Clinical Research Directory

Inhaled vs Intranasal Corticosteroids for Chronic Cough in Upper Airway Cough Syndrome

Chronic cough - a cough lasting eight weeks or longer - is one of the most common reasons people see a lung specialist. It can disturb sleep, make conversation difficult, and reduce quality of life. In many people, chronic cough occurs together with nose and sinus symptoms such as a blocked or runny nose, mucus dripping down the back of the throat, facial pain, or a reduced sense of smell. This combination is often called upper airway cough syndrome. Doctors commonly treat it with a steroid medicine given either as an inhaler breathed into the lungs or as a spray into the nose. Both are approved, widely used medicines, and treatment guidelines mention both. However, no study has directly compared the two to see whether one relieves cough better than the other, so doctors have little evidence to guide the choice. This study compares the two treatments directly in adults who have chronic cough together with nose or sinus symptoms. Participants are assigned by chance, like flipping a coin, to one of two groups: an inhaled steroid (budesonide), breathed in twice a day, or a steroid nasal spray (mometasone furoate), sprayed into each nostril twice a day. Participants use their assigned treatment for 4 weeks and then return to the clinic. At each visit they rate how severe their cough is by marking a line on a 100-millimetre scale, and they fill in a questionnaire about how the cough affects their daily life. Participants whose cough has cleared up after 4 weeks finish the study at that point. Those whose cough has not cleared up continue for another 4 weeks: people in the inhaler group carry on with the same inhaler, while people in the nasal spray group continue the spray and also start the inhaler. Everyone who continues returns for a final visit at 8 weeks. The main question is whether the inhaled steroid reduces cough severity more than the nasal spray after 4 weeks of treatment. The study also looks at cough-related quality of life, and at what happens after treatment is adjusted at 4 weeks. The study takes place at a single outpatient lung clinic in Katowice, Poland. Both medicines are given at their usual approved doses, and participants are otherwise cared for as in routine practice.

NEUROMARK Registry Study

The NEUROMARK Registry Study is a prospective, multicenter, single-arm, post-market, interventional registry study to collect real-world evidence of the NEUROMARK System in subjects with chronic rhinitis.

A Randomized Controlled Trial Comparing Posterior Nasal Nerve Ablation Procedures for Chronic Rhinitis

The goal of this clinical trial is to learn which procedural intervention most effectively reduces symptoms of chronic rhinitis (non-allergic rhinitis) in adult patients (18 years and older). The main questions it aims to answer are: * Which procedural intervention leads to the greatest reduction in total nasal symptom scores (TNSS)? * Which procedural intervention leads to the greatest improvement in sinonasal quality of life as measured by the SNOT-22? Researchers will compare radiofrequency ablation (RhinAer or Neuromark) and cryotherapy (ClariFix) to see if there are differences in symptom reduction and durability of response across treatments. Participants will: * Be randomly assigned to one of three FDA-cleared posterior nasal nerve ablation procedures (RhinAer, Neuromark, or ClariFix) * Complete validated symptom questionnaires (TNSS and SNOT-22) before and after their procedure * Have their relevant medical records reviewed (demographics, clinical history, prior rhinitis treatments)

Safety and Efficacy Study of the Neurent Medical NEUROMARK™ System in Subjects With Chronic Rhinitis (CLARITY)

The CLARITY Study is a prospective, single-arm, multicenter safety and efficacy study of the Neurent Medical NEUROMARK System in subjects with chronic rhinitis.

Clinical Evaluation of Safety and Efficacy for the NEUROMARK System in Subjects With Chronic Rhinitis (PARAGON)

The PARAGON Study is a prospective, single-arm, multicenter safety and efficacy study of the Neurent Medical NEUROMARK System in subjects with chronic rhinitis.

Traditional vs. Posterior Nasal Radiofrequency Ablation for Chronic Rhinitis

This study is a prospective, single-center, single-blinded randomized controlled trial designed to compare the clinical effectiveness of traditional radiofrequency ablation of the anterior inferior turbinate alone versus expanded radiofrequency ablation including the middle and posterior portions of the inferior turbinate (posterior nasal region). Patients with chronic rhinitis who remain symptomatic despite at least six months of medical therapy will be randomized in a 2:1 ratio to undergo extended posterior nasal ablation versus traditional anterior treatment. Symptom improvement will be evaluated using rTNSS and other validated questionnaires.

Evaluation of Pulsed Field Ablation of the Posterior Nasal Nerve for Chronic Rhinitis

Evaluation of safety, effectiveness and tolerability of the Aventix Medical Device used for the treatment of chronic rhinitis

A Study of RhinAer Stylus for Treating Chronic Rhinitis

Post-market study to continue to evaluate the effectiveness of the RhinAer Stylus for chronic rhinitis and the effect of treatment on inflammatory biomarkers.

Laser Posterior Nasal Nerve Neurolysis

This clinical trial aims to learn if laser posterior nasal nerve neurolysis can treat chronic rhinitis in adults. It will also learn about the safety of laser posterior nasal nerve neurolysis. The main questions it aims to answer are: 1. Does laser posterior nasal nerve neurolysis improve chronic rhinitis symptoms? 2. What side-effects or complications do participants have after laser posterior nasal nerve neurolysis? Researchers will compare laser posterior nasal nerve neurolysis to a placebo(a sham surgery with the same device and sound to see if laser posterior nasal nerve neurolysis works to treat chronic rhinitis. Participants will 1. Receive laser posterior nasal nerve neurolysis in the office as local anesthesia surgery. 2. Visit the clinic in the first week, first month, and 3rd months after the surgery. 3. Record their symptom scores before the surgery and during each follow-up visit.

