Clinical Investigation of Large Volume Subcutaneous Delivery up to 25 mL for Lean and Non-Lean Subjects.

PURPOSE: To evaluate the clinical feasibility and tolerability of large volume subcutaneous delivery at different injection depths for lean and non-lean subjects. METHODS: A single-center, randomized, subject-blinded, crossover study in 62 healthy subjects was conducted to evaluate delivery of a 10-cP solution containing hyaluronic acid. Subjects were separated into lean and non-lean cohort by SC thickness. A syringe pump was used to study the effect of different volumes (5, 12, 25 mL) of a viscous placebo solution and needle lengths (6, 9 and 12 mm) delivered at 0.5 mL/min. RESULTS: Across all treatments, injection sites were observed to have negligible leakage, ~34 kPa of back pressure, and VAS of mild pain with higher pain from needle insertion than during injection. While mild to moderate erythema was the most frequently reported ISR and edema was most prominent for 25 mL injections, all ISRs were resolved within 4 hours post injection. Subjects were unbothered by ISRs across all treatments and rated them as low distress scores (average 1.0-1.5 out of 6). CONCLUSION: SC injection of 25 mL is feasible and tolerable using a low-pain formulation for abdomen injection irrespective of subcutaneous thickness and injection depths at a delivery rate of 0.5 mL/min.

Pain experienced by patients during epidural insertion using 16-gauge versus 18-gauge epidural needles.

OBJECTIVE: To compare the intensity of insertion-site pain between epidural catheterisation with 16-gauge needle and with 18-gauge needle at various time points, and the number of attempts taken to locate the epidural space while using either of the needles. METHODS: This single-blind prospective study was conducted from August 2019 to January 2020 at the Shaukat Khanum Memorial Cancer Hospital and Research Centre, Lahore, Pakistan, and comprised of adult patients of either gender with American Society of Anaesthesiologist grade I-III requiring thoracic epidural for elective abdominal procedures. The patients were divided into two groups using simple randomised sampling with group A receiving 16-gauge and group B receiving 18-gauge epidural. The intensity of insertion-site pain was noted at the time of insertion, at 24 hours and one week after the insertion. The number of attempts taken to locate the epidural space was also noted for the two groups. Data was analysed using SPSS 23. RESULTS: Of the 135 patients enrolled, 126(93.3%) completed the study. There were 63(50%) subjects in group A; 30(47.6%) males, 33(52.3%) females, overall mean age 46.81±10.94. The remaining 63(50%) subjects were in group B; 22(34.9%) males, 41(65%) females, overall mean age was 44.89±11.10 (p>0.05). Pain scores did not differ significantly on comparative analysis between groups (p>0.05). Similarly, number of patients requiring 2 or more attempts for successful epidural catheter insertion was not significantly different between the groups (p>0.05). CONCLUSIONS: The difference in pain scores or number of attempts for 16-guage or 18-guage groups were not significant.

Multi-Electrode Array of Sensory Neurons as an In Vitro Platform to Identify the Nociceptive Response to Pharmaceutical Buffer Systems of Injectable Biologics.

PURPOSE: Pharmaceutical buffer systems, especially for injectable biologics such as monoclonal antibodies, are an important component of successful FDA-approved medications. Clinical studies indicate that buffer components may be contributing factors for increased injection site pain. METHODS: To determine the potential nociceptive effects of clinically relevant buffer systems, we developed an in vitro multi-electrode array (MEA) based recording system of rodent dorsal root ganglia (DRG) sensory neuron cell culture. This system monitors sensory neuron activity/firing as a surrogate of nociception when challenged with buffer components used in formulating monoclonal antibodies and other injectable biologics. RESULTS: We show that citrate salt and citrate mannitol buffer systems cause an increase in mean firing rate, burst frequency, and burst duration in DRG sensory neurons, unlike histidine or saline buffer systems at the same pH value. Lowering the concentration of citrate leads to a lower firing intensity of DRG sensory neurons. CONCLUSION: Increased activity/firing of DRG sensory neurons has been suggested as a key feature underlying nociception. Our results support the utility of an in vitro MEA assay with cultured DRG sensory neurons to probe the nociceptive potential of clinically relevant buffer components used in injectable biologics.

