Pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic comparison of epinephrine, administered intranasally and intramuscularly: An integrated analysis.

BACKGROUND: Manual intramuscular epinephrine injection is the standard of care for treating severe allergic reactions and anaphylaxis. Epinephrine autoinjectors were approved on the basis of the assumption that their pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic profiles are equivalent to manual intramuscular injection; however, although there is emerging evidence for product-related differences in pharmacokinetic profiles, very little is known about the comparative pharmacodynamic profiles. OBJECTIVE: To compare pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic profiles of epinephrine delivered through manual intramuscular injection, autoinjectors, and intranasal spray. METHODS: This integrated analysis was based on data from 4 randomized cross-over phase 1 trials that compared the pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics of epinephrine using manual intramuscular epinephrine 0.3 mg injection, epinephrine 0.3 mg autoinjectors (Symjepi and EpiPen), and epinephrine 1 mg intranasal spray (neffy). RESULTS: Data from 175 participants showed that although neffy (1.0 mg intranasal spray) resulted in a maximum concentration (258 pg/mL) that was lower than or comparable with manual epinephrine intramuscular injection (254 pg/mL), Symjepi (438 pg/mL) and EpiPen (503 pg/mL), it led to comparable increases in systolic blood pressure (maximum effect [Emax], 16.9, 10.9, 14.9, and 18.1 mm Hg, respectively). The effect of neffy on diastolic blood pressure was also markedly more pronounced than that of other products (Emax, 9.32, 5.51, 5.78, and 5.93 mm Hg, respectively). CONCLUSION: Intranasal delivery of epinephrine using neffy increases systolic blood pressure more efficiently than do manual intramuscular injection and epinephrine autoinjectors, despite lower maximum plasma concentrations.

Biorelevant In Vitro Skin Permeation Testing and In Vivo Pharmacokinetic Characterization of Lidocaine from a Nonaqueous Drug-in-Matrix Topical System.

Recently, lidocaine topical systems utilizing nonaqueous matrices have been developed and provide efficient lidocaine delivery through the skin, such that lower concentrations of drug provide equivalent or greater drug delivery than drug-in-matrix hydrogel lidocaine patches. This study characterizes drug delivery from a nonaqueous lidocaine topical system with increasing drug load both in vitro and in vivo. Topical systems formulated with either 1.8% or 5.4% lidocaine were applied to healthy volunteers' backs (n = 15) for 12 h in a single-center, open-label, four-treatment, four-period crossover pharmacokinetic study. Subjects were dosed with either three 1.8% systems or one, two, or three 5.4% systems in each period. Blood was collected for up to 48 h, and plasma lidocaine levels were measured with a validated HPLC method. In parallel, human and mouse skin models characterized the in vitro skin permeation profile. The pharmacokinetic profile was linear between one, two, and three lidocaine 5.4% applications. Application of three lidocaine 1.8% systems (108 mg lidocaine) was bioequivalent to one lidocaine 5.4% system (108 mg lidocaine). Both topical systems remained well adhered to the skin and irritation was mild. The 5.4% system had approximately threefold higher skin permeability than the 1.8% system in the mouse and human skin models. The results indicate increasing the drug load by three times results in triple the drug delivery both in vivo and in vitro. The relationship between the in vitro permeation and in vivo absorption correlates and is nonlinear.

The evaluation and management of drug effects on cardiac conduction (PR and QRS intervals) in clinical development.

Recent advances in electrocardiographic monitoring and waveform analysis have significantly improved the ability to detect drug-induced changes in cardiac repolarization manifested as changes in the QT/corrected QT interval. These advances have also improved the ability to detect drug-induced changes in cardiac conduction. This White Paper summarizes current opinion, reached by consensus among experts at the Cardiac Safety Research Consortium, on the assessment of electrocardiogram-based safety measurements of the PR and QRS intervals, representing atrioventricular and ventricular conduction, respectively, during drug development.

Antenatal and perinatal factors influencing neonatal blood pressure: a systematic review.

OBJECTIVE: A comprehensive understanding of the factors contributing to perinatal blood pressure is vital to ensure optimal postnatal hemodynamic support. The objective of this study was to review existing literature on maternal and perinatal factors influencing blood pressure in neonates up to 3 months corrected age. METHODS: A systematic search of published literature in OVID Medline, OVID Embase and the COCHRANE library identified publications relating to maternal factors affecting blood pressure of neonates up to corrected age of 3 months. Summary data were extracted and compared (PROSPERO CRD42018092886). RESULTS: Of the 3683 non-duplicate publications identified, 44 were eligible for inclusion in this review. Topics elicited were sociodemographic factors, maternal health status, medications, smoking during pregnancy, and cord management at birth. Limited data were available for each factor. Results regarding the impact of these factors on neonatal blood pressure were inconsistent across studies. CONCLUSIONS: There is insufficient evidence to draw definitive conclusions regarding the impact of various maternal and perinatal factors on neonatal blood pressure. Future investigations of neonatal cardiovascular therapies should account for these factors in their study design. Similarly, studies on maternal diseases and perinatal interventions should include neonatal blood pressure as part of their primary or secondary analyses.