in reducing the average severity and duration of rhinorrhea during 4 weeks of treatment. The advantage of ipratropium bromide plus beclomethasone nasal spray was evident by the first day of combined treatment and continued throughout the 2-week treatment period. Ipratropium bromide nasal spray had a faster onset of action during the first week of treatment and reduced the duration of rhinorrhea more than beclomethasone. Beclomethasone nasal spray was more effective in reducing the severity of congestion and sneezing than ipratropium. In patients who had not responded well to a nasal steroid prior to participation in the study based on a questionnaire administered at screening, ipratropium bromide was as effective in the steroid non-responders as steroid responders, whereas beclomethasone was more effective in steroid responders. Combined active therapy was well tolerated with no increase in adverse events over that seen previously with ipratropium bromide or beclomethasone nasal spray alone. CONCLUSIONS: The combined use of ipratropium bromide nasal spray with beclomethasone dipropionate nasal spray is more effective than either active agent for the treatment of rhinorrhea, and does not result in a potentiation of adverse drug reactions. Ipratropium bromide nasal spray 0.03% alone should be considered in patients for whom rhinorrhea is the primary symptom, and its use in combination with a nasal steroid should be considered in patients where rhinorrhea is one of the predominant symptoms, or in patients with rhinorrhea not fully responsive to other therapy.

Ipratropium bromide nasal spray 0.03% provides additional relief from rhinorrhea when combined with terfenadine in perennial rhinitis patients; a randomized, double-blind, active-controlled trial.

Medical treatment of perennial rhinitis is aimed at providing symptomatic relief of individual symptoms. Multiple agents are administered when no single agent provides complete relief. Studies assessing the benefit/risk of combined therapy are important, especially for newly available agents such as ipratropium bromide nasal spray, a topical anticholinergic agent approved for the treatment of rhinorrhea in allergic and nonallergic perennial rhinitis. The objective was to determine whether the combined use of ipratropium bromide nasal spray 0.03% (42 mcg per nostril) administered three times daily with a nonsedating antihistamine (terfenadine, 60 mg administered twice daily) is safe and provides greater clinical benefit than use of the placebo nasal spray plus terfenadine. Our method was a multicenter, 6-week, double-blind, randomized, active-controlled, crossover trial of 205 patients with perennial rhinitis (114 allergic and 91 nonallergic), 18 to 75 years of age, who had clinically significant rhinorrhea. After a 1-week run-in period, patients were treated for 2 weeks with one of the two treatment regimens, followed by a 1-week washout period, and then were treated for another 2 weeks with the other treatment regimen. Daily diary symptoms scores of rhinorrhea, congestion, and sneezing were obtained, as well as biweekly patient and physician global assessments of treatment effectiveness of each of the nasal symptoms. Ipratropium bromide nasal spray plus terfenadine was more effective than vehicle plus terfenadine in reducing the average severity (38% versus 28%) and duration (46% versus 30%) of rhinorrhea during the 2 weeks of treatment from baseline (p < 0.05). The advantage of ipratropium bromide nasal spray plus terfenadine was evident by the second day of treatment and continued throughout the 2-week treatment period. Of patients who responded more to one treatment than another, 69% responded to ipratropium bromide nasal spray plus terfenadine, compared to 31% to vehicle plus terfenadine (p < 0.05). Both physicians and patients rated control of rhinorrhea and sneezing by ipratropium bromide nasal spray plus terfenadine as superior to vehicle plus terfenadine (p < 0.05). The symptom of congestion was controlled equally well by both treatments. Combined active therapy was well tolerated with no increase in adverse events over that seen previously with ipratropium bromide nasal spray alone. The combination of ipratropium bromide nasal spray with terfenadine is more effective than vehicle plus terfenadine for the treatment of rhinorrhea, and does not result in a potentiation of adverse drug reactions.

Ipratropium nasal spray in children with perennial rhinitis.

