Premium
The protective effect of N ‐acetyl‐aspartyl‐glutamate (NAAGA) against nasal obstruction provoked by antigen in allergic rhinitis
Author(s) -
Magyar P.,
Györi Z.,
Márk Z.,
Hutás I.
Publication year - 1993
Publication title -
allergy
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 3.363
H-Index - 173
eISSN - 1398-9995
pISSN - 0105-4538
DOI - 10.1111/j.1398-9995.1993.tb00761.x
Subject(s) - medicine , allergen , nasal administration , placebo , ragweed , mucous membrane of nose , nasal lavage , allergy , immunology , nasal provocation test , nasal spray , anesthesia , gastroenterology , pharmacology , pathology , alternative medicine
Specific nasal challenge test (NCT) with pollen extracts was performed before and after a single dose pretreatment with N‐acetyl‐aspartyl‐glutamate (NAAGA: Rhinaaxia®) nasal spray in 11 grass‐ and ragweed‐pollen‐sensitive patients with allergic rhinitis in symptom‐free condition to test the protective effect of this drug on allergen‐induced nasal obstruction and symptoms. In 7 of 11 patients, a third NCT was performed in the same way as the second one, except that placebo spray was used for pretreatment instead of NAAGA nasal spray. Nasal airways resistance (RNAS) measurements were performed before pretreatment and 15 min after NCT. Pretreatment with NAAGA 1 h before NCT significantly ( P < 0.001) attenuated antigen‐induced nasal obstruction. The mean protection was 64%. The protective effect against nasal symptoms was likewise significant ( P < 0.001), but the mean protection was found to be essentially lower (39%) than for RNAS. Pretreatment with placebo nasal spray showed only a 13% ( P > 0.1) protection for RNAS, while it did not decrease allergen‐induced nasal symptoms. The results suggest that the favorable effect of the regular administration of NAAGA in allergic rhinitis is to be expected primarily when the main complaint is nasal obstruction.