Effect of Sunscreen Application on Plasma Concentration of Sunscreen Active Ingredients: A Randomized Clinical Trial.

Importance: A prior pilot study demonstrated the systemic absorption of 4 sunscreen active ingredients; additional studies are needed to determine the systemic absorption of additional active ingredients and how quickly systemic exposure exceeds 0.5 ng/mL as recommended by the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA). Objective: To assess the systemic absorption and pharmacokinetics of the 6 active ingredients (avobenzone, oxybenzone, octocrylene, homosalate, octisalate, and octinoxate) in 4 sunscreen products under single- and maximal-use conditions. Design, Setting, and Participants: Randomized clinical trial at a clinical pharmacology unit (West Bend, Wisconsin) was conducted in 48 healthy participants. The study was conducted between January and February 2019. Interventions: Participants were randomized to 1 of 4 sunscreen products, formulated as lotion (n = 12), aerosol spray (n = 12), nonaerosol spray (n = 12), and pump spray (n = 12). Sunscreen product was applied at 2 mg/cm2 to 75% of body surface area at 0 hours on day 1 and 4 times on day 2 through day 4 at 2-hour intervals, and 34 blood samples were collected over 21 days from each participant. Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary outcome was the maximum plasma concentration of avobenzone over days 1 through 21. Secondary outcomes were the maximum plasma concentrations of oxybenzone, octocrylene, homosalate, octisalate, and octinoxate over days 1 through 21. Results: Among 48 randomized participants (mean [SD] age, 38.7 [13.2] years; 24 women [50%]; 23 white [48%], 23 African American [48%], 1 Asian [2%], and 1 of unknown race/ethnicity [2%]), 44 (92%) completed the trial. Geometric mean maximum plasma concentrations of all 6 active ingredients were greater than 0.5 ng/mL, and this threshold was surpassed on day 1 after a single application for all active ingredients. For avobenzone, the overall maximum plasma concentrations were 7.1 ng/mL (coefficient of variation [CV], 73.9%) for lotion, 3.5 ng/mL (CV, 70.9%) for aerosol spray, 3.5 ng/mL (CV, 73.0%) for nonaerosol spray, and 3.3 ng/mL (CV, 47.8%) for pump spray. For oxybenzone, the concentrations were 258.1 ng/mL (CV, 53.0%) for lotion and 180.1 ng/mL (CV, 57.3%) for aerosol spray. For octocrylene, the concentrations were 7.8 ng/mL (CV, 87.1%) for lotion, 6.6 ng/mL (CV, 78.1%) for aerosol spray, and 6.6 ng/mL (CV, 103.9%) for nonaerosol spray. For homosalate, concentrations were 23.1 ng/mL (CV, 68.0%) for aerosol spray, 17.9 ng/mL (CV, 61.7%) for nonaerosol spray, and 13.9 ng/mL (CV, 70.2%) for pump spray. For octisalate, concentrations were 5.1 ng/mL (CV, 81.6%) for aerosol spray, 5.8 ng/mL (CV, 77.4%) for nonaerosol spray, and 4.6 ng/mL (CV, 97.6%) for pump spray. For octinoxate, concentrations were 7.9 ng/mL (CV, 86.5%) for nonaerosol spray and 5.2 ng/mL (CV, 68.2%) for pump spray. The most common adverse event was rash, which developed in 14 participants. Conclusions and Relevance: In this study conducted in a clinical pharmacology unit and examining sunscreen application among healthy participants, all 6 of the tested active ingredients administered in 4 different sunscreen formulations were systemically absorbed and had plasma concentrations that surpassed the FDA threshold for potentially waiving some of the additional safety studies for sunscreens. These findings do not indicate that individuals should refrain from the use of sunscreen. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT03582215.

Effect of Sunscreen Application Under Maximal Use Conditions on Plasma Concentration of Sunscreen Active Ingredients: A Randomized Clinical Trial.

