Network meta-analysis assesses nasal symptom improvements in allergic rhinitis with montelukast and antihistamines, suggesting better outcomes with combinations.
Background: Allergic rhinitis (AR) is an atopic condition affecting over 400 million people worldwide, impairing quality of life and often leading to complications such as asthma and sinusitis. Montelukast, a leukotriene receptor antagonist, is often used in combination with second-generation antihistamines (sgAHs) to enhance symptom control. However, the relative efficacy of different montelukast-sgAH combinations remains unclear. Objective: To evaluate and compare the efficacy of montelukast combined with various sgAHs versus montelukast monotherapy in patients with AR. Methods: Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing montelukast-sgAH combinations to montelukast alone were identified from 5 electronic databases up to 2025. Outcomes included Total Nasal Symptom Score (TNSS; 0–12), Daytime and Nighttime Nasal Symptom Scores (DNSS, NNSS; 0–3), and Rhinoconjunctivitis Quality of Life Questionnaire (RQLQ; 0–6). Risk of bias (RoB) was assessed using Cochrane RoB 2.0. A frequentist network meta-analysis with subgroup analysis and meta-regression was performed using RStudio and Jeffreys’s Amazing Statistics Program. Results: Seventeen RCTs involving 2,655 participants were included. For TNSS improvement, montelukast + desloratadine combination is significantly better than monotherapy in adults (mean difference [MD] = −0.92 [−1.15 to −0.69]) and children (MD = −1.95 [−3.46 to −0.44]). Effects on RQLQ and DNSS were inconsistent, while NNSS improved with montelukast-levocetirizine ( P = 0.0384). Heterogeneity was high, but most studies showed low risk of bias. No serious adverse events were reported. Conclusion: Montelukast-sgAH combinations may improve symptoms over monotherapy, especially with desloratadine in both adults and children. However, variability across outcomes and high heterogeneity warrant cautious interpretation and further research.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Wandana et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: