***TASK*** the task is to summarize an input biomedical literature in six sentences 
    ***INPUT*** the input is a biomedical literature 
    ***OUTPUT*** the output is the summary of an input biomedical literature in six sentences 
    ***DOCUMENTATION*** 
    ***EXAMPLES*** 
    Input: The efficacy and safety of intranasal budesonide were evaluated in a placebo-controlled double-blind study of 51 children ( 6 to 18 years ) and 48 adults with perennial ( allergic or nonallergic ) rhinitis . The trial commenced with a 2-week baseline period without treatment for perennial rhinitis . This was followed by a treatment period of 4 weeks . Treatment was either intranasal budesonide 200 micrograms bid or matching placebo bid . Nasal symptoms were rated daily on a scale from 0 ( absent ) to 3 ( severe ) . Safety was monitored by laboratory assessment s ( hematology , blood chemistry , urinalysis ) as well as by rhinoscopy and recording of adverse events . Budesonide reduced the nasal symptoms as compared with baseline . The reduction was greater than in the placebo group and symptoms were improved significantly on budesonide treatment compared with placebo . Laboratory assessment s demonstrated no differences between budesonide and placebo . Adverse responses to intranasal budesonide were few and minor , and compliance was high . Intranasal budesonide , 200 micrograms bid , thus appears to be efficacious , highly acceptable , and safe for the treatment of perennial rhinitis BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE MP29 - 02 ( Dymista ) , a novel intranasal formulation of azelastine hydrochloride ( AZE ) and fluticasone propionate ( FP ) , is significantly better than first-line therapy for the treatment of moderate-to-severe seasonal allergic rhinitis ( SAR ) , and is well tolerated following 52 weeks of continuous use in chronic rhinitis . The aim of this study was to evaluate the long-term efficacy of MP29 - 02 versus FP in patients with chronic rhinitis . PATIENTS AND METHODS In total , 612 chronic rhinitis patients ( perennial allergic rhinitis [ PAR ] , n = 424 ; nonallergic rhinitis , n=188 ) aged 12 years or older were enrolled into this open-label , parallel-group study and r and omized to MP29 - 02 ( 1 spray/nostril bid ) or FP nasal spray ( 2 sprays/nostril qd ) for 52 weeks . Efficacy was assessed by change from baseline in PM reflective total nasal symptom score ( rTNSS ) , time to first achieve 100 % PM rTNSS reduction from baseline , and percentage of symptom-free days in the total and PAR population s posthoc . RESULTS MP29 - 02 reduced patients ' PM rTNSS from baseline significantly more than FP , from Day 1 up to and including week 28 ( -2.88 vs -2.53 ; P = .0048 ) , with treatment difference maintained for 52 weeks . Fluctuation in significance after week 28 might be explained , at least in part , by decreasing sample size , permitted according to ICH guidelines . By Day 1 almost twice as many MP29 - 02- patients were symptom free . After 1 month , 71.1 % of MP29 - 02 patients experienced 100 % rTNSS reduction ( 60.3 % for FP ) , and did on a median of 9 days faster ( P=.0024 ) . Over 52 weeks MP29 - 02 patients experienced 8.4 % more symptom-free days ( P = .0005 ) . These results were mirrored in the PAR sub population . CONCLUSION These results confirm MP29 - 02 's wide therapeutic spectrum and assert its consistent superiority over an intranasal corticosteroid OBJECTIVE To investigate the efficacy and safety of ICX72 or Sinus Buster , a proprietary homeopathic preparation of Capsicum annum and Eucalyptol , versus placebo administered continuously over 2 weeks in subjects with a significant component of nonallergic rhinitis ( NAR ) . METHODS Forty-two consented subjects meeting inclusion /exclusion criteria were r and omized to ICX72 ( n = 20 ) or control ( n = 22 ) administered twice daily over 2 weeks . The primary endpoint was change in total nasal symptom scores ( TNSS ) from baseline to end of study . Secondary endpoints included changes in individual symptom scores ( ISS ) over 2 weeks and average time to first relief . Mean TNSS and ISS were recorded after single dosing at different intervals over 60 minutes . Rhinitis quality -of-life , rescue medication , and safety endpoints were analyzed . RESULTS ICX72 versus placebo subjects exhibited significant differences in changes from baseline to end of study for TNSS