Importance: The US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) has provided guidance that sunscreen active ingredients with systemic absorption greater than 0.5 ng/mL or with safety concerns should undergo nonclinical toxicology assessment including systemic carcinogenicity and additional developmental and reproductive studies. Objective: To determine whether the active ingredients (avobenzone, oxybenzone, octocrylene, and ecamsule) of 4 commercially available sunscreens are absorbed into systemic circulation. Design, Setting, and Participants: Randomized clinical trial conducted at a phase 1 clinical pharmacology unit in the United States and enrolling 24 healthy volunteers. Enrollment started in July 2018 and ended in August 2018. Interventions: Participants were randomized to 1 of 4 sunscreens: spray 1 (n = 6 participants), spray 2 (n = 6), a lotion (n = 6), and a cream (n = 6). Two milligrams of sunscreen per 1 cm2 was applied to 75% of body surface area 4 times per day for 4 days, and 30 blood samples were collected over 7 days from each participant. Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary outcome was the maximum plasma concentration of avobenzone. Secondary outcomes were the maximum plasma concentrations of oxybenzone, octocrylene, and ecamsule. Results: Among 24 participants randomized (mean age, 35.5 [SD, 1.5] years; 12 (50%] women; 14 [58%] black or African American; 14 [58%]), 23 (96%) completed the trial. For avobenzone, geometric mean maximum plasma concentrations were 4.0 ng/mL (coefficient of variation, 6.9%) for spray 1; 3.4 ng/mL (coefficient of variation, 77.3%) for spray 2; 4.3 ng/mL (coefficient of variation, 46.1%) for lotion; and 1.8 ng/mL (coefficient of variation, 32.1%). For oxybenzone, the corresponding values were 209.6 ng/mL (66.8%) for spray 1, 194.9 ng/mL (52.4%) for spray 2, and 169.3 ng/mL (44.5%) for lotion; for octocrylene, 2.9 ng/mL (102%) for spray 1, 7.8 ng/mL (113.3%) for spray 2, 5.7 ng/mL (66.3%) for lotion, and 5.7 ng/mL (47.1%) for cream; and for ecamsule, 1.5 ng/mL (166.1%) for cream. Systemic concentrations greater than 0.5 ng/mL were reached for all 4 products after 4 applications on day 1. The most common adverse event was rash, which developed in 1 participant with each sunscreen. Conclusions and Relevance: In this preliminary study involving healthy volunteers, application of 4 commercially available sunscreens under maximal use conditions resulted in plasma concentrations that exceeded the threshold established by the FDA for potentially waiving some nonclinical toxicology studies for sunscreens. The systemic absorption of sunscreen ingredients supports the need for further studies to determine the clinical significance of these findings. These results do not indicate that individuals should refrain from the use of sunscreen. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT03582215.

Predicting nonlinear pharmacokinetics of omeprazole enantiomers and racemic drug using physiologically based pharmacokinetic modeling and simulation: application to predict drug/genetic interactions.

PURPOSE: The objective of this study is to develop a physiologically-based pharmacokinetic (PBPK) model for each omeprazole enantiomer that accounts for nonlinear PK of the two enantiomers as well as omeprazole racemic drug. METHODS: By integrating in vitro, in silico and human PK data, we first developed PBPK models for each enantiomer. Simulation of racemic omeprazole PK was accomplished by combining enantiomer models that allow mutual drug interactions to occur. RESULTS: The established PBPK models for the first time satisfactorily predicted the nonlinear PK of esomeprazole, R-omeprazole and the racemic drug. The modeling exercises revealed that the strong time-dependent inhibition of CYP2C19 by esomeprazole greatly altered the R-omeprazole PK following administration of racemic omeprazole as in contrast to R-omeprazole given alone. When PBPK models incorporated both autoinhibition of each enantiomer and mutual interactions, the ratios between predicted and observed AUC following single and multiple dosing of omeprazole were 0.97 and 0.94, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: PBPK models of omeprazole enantiomers and racemic drug were developed. These models can be utilized to assess CYP2C19-mediated drug and genetic interaction potential for omeprazole and esomeprazole.

Current challenges in bioequivalence, quality, and novel assessment technologies for topical products.

This paper summarises the proceedings of a recent workshop which brought together pharmaceutical scientists and dermatologists from academia, industry and regulatory agencies to discuss current regulatory issues and industry practices for establishing therapeutic bioequivalence (BE) of dermatologic topical products. The methods currently available for assessment of BE were reviewed as well as alternatives and the advantages and disadvantages of each method were considered. Guidance on quality and performance of topical products was reviewed and a framework to categorise existing and alternative methods for evaluation of BE was discussed. The outcome of the workshop emphasized both a need for greater attention to quality, possibly, via a Quality-By-Design (QBD) approach and a need to develop a "whole toolkit" approach towards the problem of determination of rate and extent in the assessment of topical bioavailability. The discussion on the BE and clinical equivalence of topical products revealed considerable concerns about the variability present in the current methodologies utilized by the industry and regulatory agencies. It was proposed that academicians, researchers, the pharmaceutical industry and regulators work together to evaluate and validate alternative methods that are based on both the underlying science and are adapted to the drug product itself instead of single "universal" method.