From randomized clinical trials to real life data. An Italian clinical experience with ixekizumab and its management.

Interleukin(IL)-17 inhibitors display higher efficacy than both TNFi and IL-12/23i, which increased the goal psoriasis area severity index (PASI) from 75 to PASI 90 or even PASI 100. Ixekizumab, a recombinant, humanized IgG4 monoclonal antibody targeting IL-17A displayed a high efficacy and safety in RCTs, namely UNCOVER-2 and UNCOVER-3. However, few studies examined real-life data for these medications, and those which exist highlight discrepancies in efficacy and safety between RCTs and real-life data, likely due to the heterogeneity of patients treated outside of trials. Thus, we performed a single center large prospective observational study (RLSD) that enrolled 47 psoriatic patients followed for 20 weeks and we compared the obtained data with the UNCOVER studies. At week 20 in RLSD versus UNCOVER-3 both PASI-90 and PASI-100 results were similar, whilst at week 12, the RLSD cohort obtained higher PASI 90 (76 vs 69,3%) and PASI-100 (55 vs 39%) than UNCOVER cohorts. Interestingly we also reported higher injection-site related pain that disappeared after week 12. In conclusion, real-life data together with RCTs contribute to enrich the information background available to dermatologists in daily practice.

New adalimumab formulation associated with less injection site pain and improved motivation for treatment.

Objectives: We aimed to evaluate the effect of change to the existing formulation of adalimumab (ADA) on pain and treatment motivation.Methods: We classified injection pain into the following categories: overall pain, pain at needle insertion, pain during drug injection, and pain 10 min after injection; we evaluated the effect of change to the existing formulation on pain using a visual analogue scale. In addition, a faces pain scale was used to evaluate the effect of change in injection pain intensity on treatment motivation.Results: Compared with the existing ADA formulation, the new formulation was associated with lower scores of overall pain (1.6 vs. 6.7), pain at needle insertion (1.8 vs. 4.7), pain during injection (1.6 vs. 7.0), and pain 10 min after the injection (0.4 vs. 3.1). All results showed a significant difference. p < .001. Paired t-tests were used. In the survey, 68% and 80% of the patients reported injection pain with influenza vaccine and the existing formulation, respectively; however, the proportion of the patients who experienced pain with the new formulation decreased to 20%.Conclusions: The new ADA formulation may alleviate the burden on RA patients and improve the quality of adherence to treatment, thereby influencing the RA treatment outcomes.

Strategies to decrease injection site pain in botulinum toxin therapy.

Botulinum toxin is now used for numerous indications including dystonias, spasticity, cerebral palsy, hyperhidrosis, cosmetics and chronic migraine. It has to be injected into its target tissues thus causing injection site pain. We wanted to compare the efficacy of various analgesic interventions suggested for reduction of injection site pain. In 13 healthy controls, pain thresholds in the fingertips II and III bilaterally were determined by the Mechanical Pain Threshold Test and the Repetitive Pain Stimulation Test at baseline and under nitrous oxide/oxygen, ice spray, local anaesthetic cream and forearm ischaemia. All interventions studied produce statistically significant and robust elevations of the pain threshold in both tests. Nitrous oxide/oxygen had stronger effects than the other interventions, although this superiority was statistically significant only in the Repetitive Pain Stimulation Test and not against ice spray. Also considering duration, localisation and penetration depth of analgesic effects, hyperhidrosis treatment may benefit from nitrous oxide/oxygen, ice spray and local anaesthetic cream. In palmar hyperhidrosis, forearm ischaemia is possible and also reduces botulinum toxin washout. Cosmetic indications may also benefit from nitrous oxide/oxygen and local anaesthetic cream. For botulinum toxin therapy of spasticity, dystonia and tremor, only nitrous oxide/oxygen may offer intramuscular analgesic effect. Its systemic and prolonged effect is also an advantage in injections in several body parts. Future studies are necessary to test the influence of penetration depth and combinations of analgesic interventions.

