Improved pharmacokinetics of sumatriptan with Breath Powered™ nasal delivery of sumatriptan powder

Mohammad Obaidi, Elliot Offman, John Messina, Jennifer Carothers, Per G Djupesland, Ramy A Mahmoud, Mohammad Obaidi, Elliot Offman, John Messina, Jennifer Carothers, Per G Djupesland, Ramy A Mahmoud

Abstract

Objectives: The purpose of this study was to directly compare the pharmacokinetic (PK) profile of 22-mg sumatriptan powder delivered intranasally with a novel Breath Powered™ device (11 mg in each nostril) vs a 20-mg sumatriptan liquid nasal spray, a 100-mg oral tablet, and a 6-mg subcutaneous injection.

Background: A prior PK study found that low doses of sumatriptan powder delivered intranasally with a Breath Powered device were efficiently and rapidly absorbed. An early phase clinical trial with the same device and doses found excellent tolerability with high response rates and rapid onset of pain relief, approaching the benefits of injection despite significantly lower predicted drug levels.

Methods: An open-label, cross-over, comparative bioavailability study was conducted in 20 healthy subjects at a single center in the USA. Following randomization, fasted subjects received a single dose of each of the 4 treatments separated by a 7-day washout. Blood samples were taken pre-dose and serially over 14 hours post-dose for PK analysis.

Results: Quantitative measurement of residuals in used Breath Powered devices demonstrated that the devices delivered 8±0.9 mg (mean±standard deviation) of sumatriptan powder in each nostril (total dose 16 mg). Although the extent of systemic exposure over 14 hours was similar following Breath Powered delivery of 16-mg sumatriptan powder and 20-mg liquid nasal spray (area under the curve [AUC]0-∞ 64.9 ng*hour/mL vs 61.1 ng*hour/mL), sumatriptan powder, despite a 20% lower dose, produced 27% higher peak exposure (Cmax 20.8 ng/mL vs 16.4 ng/mL) and 61% higher exposure in the first 30 minutes compared with the nasal spray (AUC0-30 minutes 5.8 ng*hour/mL vs 3.6 ng*hour/mL). The magnitude of difference is larger on a per-milligram basis. The absorption profile following standard nasal spray demonstrated bimodal peaks, consistent with lower early followed by higher later absorptions. In contrast, the profile following Breath Powered delivery showed higher early and lower late absorptions. Relative to the 100-mg oral tablet (Cmax 70.2 ng/mL, AUC0-∞, 308.8 ng*hour/mL) and 6-mg injection (Cmax 111.6 ng/mL, AUC0-∞ 128.2 ng*hour/mL), the peak and overall exposure following Breath Powered intranasal delivery of sumatriptan powder was substantially lower.

Conclusions: Breath Powered intranasal delivery of sumatriptan powder is a more efficient form of drug delivery, producing a higher peak and earlier exposure with a lower delivered dose than nasal spray and faster absorption than either nasal spray or oral administration. It also produces a significantly lower peak and total systemic exposure than oral tablet or subcutaneous injection.

Trial registration: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT01507610.

Keywords: Breath Powered nasal delivery; bidirectional nasal delivery; bioavailability; migraine; pharmacokinetics; sumatriptan.

© 2013 OptiNose AS. Headache published by Wiley on behalf of the American Headache Society.

Figures

Fig 1
Fig 1
Gamma camera images 2 minutes after delivery using a traditional liquid spray (a) and powder with OptiNose Breath Powered device (b) shown with a logarithmic hot iron intensity scale (reference). Deposition of spray was greatest anterior to the nasal valve and in the lower posterior region of the nose (“floor” of the nasal cavity), whereas deposition of powder was shifted to more superior posterior regions of the nose. The images were from the same subject after each method of administration.
Fig 2
Fig 2
Sumatriptan plasma concentration-time profiles over the entire 14-hour sampling period for intranasal sumatriptan powder, 22-mg nasal spray, 100-mg tablet, and 6-mg subcutaneous injection and Inset for intranasal sumatriptan powder, 22-mg nasal spray, and 100-mg tablet over the first 30 minutes post-dose. The main figure shows that both methods of intranasal delivery resulted in much lower mean plasma sumatriptan concentration time profiles than observed for the tablet and the injection. Inset: In the first 15 minutes post-dose, the rate of rise of plasma sumatriptan concentration was faster for sumatriptan powder than either the 20-mg nasal spray or the 100-mg tablet.
Fig 3
Fig 3
Sumatriptan plasma concentration time profiles over the first 4 hours after administration of 22-mg sumatriptan powder by the Breath Powered device compared with the 20-mg nasal spray.