Pediatric dosing for locally acting drugs in submissions to the U.S. Food and Drug Administration between 2002 and 2020.

Deriving pediatric doses for locally acting drugs (LADs) presents a unique challenge because limited systemic exposure hinders commonly used approaches such as pharmacokinetic matching to adults. This study systematically evaluated drug development practices used for pediatric dose selection of LADs approved by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration from 2002 to 2020. The three study objectives were: (1) to determine the dose selection approach for the labeled pediatric dose, (2) to examine the studied pediatric dose(s), and (3) to evaluate the characteristics of the pediatric clinical programs used to support the labeled pediatric dose. A total of 187 pediatric submissions were characterized for the labeled and studied pediatric doses of LADs. The pediatric dose was predominantly labeled as a flat dose (91%) and at a single-dose level (67%) similar to adults. The majority (68.4%) of the submissions had the same labeled dose for pediatrics and adults. Independent pharmacodynamic/efficacy studies in pediatric patients commonly (64.2%) provided supportive evidence for the labeled pediatric dose. Inhalation, nasal, and injectable submissions had the highest number of clinical trials, lowest usage of an extrapolation of efficacy approach, and utilized diverse approaches in selecting the studied pediatric doses. This article highlights approaches for LAD dosing in pediatric patients and can be used to inform drug development of these products in the pediatric population.

In Vitro Skin Permeation Methodology for Over-The-Counter Topical Dermatologic Products.

For topically applied over-the-counter (OTC) products, the association of unwanted systemic exposure and adverse events may be difficult to ascertain without a recognition or determination of in vivo absorption. Evaluation of skin permeability using a validated in vitro permeation methodology can provide important information for both initial formulation selection and reformulation during the product life cycle. Additionally, a comparison of permeation rates between formulations using a validated methodology could reduce the number of nonclinical studies needed as part of reformulation. However, many in vitro permeation tests (IVPTs) have produced results with high variability and low reproducibility between study sites. It is unclear if this is due to a lack of a standardized protocol, or lack of control of multiple key experimental factors including skin source, preparation, receptor fluid, and study design. This review presents the authors perspective on the potential regulatory utility of IVPT and proposes steps to improve the accuracy and reproducibility of IVPT. The focus of this review is on topical dermatologic drugs with an initial emphasis on the OTC marketplace where reformulations are more common.

In Vitro Skin Permeation Methodology for Over-The-Counter Topical Dermatologic Products.

For topically applied over-the-counter (OTC) products, the association of unwanted systemic exposure and adverse events may be difficult to ascertain without a recognition or determination of in vivo absorption. Evaluation of skin permeability using a validated in vitro permeation methodology can provide important information for both initial formulation selection and reformulation during the product life cycle. Additionally, a comparison of permeation rates between formulations using a validated methodology could reduce the number of nonclinical studies needed as part of reformulation. However, many in vitro permeation tests (IVPTs) have produced results with high variability and low reproducibility between study sites. It is unclear if this is due to a lack of a standardized protocol, or lack of control of multiple key experimental factors including skin source, preparation, receptor fluid, and study design. This review presents the authors perspective on the potential regulatory utility of IVPT and proposes steps to improve the accuracy and reproducibility of IVPT. The focus of this review is on topical dermatologic drugs with an initial emphasis on the OTC marketplace where reformulations are more common.

Navigating sticky areas in transdermal product development.

The benefits of transdermal delivery over the oral route to combat such issues of low bioavailability and limited controlled release opportunities are well known and have been previously discussed by many in the field (Prausnitz et al. (2004) [1]; Hadgraft and Lane (2006) [2]). However, significant challenges faced by developers as a product moves from the purely theoretical to commercial production have hampered full capitalization of the dosage forms vast benefits. While different technical aspects of transdermal system development have been discussed at various industry meetings and scientific workshops, uncertainties have persisted regarding the pharmaceutical industry's conventionally accepted approach for the development and manufacturing of transdermal systems. This review provides an overview of the challenges frequently faced and the industry's best practices for assuring the quality and performance of transdermal delivery systems and topical patches (collectively, TDS). The topics discussed are broadly divided into the evaluation of product quality and the evaluation of product performance; with the overall goal of the discussion to improve, advance and accelerate commercial development in the area of this complex controlled release dosage form.