Comparison of pain after prophylactic anticoagulant injections to prevent venous thromboembolism.

Subcutaneous injection of unfractionated heparin (UH) or low molecular weight heparin (LMWH) is frequently utilized for venous thromboembolism chemoprophylaxis. We previously discovered that nurses believe patients experience more pain with UH compared to the LMWH enoxaparin; however, no published studies that are appropriately powered exist comparing pain associated with subcutaneous chemoprophylaxis. Our objective was to assess if differences exist in pain associated with subcutaneous administration of UH and enoxaparin. We conducted an observational study of patients who underwent major abdominal surgery between 11/2017-4/2019. All patients received one of three prophylactic regimens: (1) UH only, (2) Initial dose of UH followed by enoxaparin, or (3) enoxaparin only. Of the 74 patients observed, 40 patients received UH followed by enoxaparin, 17 received UH only, and 17 received enoxaparin only. There was a significant difference in patients' mean perceived pain between subcutaneous UH and enoxaparin injections (mean post-injection pain after UH 3.3 vs. enoxaparin 1.5; p < 0.001). There was no significant difference in perceived pain for patients who received consecutive UH or enoxaparin injections. Differences in pain associated with different chemoprophylaxis agents may be an unrecognized driver of patient refusals of VTE chemoprophylaxis and may lead to worse VTE outcomes.

Satisfaction with the Injection Experience of a New, Citrate-Free Formulation of Ixekizumab.

INTRODUCTION: A new, citrate-free ixekizumab formulation, which is bioequivalent to the original formulation, was associated with significant reduction in injection site pain. This study evaluates patient satisfaction with the first injection experience of citrate-free ixekizumab in a real-world setting. METHODS: A non-interventional, observational, web-based survey of adults (≥ 18 years) with psoriasis, psoriatic arthritis, or axial spondyloarthritis was conducted between August 2022 and March 2023. Patients enrolled in the Taltz US Customer Support Program were identified as receiving either the original ixekizumab or initiating citrate-free ixekizumab. Patients receiving original ixekizumab completed one survey at baseline to assess satisfaction with the formulation and one survey after switching to assess satisfaction, willingness to continue using and recommending citrate-free ixekizumab, and formulation preference. Participants previously exposed to ixekizumab completed one survey to assess their satisfaction and willingness to continue using and recommending citrate-free ixekizumab. Descriptive and comparative statistics are reported for patients that switched from original to citrate-free ixekizumab (n = 361); and descriptive statistics are reported for patients not previously exposed to ixekizumab (n = 90). RESULTS: A total of 451 patients were included in the analysis. Significantly more patients were satisfied with their first injection with citrate-free ixekizumab compared to original ixekizumab (83.9% vs. 71.7% respectively; p = 0.0001). Almost all patients who switched from original ixekizumab were definitely or mostly willing to continue using and recommending citrate-free ixekizumab (93.9% and 93.4%, respectively). Additionally, 94.2% of patients who switched from original to citrate-free ixekizumab preferred citrate-free ixekizumab or had no preference. Three-fourths of patients not previously exposed to ixekizumab were satisfied with their first injection with citrate-free ixekizumab and 94.5% were definitely or mostly willing to continue using citrate-free ixekizumab. CONCLUSION: The citrate-free ixekizumab formulation was preferred and well accepted by most patients who switched from the original ixekizumab formulation. Similar findings were seen for those newly initiating citrate-free ixekizumab.

A Systematic Literature Review of Injection Site Pain Perception in Adult Patients Treated with Citrate-Free and Citrate-Containing Biologic Agents.

