ArticleBrazilian journal of otorhinolaryngology
Olopatadine plus mometasone for seasonal allergic rhinitis treatment: A pooled analysis of clinical trials.
Article in Brazilian journal of otorhinolaryngology. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to 4 registered trials, which are not on this map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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.
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.
A Double-blind, Randomized, Parallel-group, Comparative Study to Evaluate the Efficacy, Safety and Tolerability of Two Different Strengths and Regimens of a Fixed Dose Combination GSP 301 Nasal Spray Compared With Placebo Nasal Spray and Individual Monotherapy Formulations (Comparators), in Subjects (12 Years of Age and Older) With Seasonal Allergic Rhinitis (SAR)
A Double-Blind, Randomized, Parallel-Group, Comparative Study to Evaluate the Efficacy, Safety and Tolerability of a Fixed Dose Combination GSP 301 Nasal Spray (NS) Compared With Placebo Nasal Spray and Individual Monotherapy Formulations (Comparators) in Subjects (Aged 12 Years and Older) With Seasonal Allergic Rhinitis (SAR)
A Double-Blind, Randomized, Parallel-Group Seasonal Allergic Rhinitis (SAR) Study to Evaluate the Efficacy, Safety and Tolerability of GSP 301 Nasal Spray Compared With Placebo Nasal Spray and Individual Monotherapy Formulations (Olopatadine Hydrochloride Nasal Spray and Mometasone Furoate Nasal Spray) in Adult and Adolescent Subjects (12 Years of Age and Older)
A Single-Center, Double-Blind, Double-Dummy, Randomized, Parallel-Group, Comparative Environmental Exposure Chamber (EEC) Study to Evaluate Efficacy, Safety and Tolerability of Two Fixed Dose Combination (FDC) Products of Olopatadine Hydrochloride and Mometasone Furoate Nasal Spray as Compared to the FDC of Azelastine Hydrochloride and Fluticasone Propionate Nasal Spray, Olopatadine Nasal Spray, and Placebo in Patients With Seasonal Allergic Rhinitis.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveThis study was conducted to analyze the efficacy and safety of a fixed-dose combination of olopatadine HCl (antihistamine) and mometasone furoate (corticosteroid) (Olo/Mom, GSP301) for the treatment of Seasonal Allergic Rhinitis (SAR).
methodsEfficacy data from one phase II (NCT02318303 [GSP301-201]) and two pivotal phase III double-blind, randomized, active, placebo-controlled (NCT02631551 [GSP301-301] and NCT02870205 [GSP301-304]) clinical trials were collated and analyzed. These studies investigated Olo/Mom (administered twice daily/BID) compared with placebo and its monotherapy constituents for the treatment of SAR in patients aged ≥12-years. In addition, safety data were analyzed from the aforementioned studies and a proof-of-concept study (NCT03444506 [GSP301-POC]). Primary and secondary endpoints were compared between Olo/Mom, its active mometasone and olopatadine constituents, and placebo.
resultsFor the efficacy analyses (n = 2971), Olo/Mom significantly reduced rTNSS scores compared with placebo (Least Square Mean Difference [LSMD = -0.94]; 95% CI: -1.17, -0.70; p < 0.0001), olopatadine (LSMD = -0.37; 95% CI: -0.60, -0.14; p = 0.0019), and mometasone (LSMD = -0.42; 95% CI: -0.65, -0.18; p = 0.0005). Olo/Mom also significantly improved the RQLQ and iTNSS scores compared with placebo and its monotherapy constituents (p < 0.05, all). The onset of action of Olo/Mom was observed at 15-minutes and was sustained at subsequent timepoints. The incidence of treatment-emergent adverse events in the Olo/Mom, placebo, olopatadine, and mometasone groups was 13.9%, 9.5%, 13.2%, and 7.9%, respectively.
conclusionThis pooled analysis demonstrated the superiority of Olo/Mom compared to its monotherapy constituents or placebo in reducing SAR symptoms over 14-days. Moreover, this study showed that Olo/Mom has a rapid onset of action and significantly improves RQLQ scores compared to placebo. Administration of Olo/Mom BID is an effective and well-tolerated option for the treatment of SAR in patients aged 12-years or older. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: I (Level I - randomized controlled trials).
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
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.