Validation of the Human Ozone Challenge Model as a Tool for Assessing Anti-Inflammatory Drugs in Early Development

This study aimed to test the utility of the ozone challenge model for profiling novel compounds designed to reduce airway inflammation. The authors used a randomized, doubledummy, double-blind, placebo-controlled 3-period crossover design alternating single orally inhaled doses of fluticasone propionate (inhaled corticosteroids, 2mg), oral prednisolone (oral corticosteroids, 50mg), ormatched placebo. At a 2-week interval, 18 healthy ozone responders (>10% increase in sputum neutrophils) underwent a 3-hour ozone (250 ppb)/intermittent exercise challenge starting 1 hour after drug treatment. Airway inflammation was assessed at 2 hours (breath condensate) and 3 hours (induced sputum) after ozone challenge. Compared to placebo, pretreatment with inhaled corticosteroids or oral corticosteroids resulted in a significant reduction (mean [95% confidence interval]) of sputum neutrophils by 62% (35%, 77%) and 64% (39%, 79%) and of sputum supernatant myeloperoxidase by 55% (41%, 66%) and 42% (25%, 56%), respectively. The authors conclude that an optimized ozone challenge model (including ozone responders and ensuring adequate drug levels during exposure) may be useful for testing novel anti-inflammatory compounds in early development

Inhaled ciclesonide versus inhaled budesonide or inhaled beclomethasone or inhaled fluticasone for chronic asthma in adults: a systematic review

BACKGROUND: Ciclesonide is a new inhaled corticosteroids licensed for the prophylactic treatment of persistent asthma in adults. Currently beclomethasone dipropionate, budesonide and fluticasone propionate are the most commonly prescribed inhaled corticosteroids for the treatment of asthma but there has been no systematic review comparing the effectiveness and safety ciclesonide to these agents. We therefore aimed to systematically review published randomised controlled trials of the effectiveness and safety of ciclesonide compared to alternative inhaled corticosteroids in people with asthma. METHODS: We performed literature searches on MEDLINE, EMBASE, PUBMED, the COCHRANE LIBRARY and various Internet evidence sources for randomised controlled trials or systematic reviews comparing ciclesonide to beclomethasone or budesonide or fluticasone in adult humans with persistent asthma. Data was extracted by one reviewer. RESULTS: Five studies met the inclusion criteria. Methodological quality was variable. There were no trials comparing ciclesonide to beclomethasone. There was no significant difference between ciclesonide and budesonide or fluticasone on the following outcomes: lung function, symptoms, quality of life, airway responsiveness to a provoking agent or inflammatory markers. However, the trials were very small in size, increasing the possibility of a type II error. One trial demonstrated that the combined deposition of ciclesonide (and its active metabolite) in the oropharynx was 47% of that of budesonide while another trial demonstrated that the combined deposition of ciclesonide (and its active metabolite) in the oropharynx was 53% of that of fluticasone. One trial demonstrated less suppression of cortisol in overnight urine collection after ciclesonide compared to fluticasone (geometric mean fold difference = 1.5, P < 0.05) but no significant difference in plasma cortisol response. CONCLUSION: There is very little evidence comparing CIC to other ICS, restricted to very small, phase II studies of low power. These demonstrate CIC has similar effectiveness and efficacy to FP and BUD (though equivalence is not certain) and findings regarding oral deposition and HPA suppression are inconclusive. There is no direct comparative evidence that CIC causes fewer side effects since none of the studies reported patient-based outcomes

In vitro metabolism of beclomethasone dipropionate, budesonide, ciclesonide, and fluticasone propionate in human lung precision-cut tissue slices

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>The therapeutic effect of inhaled corticosteroids (ICS) may be affected by the metabolism of the drug in the target organ. We investigated the <it>in vitro </it>metabolism of beclomethasone dipropionate (BDP), budesonide (BUD), ciclesonide (CIC), and fluticasone propionate (FP) in human lung precision-cut tissue slices. CIC, a new generation ICS, is hydrolyzed by esterases in the upper and lower airways to its pharmacologically active metabolite desisobutyryl-ciclesonide (des-CIC).</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>Lung tissue slices were incubated with BDP, BUD, CIC, and FP (initial target concentration of 25 μM) for 2, 6, and 24 h. Cellular viability was assessed using adenosine 5'-triphosphate content and protein synthesis in lung slices. Metabolites and remaining parent compounds in the tissue samples were analyzed by HPLC with UV detection.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>BDP was hydrolyzed to the pharmacologically active metabolite beclomethasone-17-monopropionate (BMP) and, predominantly, to inactive beclomethasone (BOH). CIC was hydrolyzed initially to des-CIC with a slower rate compared to BDP. A distinctly smaller amount (approximately 10-fold less) of fatty acid esters were formed by BMP (and/or BOH) than by BUD or des-CIC. The highest relative amounts of fatty acid esters were detected for BUD. For FP, no metabolites were detected at any time point. The amount of drug-related material in lung tissue (based on initial concentrations) at 24 h was highest for CIC, followed by BUD and FP; the smallest amount was detected for BDP.</p> <p>Conclusion</p> <p>The <it>in vitro </it>metabolic pathways of the tested ICS in human lung tissue were differing. While FP was metabolically stable, the majority of BDP was converted to inactive polar metabolites. The formation of fatty acid conjugates was confirmed for BMP (and/or BOH), BUD, and des-CIC.</p