References

    1. Erlichson K, Waight J. Therapeutic applications for subcutaneous triptans in the treatment of migraine. Curr Med Res Opin. 2012;28:1231–1238.
    1. Ferrari MD, Goadsby PJ, Roon KI, Lipton RB. Triptans (serotonin 5-HT1B/1D agonists) in migraine: Detailed results and methods of a meta-analysis of 53 trials. Cephalalgia. 2002;22:633–658.
    1. Dahlöf C. Sumatriptan nasal spray in the acute treatment of migraine: A review of clinical studies. Cephalalgia. 1999;19:769–778.
    1. Fox AW. Onset of effect of 5-HT1B/1D agonists: A model with pharmacokinetic validation. Headache. 2004;44:142–147.
    1. Salonen R, Ashford E, Dahlöf C. Intranasal sumatriptan for the acute treatment of migraine. J Neurol. 1994;241:463–469.
    1. Aurora SK, Kori SH, Barrodale P, McDonald SA, Haseley D. Gastric stasis in migraine: More than just a paroxysmal abnormality during a migraine attack. Headache. 2006;46:57–63.
    1. Aurora S, Kori S, Barrodale P, Nelsen A, McDonald S. Gastric stasis occurs in spontaneous, visually induced, and interictal migraine. Headache. 2007;47:1443–1446.
    1. Boyle R, Behan PO, Sutton JA. A correlation between severity of migraine and delayed gastric emptying measured by an epigastric impedance method. Br J Clin Pharmacol. 1990;30:405–409.
    1. Aurora SK, Papapetropoulos S, Kori SH, Kedar A, Abell TL. Gastric stasis in migraineurs: Etiology, characteristics, and clinical and therapeutic implications. Cephalalgia. 2013;33:408–415.
    1. Aggarwal R, Cardozo A, Homer JJ. The assessment of topical nasal drug distribution. Clin Otolaryngol. 2004;29:201–205.
    1. Djupesland PG, Skretting A, Winderen M, Holand T. Breath actuated device improves delivery to target sites beyond the nasal valve. Laryngoscope. 2006;116:466–472.
    1. Djupesland PG. Nasal drug delivery devices: Characteristics and performance in a clinical perspective – A review. Drug Deliv Transl Res. 2013;3:42–62.
    1. Sahin-Yilmaz A, Naclerio RM. Anatomy and physiology of the upper airway. Proc Am Thorac Soc. 2011;8:31–39.
    1. Duquesnoy C, Mamet JP, Sumner D, Fuseau E. Comparative clinical pharmacokinetics of single doses of sumatriptan following subcutaneous, oral, rectal and intranasal administration. Eur J Pharm Sci. 1998;6:99–104.
    1. Djupesland PG, Skretting A, Winderen M, Holand T. Bi-directional nasal delivery of aerosols can prevent lung deposition. J Aerosol Med. 17:249–259.
    1. Djupesland PG, Skretting A. Nasal deposition and clearance in man: Comparison of a bidirectional powder device and a traditional liquid spray pump. J Aerosol Med Pulm Drug Deliv. 2012;25:280–289.
    1. Vause C, Bowen E, Spierings E, Durham P. Effect of carbon dioxide on calcitonin gene-related peptide secretion from trigeminal neurons. Headache. 2007;47:1385–1397.
    1. Luthringer R, Djupesland PG, Sheldrake CD. Rapid absorption of sumatriptan powder and effects on glyceryl trinitrate model of headache following intranasal delivery using a novel bi-directional device. J Pharm Pharmacol. 2009;61:1219–1228.
    1. 2003. U.S. Food and Drug Administration Guidance for Industry: Bioavailability and bioequivalence studies for orally administered drug products – General considerations .
    1. Goadsby PJ. A triptan too far. J Neurol Neurosurg Psychiatry. 1998;64:143–147.
    1. Djupesland PG, Dočekal P the Czech Migraine Investigators Group. Intranasal sumatriptan powder delivered by a novel breath-actuated bi-directional device for the acute treatment of migraine: A randomised, placebo-controlled study. Cephalalgia. 2010;30:933–942.
    1. U.S. Food and Drug Administration. 1997. Summary basis of approval for NDA 20-626. August 26, .
    1. Kågedal M, Zingmark P-H, Hedlund C. True nasopharyngeal absorption of zolmitriptan after administration via nasal spray in healthy volunteers. Am J Drug Deliv. 2005;3:133–140.
    1. IMS National Prescription Audit, May 2010–April 2011.
    1. Tzabazis A, Niv SH, Manering NA. Trigeminal antihyperalgesic effect of intranasal carbon dioxide. Life Sci. 2010;87:36–41.
    1. Headache Classification Subcommittee of the International Headache Society. The international classification of headache disorders, 2nd edn. Cephalalgia. 2004;24:9–160. (Suppl. 1):

Source: PubMed

3
Abonnieren