OBJECTIVE: To investigate injection site pain (ISP) and other injection site outcomes caused by biologics administered alongside citrate-free (CF) and citrate-containing (CC) formulations. METHODS: Electronic literature databases (Medline, Embase, and Cochrane Library) were systematically searched for clinical trials and observational studies reporting on injection site outcomes after subcutaneous administration of biologics. Studies with unknown excipient formulations were excluded. The primary outcome was ISP, and secondary outcomes included any other reported injection site reactions (ISRs). Meta-analysis approaches were used to aggregate evidence identified via the conducted systematic literature review. RESULTS: A total of two observational studies, two cross-over/sequential trials, and three head-tohead comparison trials directly comparing CF with CC biologics were identified, as well as seven placebo-controlled trials. Evidence from five of the seven direct comparison studies suggested reduced pain perception at the injection site when CF formulations were applied. Findings for other ISRs were balanced between both formulations, with slightly favorable results for preparations without citrate. A meta-analysis of placebo-controlled trials found no significant difference between arms with CF formulations and placebo regarding the proportion of patients experiencing ISP (OR 0.62, 95% CI 0.30-1.28). CONCLUSION: Excipient formulations are rarely specified in studies assessing pain and other ISRs of subcutaneously administered biologics. The available data indicate that subcutaneous administration of biologic agents without citrate may be associated with lower pain perception outcomes compared with treatment using CC formulations. Importantly, ISP is influenced by many factors which may have affected the results. More research is needed to assess how formulation excipients influence ISRs.

Ixekizumab Citrate-Free Formulation: Results from Two Clinical Trials.

INTRODUCTION: Subcutaneous (SC) injection is a common route of drug administration; however, injection site pain (ISP) might create a negative patient experience. We evaluated ISP, bioequivalence, and overall safety of the citrate-free (CF) formulation of ixekizumab, a high-affinity monoclonal antibody that selectively targets interleukin-17A. METHODS: Two phase 1, single-blind studies were conducted in healthy participants. The crossover study A (NCT03848403) evaluated pain intensity on injection as measured by visual analog scale of pain (VAS) scores. Subjects (N = 70) were randomized 1:1:1 at the beginning to three possible treatment sequences and received a 1 mL SC injection of the three formulations sequentially in the abdomen on days 1, 8, and 15, respectively. A mixed-effects repeated measures analysis model was used to analyze VAS score by time post-injection. Study B (NCT04259346) evaluated the bioequivalence of a single 80 mg dose of CF formulation compared to the original commercial formulation. Subjects (N = 245) were randomized 1:1 to either commercial or CF formulation and received a single SC injection into the abdomen, arm, or thigh. RESULTS: Primary endpoint was achieved in both studies. In study A, least-squares mean (LSM) difference of VAS scores immediately post injection between commercial (n = 61) and CF formulation (n = 63) was - 21.7 (p < 0.0001), indicating a lower degree of pain associated with CF formulation. In study B, bioequivalence of the CF formulation was established as 90% CIs for the ratio of geometric LSM AUC0-tlast, AUC0-∞, and Cmax between treatments were contained within the prespecified limits of 0.8 and 1.25. Except for less ISP in the CF formulation, overall safety profile was comparable. CONCLUSION: Ixekizumab CF formulation proved to be bioequivalent, was associated with less ISP, and had no other notable differences in the safety profile compared to the original commercial formulation. TRAIL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov identifier NCT03848403, NCT04259346.

The Adverse Reactions of Pfizer BioNTech COVID-19 Vaccine Booster Dose are Mild and Similar to the Second Dose Responses: A Retrospective Cross-Sectional Study.

