Search

Objectives The aim was to investigate the pharmacokinetics of intranasal sumatriptan (administered using a novel bi-directional powder delivery device) and study its effects on quantitative electroencephalography in patients with migraine. The safety profiles of the two formulations were also compared. Methods The pharmacokinetics of intranasal sumatriptan (10 mg and 20 mg) administered using a novel breath-actuated bi-directional powder delivery device were compared with subcutaneous sumatriptan (6 mg), along with an investigation of their effects on the electroencephalogram (EEG) following glyceryl trinitrate (GTN) challenge in 12 patients with migraine using a randomized, three-way cross-over design. Key findings Following intranasal delivery, median tmax was 20 min with both doses compared with 10 min after the subcutaneous dose. Mean ± SD values for Cmax were 96 ± 25, 11 ± 7 and 16 ± 6 ng/ml for subcutaneous, intranasal 10 mg and intranasal 20 mg formulations, respectively. Values for area under the curve were also lower with the intranasal doses. Intranasal and subcutaneous sumatriptan induced similar EEG changes characterized by reduced theta-power and increased beta-power. The majority of study participants were free of pain according to the headache severity score with all treatments from 15 min through to 8 h post-dose. All treatments were well tolerated and there were no reports of bitter aftertaste after intranasal delivery. Sumatriptan was rapidly absorbed after intranasal administration using the new device. Using the GTN challenge, sumatriptan powder delivered intranasally at a dose of 20 mg by the new device had effects similar to those of subcutaneous sumatriptan on EEG and reported headache pain, despite much lower systemic exposure. Conclusions Administration of sumatriptan intranasally at doses of 10 mg and 20 mg by the breath actuated bi-directional powder delivery device results in rapid absorption. Delivery to target sites beyond the nasal valve induced a similar EEG profile to subcutaneous sumatriptan 6 mg and prevented migraine attacks in patients following GTN challenge. Intranasal administration of sumatriptan powder with the breath actuated bi-directional powder delivery device was well tolerated.

Despite the growing means devoted to research and development (R α D) and refinements in the preclinical stages, the efficiency of central nervous system (CMS) drug development is disappointing. Many drugs reach patient studies with an erroneous therapeutic indication andlor in incorrect doses. Apart from the first clinical studies, which are conducted in healthy volunteers and focus only on safety, iolerability, and pharmacokinetics, drug development mostly relies on patient studies. Psychiatric disorders are characterized by heterogeneity and a high rate of comorbidity. It is becoming increasingly difficult to recruit patients for clinical trials and there are many confounding factors in this population, for example, those related to treatments. In order to keep patient exposure and financial expenditure to a minimum, it is important to avoid ill-designed and inconclusive studies. This risk could be minimized by gathering pharmacodynamic data earlier in development and considering that the goal of a phase 1 plan is to reach patient studies with clear ideas about the compound's pharmacodynamic profile, its efficacy in the putative indication (proof of concept), and pharmacokinetic/pharmacodynamic relationships, in addition to safety, tolerability, and pharmacokinetics. Human models in healthy volunteers may be useful tools for this purpose, but their use necessitates a global adaptation of the phase scheme, favoring pharmacodynamic assessments without neglecting safety. We are engaged in an R α D program aimed to adapt existing models and develop new paradigms suitable for early proof of concept substantiation.

Pharmacodynamic (PD) clinical studies are characterised by a high degree of multiplicity. This multiplicity is the result of the design of these studies that typically investigate effects of a number of biomarkers at various doses and multiple time points. Measurements are taken at many or all points of a “hyper-grid” that can be understood as the cross-product of a number of dimensions each of which has typically 3–30 discrete values. This exploratory design helps understanding the phenomena under investigation, but has made a confirmatory statistical analysis of these studies difficult, so that such an analysis is often missing in this type of studies. In this contribution we show that the cross-product structure of PD studies allows to combine several well-known techniques to address multiplicity in an effective way, so that a confirmatory analysis of these studies becomes feasible without unrealistic loss of power. We demonstrate the application of this technique in two studies that use the quantitative EEG (qEEG) as biomarker for drug activity at the GABA-A receptor. QEEG studies suffer particularly from the curse of multiplicity, since, in addition to the common dimensions like dose and time, the qEEG is measured at many locations over the scalp and in a number of frequency bands which inflate the multiplicity by a factor of about 250.

Most studies that investigated the next-day residual effects of hypnotic drugs on daytime driving performances were performed on healthy subjects and after a single drug administration. In the present study, we further examine whether the results of these studies could be generalised to insomniac patients and after repeated drug administration. Single and repeated (7 day) doses of zolpidem (10 mg), zopiclone (7.5 mg), lormetazepam (1 mg) or placebo were administered at bedtime in a crossover design to 23 patients (9 men and 14 women aged 38.8±2.0 years) with Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, Fourth Edition (DSM-IV) primary insomnia. Driving tests were performed 9–11 h post-dose. Results showed that treatment effects were evidenced for subjective sleep, for driving abilities, and for electroencephalogram (EEG) recorded before (resting EEG) and during the driving simulation test (driving EEG). Compared to placebo, zopiclone increased the number of collisions and lormetazepam increased deviation from speed limit and deviation from absolute speed, whereas zolpidem did not differentiate from placebo on these analyses. EEG recordings showed that in contrast to zolpidem, lormetazepam and zopiclone induced typical benzodiazepine-like alterations, suggesting that next-day poor driving performance could relate to a prolonged central nervous system effect of these two hypnotics. The present results corroborate studies on healthy volunteers showing that residual effects of hypnotics increase with their half-lives. The results further suggest that drugs preserving physiological EEG rhythms before and during the driving simulation test 9–11 h post-dose, such as zolpidem, do not influence next-day driving abilities.