Novel Patient-Friendly Orodispersible Formulation of Ivermectin is Associated With Enhanced Palatability, Controlled Absorption, and Less Variability: High Potential for Pediatric Use.

Ivermectin has been used since the 1980s as an anthelmintic and antiectoparasite agent worldwide. Currently, the only available oral formulation is tablets designed for adult patients. A patient-friendly orodispersible tablet formulation designed for pediatric use (CHILD-IVITAB) has been developed and is entering early phase clinical trials. To inform the pediatric program of CHILD-IVITAB, 16 healthy adults were enrolled in a phase I, single-center, open-label, randomized, 2-period, crossover, single-dose trial which aimed to compare palatability, tolerability, and bioavailability and pharmacokinetics of CHILD-IVITAB and their variability against the marketed ivermectin tablets (STROMECTOL) at a single dose of 12 mg in a fasting state. Palatability with CHILD-IVITAB was considerably enhanced as compared to STROMECTOL. Both ivermectin formulations were well tolerated and safe. Relative bioavailability of CHILD-IVITAB compared to STROMECTOL was estimated as the ratios of geometric means for Cmax, AUC 0-∞, and AUC0-last, which were 1.52 [90% CI: 1.13-2.04], 1.27 [0.99-1.62], and 1.29 [1.00-1.66], respectively. Maximum drug concentrations occurred earlier with the CHILD-IVITAB formulation, with a median Tmax at 3.0 h [range 2.0-4.0 h] versus 4.0 h [range 2.0-5.0 h] with STROMECTOL (P = .004). With CHILD-IVITAB, variability in exposure was cut in half (coefficient of variation: 37% vs 70%) compared to STROMECTOL. Consistent with a more controlled absorption process, CHILD-IVITAB was associated with reduced variability in drug exposure as compared to STROMECTOL. Together with a favorable palatability and tolerability profile, these findings motivate for further clinical studies to evaluate benefits of such a patient-friendly ODT formulation in pediatric patients with a parasitic disease, including infants and young children <15 kg.

Pharmacometrics to Evaluate Dosing of the Patient-Friendly Ivermectin CHILD-IVITAB in Children ≥ 15 kg and <15 kg.

The antiparasitic drug ivermectin is approved for persons > 15 kg in the US and EU. A pharmacometric (PMX) population model with clinical PK data was developed (i) to characterize the effect of the patient-friendly ivermectin formulation CHILD-IVITAB on the absorption process and (ii) to evaluate dosing for studies in children < 15 kg. Simulations were performed to identify dosing with CHILD-IVITAB associated with similar exposure coverage in children ≥ 15 kg and < 15 kg as observed in adults receiving the reference formulation STROMECTOL®. A total of 448 ivermectin concentrations were available from 16 healthy adults. The absorption rate constant was 2.41 h-1 (CV 19%) for CHILD-IVITAB vs. 1.56 h-1 (CV 43%) for STROMECTOL®. Simulations indicated that 250 µg/kg of CHILD-IVITAB is associated with exposure coverage in children < 15 kg consistent with that observed in children ≥ 15 kg and adults receiving 200 µg/kg of STROMECTOL®. Performed analysis confirmed that CHILD-IVITAB is associated with faster and more controlled absorption than STROMECTOL®. Simulations indicate that 250 µg/kg of CHILD-IVITAB achieves equivalent ivermectin exposure coverage in children < 15 kg as seen in children ≥ 15 kg and adults.

Evaluating the Risks of Systemic Maternal Ivermectin Exposure During Pregnancy in Human and Vertebrate Animals: A Scoping Review.

BACKGROUND: Ivermectin is widely used for the treatment of neglected tropical diseases associated with adverse maternal and fetal outcomes when the infection complicates the pregnancy. However, the United States FDA classification and current distribution protocols limit ivermectin treatment in pregnant women because antepartum safety has not been well-established. OBJECTIVE: We conducted a scoping review to address the question of what is known from both human and vertebrate animal studies about the safety of systemic ivermectin exposure during pregnancy. METHODS: We searched PubMed for adverse outcomes related to systemic ivermectin exposure in human and vertebrate animal pregnancies, including English-language primary articles from 1900 - 2019. RESULTS: We identified 23 primary articles for evaluation, including 10 human studies and 13 vertebrate animal studies of interest. One prospective randomized, controlled trial investigating the safety of systemic ivermectin exposure during pregnancy and four retrospective human studies did not identify a significant association with adverse birth outcome metrics. Out of the three human case reports, two reported uncomplicated prenatal courses and one reported stillbirth and maternal death. A retrospective cross-sectional study concluded a positive association between onchocerciasis and spontaneous abortion, mitigated by ivermectin mass drug administration. While adverse pregnancy outcomes were observed at high doses in mice, rats, and rabbits, there was overall a lack of evidence to support concerns that therapeutic doses of ivermectin (0.2 mg/kg) cause adverse pregnancy outcomes. CONCLUSION: Further research is warranted to address safety concerns regarding the use of ivermectin in pregnant women in treating and preventing neglected helminth infections that threaten maternal-child health.

Oral ivermectin for the treatment of head lice infestation.

PURPOSE: Published literature describing the use of oral ivermectin for the treatment of head lice infestation is reviewed. SUMMARY: In the United States and globally, head lice infestation, or pediculosis capitis, remains a public health issue with both social and medical implications. Treatment with oral or topical medications is typically required for head lice eradication. Resistance to traditional topical therapies for head lice infestation is increasing, creating a need for consideration of additional treatment options. A growing body of data describing the potential role of oral ivermectin for the treatment or prevention of head lice infestation is available. A literature search identified 5 clinical trials that evaluated safety and/or effectiveness outcomes of oral ivermectin use as an alternative to malathion, other topical prescription medications, and traditional, nonprescription remedies; those studies were conducted in various parts of the world (e.g., Australia, Brazil, Mexico, Egypt) and likely involved varying types and degrees of lice resistance. Clinical research findings to date, while not consistently robust, suggest that oral ivermectin is comparable or superior in effectiveness to other topical treatment options for head lice infestation while being well tolerated and favorably perceived by patients and caretakers. CONCLUSION: Oral ivermectin is an option for the treatment of head lice infestation, especially in individuals who have experienced a treatment failure. Published evidence from clinical trials indicates that oral ivermectin is as effective as currently available topical treatments.