Evaluating the Suitability of Using Rat Models for Preclinical Efficacy and Side Effects with Inhaled Corticosteroids Nanosuspension Formulations

Inhaled corticosteroids (ICS) are often prescribed as first-line therapy for patients with asthma Despite their efficacy and improved safety profile compared with oral corticosteroids, the potential for systemic side effects continues to cause concern. In order to reduce the potential for systemic side effects, the pharmaceutical industry has begun efforts to generate new drugs with pulmonary-targeted topical efficacy. One of the major challenges of this approach is to differentiate both efficacy and side effects (pulmonary vs. systemic) in a preclinical animal model. In this study, fluticasone and ciclesonide were used as tool compounds to explore the possibility of demonstrating both efficacy and side effects in a rat model using pulmonary delivery via intratracheal (IT) instillation with nanosuspension formulations. The inhibition of neutrophil infiltration into bronchoalveolar lavage fluid (BALF) and cytokine (TNFα) production were utilized to assess pulmonary efficacy, while adrenal and thymus involution as well as plasma corticosterone suppression was measured to assess systemic side effects. Based on neutrophil infiltration and cytokine production data, the ED50s for ciclesonide and fluticasone were calculated to be 0.1 and 0.03 mg, respectively. At the ED50, the average adrenal involution was 7.6 ± 5.3% for ciclesonide versus 16.6 ± 5.1% for fluticasone, while the average thymus involution was 41.0 ± 4.3% for ciclesonide versus 59.5 ± 5.8% for fluticasone. However, the differentiation became less significant when the dose was pushed to the EDmax (0.3 mg for ciclesonide, 0.1 mg for fluticasone). Overall, the efficacy and side effect profiles of the two compounds exhibited differentiation at low to mid doses (0.03–0.1 mg ciclesonide, 0.01–0.03 mg fluticasone), while this differentiation diminished at the maximum efficacious dose (0.3 mg ciclesonide, 0.1 mg fluticasone), likely due to overdosing in this model. We conclude that the rat LPS model using IT administration of nanosuspensions of ICS is a useful tool to demonstrate pulmonary-targeted efficacy and to differentiate the side effects. However, it is only suitable at sub-maximum efficacious levels

Monitoring the initial pulmonary absorption of two different beclomethasone dipropionate aerosols employing a human lung reperfusion model

BACKGROUND: The pulmonary residence time of inhaled glucocorticoids as well as their rate and extend of absorption into systemic circulation are important facets of their efficacy-safety profile. We evaluated a novel approach to elucidate the pulmonary absorption of an inhaled glucocorticoid. Our objective was to monitor and compare the combined process of drug particle dissolution, pro-drug activation and time course of initial distribution from human lung tissue into plasma for two different glucocorticoid formulations. METHODS: We chose beclomethasone dipropionate (BDP) delivered by two different commercially available HFA-propelled metered dose inhalers (Sanasthmax(®)/Becloforte™ and Ventolair(®)/Qvar™). Initially we developed a simple dialysis model to assess the transfer of BDP and its active metabolite from human lung homogenate into human plasma. In a novel experimental setting we then administered the aerosols into the bronchus of an extracorporally ventilated and reperfused human lung lobe and monitored the concentrations of BDP and its metabolites in the reperfusion fluid. RESULTS: Unexpectedly, we observed differences between the two aerosol formulations Sanasthmax(®)/Becloforte™ and Ventolair(®)/Qvar™ in both the dialysis as well as in the human reperfusion model. The HFA-BDP formulated as Ventolair(®)/Qvar™ displayed a more rapid release from lung tissue compared to Sanasthmax(®)/Becloforte™. We succeeded to explain and illustrate the observed differences between the two aerosols with their unique particle topology and divergent dissolution behaviour in human bronchial fluid. CONCLUSION: We conclude that though the ultrafine particles of Ventolair(®)/Qvar™ are beneficial for high lung deposition, they also yield a less desired more rapid systemic drug delivery. While the differences between Sanasthmax(®)/Becloforte™ and Ventolair(®)/Qvar™ were obvious in both the dialysis and lung perfusion experiments, the latter allowed to record time courses of pro-drug activation and distribution that were more consistent with results of comparable clinical trials. Thus, the extracorporally reperfused and ventilated human lung is a highly valuable physiological model to explore the lung pharmacokinetics of inhaled drugs

