List of Excipients in Branded Drug GOOD SENSE 24 HOUR ALLERGY NASAL

« Back to Dashboard

Generic Drugs Containing GOOD SENSE 24 HOUR ALLERGY NASAL

Company	Ingredient	NDC	Excipient
L Perrigo Company	fluticasone propionate	0113-0028	BENZALKONIUM CHLORIDE
L Perrigo Company	fluticasone propionate	0113-0028	CARBOXYMETHYLCELLULOSE SODIUM
L Perrigo Company	fluticasone propionate	0113-0028	CELLULOSE, MICROCRYSTALLINE
L Perrigo Company	fluticasone propionate	0113-0028	DEXTROSE
L Perrigo Company	fluticasone propionate	0113-0028	PHENYLETHYL ALCOHOL
L Perrigo Company	fluticasone propionate	0113-0028	POLYSORBATE 80
L Perrigo Company	fluticasone propionate	0113-0028	WATER

What are the Most Frequently-Used Excipients in GOOD SENSE 24 HOUR ALLERGY NASAL?

# Of NDCs	Excipient
4	BENZALKONIUM CHLORIDE
4	CARBOXYMETHYLCELLULOSE SODIUM
4	CELLULOSE, MICROCRYSTALLINE
4	DEXTROSE
4	PHENYLETHYL ALCOHOL
4	POLYSORBATE 80
4	WATER

Good Sense 24 Hour Allergy Nasal: Excipient Strategy and Commercial Opportunities

Last updated: August 9, 2026

Good Sense 24 Hour Allergy Nasal is an over-the-counter fluticasone propionate nasal spray used for temporary relief of allergy symptoms. Its commercial opportunity is primarily in private-label pricing, device performance, preservative positioning, package optimization, and line extensions rather than in new-molecule patent protection. The product is subject to the FDA’s over-the-counter nasal-allergy framework and competes with Flonase Allergy Relief, store-brand fluticasone products, and other intranasal corticosteroids.[1][2]

What is Good Sense 24 Hour Allergy Nasal?

Good Sense 24 Hour Allergy Nasal contains fluticasone propionate, a corticosteroid administered intranasally for allergic rhinitis. The standard product delivers 50 micrograms per spray and is marketed for once-daily use.[1]

Attribute	Product position
Brand	Good Sense 24 Hour Allergy Nasal
Active ingredient	Fluticasone propionate
Dosage form	Metered-dose nasal spray
Strength	50 mcg per spray
Route	Intranasal
Primary indication	Temporarily relieves symptoms of hay fever or other respiratory allergies
Main symptoms	Nasal congestion, sneezing, runny nose, itchy nose
Regulatory pathway	OTC drug product
Reference-brand competitor	Flonase Allergy Relief
Primary commercial model	Retail and private-label OTC
Biosimilar exposure	None

The product’s therapeutic differentiation is limited because fluticasone propionate nasal spray is a mature, widely available active ingredient. The principal value drivers are manufacturing cost, dose consistency, spray feel, formulation tolerability, packaging, retail placement, and consumer trust.

What excipients are used in Good Sense 24 Hour Allergy Nasal?

The labeled formulation uses a conventional aqueous suspension system designed to keep poorly water-soluble fluticasone propionate uniformly dispersed and deliver a reproducible spray dose.[1]

Excipient	Functional role	Commercial significance
Microcrystalline cellulose	Suspending and rheology-control agent	Maintains particle suspension and supports dose uniformity
Carboxymethylcellulose sodium	Suspending, thickening, and viscosity-control agent	Controls settling and spray delivery
Dextrose	Tonicity and formulation-support agent	Supports nasal tolerability and product robustness
Benzalkonium chloride	Preservative	Controls microbial growth in the multidose container
Polysorbate 80	Wetting and dispersing agent	Improves dispersion of fluticasone particles
Phenylethyl alcohol	Preservative and formulation-support agent	Contributes to microbial control and product stability
Purified water	Vehicle	Provides the aqueous continuous phase

The formulation is not a simple solution. It is a suspension in which excipient selection affects particle dispersion, viscosity, sedimentation, pump compatibility, plume geometry, and delivered dose.