and each ISS ( P < .01 ) , had an average time to first relief of 52.6 seconds ( P < .01 ) , and improvement in nasal congestion , sinus pain , sinus pressure , and headache at 5 , 10 , 15 , and 30 minutes , persisting at 60 minutes for nasal congestion and sinus pain ( P < .05 ) . No difference between groups in adverse events or rescue medication was observed . ICX72 versus placebo subjects experienced no rebound congestion or impaired olfaction at the end of the study . CONCLUSION This is the first controlled trial demonstrating intranasal capsaicin , when used continuously over 2 weeks , rapidly and safely improves symptoms in rhinitis subjects with a significant NAR component Intranasal ipratropium bromide has been shown to significantly reduce  rhinorrhea .  Use of a freon-propelled intranasal preparation has result ed in side effects associated with the drying properties of the propellant . The purpose of the present trial was to study the safety and efficacy of a new isotonic aqueous ipratropium bromide nasal spray pump , specifically in patients with perennial nonallergic rhinitis . Two hundred thirty-three patients participated in an 8-week double-blind parallel comparison of ipratropium bromide nasal spray with its vehicle , a saline solution . Treatment with the ipratropium spray result ed in a 30 % reduction in rhinorrhea ; this reduction was significantly greater than that seen with the saline vehicle . There was a modest reduction in postnasal drip , sneezing , and congestion with both treatments , which may be attributable to the salutary effects of the saline solution . Patients also perceived a significant reduction in the degree to which rhinorrhea interfered with their daily activities and moods . Treatment was well tolerated , with no drug-related systemic adverse events and no evidence of nasal rebound on discontinuation of treatment . Minor , infrequent episodes of nasal dryness and epistaxis were the only significant adverse events reported ; these did not limit treatment Background : It is unclear what constitutes a clinical ly meaningful response for allergic rhinitis ( AR ) outcomes . The objectives of these post hoc analyses were ( 1 ) to define a clinical ly meaningful response using novel efficacy analyses ( including a responder analysis ) , and ( 2 ) to compare the efficacy of MP29 - 02 [ a novel intranasal formulation of azelastine hydrochloride ( AZE ) and fluticasone propionate ( FP ) ] with commercially available FP , AZE and placebo in seasonal AR ( SAR ) patients , using these novel analyses . Methods : 610 moderate-to-severe SAR patients ( ≥12 years old ) were r and omized into a double-blind , placebo-controlled , 14-day , parallel-group trial . Change from baseline in the reflective total nasal symptom score ( rTNSS ) over 14 days was the primary outcome . Post hoc endpoints included the sum of nasal and ocular symptoms ( rT7SS ) , efficacy by disease severity and by predominant nasal symptom , and a set of responder analyses . Results : MP29 - 02 most effectively reduced rT7SS ( relative greater improvement : 52 % to FP ; 56 % to AZE ) and both nasal and ocular symptoms irrespective of severity . More MP29 - 02 patients achieved a ≥30 , ≥50 , ≥60 , ≥75 and ≥90 % rTNSS reduction , which occurred days faster than with either active comparator ; MP29 - 02 alone was superior to placebo at the ≥60 % ( or higher ) threshold . One in 2 MP29 - 02 patients achieved a ≥50 % rTNSS reduction and 1 in 6 achieved complete/near-to-complete response . Only MP29 - 02 was consistently superior to placebo for all patients , whatever their predominant symptom . Conclusions : MP29 - 02 provided faster and more complete symptom control than first-line therapies . It was consistently superior irrespective of severity , response criteria or patient-type , and may be considered the drug of choice for moderate-to-severe AR . These measures define a new st and ard for assessing relevance in AR Abstract Conclusion : Kinetic oscillation stimulation ( KOS ) of nasal mucosa at low frequency seems to be a possibly effective and safe short-term treatment of non-allergic nasal stuffiness . Objective : To assess the relief of rhinitis symptoms , especially stuffiness , by comparing active treatment , i.e. KOS at low frequency of the nasal mucosa , with placebo . Methods : Patients were r and omized to active or placebo treatment in this