A Phase 1 Trial of pharmacologic interactions between transdermal selegiline and a 4-hour cocaine infusion

BackgroundThe selective MAO-B inhibitor selegiline has been evaluated in clinical trials as a potential medication for the treatment of cocaine dependence. This study evaluated the safety of and pharmacologic interactions between 7 days of transdermal selegiline dosed with patches (Selegiline Transdermal System, STS) that deliver 6 mg/24 hours and 2.5 mg/kg of cocaine administered over 4 hours.MethodsTwelve nondependent cocaine-experienced subjects received deuterium-labeled cocaine-d5 intravenously (IV) 0.5 mg/kg over 10 minutes followed by 2 mg/kg over 4 hours before and after one week of transdermal selegiline 6 mg/24 hours. Plasma and urine were collected for analysis of selegiline, cocaine, catecholamine and metabolite concentrations. Pharmacodynamic measures were obtained.ResultsSelegiline did not change cocaine pharmacokinetic parameters. Selegiline administration increased phenylethylamine (PEA) urinary excretion and decreased urinary MHPG-sulfate concentration after cocaine when compared to cocaine alone. No serious adverse effects occurred with the combination of selegiline and cocaine, and cocaine-induced physiological effects were unchanged after selegiline. Only 1 peak subjective cocaine effects rating changed, and only a few subjective ratings decreased across time after selegiline.ConclusionNo pharmacological interaction occurred between selegiline and a substantial dose of intravenous cocaine, suggesting the combination will be safe in pharmacotherapy trials. Selegiline produced few changes in subjective response to the cocaine challenge perhaps because of some psychoactive neurotransmitters changing in opposite directions

Adrenal suppression: A practical guide to the screening and management of this under-recognized complication of inhaled corticosteroid therapy

Inhaled corticosteroids (ICSs) are the most effective anti-inflammatory agents available for the treatment of asthma and represent the mainstay of therapy for most patients with the disease. Although these medications are considered safe at low-to-moderate doses, safety concerns with prolonged use of high ICS doses remain; among these concerns is the risk of adrenal suppression (AS). AS is a condition characterized by the inability to produce adequate amounts of the glucocorticoid, cortisol, which is critical during periods of physiological stress. It is a proven, yet under-recognized, complication of most forms of glucocorticoid therapy that can persist for up to 1 year after cessation of corticosteroid treatment. If left unnoticed, AS can lead to significant morbidity and even mortality. More than 60 recent cases of AS have been described in the literature and almost all cases have involved children being treated with ≥500 μg/day of fluticasone

An interactive algorithm for the assessment of cumulative cortisol suppression during inhaled corticosteroid therapy

The objective of the study was to develop an algorithm based on a pharmacokinetic-pharmacodynamic (PK/PD) modeling approach to quantify and predict cumulative cortisol suppression (CCS) as a surrogate marker for the systemic activity of inhaled corticosteroid therapy. Two Excel spreadsheets, one for single dose and another for steady-state multiple doses of inhaled steroids, were developed for predicting CCS. Four of the commonly used inhaled steroids were chosen for the purposes of simulation: fluticasone propionate (EP), budesonide (BUD), flunisolide (FLU), and triamcinolone acetonide (TAA). Drug-specific PK and PD parameters were obtained from previous single- and multiple-dose studies. In cases in which multiple-dose data were not available, the single-dose data were extrapolated. The algorithm was designed to calculate CCS based on 5 input parameters: name of drug, dose, dosing interval, time(s) of dosing, and type of inhaler device. In addition, a generalized algorithm was set up to calculate CCS based on clearance, volume of distribution, absorption rate, protein binding, pulmonary deposition, oral bioavailability, and unbound EC50 of the corticosteroid of interest. The spreadsheet allowed predictions of CCS for single doses as well as steady-state conditions. A simple method has been developed that facilitates comparisons between various drugs and dosing regimens and has the potential to significantly reduce the number of comparative clinical trials to be performed for evaluating the short-term systemic activity of inhaled corticosteroids)