Online summary
Correction to: Paul K. Keith and Glenis K. Scadding. “Are intranasal corticosteroids all equally consistent in managing ocular symptoms of seasonal allergic rhinitis?” Curr Med Res Opin 2009;25:2021-2041; doi:10.1185/03007990903094106
Correction to: Paul K. Keith and Glenis K. Scadding. Are intranasal corticosteroids all equally consistent in managing ocular symptoms of seasonal allergic rhinitis? Curr Med Res Opin 2009;25:2021–2041.
The authors have been made aware of one error (the misclassification of one study) that resulted in several changes to their recent review; the conclusions did not change. The authors are happy for the following corrections to be made:
One mometasone furoate (MF) study was incorrectly categorised as being inconclusive/negative in both figure 1 and in the associated text. Specific corrections are as follows:
On page 2032, column 2, paragraph 2, the correct text should read: Four studies demonstrated positive effects on ocular symptoms, whereas the remaining seven reported negative or inconclusive outcomes.
On page 2033, column 1, paragraph 2, the number of inconclusive studies should be two rather than three, with the correct text reading: Variable or inconclusive results within single studies for MF have been observed in two trials.
On page 2033, column 1, paragraph 2, discordant results have been shown in one rather than two studies; thus the correct text should read: Discordant results have also been reported in one phase III study55.
On page 2033, column 1, paragraph 2, the following text should be deleted: Furthermore, a recent prospectively designed study (Study P05106, n = 429) that investigated the effects of MF 200 mg once daily on ocular symptoms as a co-primary endpoint also showed inconsistent results in terms of efficacy (measured using a four-point scale). The severity of ocular symptoms in this study was confirmed, with patients included only if they had a baseline TOSS of ≥ 4. In this study, MF 200 mg once daily was shown to be superior to placebo in LS mean change in AM iTOSS from day 2–15 (−1.71 vs. −1.37 [baseline values not reported], respectively; difference = 0.34: p = 0.02) but, within the components of TOSS, MF failed to differentiate from placebo in reducing eye redness59,60.
On page 2033, column 1, third paragraph, four studies rather than three studies showed positive results. The correct text should read: Four studies, two evaluating non-nasal symptom scores and two evaluating TOSS, provide evidence supporting the effectiveness of MF compared with placebo in treating ocular symptoms of AR. All four studies investigated MF 200 mg once daily in a combined study population of 1577 patients49,56,57,59–61.
On page 2033, column 2, end of first full paragraph, the following text should be added: Furthermore, a recent prospectively designed study (Study P05106, n = 429) that investigated the effects of MF 200 mg once daily on ocular symptoms as a co-primary endpoint also showed positive results. The severity of ocular symptoms in this study was confirmed, with patients included only if they had a baseline TOSS of ≥4. In this study, MF 200 mg once daily was shown to be superior to placebo in LS mean change in AM iTOSS from day 2–15 (−1.71 vs. −1.37 [baseline values not reported], respectively; difference = 0.34: p = 0.02)59,60.
Figure 1, page 2034, the bars for MF should read 36% on the clinical benefit/positive scale and 64% on the inconclusive/negative scale.
It was incorrectly stated that a baseline TOSS score was not an enrolment criteria in one MF study, requiring the following text changes:
On page 2032, column 2, paragraph 3, the final sentence should read: TOSS was assessed in three trials58–61, and was a primary endpoint in two of these58–60, with a TOSS of ≥ 4 required for entry in these two trials58–60.
On page 2033, column 1, paragraph 1, the phrase “although baseline ocular scores were not a requirement for inclusion in this trial” should be deleted so that the text should read: One study was conducted in an allergen exposure unit48, four studies assessed ocular symptoms as a component of non-nasal symptom score48,52–54, and one prospectively designed trial assessed the effect of active treatment on AM iTOSS as a co-primary endpoint58.