Background: Like other vaccines, Pfizer BioNTech's COVID-19 vaccine efficacy against SARS-CoV-2 virus infections begins to decline within a few months after the 2nd dose. On August 12, 2021, the FDA allowed additional Pfizer BioNTch's COVID-19 vaccine dose (3rd or booster dose) for individuals with weakened immunity. This study aimed to evaluate the short-term adverse reactions (ADRs) of the 2nd and the 3rd doses of the Pfizer BioNTech COVID-19 vaccine. Methods: Information for this study was collected by Google Form questionnaire (online survey). The results included responses from 442 people, the majority from Saudi Arabia. Results: The most common local ADRs following the 3rd dose were injection site pain, injection site hypersensitivity, and axillary lymph node swelling. The most common systemic ADRs were fatigue, muscle pain, bone pain, headache, and fever less than 38ºC. Less common systemic ADRs were shivering, fever more than 38ºC, nasal congestion and rhinorrhea, arrhythmia, cough, abdominal pain, chest tightness, nausea, diarrhea, vomiting, and tachypnea. Rare systemic ADRs were constipation, dizziness and vertigo, lack of concentration, sore throat, excessive hair loss, dysmenorrhea and heavy menstruation, and Bell's palsy. Severe allergic reactions were reported by 2.6% of participants after the 2nd dose, compared with none after the 3rd dose. Nasal congestion and runny nose are more frequent after the 3rd dose. The ADRs of the 2nd and 3rd doses were significantly more prevalent in females. 12% of participants reported ADRs lasting more than one week after the 3rd dose compared to 5% after the 2nd dose. People ≤ 60 years were more affected by the vaccine ADRs. Conclusion: Most of the ADRs reported after the 3rd vaccine dose were consistent with the Pfizer vaccine information sheet and similar to the 2nd dose ADRs.

Newly formulated GROWJECT® is bioequivalent to the prior GROWJECT® formulation and causes less injection-associated pain.

Daily treatment with subcutaneous injections of recombinant human GH can be physically and emotionally stressful for children and their caregivers owing to the pain caused by injection. In this study, 52 healthy male subjects were randomized to investigate the bioequivalence and compare the safety and injection-associated pain between the prior GROWJECT® sc formulation and the new formulation, which contains less phosphate buffer. Single subcutaneous doses of each formulation were administered in a crossover manner. Adverse events were monitored throughout the study and subjects rated injection site pain on a 5-point scale. The 90% confidence intervals of the geometric least square means ratio for the area under the human GH concentration-time curve from 0 to 24 h and maximum concentration were 1.002-1.049 and 0.971-1.075 following 6 mg and 0.992-1.038 and 0.973-1.058 following 12 mg, respectively. No severe adverse events were observed. The mean pain score was significantly higher (i.e., less painful) with the new formulation than with the prior formulation regardless of the order of treatment. The new GROWJECT® sc formulation was bioequivalent to the prior formulation and associated with less injection site pain.

Evaluation of Adherence and Persistence Differences Between Adalimumab Citrate-Free and Citrate Formulations for Patients with Immune-Mediated Diseases in the United States.

