Other
-
Languagesgerman, english
Publications (27) View all
-
Article: An innovative Phase I population pharmacokinetic (PK) approach to investigate the PK of intranasal fentanyl spray (INFS) in healthy subjects.
[show abstract] [hide abstract]
ABSTRACT: Background: Intranasal Fentanyl Spray (INFS) was developed for the treatment of breakthrough pain (BTP) in cancer patients using a new route of administration. Dose strengths of 50, 100, and 200 μg INFS (Instanyl®) are currently on the market, however, some adult cancer patients with BTP may require higher doses up to 400 μg INFS. Objective: As pharmacokinetic (PK) samples from cancer patients with BTP are hard to obtain, PK of 400 μg INFS was investigated in healthy volunteers. Using prior knowledge from an available population PK (PopPK) model, a PK trial design was derived which aimed for short study duration and reduced trial costs without jeopardizing trial readout. Methods: Different trial designs to investigate the systemic exposure of 400 μg INFS were simulated using the available PopPK model. Parameters with strong influence on Cmax and AUC, i.e., clearance (CL), absorption rate constant (KA), central volume (V2) and bioavailability (F1), were estimated, while other parameters were fixed to previous model estimates. The concentration-time data obtained from the applied trial design was subjected to a PopPK analysis. From the final individual parameter estimates, single-dose concentration-time profiles with wash-out were simulated, and AUC and Cmax values were calculated as for a classical trial design. Results: The final trial design was a two-sequence, three period, and three-treatment cross-over design with no wash-out intervals between treatments. 20 subjects received three doses of INFS. Four hours after a single dose of 200 μg INFS (Treatment A), subjects received either a single dose of 400 μg INFS (Treatment B) or two single doses (10 minutes apart) of 400 μg INFS (Treatment C). At t = 24 hours subjects received either Treatment B or Treatment C as cross-over. Plasma samples were taken up to 72 hours. The study duration per subject was less than 4 days. PopPK analysis and validation were performed successfully. The estimated primary PK parameters were F1 = 59%, CL=33.5 l/h, V2 = 68.8 l and KA = 12.8 1/h. The ratio analysis of the least square geometric means of dose normalized AUC∞ values resulted in point estimates of 97 - 104%, indicating dose proportionality in the investigated dose range of 200 μg - 2 × 400 μg. Conclusion: The implementation of a PopPK approach in the planning and analysis of this trial yielded an innovative, cost- and time-saving trial design that successfully delivered the required information about the PK of the 400 μg dose strength within this small clinical study.International journal of clinical pharmacology and therapeutics 04/2013; · 1.18 Impact Factor -
Article: Single-dose and multi-dose delivery systems for intranasal fentanyl spray are bioequivalent as demonstrated in a replicate pharmacokinetic study.
[show abstract] [hide abstract]
ABSTRACT: Background: Intranasal fentanyl spray (INFS, Instanyl®) was developed to treat cancer patients with Breakthrough Pain (BTP). INFS is delivered via a multi-dose delivery system (MDS) that is available in various dose strengths. The aim of this study was to demonstrate the pharmacokinetic bioequivalence of INFS single dose delivery system (SDS) in relation to the currently marketed MDS device. Methods: In a randomized, single-center, single-dose, open label, comparative, four-period, two-sequence, replicate cross-over study, 48 healthy subjects (24 male and 24 female, mean age of 28.1 years, mean bodyweight 69.8 kg) received 200 μg/100 μl fentanyl administered via SDS and via MDS in one of two alternating treatment sequences. Naltrexone was given to all subjects to prevent potential fentanyl adverse drug reactions. Blood samples were frequently taken up to 72 hours post INFS administration and analyzed by liquid chromatography with tandem mass spectrometric detection. Primary pharmacokinetic parameters were area under the curve extrapolated to infinity (AUC0-∞) and peak plasma concentration (Cmax). Statistical analyses of the primary pharmacokinetic parameters were performed using a linear mixed effect model applied to the natural log-transformed data. Results: Healthy subjects showed very similar plasma concentration over time profiles for both delivery systems. The mean fentanyl Cmax and AUC0-∞ values for SDS and MDS were 948 pg/ml, 949 pg/ml and 4,439 pg×h/ml, 4,489 pg×h/ml. respectively. Point estimates (and 90% confidence intervals) for AUC and Cmax were 0.97 (0.93 - 1.02) and 1.00 (0.92 - 1.09) and therefore in the bioequivalence range of 0.80 - 1.25. Conclusions: Results of this study show that SDS and MDS met the pre-defined regulatory criteria for bioequivalence. Safety profiles were consistent between both devices and no safety concerns were identified with INFS administered in combination with oral naltrexone.International journal of clinical pharmacology and therapeutics 09/2012; 50(10):751-9. · 1.18 Impact Factor -
Article: Population pharmacokinetic meta-analysis of intranasal fentanyl spray as a means to enrich pharmacokinetic information for patients with cancer breakthrough pain.
