Display options
Share it on

J Drug Assess. 2012 Oct 09;1(1):40-7. doi: 10.3109/21556660.2012.728547. eCollection 2012.

The assessment of the optimal duration of early intervention with montelukast in the treatment of Japanese cedar pollinosis symptoms induced in an artificial exposure chamber.

Journal of drug assessment

Kazuhiro Hashiguchi, Kimihiro Okubo, Ken-Ichiro Wakabayashi, Nobuaki Tanaka, Yukiko Watada, Kiyochika Suematsu, Minoru Gotoh

Affiliations

  1. Department of Otolaryngology, Futaba Clinic, TokyoJapan.
  2. Department of Otolaryngology, Nippon Medical School, TokyoJapan.
  3. Department of Otorhinolaryngology, Kitasato Institute Hospital, TokyoJapan.
  4. Tanaka ENT Clinic, Tokyo, Japan; Department of Otorhinolaryngology, Tokyo Women's Medical University Medical Center East, TokyoJapan.
  5. Department of Otorhinolaryngology, Keio University School of Medicine, TokyoJapan.
  6. Pharmaceutical Department, Medical Corporation Shinanokai, Samoncho Clinic, TokyoJapan.

PMID: 27536427 PMCID: PMC4980728 DOI: 10.3109/21556660.2012.728547

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: The study objective was to investigate the prophylactic efficacy of montelukast (MLK) 10 mg in suppressing seasonal allergic rhinitis (SAR) symptoms induced by Japanese cedar (JC) pollen and to determine how many days before exposure to JC in the artificial exposure chamber (OHIO chamber) would be optimal to start administration.

METHODS: This was a single-institution, double-blind, randomized placebo-controlled four-group parallel inter-group comparison study. Adult volunteers with JC pollinosis were divided into four groups: an MLK 7-day administration group (n = 27), an MLK 3-day administration group (n = 27), an MLK 1-day administration group (n = 26), and a placebo group (n = 26). The mean change in total nasal symptom scores (nasal obstruction, nasal discharge and sneezing) (TNSS) and each of the nasal symptom scores during exposure of JC pollen in the OHIO chamber were investigated.

RESULTS: The mean change in TNSS was significantly lower in the MLK treatment group, regardless of the number of days of administration, than in the placebo group (p = 0.0192). The results for the individual nasal symptoms showed that nasal obstruction was significantly suppressed in the 1-day administration group as compared with placebo (p = 0.0076), but no differences were found in sneezing score between any of the groups. For nasal discharge, we found a trend towards the effect clearing up after 3 days of administration. No serious adverse events were observed during the study.

CONCLUSION: Although this study was acute and this artificial exposure model was conducted out of the pollen season, nasal symptoms that developed in the pollen exposure chamber, especially nasal obstruction, were significantly suppressed by starting oral administration of MLK 10 mg at least 1 day before exposure. These results suggest that prophylactic administration of MLK is effective and safe in the treatment of SAR.

Keywords: Early intervention; Environmental exposure chamber; Japanese cedar pollinosis; Montelukast Clinical Trial Registration: UMIN Clinical Trials Registry number

References

  1. Allergol Int. 2009 Jun;58(2):155-62 - PubMed
  2. Ann Allergy Asthma Immunol. 2006 Feb;96(2):263-77; quiz 277-8, 315 - PubMed
  3. Allergy. 2004 Mar;59(3):280-8 - PubMed
  4. Allergy Asthma Proc. 2008 May-Jun;29(3):304-12 - PubMed
  5. Ann Allergy Asthma Immunol. 2006 Jun;96(6):779-86 - PubMed
  6. Clin Exp Allergy. 2006 Jun;36(6):689-703 - PubMed
  7. Clin Allergy. 1986 Jul;16(4):289-97 - PubMed
  8. Ann Allergy Asthma Immunol. 2005 Jun;94(6):609-18; quiz 618-20, 669 - PubMed
  9. Allergy Asthma Proc. 2010 Jul-Aug;31(4):296-303 - PubMed
  10. Allergy. 2000;55 Suppl 64:7-16 - PubMed
  11. Am J Med. 2004 Mar 1;116(5):338-44 - PubMed
  12. Eur Respir J. 1999 Jul;14(1):12-8 - PubMed
  13. Ann Allergy Asthma Immunol. 2003 Feb;90(2):214-22 - PubMed
  14. Allergy Asthma Proc. 2005 Jan-Feb;26(1):41-6 - PubMed
  15. Ann Allergy Asthma Immunol. 2002 Jun;88(6):592-600 - PubMed
  16. Allergy. 2003 Dec;58(12):1268-76 - PubMed
  17. Allergol Int. 2008 Sep;57(3):247-55 - PubMed
  18. J Allergy Clin Immunol. 2012 Jul;130(1):122-7.e8 - PubMed
  19. Ann Allergy. 1988 Jun;60(6):537-40 - PubMed
  20. Int Arch Allergy Immunol. 2009;149(4):350-8 - PubMed
  21. Clin Exp Allergy. 2002 Jul;32(7):1020-8 - PubMed
  22. Int Arch Allergy Immunol. 2009;149(2):141-9 - PubMed
  23. Chest. 2002 Mar;121(3):732-8 - PubMed

Publication Types