Why microcrystalline cellulose and carboxymethylcellulose matter

The cellulose combination is central to product performance. Microcrystalline cellulose provides a structured suspension matrix, while carboxymethylcellulose sodium contributes viscosity and stabilizes the dispersed drug particles. Excessive viscosity can reduce sprayability, increase priming requirements, or produce a less acceptable plume. Insufficient viscosity can cause rapid settling and dose variability.

A manufacturer considering an alternative excipient system would need to demonstrate:

• Uniformity of delivered dose through the labeled container life.
• Consistent spray content after storage and handling.
• Acceptable sedimentation and redispersion behavior.
• Reliable pump actuation at beginning, middle, and end of container use.
• Compatibility with the drug particle-size distribution.
• Stability under temperature and humidity stress.
• No unacceptable increase in nasal irritation.

The excipient system therefore creates a technical barrier, even though it is unlikely to create durable composition-of-matter exclusivity.

Why benzalkonium chloride creates a commercial choice

Benzalkonium chloride is widely used in multidose nasal sprays, but some consumers and healthcare professionals prefer preservative-free products because of concerns about local irritation or chronic exposure. The presence of benzalkonium chloride gives manufacturers two possible commercial strategies:

1. Retain the conventional preserved multidose format and compete on price.
2. Develop a preservative-free presentation using a unit-dose container, a one-way valve, a protected pump, or another microbiologically controlled delivery system.

A preservative-free version would require more than removing benzalkonium chloride. The container-closure system, pump design, microbiological controls, in-use stability, and manufacturing process would all need to support the proposed shelf life and usage pattern. That strategy can command a price premium but increases packaging cost and technical complexity.

What excipient strategies can differentiate a fluticasone nasal spray?

The strongest formulation opportunities are incremental. They involve tolerability, suspension stability, delivery performance, and packaging rather than a new pharmacologic mechanism.

1. Preservative-free formulation

A preservative-free fluticasone spray could target:

• Frequent users.
• Consumers with nasal sensitivity.
• Pediatric and family segments, subject to labeling and regulatory support.
• Patients who prefer preservative-free products.
• Specialty retailers and pharmacy channels.

The commercial challenge is cost. A standard multidose pump with a preservative is less expensive than a microbiologically protected preservative-free system. The product would also need a clear consumer benefit because fluticasone efficacy is already familiar.

2. Lower-irritation excipient system

A reformulated product could evaluate alternative preservatives, lower preservative concentrations, or excipients selected to reduce burning, dryness, or unpleasant taste. Any change would require comparative quality and tolerability work.

Potential development variables include:

• Osmolality.
• pH.
• Viscosity.
• Surfactant concentration.
• Preservative concentration.
• Alcohol content.
• Spray droplet-size distribution.
• Nasal deposition.
• Postnasal drip and throat sensation.

The best commercial claim would be narrow and substantiated, such as a more comfortable spray or a lower-irritation formulation. Broad superiority claims would be difficult to support without controlled clinical data.

3. Improved suspension robustness

Suspension stability can be improved through control of:

• Fluticasone particle size and morphology.
• Cellulose polymer grade.
• Polymer concentration.
• Wetting-agent level.
• Mixing sequence.
• Homogenization conditions.
• Fill-volume accuracy.
• Pump and actuator geometry.

A robust formulation can reduce batch failures, improve content uniformity, and reduce the risk of underdelivery after extended storage. This is valuable even without a consumer-facing claim because it can lower manufacturing waste and quality-control costs.

4. Better spray-device performance

The pump is part of the product’s commercial identity. Relevant attributes include:

• Actuation force.
• Spray plume width.
• Droplet-size distribution.
• Priming and repriming behavior.
• Residual volume.
• Tip design.
• Cap fit.
• Dose counter availability.
• Ease of use for children and older adults.

A device with a more consistent plume or easier actuation can support a differentiated user experience. Device changes may also create separate intellectual-property opportunities, including pump architecture, actuator design, dose counting, and container-closure systems.