[show abstract] [hide abstract]
ABSTRACT: The development of intranasal fentanyl (INFS) aimed for a rapid treatment of breakthrough pain (BTP) in cancer patients. The pharmacokinetics (PK) of INFS was well characterized in healthy subjects, while PK investigations in cancer patients are limited. The objective was to develop a population PK model for fentanyl in volunteers and patients following INFS administration, to evaluate the influence of potential covariates and to simulate the exposure of fentanyl after repeated dosing in cancer patients. PK data from ten clinical trials were used for model development. The final model was validated with nonparametric bootstrap and visual predictive check. In addition, the secondary PK parameters (AUC0-tlast, Cmax, tmax) of a separate validation data set of INFS were predicted and compared to noncompartmental analysis results. Afterwards, repeated dose PK profiles in cancer patients were simulated. Plasma profiles after INFS administration were best described by a three-compartment model. Significant covariate relationships were identified for naltrexone and oxymetazoline co-treatment. Influences of body weight, BMI, sex and cancer patient as subject type were considered not to be clinically relevant. PK parameters for subpopulations of cancer patients were derived. Steady state simulations revealed that an extension from the current SmPC scenario to 6 pain episodes per day would yield similar Cmax values. A robust population PK model for INFS was developed. The model enhances the understanding of fentanyl PK after INFS dosing in cancer patients with BTP, a population for whom real-life data would be very hard to obtain.International journal of clinical pharmacology and therapeutics 07/2012; 50(9):665-77. · 1.18 Impact Factor -
Article: An investigation of the pharmacokinetics, pharmacodynamics, safety, and tolerability of ciclesonide hydrofluoroalkane nasal aerosol in healthy subjects and subjects with perennial allergic rhinitis.
Paul Ratner, Mark A Wingertzahn, Rolf Herzog, Holly Huang, Shailesh Y Desai, Gary Maier, Ruediger Nave[show abstract] [hide abstract]
ABSTRACT: Ciclesonide hydrofluoroalkane nasal aerosol (CIC-HFA) is currently in development for treatment of allergic rhinitis. This Phase I study evaluated the pharmacokinetics, pharmacodynamics, safety, and tolerability of CIC-HFA in healthy subjects (N = 18) and subjects with perennial allergic rhinitis (PAR, N = 18) in a double-blind, placebo-controlled, 3-period crossover design following treatment with 282 μg or 148 μg CIC-HFA or placebo once-daily for 14 days. The concentrations of desisobutyryl-ciclesonide (des-CIC), the pharmacologically active metabolite of CIC were measured by a validated high performance liquid chromatography with tandem mass spectrometry. Maximum serum concentration (C(max)), area under the serum concentration time curve (AUC), time to maximum serum concentration (t(max)) and elimination half life (t(1/2)) where feasible, were calculated. Serum cortisol (AUC(0-24h)) and adverse events (AE) were also evaluated. The overall systemic exposure of des-CIC was low. The mean C(max) for des-CIC on Day 14 was 35.84 ng/L and 25.98 ng/L for the CIC-HFA 282 μg and CIC-HFA 148 μg treatment groups respectively. Mean AUC((0, last)) for des-CIC on Day 14 was 213 ng·h/L and 112.3 ng·h/L for CIC-HFA 282 μg and 148 μg respectively. Mean serum cortisol (AUC(0-24h)) was similar for CIC-HFA 282 μg (178 μg·h/dL), CIC-HFA 148 μg (169 μg·h/dL), and placebo (174 μg·h/dL) on Day 14. The overall incidence of AEs was low and headache and epistaxis were the most common individual AEs reported. In this study, systemic exposure of des-CIC was low and similar in healthy subjects and subjects with PAR with no evidence of clinically relevant accumulation over the 14 day treatment period in either treatment group. Both doses of CIC-HFA were well tolerated without significant effect on cortisol levels.Pulmonary Pharmacology & Therapeutics 08/2011; 24(4):426-33. · 2.80 Impact Factor -
Article: Pharmacokinetics of ciclesonide and desisobutyryl ciclesonide after administration via aqueous nasal spray or hydrofluoroalkane nasal aerosol compared with orally inhaled ciclesonide: an open-label, single-dose, three-period crossover study in healthy volunteers.