double-blinded parallel design study . Treatment with an inflatable oscillating catheter was administered on day 0 , and symptom scores ( stuffiness , secretion , and itching ) were grade d daily until day 14 . An overall grading of symptoms from 1 week before treatment and during 14 days thereafter was made at day 14 . Eighty-six patients ( 52 with non-allergic perennial rhinitis , NAR ; 34 with rhinitis medicamentosa , RM ) were r and omized , and 71 were evaluated ( active treatment , n = 35 ; placebo , n = 36 ) . Results : Patients with either NAR or RM who received active treatment reported reduced symptom scores by some measures , e.g. median RQSS stuffiness measure fell from 2 to 1 on a scale from 0 to 3 during the week following treatment . No significant effect was observed for patients treated with placebo . Mild side effects were reported Intranasal fluorocarbon anticholinergic agents have been used to treat the nasal hypersecretion of perennial non‐allergic rhinitis , but chronic use has been restricted either due to the potential for systemic anticholinergic adverse events or due to the irritating properties of the fluorocarbon metered dose formulations . This study evaluates a new aqueous nasal formulation of ipratropium bromide ( Atrovent Nasal Spray 0.03 % ) in subjects with perennial non‐allergic rhinitis in a double‐blind , placebo‐controlled trial . Two hundred and twenty‐eight patients were r and omized to receive two sprays per nostril of either ipratropium bromide ( 42μ/nostril ) or placebo‐administered three times a day as an aqueous nasal spray over an 8‐week interval . Patients were evaluated bi‐weekly and maintained daily diaries for duration and severity of nasal symptoms . Ipratropium bromide reduced the mean severity and duration of rhinorrhoea within the first week and throughout the 8 weeks of active treatment compared with placebo ( P < 0.05 ) . Secondary endpoints of efficacy ( patient and physician global assessment s and a quality of life assessment ) also supported the use of ipratropium bromide nasal spray for rhinitis symptom control . With the reduction in rhinorrhoea by the ipratropium bromide nasal spray , patients reported a marked improvement in daily moods vs placebo ( P < 0.01 ) . Both placebo and ipratropium bromide nasal spray induced a modest reduction of nasal congestion , sneezing and postnasal drip . This improvement in these other nasal symptoms was consistent with the known soothing effects of a nasal saline vehicle . There were no drug‐related serious or systemic anticholinergic adverse events . The medication was well tolerated with side‐effects limited to infrequent episodes of epistaxis and nasal dryness of mild intensity . Assessment for nasal rebound for 1 week after discontinuation of treatment showed no increase in nasal symptoms above the original baseline symptoms . These data indicate that ipratropium bromide administered as an 0.03 % aqueous nasal spray , 42μg/nostril t.i.d . , is a well tolerated and a highly effective medication for controlling the severity and duration of rhinorrhoea in perennial non‐allergic rhinitis . This new aqueous formulation should provide an additional therapeutic agent to utilize for the chronic treatment of non‐allergic rhinitis Many patients with allergic rhinitis ( AR ) have uncontrolled symptoms despite available treatment options . This study was design ed to evaluate the efficacy and safety of MP29 - 02 ( a novel intranasal formulation of fluticasone propionate [ FP ] and azelastine [ AZ ] hydrochloride ) , compared with monotherapy with FP , AZ , and placebo sprays for the treatment of seasonal allergic rhinitis ( SAR ) . This 2-week r and omized , double-blind , placebo-controlled trial was conducted in 779 patients with moderate-to-severe SAR . Treatments were administered 1 spray/nostril twice daily in the same vehicle and delivery device . Daily doses of AZ and FP were 548 and 200 micrograms , respectively . The primary efficacy variable was the 12-hour reflective total nasal symptom score ( rTNSS ) , consisting of nasal congestion , sneezing , itchy nose , and run 
    Output:
    
Combination of fluticasone propionate and azelastine is a promising option in achieving better symptom reduction .
New studies demonstrate a lack of correlation between objective outcome of radiofrequency ablation of the inferior turbinate and subjective patient symptoms .