5. Reduced postnasal drip and taste

Consumers often judge nasal sprays by sensory experience rather than efficacy alone. Formulation and device variables that may affect taste include:

• Droplet size.
• Spray angle.
• Delivered volume.
• Nasal deposition.
• Excipient selection.
• Spray velocity.
• Residual drainage into the throat.

A less noticeable taste or lower throat sensation could improve repeat purchasing. These benefits require human sensory testing and cannot be assumed from excipient substitution alone.

What patents protect Good Sense 24 Hour Allergy Nasal?

No publicly visible product-specific patent estate is apparent from the OTC product positioning and labeled formulation. Fluticasone propionate is a mature active ingredient, and the commercial product is not marketed as a new chemical entity.

IP category	Relevance to Good Sense 24 Hour Allergy Nasal
Active-ingredient patent	Not a current commercial barrier for a mature fluticasone product
New chemical entity exclusivity	Not applicable
Formulation patent	Possible for a particular excipient ratio or stability profile, but not established from the public label
Device patent	Possible for pump, actuator, valve, or dose-counter architecture
Method-of-use patent	Limited commercial relevance in an OTC allergic-rhinitis product
Manufacturing patent	Possible for suspension processing, particle engineering, or filling
Trademark	Good Sense brand protection may apply
Trade secret	Likely relevant to process parameters and quality controls

A formulation patent would need more than a list of conventional excipients. Patentable scope could arise from a defined concentration range, particle-size distribution, stability result, preservative-free container system, or unexpected tolerability advantage. Routine substitution among common nasal-spray excipients would face substantial obviousness risk.

When does Good Sense 24 Hour Allergy Nasal lose exclusivity?

Good Sense 24 Hour Allergy Nasal does not have a conventional branded-drug exclusivity timeline comparable to a newly approved prescription product. The product competes in the OTC market, where FDA monograph compliance can provide a regulatory pathway without product-specific new-drug exclusivity.[2]

The commercial exclusivity profile is therefore:

• No meaningful new chemical entity exclusivity.
• No expected biosimilar exclusivity.
• Limited value from Orange Book-listed patents.
• Competition based on formulation, manufacturing, distribution, brand, and price.
• Potential protection from private-label contracts and retailer relationships.

Fluticasone propionate nasal spray was previously associated with prescription and later OTC products, but the commercial market now includes multiple generic and store-brand equivalents. A new entrant can generally compete if it satisfies the applicable FDA requirements and establishes an acceptable product and manufacturing system.

What is the Orange Book status of Good Sense 24 Hour Allergy Nasal?

Good Sense 24 Hour Allergy Nasal is an OTC product rather than a conventional prescription product with an Orange Book patent-certification strategy. The Orange Book is therefore not the primary commercial tool for assessing its competitive position.[3]

A competitor evaluating market entry should focus on:

• FDA OTC monograph requirements.
• Product listing and labeling.
• Drug Master File and manufacturing controls where applicable.
• Abbreviated or other FDA submission requirements if the formulation falls outside the monograph pathway.
• Patent claims covering the specific formulation or device.
• Trademark and trade-dress risks.
• Retailer and private-label supply agreements.

Are Paragraph IV challenges relevant?

Paragraph IV litigation is generally not the central pathway for challenging this type of OTC store-brand product. A Paragraph IV notice is directed to listed patents associated with an abbreviated new drug application. A manufacturer pursuing a new fluticasone nasal product must instead determine whether it is relying on an OTC monograph, an approved reference product, or a different FDA pathway.

If a competitor obtains approval through an NDA or ANDA and relies on listed patents, Paragraph IV issues could arise. That analysis would be product-specific. The public commercial profile of Good Sense does not indicate that Paragraph IV litigation is the main entry risk.

What manufacturing and IP barriers affect commercial entry?

The principal barriers are technical execution and scale.

