Aim: This study assessed multiple doses of flurbiprofen 8.75 mg lozenges for the relief of three prominent symptoms of acute pharyngitis: pain intensity (primary end point), difficulty swallowing and swollen throat. Patients & methods: A total of 204 patients (102 in each group) with confirmed pharyngitis (onset ≤4 days) were randomly assigned to take up to five flurbiprofen or placebo lozenges every 3–6 h, for 7 days. Using validated rating scales (sore throat pain intensity, difficulty swallowing and swollen throat) patients rated their symptoms for the duration of the study. Results: Over the first 24 h, patients treated with flurbiprofen lozenges reported significantly greater reductions in sore throat pain (47%) as well as difficulty swallowing (66%) and swollen throat (40%) compared with placebo (all p < 0.05). Conclusion: Multiple doses of flurbiprofen lozenges provide effective relief of sore throat pain intensity as well as difficulty swallowing and swollen throat.

Keywords:

Papers of special note have been highlighted as: • of interest; •• of considerable interest

References

1 Marshall S. Giving advice on sore throats. Pharm. J. 280, 127–130 (2008).
Google Scholar
2 Schachtel BP, Fillingim JM, Beiter DJ, Lane AC, Schwartz LA. Subjective and objective features of sore throat. Arch. Intern. Med. 144(3), 497–500 (1984). •• One of the first publications to describe the qualitative features of sore throat.
Medline CASGoogle Scholar
3 Schachtel B, Aspley S, Berry P et al. Chief complaint: the therapeutogenic stimulus as the primary, individualized endpoint in clinical trials. J. Pain 13(4), S6 (2012).
Google Scholar
4 Spinks A, Glasziou PP, Del Mar CB. Antibiotics for sore throat. Cochrane Database Syst. Rev. 11, CD000023 (2013). • Review article on the use of antibiotics for sore throat.
Google Scholar
5 Addey D, Shephard A. Incidence, causes, severity and treatment of throat discomfort: a four-region online questionnaire survey. BMC Ear Nose Throat Disord. 12, 9 (2012).
MedlineGoogle Scholar
6 Shulman ST, Bisno AL, Clegg HW et al. Clinical practice guideline for the diagnosis and management of group A streptococcal pharyngitis: 2012 update by the Infectious Diseases Society of America. Clin. Infect. Dis. 55(10), 1279–1282 (2012). • Current guidelines for the management of sore throat.
Medline CASGoogle Scholar
7 Chiappini E, Regoli M, Bonsignori F et al. Analysis of different recommendations from international guidelines for the management of acute pharyngitis in adults and children. Clin. Ther. 33(1), 48–58 (2011). • Current guidelines for the management of sore throat.
MedlineGoogle Scholar
8 Global Respiratory Infection Partnership. www.grip-initiative.org.
Google Scholar
9 van der Velden A, Duerden MG, Bell J et al. Prescriber and patient responsibilities in treatment of acute respiratory tract infections – essential for conservation of antibiotics. Antibiotics 2(2), 316–327 (2013).
CASGoogle Scholar
10 van Driel ML, De Sutter A, Deveugele M et al. Are sore throat patients who hope for antibiotics actually asking for pain relief? Ann. Fam. Med. 4(6), 494–499 (2006). •• Study describing the concerns of patients with sore throat and the importance they attach to an antibiotic.
MedlineGoogle Scholar
11 Eccles R. Mechanisms of symptoms of the common cold and influenza. Br. J. Hosp. Med. (Lond.) 68(2), 71–75 (2007).
MedlineGoogle Scholar
12 Buchanan WW, Kassam YB. European experience with flurbiprofen. A new analgesic/anti-inflammatory agent. Am. J. Med. 80(3A), 145–152 (1986).
Medline CASGoogle Scholar
13 Sefia E, Mann A, Lambkin R et al. Flurbiprofen lozenges rapidly reduce levels of prostaglandin E in human respiratory cells in vitro. Abstract presented at the Annual Scientific Meeting of the British Pain Society, Glasgow, UK, 24–27 April 2007.
Google Scholar
14 Schachtel BP, Homan HD, Gibb IA, Christian J. Demonstration of dose response of flurbiprofen lozenges with the sore throat pain model. Clin. Pharmacol. Ther. 71(5), 375–380 (2002). •• Study which investigated flurbiprofen lozenges at different doses for sore throat.
Medline CASGoogle Scholar
15 Watson N, Nimmo WS, Christian J, Charlesworth A, Speight J, Miller K. Relief of sore throat with the anti-inflammatory throat lozenge flurbiprofen 8.75 mg: a randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled study of efficacy and safety. Int. J. Clin. Pract. 54(8), 490–496 (2000).
Medline CASGoogle Scholar
16 NICE. Non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs. ISBN: 978-1-4731-0946-9. www.nice.org.uk/advice/ktt13/resources/nonsteroidal-antiinflammatory-drugs-58757951055301.
Google Scholar
17 Benrimoj SI, Langford JH, Christian J, Charlesworth A, Steans A. Efficacy and tolerability of the anti-inflammatory throat lozenge flurbiprofen 8.75 mg in the treatment of sore throat: a randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled study. Clin. Drug Invest. 21(3), 183–193 (2001).
Medline CASGoogle Scholar
18 Blagden M, Christian J, Miller K, Charlesworth A. Multidose flurbiprofen 8.75 mg lozenges in the treatment of sore throat: a randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled study in UK general practice centres. Int. J. Clin. Pract. 56(2), 95–100 (2002).
Medline CASGoogle Scholar
19 Aspley S, Schachtel B, Berry P et al. Treatment of odynophagia and dysphagia by flurbiprofen 8.75 mg lozenges. Pain Res. Manag. 17(3), 203 (2012).
Google Scholar
20 Schachtel B, Aspley S, Berry P et al. Efficacy and duration of flurbiprofen 8.75 mg lozenge. Clin. Pharmacol. Drug. Dev. 1, 194 (2012).
Google Scholar
21 Schachtel B, Aspley S, Shephard A et al. Onset of action of a lozenge containing flurbiprofen 8.75 mg: a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial with a new method for measuring onset of analgesic activity. Pain 155(2), 422–428 (2014). •• Study demonstrating the onset of action of flurbiprofen 8.75 mg lozenges.
Medline CASGoogle Scholar
22 Shephard A, Smith G, Aspley S, Schachtel BP. Randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled studies on flurbiprofen 8.75 mg lozenges in patients with/without group A or C streptococcal throat infection, with an assessment of clinicians’ prediction of ‘strep throat’. Int. J. Clin. Pract. 69(1), 59–71 (2015). •• Study demonstrating the use of flurbiprofen lozenge for treating symptoms in patients with strep throat.
Medline CASGoogle Scholar
23 Aspley S, Shephard A, Schachtel E, Sanner K, Savino L, Schachtel B. Efficacy of flurbiprofen 8.75 mg lozenge in patients with a swollen and inflamed sore throat. Curr. Med. Res. Opin. 18, 1–10 (2016).
Google Scholar
24 Schachtel BP, Pan S, Kohles JD, Sanner KM, Schachtel EP, Bey M. Utility and sensitivity of the sore throat pain model: results of a randomized controlled trial on the COX-2 selective inhibitor valdecoxib. J. Clin. Pharmacol. 47(7), 860–870 (2007).
Medline CASGoogle Scholar
25 Schachtel BP, McCabe D, Berger M et al. Efficacy of low-dose celecoxib in patients with acute pain. J. Pain 12(7), 756–763 (2011).
Medline CASGoogle Scholar
26 Schachtel B, Aspley S, Shephard A, Shea T, Smith G, Schachtel E. Utility of the sore throat pain model in a multiple-dose assessment of the acute analgesic flurbiprofen: a randomized controlled study. Trials 15, 263 (2014).
MedlineGoogle Scholar
27 Schachtel BP, Fillingim JM, Beiter DJ, Lane AC, Schwartz LA. Rating scales for analgesics in sore throat. Clin. Pharmacol. Ther. 36(2), 151–156 (1984). •• The first publication describing the sore throat pain model.
Medline CASGoogle Scholar
28 Schachtel BP. Sore throat pain. In: Advances in Pain Research and Therapy (Volume 18). Max MB, Portnoy RK, Laska EM (Eds). Raven Press, NY, USA, 393–406 (1991).
Google Scholar
29 Atkinson MJ, Kumar R, Cappelleri JC, Hass SL. Hierarchical construct validity of the Treatment Satisfaction Questionnaire for Medicine (TSQM version 2) among outpatient pharmacy consumers. Value Health 8(Suppl. 1), S9–S24 (2005).
MedlineGoogle Scholar
30 Farrar JT, Young JP Jr, LaMoreaux L, Werth JL, Poole RM. Clinical importance of changes in chronic pain intensity measured on an 11-point numerical pain rating scale. Pain 94(2), 149–158 (2001).
Medline CASGoogle Scholar