OBJECTIVE: To compare the efficacy and safety of ipratropium nasal spray and placebo administered twice each day for 4 weeks in pediatric patients with perennial rhinitis who had rhinorrhea as a major complaint. METHODS: This was a multicenter, double-blind, parallel group study. Patients aged 6 to 18 years with symptoms of perennial nonallergic (PNAR) or perennial allergic rhinitis (PAR) were randomized to receive ipratropium (42 micrograms per nostril) or placebo nasal spray, double-blind, twice each day for 4 weeks. Efficacy was evaluated by nasal symptoms, especially anterior rhinorrhea, and quality of life. Previous caregivers for rhinitis and medications used in the past were also evaluated. RESULTS: A total of 202 patients were empanelled, 162 with PAR, 40 with PNAR; of these 151 with mild-severe rhinorrhea were evaluated for efficacy. Treatment with ipratropium reduced symptoms of rhinorrhea primarily in patients with PNAR. In patients with PAR this response was less pronounced, and was seen as a modest decrease in the severity of rhinorrhea noted in the first 2 weeks of treatment. Quality of life assessments confirmed that rhinorrhea was bothersome to these pediatric patients, and suggested that treatment with ipratropium nasal spray was associated with an improvement, especially in the patients with PNAR. There were few adverse events; these were similar in the two treatment groups. CONCLUSIONS: Ipratropium nasal spray 0.03% administered at a dose of 42 micrograms/nostril bid is a safe and effective new therapy for control of anterior rhinorrhea in pediatric patients with PNAR. Twice daily administration is adequate for patients with PNAR, but patients with PAR might benefit from more frequent administration (e.g., tid).

Labetalol pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics: evidence of stereoselective disposition.

Labetalol pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics were evaluated in nine subjects before and during enzyme inhibition with cimetidine. Pharmacologic response was assessed by use of standardized treadmill tests during 24 hours after administration of oral labetalol. Oral clearance of labetalol decreased with cimetidine administration (58.7 +/- 23.3 to 32.9 +/- 13.2 ml/min/kg; p less than 0.05), thereby causing a 79% increase in area under the curve. Labetalol systemic clearance also decreased (23.2 +/- 5.3 to 17.7 +/- 3.7 ml/min/kg; p less than 0.05), but the volume of distribution was unchanged. Labetalol caused significant beta-blockade for 8 hours after the last oral dose, but cimetidine did not alter pharmacologic response. The Emax model provided a good description of the concentration-effect relationship. At peak labetalol concentrations after oral administration, (R,R)-labetalol concentrations were significantly lower than those of the other three stereoisomers (p less than 0.05). Cimetidine caused an increase in the concentrations of each stereoisomer, but the difference was significant (p less than 0.05) for only the (S,R)-, (S,S)-, and (R,S)-isomers. This first evidence of labetalol stereoselective disposition is consistent with the findings of previous (R,R)-labetalol pharmacokinetic studies and with previous pharmacodynamic investigations of labetalol and (R,R)-labetalol.

Stability of esmolol hydrochloride in the presence of aminophylline, bretylium tosylate, heparin sodium, and procainamide hydrochloride.

The visual and chemical compatibility of esmolol hydrochloride mixed with aminophylline, heparin sodium, bretylium tosylate, or procainamide hydrochloride in 5% dextrose injection was studied. Esmolol hydrochloride 600 mg was injected into polyvinyl chloride bags containing 100 mL of 5% dextrose injection with aminophylline 100 mg, heparin sodium 5000 units, bretylium tosylate 100 mg, or procainamide hydrochloride 400 mg. All admixtures were prepared in triplicate and stored at room temperature under fluorescent light. Esmolol concentrations were measured with high-performance liquid chromatography at 0, 2, 4, 8, and 24 hours. Samples were also examined for precipitate formation and pH and color changes by using visual, microscopic, and spectrophotometric methods. No detectable changes in color or pH and no particulate formation were observed in any of the sample bags. Esmolol concentrations varied by less than 5% throughout the 24-hour study period. Esmolol hydrochloride was visually compatible and chemically stable for at least 24 hours when mixed with aminophylline, heparin sodium, bretylium tosylate, or procainamide hydrochloride in polyvinyl chloride bags containing 5% dextrose injection.