Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35797024›Full record

Trial reportJAMA otolaryngology-- head & neck surgery2022

Efficacy and Safety of Saline Nasal Irrigation Plus Theophylline for Treatment of COVID-19-Related Olfactory Dysfunction: The SCENT2 Phase 2 Randomized Clinical Trial.

Shruti Gupta, Jake J Lee, Amber Perrin, Amish Khan, Harrison J Smith, Nyssa Farrell, Dorina Kallogjeri, Jay F Piccirillo

2 registry-linked trialsOpen access · bronzeAbstract readClinical Trial, Phase IIRandomized Controlled Trial
In one paragraph

Trial report in JAMA otolaryngology-- head & neck surgery, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to 2 registered trials, which are not on this map. Cited by 21 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
21citing papers in PubMed, 3 pooled it
4.3field-weighted citation impact, top 4% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

NCT04789499 phase2completednot on this map

Smell in Covid-19 and Efficacy of Nasal Theophylline

TypeinterventionalSponsorWashington University School of MedicineRan2021 to 2021Enrolled51ConditionsCovid19, Anosmia, Olfactory Disorder, Covid-19 PandemicArmsTheophylline Powder, Placebo Comparator
NCT05947643 phase2completednot on this map

Smell in COVID-19 and Efficacy of Nasal Theophylline 3

TypeinterventionalSponsorWashington University School of MedicineRan2022 to 2025Enrolled77ConditionsCOVID-19Armstheophylline, Placebo
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

21 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 35 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Inhaled corticosteroids' effect on COVID-19 patients: A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.Canadian journal of respiratory therapy : CJRT = Revue canadienne de la therapie respiratoire : RCTR · 2023
    Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Treatment of COVID-19 olfactory dysfunction with olfactory training, palmitoylethanolamide with luteolin, or combined therapy: a blinded controlled multicenter randomized trial.European archives of oto-rhino-laryngology : official journal of the European Federation of Oto-Rhino-Laryngological Societies (EUFOS) : affiliated with the German Society for Oto-Rhino-Laryngology - Head and Neck Surgery · 2023
    Trial
  5. Trial
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Review
  10. Different Modalities in the Management of Post-COVID-19 Olfactory Dysfunction.Indian journal of otolaryngology and head and neck surgery : official publication of the Association of Otolaryngologists of India · 2025
    Article
  11. Article
  12. Long-term olfactory loss post-COVID-19: Pathobiology and potential therapeutic strategies.World journal of otorhinolaryngology - head and neck surgery · 2024
    Review
  13. Clinical studies in COVID-related olfactory disorders: Review of an institutional experience.World journal of otorhinolaryngology - head and neck surgery · 2024
    Article
  14. Article
  15. Review
  16. Delivery of Topical Drugs to the Olfactory Cleft.Journal of clinical medicine · 2023
    Review
  17. Review
  18. Article
  19. Review
  20. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

8 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.

Shruti GuptaClinical Outcomes Research Office, Department of Otolaryngology-Head & Neck Surgery, Washington University School of Medicine in St Louis, St Louis, Missouri.
Jake J LeeClinical Outcomes Research Office, Department of Otolaryngology-Head & Neck Surgery, Washington University School of Medicine in St Louis, St Louis, Missouri.
Amber PerrinClinical Outcomes Research Office, Department of Otolaryngology-Head & Neck Surgery, Washington University School of Medicine in St Louis, St Louis, Missouri.
Amish KhanWashington University School of Medicine in St Louis, St Louis, Missouri.
Harrison J SmithNew York Medical College, Valhalla, New York.
Nyssa FarrellDivision of Rhinology, Department of Otolaryngology-Head & Neck Surgery, Washington University School of Medicine in St Louis, St Louis, Missouri.
Dorina KallogjeriClinical Outcomes Research Office, Department of Otolaryngology-Head & Neck Surgery, Washington University School of Medicine in St Louis, St Louis, Missouri.
Jay F PiccirilloClinical Outcomes Research Office, Department of Otolaryngology-Head & Neck Surgery, Washington University School of Medicine in St Louis, St Louis, Missouri.
Washington University in St. Louis · USAugusta University · USNew York Medical College · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Importance: Recent studies suggest that theophylline added to saline nasal irrigation (SNI) can be an effective treatment for postviral olfactory dysfunction (OD), a growing public health concern during the COVID-19 pandemic. Objective: To evaluate the efficacy and safety of theophylline added to SNI compared with placebo for COVID-19-related OD. Design, Setting, and Participants: This triple-blinded, placebo-controlled, phase 2 randomized clinical trial was conducted virtually between March 15 and August 31, 2021. Adults residing in Missouri or Illinois were recruited during this time period if they had OD persisting for 3 to 12 months following suspected COVID-19 infection. Data analysis was conducted from October to December 2021. Interventions: Saline sinus rinse kits and bottles of identical-appearing capsules with either 400 mg of theophylline (treatment) or 500 mg of lactose powder (control) were mailed to consenting study participants. Participants were instructed to dissolve the capsule contents into the saline rinse and use the solution to irrigate their nasal cavities in the morning and at night for 6 weeks. Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary outcome was the difference in the rate of responders between the treatment and the control arms, defined as a response of at least slightly better improvement in the Clinical Global Impression-Improvement scale posttreatment. Secondary outcome measures included changes in the University of Pennsylvania Smell Identification Test (UPSIT), the Questionnaire for Olfactory Disorders, the 36-Item Short Form Health Survey on general health, and COVID-19-related questions. Results: A total of 51 participants were enrolled in the study; the mean (SD) age was 46.0 (13.1) years, and 36 (71%) participants were women. Participants were randomized to SNI with theophylline (n = 26) or to SNI with placebo (n = 25). Forty-five participants completed the study. At the end of treatment, 13 (59%) participants in the theophylline arm reported at least slight improvement in the Clinical Global Impression-Improvement scale (responders) compared with 10 (43%) in the placebo arm (absolute difference, 15.6%; 95% CI, -13.2% to 44.5%). The median difference for the UPSIT change between baseline and 6 weeks was 3.0 (95% CI, -1.0 to 7.0) for participants in the theophylline arm and 0.0 (95% CI, -2.0 to 6.0) for participants in the placebo arm. Mixed-model analysis revealed that the change in UPSIT scores through study assessments was not statistically significantly different between the 2 study arms. Eleven (50%) participants in the theophylline arm and 6 (26%) in the placebo arm had a change of 4 or more points in UPSIT scores from baseline to 6 weeks. The difference in the rate of responders as measured by the UPSIT was 24% (95% CI, -4% to 52%) in favor of theophylline. Conclusions and Relevance: This randomized clinical trial suggests that the clinical benefit of theophylline nasal irrigations on olfaction in participants with COVID-19-related OD is inconclusive, though suggested by subjective assessments. Larger studies are warranted to investigate the efficacy of this treatment more fully. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT04789499.

Indexed as

COVID-19Olfaction DisordersAdultDouble-Blind MethodFemaleHumansMaleMiddle AgedNasal LavagePandemicsSaline SolutionSmellTheophyllineTreatment OutcomeSaline SolutionTheophylline

Identifiers

PMID35797024
PMCPMC9264240
OpenAlexW4284673783

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.