Suspension manufacturing

Fluticasone propionate has low aqueous solubility, so manufacturing must control particle dispersion and suspension uniformity. Critical process parameters can include:

• Drug particle deagglomeration.
• Polymer hydration.
• Order of excipient addition.
• Shear rate and mixing time.
• Bulk hold time.
• Temperature control.
• Homogeneity before filling.
• Fill-line recirculation.
• Pump and bottle compatibility.

A weak process can produce variable delivered dose even when the nominal formulation matches a competitor’s label.

Analytical testing

A commercial developer would need validated methods for:

• Assay.
• Delivered-dose uniformity.
• Spray content uniformity.
• Related substances.
• Preservative content.
• Particle-size distribution.
• Microbial limits.
• Spray pattern.
• Plume geometry.
• Priming and repriming.
• Container-closure integrity.

These tests create a higher barrier than the ingredient list suggests.

Device and supply-chain risk

The pump, bottle, actuator, and cap must be sourced at large volume with consistent tolerances. A change in pump supplier can alter spray performance and may require comparability work. Component shortages can also affect private-label margins because the device may represent a significant portion of total cost of goods.

Which companies are challenging the Good Sense commercial position?

The competitive set includes branded and generic intranasal corticosteroid suppliers rather than companies pursuing a single patent challenge against Good Sense.

Competitor category	Examples	Competitive basis
Branded fluticasone	Flonase Allergy Relief	Brand recognition, consumer advertising, retail placement
Store-brand fluticasone	Retailer-specific generics	Low price and private-label distribution
Other OTC corticosteroids	Nasacort Allergy 24HR, Rhinocort Allergy	Active ingredient differentiation
Prescription nasal steroids	Various generic products	Prescriber channel and insurance access
Saline and nonsteroidal sprays	Saline products and antihistamine sprays	Tolerability, immediate sensory appeal, alternative mechanism

The most direct threat is a lower-cost fluticasone product with comparable spray performance. The strongest non-price threat is another OTC nasal corticosteroid with better consumer recognition or a perceived tolerability advantage.

How does Good Sense compare with competing nasal allergy products?

Factor	Good Sense fluticasone	Flonase Allergy Relief	Nasacort Allergy 24HR	Saline spray
Drug class	Intranasal corticosteroid	Intranasal corticosteroid	Intranasal corticosteroid	Mechanical cleansing and moisturization
Main differentiation	Value pricing	Brand and distribution	Different active ingredient	Preservative and drug-free positioning
Once-daily positioning	Yes	Yes	Yes	Depends on product
Prescription-to-OTC heritage	Yes	Yes	Yes	Not applicable
Formulation opportunity	Preservative-free, sensory, device	Brand extensions and device	Formulation and retail positioning	Moisturization and packaging
Patent-based barrier	Low to moderate, formulation dependent	Potentially higher at product level	Product-specific	Usually low
Price sensitivity	High	Lower	Mid-range	High

Good Sense can win where consumers or retailers prioritize price and where the product matches the reference brand’s basic user experience. It is less differentiated in channels that reward branded advertising, premium packaging, or specialist recommendations.

What commercial opportunities exist for Good Sense excipient strategy?

Private-label portfolio expansion

A supplier can use the same active ingredient platform to offer:

• Standard preserved fluticasone.
• Preservative-free fluticasone.
• Pediatric-oriented packaging, subject to labeling requirements.
• Twin packs for seasonal demand.
• Family-size or multi-unit configurations.
• Club-store packaging.
• Travel-size formats where permitted.
• Retailer-exclusive presentations.

The value lies in using common bulk formulation and manufacturing assets while changing packaging and channel strategy.

Premium preservative-free positioning

A preservative-free product can support a higher retail price if the delivery system is credible and the benefit is communicated clearly. The premium must offset higher costs for specialized pumps, microbial controls, packaging, and validation.

Sustainability and packaging

Commercial development can target:

• Lower-plastic bottles.
• Recyclable secondary packaging.
• Reduced package size.
• Lower residual drug volume.
• More efficient shipping configurations.
• Refillable or modular components, if compatible with FDA requirements.