[show abstract] [hide abstract]
ABSTRACT: Ciclesonide, an intranasal corticosteroid, is administered as a prodrug and is converted to the active metabolite, desisobutyryl ciclesonide, in the upper and lower airways. Previous studies have assessed systemic exposure with the ciclesonide hydrofluoroalkane metered dose inhaler (CIC HFA-MDI) and the ciclesonide aqueous nasal spray (CIC-AQ) formulations. However, systemic exposure with ciclesonide HFA nasal aerosol (CIC-HFA) developed for the treatment of allergic rhinitis has not been investigated. This study compared the systemic exposure of ciclesonide and desisobutyryl ciclesonide after administration of ciclesonide formulated as an aqueous nasal spray, an HFA nasal aerosol, or as an orally inhaled HFA-MDI. Healthy adults (aged 18-60 years) were randomly assigned in an open-label, singledose, 3-period crossover design to CIC-AQ 300 microg, CIC-HFA 300 microg, or CIC HFA-MDI 320 microg. Serum samples were collected before study drug administration and at 5, 15, and 30 minutes and 1, 1.5, 2, 3, 4, 6, 8, 10, 12, 14, 18, 22, and 24 hours after dosing. The primary pharmacokinetic parameters were AUC(0-infinity) and C(max) of desisobutyryl ciclesonide. Adverse events were elicited by direct questioning of participants throughout the study. Thirty volunteers were randomly assigned. Most of the volunteers were male (63% [19/30]) and white (83% [25/30]); the mean age was 36 years and mean weight was 68 kg. Concentrations of desisobutyryl ciclesonide were quantifiable (lower limit of quantitation [LLOQ] = 10 ng/L) in the serum samples of only 5 volunteers (of 30) receiving CIC-AQ, and the highest C(max) value of desisobutyryl ciclesonide was 26.7 ng/L (mean C(max), 15.2 ng/L). The AUC(0-infinity) of desisobutyryl ciclesonide for CIC-AQ was below the LLOQ of the bioanalytic assay. Mean C(max) and AUC(0-infinity) of desisobutyryl ciclesonide were 59.1 ng/L and 397.5 ng . h/L, respectively, for CIC-HFA; and 586.2 ng/L and 2685.0 ng . h/L, respectively, for CIC HFA-MDI. Concentrations of the parent compound, ciclesonide, were below the LLOQ in serum samples after administration of CIC-AQ; they were detectable up to 2 hours after administration of CIC-HFA and up to 4 hours after administration of CIC HFA-MDI. Treatment-emergent adverse events occurred with a low frequency in all 3 treatment groups (30% [9/30] overall) and were mild in intensity as determined by the study investigator. In this study, compared with that of CIC HFA-MDI, the systemic exposure of desisobutyryl ciclesonide was 10-fold lower after administration of CIC-HFA and at least 40-fold lower after administration of CIC-AQ. All treatments were well tolerated.Clinical Therapeutics 12/2009; 31(12):2988-99. · 2.32 Impact Factor