INTRODUCTION: Our aim was to evaluate patient adherence and persistence with citrate-free adalimumab (ADA-CF), introduced in 2018 to reduce injection-site pain, compared with citrate-containing adalimumab (ADA-C). METHODS: This was a retrospective cohort study using a US claims database (IBM® MarketScan® Commercial and Medicare Supplemental Claims Database) from February 2018 to January 2020. Patients at least 18 years of age who were naïve to adalimumab 6 months before the index date (date of first adalimumab claim) and with at least 12 months of continuous medical and pharmacy coverage were eligible for the study. Adherence was assessed by determining the proportion of days covered (PDC) and the percentage of patients with PDC ≥ 80% during the 12-month follow-up period. Persistence was evaluated by measuring the rate of discontinuation and days to discontinuation (i.e., time on treatment) from the index date over the 12-month follow-up period. Continuous adherence outcomes (PDC) were evaluated using linear regression models. Binary adherence outcomes (PDC ≥ 80%) were assessed using logistic regression models. Kaplan-Meier analysis and Cox proportional hazards models were used to assess persistence outcomes. RESULTS: There were 2195 and 1005 patients in the ADA-CF and ADA-C cohorts, respectively, with most using adalimumab for rheumatoid arthritis (ADA-CF 29.7%, ADA-C 27.2%) and psoriasis (ADA-CF 24.5%, ADA-C 31.9%). Significantly greater adherence was achieved with ADA-CF compared with ADA-C (mean PDC [standard deviation] 0.68 [0.30] vs 0.61 [0.32], P < 0.0001). A significantly greater percentage of patients receiving ADA-CF (47.2%) vs ADA-C (39.6%) had PDC ≥ 80% (P < 0.0001). The discontinuation rate was significantly lower for the ADA-CF cohort (46.4%) compared with ADA-C (55.9%, P < 0.0001), resulting in a 27% lower likelihood of discontinuation during the 12-month follow-up period (hazard ratio 0.73; 95% confidence interval 0.66, 0.82; P < 0.0001) and longer time on treatment (260 vs 232 days, P < 0.0001). CONCLUSION: Adherence and persistence are significantly improved with ADA-CF compared with ADA-C.

Minor to Moderate Side Effects of Pfizer-BioNTech COVID-19 Vaccine Among Saudi Residents: A Retrospective Cross-Sectional Study.

BACKGROUND: The Pfizer-BioNTech COVID-19 vaccine has recently received emergency approval from the US FDA. The mRNA technology was used to manufacture the Pfizer vaccine; however, as a pioneering technology that has never been used in the manufacture of vaccines, many people have concerns about the vaccine's side effects. Thus, the current study aimed to track the short-term side effects of the vaccine. METHODS: The information in this study was gathered by a Google Form-questionnaire (online survey). The results included the responses of 455 individuals, all of whom are Saudi Arabia inhabitants. Adverse effects of the vaccine were reported after the first and the second doses. RESULTS: The most common symptoms were injection site pain, headaches, flu-like symptoms, fever, and tiredness. Less common side effects were a fast heartbeat, whole body aches, difficulty breathing, joint pain, chills, and drowsiness. Rare side effects include Bell's palsy and lymph nodes swelling and tenderness. Flu-like symptoms were more common among those under 60 years of age, while injection site pain was more frequent among recipients who were 60 years and older. The study revealed a significant increase in the number of females who suffered from the vaccine side effects compared to males. Difficulty of breathing was more reported among recipients who had been previously infected with the coronavirus compared to those who had not been previously infected. CONCLUSION: Most of the side effects reported in this study were consistent with Pfizer's fact sheet for recipients and caregivers. Further studies are required to determine the long-term side effects.

Ultrasound-Guided Transversus Abdominis Plane Block for Cesarean Delivery: Injection Site Pain as a New Complication and Dexamethasone Reduced Incidence.

BACKGROUND: Although ultrasound-guided transversus abdominis plane block (TAPB) is widely used in multimodal analgesia after cesarean delivery (CD), the complications of TAPB during analgesia after CD have rarely been reported. METHODS: A total of 84 cases of CD were randomly assigned to either a ropivacaine group (R group) or ropivacaine + dexamethasone group (RD group) in this double-blind trial. The pain site and pain degree at rest and during activity at 2 h, 6 h, 10 h, 12 h, 14 h, 16 h, 20 h, and 24 h after maternal surgery were recorded. The consumption of opioids at 24h, postoperative nausea, vomiting, exhaustion, and other adverse reactions were recorded. RESULTS: A total of 80 patients were included in the analysis of results. A total of 19 patients developed ISP, 14 in the R group and 5 in the RD group. The incidence of ISP in the R and RD groups was 35% and 12.5%, respectively. The results described above showed that combining dexamethasone with ropivacaine reduced the incidence of ISP, and the difference was statistically significant (P<0.05). Two groups of women with positive ISP had higher values of opioid consumption than women with negative ISP, but the difference was not significant. CONCLUSION: Dexamethasone as an adjuvant for ropivacaine can effectively relieve the ISP of ultrasound-guided TAPB after CD, and can enhance the analgesic effect of ropivacaine.

