Efficacy of Pidotimod use in treating allergic rhinitis in a pediatric population.
Microbiota
Nasal obstruction
Pidotimod
Rhinomanometry
Journal
Italian journal of pediatrics
ISSN: 1824-7288
Titre abrégé: Ital J Pediatr
Pays: England
ID NLM: 101510759
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
07 Jul 2020
07 Jul 2020
Historique:
received:
10
03
2020
accepted:
29
06
2020
entrez:
9
7
2020
pubmed:
9
7
2020
medline:
16
6
2021
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
Allergic rhinitis (AR) and adenoidal hypertrophy (AH) are the most frequent causative disorders of nasal obstruction in children, leading to recurrent respiratory infections. Both nasal cavities are colonized by a stable microbial community susceptible to environmental changes and Staphylococcus aureus seems to play the major role. Furthermore, nasal microbiota holds a large number and variety of viruses with upper respiratory tract infections. This local microbiota deserves attention because its modification could induce a virtuous cross-talking with the immune system, with a better clearance of pathogens. Although AR and AH present a different etiopathogenesis, they have in common a minimal chronic inflammation surrounding nasal obstruction; hence it would be challenging to evaluate the effect of an immunomodulator on this minimal chronic inflammation with possible clinical and microbiological effects. The aim of this study is therefore to evaluate the efficacy of an immunomoldulator (Pidotimod) on nasal obstruction in children with AR and/or AH and whether its action involves a variation of nasal microbiota. We enrolled 76 children: those with allergic rhinitis (AR) sensitized to dust mites entered the AR group, those with adenoidal hypertrophy (AH) the AH group, those with both conditions the AR/AH group and those without AR ± AH as controls (CTRL). At the first visit they performed: skin prick tests, nasal fiberoptic endoscopy, anterior rhinomanometry, nasal swabs. Children with. AR ± AH started treatment with Pidotimod. After 1 month they were re-evaluated performing the same procedures. The primary outcome was the evaluation of nasal obstruction after treatment and the secondary outcome was the improvement of symptoms and the changes in nasal microflora. All patients improved their mean nasal flow (mNF) in respect to the baseline. In AR children mNF reached that one of CTRL. In AH children±AR the mNF was lower in respect to CTRL and AR group. We did not find any differences among all the groups at the two different time points in nasal microflora. Pidotimod is able to give an improvement in nasal obstruction, especially in AR children but this effect seems to be not mediated by changes in nasal microbiota.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
BACKGROUND
Allergic rhinitis (AR) and adenoidal hypertrophy (AH) are the most frequent causative disorders of nasal obstruction in children, leading to recurrent respiratory infections. Both nasal cavities are colonized by a stable microbial community susceptible to environmental changes and Staphylococcus aureus seems to play the major role. Furthermore, nasal microbiota holds a large number and variety of viruses with upper respiratory tract infections. This local microbiota deserves attention because its modification could induce a virtuous cross-talking with the immune system, with a better clearance of pathogens. Although AR and AH present a different etiopathogenesis, they have in common a minimal chronic inflammation surrounding nasal obstruction; hence it would be challenging to evaluate the effect of an immunomodulator on this minimal chronic inflammation with possible clinical and microbiological effects. The aim of this study is therefore to evaluate the efficacy of an immunomoldulator (Pidotimod) on nasal obstruction in children with AR and/or AH and whether its action involves a variation of nasal microbiota.
METHODS
METHODS
We enrolled 76 children: those with allergic rhinitis (AR) sensitized to dust mites entered the AR group, those with adenoidal hypertrophy (AH) the AH group, those with both conditions the AR/AH group and those without AR ± AH as controls (CTRL). At the first visit they performed: skin prick tests, nasal fiberoptic endoscopy, anterior rhinomanometry, nasal swabs. Children with. AR ± AH started treatment with Pidotimod. After 1 month they were re-evaluated performing the same procedures. The primary outcome was the evaluation of nasal obstruction after treatment and the secondary outcome was the improvement of symptoms and the changes in nasal microflora.
