Comparison of intranasal triamcinolone acetonide with oral loratadine in the treatment of seasonal ragweed-induced allergic rhinitis.

A double-blind, randomized, multicenter, parallel-group controlled study compared the efficacy and safety of intranasal triamcinolone acetonide (220 micrograms/day) and oral loratadine (10 mg/day) in patients with at least two seasons of ragweed-induced seasonal allergic rhinitis. A 28-day screening period, including a 5-day baseline period, preceded a 4-week treatment period. Reduction in rhinitis symptom scores was evident in both groups as early as day 1, with no significant between-group differences during week 1. At weeks 2, 3, and 4, patients treated with triamcinolone acetonide were significantly (P < 0.05) more improved in total nasal score, nasal itch, nasal stuffiness, and sneezing than were patients treated with loratadine. At weeks 3 and 4, rhinorrhea and ocular symptoms were significantly (P < 0.05) more improved from baseline among triamcinolone acetonide patients compared with loratadine patients. There was no significant between-group difference in relief from postnasal drip at any time point. Physicians' global evaluations significantly (P = 0.002) favored triamcinolone acetonide at the final visit, with moderate to complete relief of symptoms attained by 68% of triamcinolone acetonide patients and 59% of loratadine patients. Over the 4-week treatment period, triamcinolone acetonide patients had significantly greater improvement in total nasal score, nasal itch, nasal stuffiness, sneezing, and ocular symptoms. Both treatments were well tolerated, with headache being the most frequently reported drug-related adverse effect in both the triamcinolone acetonide (15%) and loratadine (11%) groups. These results indicate that triamcinolone acetonide is more effective than oral loratadine in relieving the symptoms of ragweed-induced seasonal allergic rhinitis.