Understanding and Minimising Injection-Site Pain Following Subcutaneous Administration of Biologics: A Narrative Review.

Injection-site pain (ISP) is a subjective side effect that is commonly reported with the subcutaneous administration of biological agents, yet it may only be a concern to some. Multiple factors related to the product formulation, such as pH, volume and excipients, and/or to the injection process have the potential to contribute to ISP, while patient-related factors, such as low body weight, gender and age, can make an individual more susceptible to experiencing ISP. While total elimination of ISP remains unlikely with any subcutaneously administered agent, it can be minimised by helping the patient to develop a confident and competent injection technique via robust and effective training. Careful management of patient expectations along with open discussion regarding the potential risk of ISP may serve to minimise treatment-related anxieties and, importantly, allow the patient to remain in control of his/her treatment. Other interventions to help minimise ISP include psychological interventions, allowing biologics to reach room temperature prior to injection, using the most suitable injection device for the individual patient and selecting an alternative drug formulation, when available. Productive patient-physician communication remains important in order to support and optimise treatment experience and adherence, while also providing the opportunity for patients to discuss any ISP-related issues.

Decreased Injection Site Pain Associated with Phosphate-Free Etanercept Formulation in Rheumatoid Arthritis or Psoriatic Arthritis Patients: A Randomized Controlled Trial.

INTRODUCTION: Etanercept, a tumor necrosis factor inhibitor, is used to treat rheumatoid arthritis (RA) and psoriatic arthritis (PsA), and is administered via subcutaneous injection. Injection site pain (ISP) associated with subcutaneous administration may affect compliance or hinder initiation of prescribed medications. To improve the patient experience, a new phosphate-free formulation of etanercept was evaluated for reduced ISP associated with administration. METHODS: This phase 3b, multicenter, randomized, double-blind, cross-over study compared the prior formulation of etanercept to a phosphate-free formulation. Etanercept-naïve adults with RA or PsA indicated for treatment with etanercept were eligible. Patients were randomized (1:1) to receive both etanercept formulations (50 mg) in one of two crossover sequences: prior formulation followed by phosphate-free formulation (sequence AB) or phosphate-free formulation followed by prior formulation (sequence BA) at visits 1 week apart. Patients self-reported ISP using a fit-for-purpose 100-mm visual analog scale within 30 s after injection. Safety outcomes included incidence of treatment-emergent adverse events. Mixed-effects analysis of variance model was used to assess ISP, with treatment, study period, sequence, and disease indication as fixed-effect covariates and patient-within-sequence as random effect. RESULTS: A total of 111 patients enrolled (56 sequence AB; 55 sequence BA). Mean ISP score for prior formulation was 23.1 mm and for phosphate-free formulation was 19.1 mm (mean difference - 4 mm; 95% confidence interval: - 8.0, 0.0; P = 0.048). Patients with the highest ISP scores from the prior formulation (by quartile cut points) had the largest reduction in pain with phosphate-free formulation. Injection site reactions were few in number and similar between formulations; no new safety signals were observed. CONCLUSIONS: The new phosphate-free formulation of etanercept had statistically significantly lower mean pain scores than the prior formulation, with largest pain reductions observed among patients who reported highest pain with the prior formulation. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT02986139. FUNDING: Amgen Inc, Thousand Oaks, CA USA.

Usability of Prefilled Syringe and Autoinjector for SB4 (An Etanercept Biosimilar) in Patients with Rheumatoid Arthritis.