Study on the Optimization of the Diagnostic Process for Chronic Rhinitis Using Nasal Allergen Provocation Test

Chronic rhinitis (CR) is one of the most prevalent global diseases, with studies estimating that up to 30% of the worldwide population is affected. In China, the prevalence of chronic rhinitis ranges from 10% to 40%, impacting over 300 million individuals. Although non-fatal, CR significantly disrupts daily work and academic performance, predisposes patients to respiratory comorbidities such as nasal polyps and asthma, and may induce systemic complications (e.g., secretory otitis media). Additionally, it detrimentally affects mental health, contributing to psychological disorders, substantial healthcare expenditures, and socioeconomic burdens. Clinically, CR is broadly classified into allergic rhinitis (AR) and non-allergic rhinitis (NAR) based on skin prick test (SPT) and/or serum-specific IgE results. However, real-world clinical complexity arises as a subset of patients exhibit AR symptoms despite negative test results (local allergic rhinitis), while others with confirmed AR evade detection via conventional methods. This challenges the traditional dichotomous classification, highlighting its growing inadequacy. Given divergent therapeutic strategies for CR subtypes, ambiguous classification frequently leads to ineffective clinical outcomes, necessitating a gold-standard diagnostic framework for precise phenotyping. The nasal allergen provocation test (NAPT), internationally recognized as the diagnostic gold standard for AR and local allergic rhinitis, directly applies allergens to nasal mucosa to elicit or exacerbate symptoms. Endorsed by global guidelines (e.g., ARIA, EPOS), NAPT has demonstrated safety through over a decade of clinical refinement. Despite its advantages, current protocols involve multi-dose allergen challenges at varying concentrations, rendering the procedure time-prohibitive and limiting clinical adoption. Developing a simplified, standardized provocation method is an urgent unmet need to expedite practical application.

Diagnostic Efficacy of CDA Nasal Provocation Test in Patients With IR

Chronic rhinitis is a common chronic nasal mucosal inflammatory disease. Its clinical symptoms and severity are diverse, mainly including allergic rhinitis, local allergic rhinitis, non-allergic rhinitis with hypereosinophilia syndrome and idiopathic rhinitis. All kinds of rhinitis have clinical symptoms such as nasal congestion, runny nose, sneezing, and nasal itching, but the causes are different. At present, the diagnosis of idiopathic rhinitis (IR) is based on detailed medical history and negative allergen test results, which is a diagnosis of exclusion. According to the position paper of the European Academy of Allergy and Clinical Immunology (EAACI), nasal hyperresponsiveness is an abnormal reaction of the nasal mucosa to stimuli that most people can tolerate. One of the distinguishing features of non-allergic rhinitis. cold dry air (CDA) nasal provocation test has been proved to be a good, safe and tolerable test for nasal hyperresponsiveness, with superior sensitivity and specificity. At present, there is still a lack of clear diagnostic criteria for IR. Therefore, optimizing CDA nasal provocation test, determining the diagnostic efficacy of CDA nasal provocation test with different parameters for IR, and initially constructing an IR diagnostic model can provide more comprehensive guidance for clinical diagnosis and treatment, which has important clinical significance.

Characteristic Transcriptomic, Proteomic and Metabolomic Molecular Studies of Nasal Secretions From Chronic Rhinitis

Chronic rhinitis is a common chronic nasal mucosal inflammatory disease. Its clinical symptoms and severity are diverse, mainly including allergic rhinitis, local allergic rhinitis, non-allergic rhinitis with hypereosinophilia syndrome and idiopathic rhinitis. All kinds of rhinitis have clinical symptoms such as nasal congestion, runny nose, sneezing, and nasal itching, but the causes are different. At present, the complicated diagnostic methods of different subtypes of chronic rhinitis are an important factor restricting the improvement of clinical diagnosis and treatment. Based on the found key markers of each subtype of chronic rhinitis, the establishment of a non-invasive classification diagnostic method of chronic rhinitis with nasal secretion as the core is of great practical significance for optimizing the existing clinical diagnosis system and improving the efficiency of clinical diagnosis

The Epidemiological and Intrinsic Characteristics of Chronic Rhinitis

Chronic rhinitis affects 10-40% of China's population, or over 300 million people, and can lead to respiratory and psychological issues. Despite treatment progress, 30% of patients have poor outcomes, likely due to the disease's complexity and a lack of new treatment targets. The incidence is rising, but there's a lack of nationwide studies on its variations. This study addresses this through a multicentric survey to create a national database on chronic rhinitis, including epidemiological, clinical, and biological data. The goal is to understand chronic rhinitis's causes and risks, improve treatments, and develop preventive strategies. The study will survey 30,000 patients across China, using questionnaires and nasal exams, and preserve biological samples in a biobank for detailed analysis. This will lay the groundwork for understanding the disease's mechanisms, developing new diagnostics, and tailoring prevention and treatment approaches for different forms of chronic rhinitis.

Efficacy of Azelastine and Mometasone Irrigation in Comparison to Nasal Sprays in Patients With Chronic Rhinitis

The goal of this clinical trial is to determine the best combination of drugs and drug delivery routes to treat surgically naive chronic rhinitis patients. The main question it aims to answer is: Do high volume, high pressure delivery mechanisms in nasal irrigation improve the efficacy of azelastine combined with nasal steroid mometasone as compared to the standard low pressure, low volume delivery mechanisms in nasal sprays? Subjects will complete six months of one of three medication regimens: 1. Saline irrigation followed by azelastine spray and mometasone spray 2. Mometasone saline irrigation 3. Azelastine saline irrigation combined with mometasone saline irrigation.