RESULTS
RESULTS
All patients improved their mean nasal flow (mNF) in respect to the baseline. In AR children mNF reached that one of CTRL. In AH children±AR the mNF was lower in respect to CTRL and AR group. We did not find any differences among all the groups at the two different time points in nasal microflora.
CONCLUSIONS
CONCLUSIONS
Pidotimod is able to give an improvement in nasal obstruction, especially in AR children but this effect seems to be not mediated by changes in nasal microbiota.
Identifiants
pubmed: 32635938
doi: 10.1186/s13052-020-00859-8
pii: 10.1186/s13052-020-00859-8
pmc: PMC7341603
doi:
Substances chimiques
Immunologic Factors
0
Thiazolidines
0
pidotimod
785363R681
Pyrrolidonecarboxylic Acid
SZB83O1W42
Types de publication
Clinical Trial
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
93Références
J Allergy Clin Immunol. 2018 Jul;142(1):287-290.e4
pubmed: 29452201
J Biol Regul Homeost Agents. 2013 Jan-Mar;27(1):253-8
pubmed: 23489705
Eur Arch Otorhinolaryngol. 2014 Jan;271(1):103-7
pubmed: 23591798
Curr Med Res Opin. 2015 May;31(5):939-41
pubmed: 25753228
Pediatr Pulmonol. 2008 Oct;43(10):1020-4
pubmed: 18785259
Curr Med Res Opin. 2015 Mar;31(3):391-6
pubmed: 25629793
Cell Host Microbe. 2015 May 13;17(5):704-15
pubmed: 25865368
Pediatr Pulmonol. 2002 Mar;33(3):174-80
pubmed: 11836796
Pharmacol Res. 2015 Jul;97:79-83
pubmed: 25931316
Curr Allergy Asthma Rep. 2019 Feb 22;19(2):13
pubmed: 30793232
Clin Mol Allergy. 2015 May 21;13(1):8
pubmed: 25999796
Expert Rev Clin Immunol. 2018 Aug;14(8):645-647
pubmed: 29999434
Ital J Pediatr. 2013 May 10;39:29
pubmed: 23663325
Allergy. 2013;68(5):580-4
pubmed: 23409759
J Biol Regul Homeost Agents. 2014 Oct-Dec;28(4):753-66
pubmed: 25620184
J Allergy Clin Immunol. 2017 Oct;140(4):950-958
pubmed: 28602936
J Transl Med. 2015 Sep 03;13:288
pubmed: 26335787
PLoS One. 2012;7(10):e46803
pubmed: 23071640
Rhinology. 1984 Sep;22(3):151-5
pubmed: 6505516
Eur Respir J. 2014 Feb;43(2):343-73
pubmed: 24337046
Am J Rhinol Allergy. 2014 Jul-Aug;28(4):281-6
pubmed: 25197913
Int Immunopharmacol. 2009 Nov;9(12):1366-73
pubmed: 19712757
J Allergy Clin Immunol. 2018 May;141(5):1949-1952.e8
pubmed: 29425849
Ital J Pediatr. 2013 Dec 06;39:75
pubmed: 24314100
Medicine (Baltimore). 2018 Dec;97(51):e13783
pubmed: 30572534
Am J Rhinol Allergy. 2015 Jan-Feb;29(1):54-6
pubmed: 25590321
Rhinology. 2016 Jun;54(2):164-9
pubmed: 26874896
Int Forum Allergy Rhinol. 2017 Jun;7(6):561-569
pubmed: 28481057
Int J Pediatr Otorhinolaryngol. 2003 Dec;67(12):1303-9
pubmed: 14643473
Sci Adv. 2015 Jun 05;1(5):e1400216
pubmed: 26601194
J Asthma. 2004;41(3):285-7
pubmed: 15260461