INTRODUCTION: This study aimed to compare the usability of subcutaneous administration of SB4 (an etanercept biosimilar) via prefilled syringe (PFS) and autoinjector (AI) based on injection site pain, patient preference, and safety in patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA). METHODS: This was an open-label, single-arm, multicenter study to evaluate the usability and safety of the AI and PFS of SB4. Adult patients with RA received two injections of SB4 via the PFS, followed by six injections by the AI every week, up to 8 weeks. The primary endpoint was the change in injection site pain score immediately post-injection from week 1 (PFS) to week 3 (AI). Injection site pain after 15-30 min post-injection, overall impression, and preference for PFS and AI were also assessed. Safety was assessed up to 11 weeks after the first injection. RESULTS: A total of 54 patients were enrolled and 52 patients (96.3%) completed the 8-week treatment period. The mean difference in pain scores between PFS and AI was - 0.057 and the 95% CI of the difference was [- 0.63, 0.51], which was within the equivalence margin of ± 5. Overall impression of the device slightly favored the AI. Overall preference for the AI was more favorable when compared to the PFS in all categories. Adverse events were mild to moderate and found to be generally consistent with those expected for reference etanercept. There were no deaths or serious adverse events reported. CONCLUSIONS: This study demonstrated comparable usability and safety between the PFS and AI when self-administrated by patients with RA. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov identifier, NCT03193957. FUNDING: Samsung Bioepis.

Usability and safety of SB5 (an adalimumab biosimilar) prefilled syringe and autoinjector in patients with rheumatoid arthritis.

OBJECTIVE: To demonstrate comparability between administration of the adalimumab biosimilar, SB5, via prefilled syringe (PFS) and autoinjector (AI) pen based on injection site pain, patient preference, and safety in rheumatoid arthritis (RA) patients. METHODS: In this phase 2, open-label study (NCT02565810; EudraCT Number 2014-004887-39), adult RA patients self-administered 40 mg SB5 subcutaneously via PFS at weeks 0 and 2, followed by AI at weeks 4, 6, 8, and 10. Patients rated injection site pain from 0 (no pain) to 10 (severe pain) using a visual numeric scale immediately and 15-30 min post-injection at weeks 0, 2, 4, and 6. Equivalence between PFS and AI was concluded if the 97.5% confidence interval (CI) of the difference in the injection site pain scores at weeks 2 and 6 was contained within the equivalence margin of ±5. Overall impression and preference for PFS and AI were also evaluated. Safety was assessed up to 20 weeks after the first injection. RESULTS: Of 49 patients enrolled, 48 completed the study. Mean injection site pain scores were equivalent between PFS and AI immediately (2.3 vs 2.0; 97.5% CI = -0.99-0.30) and 15-30 min post-injection (0.8 vs 0.7; 97.5% CI = -0.47-0.25). The overall impression of both devices was comparable. The overall preference of AI was higher than PFS. Treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAE) were mild-to-moderate. There were no severe or serious TEAEs reported during the study. CONCLUSIONS: In RA patients, SB5 showed equivalent injection site pain and comparable safety when administered via PFS and AI.

An assessment of injection site reaction and injection site pain of 1-month and 3-month long-acting injectable formulations of paliperidone palmitate.

PURPOSE: To evaluate injection site reactions and pain following paliperidone palmitate 1-month (PP1M) and 3-month (PP3M) administration using safety data of double-blind (DB), noninferiority study. METHODS: Patients (n = 1,429) with schizophrenia, treated with PP1M (50-150 mg-eq, 17-week open-label [OL] phase) were randomized to PP1M or PP3M in 48-week DB phase. FINDINGS: PP1M and PP3M injections were well tolerated. Incidence of induration, redness, and swelling were low in both phases (OL: 9-12%; DB: 7-13%), and were mostly mild in both groups. Mean (SD) visual analog scale scores decreased from OL-baseline (22.0 [21.6]) to DB-baseline (19.5 [20.6] vs. 18.4 [20.4]) and DB-endpoint (15.6 [17.9] vs. 15.5 [18.3]). PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS: Injection site reactions and pain were low and similar between both treatments, regardless of administration site and dose.