Maximal Usage Trial: An Overview of the Design of Systemic Bioavailability Trial for Topical Dermatological Products.

Dermatologic diseases can present in varying forms and severity, ranging from the individual lesion and up to almost total skin involvement. Pharmacokinetic assessment of topical drug products has previously been plagued by bioanalytical assay limitations and the lack of a standardized study design. Since the mid-1990's the US Food and Drug Administration has developed and implemented a pharmacokinetic maximal usage trial (MUsT) design to help address these issues. The MUsT design takes into account the following elements: the enrollment of patients rather than normal volunteers, the frequency of dosing, duration of dosing, use of highest proposed strength, total involved surface area to be treated at one time, amount applied per square centimeter, application method and site preparation, product formulation, and use of a sensitive bioanalytical method that has been properly validated. This paper provides a perspective of pre-MUsT study designs and a discussion of the individual elements that make up a MUsT.

Regulatory perspective of bioanalysis from a clinical pharmacology reviewer standpoint: do you see what I see?

Clinical pharmacology plays an important role in drug development, including the evaluation of the drug's pharmacokinetics, pharmacodynamics, drug-interaction potential, exposure-response relationship and safety considerations when being used in specific populations. Clinical pharmacology data is pivotal in ensuring the delivery of the right drug, in the right dose, at the right time, to each particular patient and it has significantly influenced the risk/benefit assessment and labeling recommendations. Consequently, the reliability of the bioanalytical methods and data are of considerable importance, and the solid footing in drug development. Documentation of bioanalytical data from method validation or clinical trials is a critical element supporting regulatory submissions such as new drug applications or biologics license applications. Case examples are presented to highlight the utility and importance of bioanalysis in drug development to ensure that drug products are safe, efficacious, and given at the right dose.

Bioanalytical method validation: concepts, expectations and challenges in small molecule and macromolecule--a report of PITTCON 2013 symposium.

The concepts, importance, and implications of bioanalytical method validation has been discussed and debated for a long time. The recent high profile issues related to bioanalytical method validation at both Cetero Houston and former MDS Canada has brought this topic back in the limelight. Hence, a symposium on bioanalytical method validation with the aim of revisiting the building blocks as well as discussing the challenges and implications on the bioanalysis of both small molecules and macromolecules was featured at the PITTCON 2013 Conference and Expo. This symposium was cosponsored by the American Chemical Society (ACS)-Division of Analytical Chemistry and Analysis and Pharmaceutical Quality (APQ) Section of the American Association of Pharmaceutical Scientists (AAPS) and featured leading speakers from the Food & Drug Administration (FDA), academia, and industry. In this symposium, the speakers shared several unique examples, and this session also provided a platform to discuss the need for continuous vigilance of the bioanalytical methods during drug discovery and development. The purpose of this article is to provide a concise report on the materials that were presented.

Clinical pharmacology as a cornerstone of orphan drug development.

A recent US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) advisory committee meeting highlighted the potential of clinical pharmacology to overcome challenges in orphan drug development.

AAPS-FDA workshop white paper: microdialysis principles, application and regulatory perspectives.

Many decisions in drug development and medical practice are based on measuring blood concentrations of endogenous and exogenous molecules. Yet most biochemical and pharmacological events take place in the tissues. Also, most drugs with few notable exceptions exert their effects not within the bloodstream, but in defined target tissues into which drugs have to distribute from the central compartment. Assessing tissue drug chemistry has, thus, for long been viewed as a more rational way to provide clinically meaningful data rather than gaining information from blood samples. More specifically, it is often the extracellular (interstitial) tissue space that is most closely related to the site of action (biophase) of the drug. Currently microdialysis (microD) is the only tool available that explicitly provides data on the extracellular space. Although microD as a preclinical and clinical tool has been available for two decades, there is still uncertainty about the use of microD in drug research and development, both from a methodological and a regulatory point of view. In an attempt to reduce this uncertainty and to provide an overview of the principles and applications of microD in preclinical and clinical settings, an AAPS-FDA workshop took place in November 2005 in Nashville, TN, USA. Stakeholders from academia, industry and regulatory agencies presented their views on microD as a tool in drug research and development.