Sustainability claims require substantiation, but packaging reduction can produce direct logistics savings.

International expansion

Geographic expansion depends on country-specific rules for fluticasone, OTC availability, labeling, preservative use, and device registration. The formulation may need modification for:

• Different preservative limits.
• Local excipient acceptability.
• Bilingual or multilingual labeling.
• Climate-zone stability.
• Country-specific medical-device requirements.
• Different age indications.

A common global formulation lowers development cost, but local regulatory and packaging requirements can limit standardization.

What revenue exposure does the product create?

Good Sense revenue is exposed to the seasonal nature of allergic rhinitis, retailer purchasing cycles, private-label pricing pressure, and substitution by other OTC nasal steroids. The product has no public basis for a large, product-specific patent premium.

Key revenue drivers include:

• Spring and fall allergy seasons.
• Retailer shelf placement.
• Store-brand penetration.
• Price gaps versus Flonase.
• Promotional frequency.
• Stock availability.
• Consumer repeat use.
• Pharmacy and club-store distribution.
• Cost of the pump and bottle system.

A low-cost formulation can improve gross margin, but an excipient change that worsens spray feel or dose consistency can increase returns and damage retailer relationships. The highest-value development work is therefore likely to be a combination of formulation robustness, device performance, and targeted premium packaging.

Key Takeaways

• Good Sense 24 Hour Allergy Nasal is an OTC fluticasone propionate nasal spray positioned mainly on value and distribution.
• Its conventional excipients support suspension stability, preservation, nasal tolerability, and dose delivery.
• The leading formulation opportunity is a preservative-free product with a microbiologically controlled device.
• Secondary opportunities include lower-irritation excipients, improved taste, better plume geometry, and dose-counting packaging.
• Active-ingredient exclusivity is not the main barrier. Formulation, device, manufacturing, trademark, and retailer-contract rights are more relevant.
• Paragraph IV litigation and biosimilar competition are not the primary risks for this OTC product.
• Commercial success depends on delivered-dose consistency, pump performance, retailer economics, and consumer acceptance.
• A competitive entrant should prioritize excipient-device compatibility and manufacturing robustness over broad patent claims based only on conventional ingredient substitutions.

FAQs

Can benzalkonium chloride be removed from Good Sense nasal spray?

Yes, but removal would require a redesigned microbiological control strategy. A preservative-free multidose product would need an appropriate container-closure and pump system, in-use stability data, and FDA-compliant manufacturing controls.

Is fluticasone propionate nasal spray protected by a formulation patent?

The active ingredient is mature, but particular formulations, particle-size distributions, device systems, or manufacturing processes could be patentable. Patent strength would depend on claim scope, priority dates, validity, and evidence of unexpected performance.

Which excipient is most important for fluticasone nasal-spray stability?

The cellulose suspension system is central because microcrystalline cellulose and carboxymethylcellulose sodium help maintain drug dispersion and dose uniformity. Polysorbate 80 also contributes to wetting and dispersion.

Can a retailer launch a cheaper fluticasone nasal spray using the same excipients?

Potentially, provided the product complies with the applicable FDA pathway, manufacturing requirements, labeling rules, quality specifications, and any enforceable formulation, device, trademark, or contractual rights.

Does Good Sense have biosimilar competition?

No. Biosimilar regulation applies to biological products. Fluticasone propionate is a small-molecule corticosteroid, so competition arises from generic and OTC products rather than biosimilars.

References

1. DailyMed. (n.d.). Good Sense 24 Hour Allergy, fluticasone propionate nasal spray, metered. U.S. National Library of Medicine. https://dailymed.nlm.nih.gov/

2. U.S. Food and Drug Administration. (n.d.). Over-the-counter monograph M012: Allergy alert, nasal decongestant, and nasal corticosteroid drug products. https://www.fda.gov/

3. U.S. Food and Drug Administration. (2024). Approved drug products with therapeutic equivalence evaluations, Orange Book. https://www.fda.gov/drugs/drug-approvals-and-databases/approved-drug-products-therapeutic-equivalence-evaluations-orange-book