Jens Umlauf

Mr. Jens Umlauf


Research Focus & Metrics

Academic Career Length

1Year (2026-Present)

(Calculated once Scilit publication data is synced: current year − year of first publication + 1)

Representative Publications

View All Publications
15 October 2026 in Preprints.org
Verified
Preprint
Open access
PDF file
Ralph MösgesRalph Mösges
Ralph Mösges
HVHanna Christina Verfürth
Hanna Christina Verfürth
JUJens Umlauf
Jens Umlauf
ECEdmund Curtius
Edmund Curtius
JBJulia Blankartz
Julia Blankartz
ARAnna Rybachuk
Anna Rybachuk
Background/Objectives: Drug-free nasal formulations may provide an alternative or adjunct to pharmacological treatment in patients with allergic rhinitis. This study in-vestigated the clinical performance, tolerability, and safety of a hypertonic nasal spray containing hydroxypropyl-β-cyclodextrin (BDNS) compared with 0.9% isotonic saline in adults with pollen-induced allergic rhinitis. Methods: This prospective, randomised, double-blind, controlled, two-period crossover study included 32 adults with pollen-induced allergic rhinitis. Participants were randomised 1:1 to receive BDNS followed by isotonic saline or the reverse sequence, with each treatment administered for 7 days. The primary endpoint was the mean Lebel Symptom Score following standard-ised nasal allergen provocation testing after each treatment period. Secondary out-comes included individual symptom scores, peak nasal inspiratory flow, nasal sensory tolerability, treatment satisfaction and preference, and safety. The primary analysis was conducted in the per-protocol set using a linear mixed-effects model. Results: All 32 randomised participants completed the study, and 30 were included in the per-protocol set. The adjusted least-squares mean Lebel Symptom Score was 3.33 after BDNS and 4.30 after isotonic saline. BDNS met the prespecified criterion for non-inferiority and subsequently demonstrated superiority over isotonic saline, with a mean treatment difference of −0.97 points in the per-protocol population (p = 0.026). The analysis in the randomised set yielded consistent findings (mean difference, −0.87 points; p = 0.033). Treatment satisfaction was significantly higher with BDNS for both perceived effectiveness (difference, 0.69; p = 0.007) and tolerability (difference, 0.81; p < 0.001). Overall, 75% of participants preferred BDNS. No serious treatment-emergent adverse events or serious adverse device effects occurred, and no device deficiencies were reported. Conclusions: In adults with pollen-induced allergic rhinitis, BDNS was non-inferior and, following hierarchical testing, superior to 0.9% isotonic saline with respect to post-provocation symptom severity after 7 days of treatment. BDNS was well tolerated and was associated with greater participant satisfaction and a clear treatment preference. These findings support the favourable short-term clinical per-formance and acceptability of BDNS under controlled allergen-challenge conditions.