Vol. 6, No. 6

Metrics

Downloaded 153 times

History

Published online 29 June 2016

Published in print November 2016

Information

Keywords

Acknowledgements

The authors would like to thank Gary Smith for his role in the initial analysis and interpretation of the data, and for his help in drafting the original submitted version of the manuscript. The authors would also like to thank Antonio Cagnazzo for his further analysis and interpretation of the data.

Financial & competing interests disclosure

A Shephard, T Shea and S Aspley are employees of Reckitt Benckiser Healthcare International Ltd. BP Schachtel and E Schachtel received an investigational grant from Reckitt Benckiser Healthcare International Ltd to design and conduct this study with K Sanner and L Savino. The authors have no other relevant affiliations or financial involvement with any organization or entity with a financial interest in or financial conflict with the subject matter or materials discussed in the manuscript apart from those disclosed.

Medical writing assistance was provided by Hannah Chatfield (Elements Communications Ltd, UK) and funded by Reckitt Benckiser Healthcare International Ltd.

Ethical conduct of research

Ethical approval for this study was obtained from the university's Institutional Review Board (IRB) and was conducted in accordance with Good Clinical Practice and the Declaration of Helsinki (South Africa, 1996), as referenced in the EU Directive 2001/20/EC. This study also complied with the Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) of the US FDA and was registered on the clinicaltrials.gov registry (NCT01049334). As approved by the IRB, all patients provided written informed consent prior to the study and received financial compensation for their time and any inconvenience. Trial registration: clinicaltrials.gov registry NCT01049334.

PDF download