The newly developed 0.77% olopatadine hydrochloride ophthalmic solution formulation resulted in a higher and more prolonged olopatadine concentration in the target tissue, that is, conjunctiva compared to the commercial formulation of 0.2% olopatadine ophthalmic solution.

The eye is a complex organ with a series of anatomic barriers that provide protection from physical and chemical injury while maintaining homeostasis and function. The physiology of the eye is multifaceted, with dynamic flows and clearance mechanisms. This review highlights that in vitro ocular transport and metabolism models are confined by the availability of clinically relevant absorption, distribution, metabolism, and excretion (ADME) data. In vitro ocular transport models used for pharmacology and toxicity poorly predict ocular exposure. Although ocular cell lines cannot replicate in vivo conditions, these models can help rank-order new chemical entities in discovery. Historic ocular metabolism of small molecules was assumed to be inconsequential or assessed using authentic standards. While various in vitro models have been cited, no single system is perfect, and many must be used in combination. Several studies document the use of laboratory animals for the prediction of ocular pharmacokinetics in humans. This review focuses on the use of human-relevant and human-derived models which can be utilized in discovery and development to understand ocular disposition of new chemical entities. The benefits and caveats of each model are discussed. Furthermore, ADME case studies are summarized retrospectively and capture the ADME data collected for health authorities in the absence of definitive guidelines. Finally, we discuss the novel technologies and a hypothesis-driven ocular drug classification system to provide a holistic perspective on the ADME properties of drugs administered by the ocular route.

No abstract

No abstract

PRX-00023, a serotonin 1A receptor agonist, was designed to provide high potency and selectivity for its target. To assess the possible therapeutic utility in anxiety, a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial was conducted in 311 subjects who met the criteria of the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, Fourth Edition, for generalized anxiety disorder. All subjects underwent a 1-week placebo run-in and were randomized to receive once-daily capsules containing either PRX-00023 (80 mg/d) or placebo for an additional 8 weeks. The primary outcome measure was the Hamilton Anxiety Scale (HAM-A). The Montgomery-Asberg Depression Rating Scale was used as a secondary endpoint to measure depressive symptoms. Statistical testing was performed with analysis of covariance, between baseline and week 8, with baseline values as a covariate. The anxiolytic effect of PRX-00023, compared with placebo, showed trends across all anxiolytic measures but failed to reach significance on the primary endpoint (HAM-A total score). Among the components of the HAM-A total score, the anxious mood item was significantly different from placebo in the PRX-00023-treated group (-1.015 vs -0.748; P = 0.02). The scores of the Montgomery-Asberg Depression Rating Scale were significantly improved compared with placebo at week 8 (-4.5 vs -1.6; P = 0.0094 in the last observation carried forward analysis). PRX-00023 was well tolerated; of note, there were no drug-related serious adverse events, and more patients discontinued due to adverse events in the placebo group (2.9%) than in the PRX-00023 group (1.4%). The most common adverse event was headache, observed in 15.7% and 10.9% of PRX-00023- and placebo-treated patients, respectively. Furthermore, there was no evidence of impaired sexual function, as measured by the Massachusetts General Hospital Sexual Function Scale. Collectively, these results support further clinical investigation of higher doses of PRX-00023 in anxiety and depression.

A PK/PD model was well utilized to characterize the effect of RWJ-270201 (BCX-1812) on the influenza A and B virus. The results from this model showed that both the loading dose and the standard dose regimens are efficacious against A and B virus. RWJ-270201 (BCX-1812) is under clinical development for the treatment of influenza A and B infections in adult and high-risk populations. It is a potent and selective inhibitor of both influenza A and B virus neuraminidases and inhibits the viral cleavage of sialic acid from cell surface glycoproteins and glycolipids. Consequently, RWJ-270201 (BCX-1812) prevents infection by stopping the release of newly formed virus from the surface of infected cells and preventing viral spread across the mucous lining of the respiratory tract. It therefore represents an attractive agent for antiviral therapy.

No abstract

The objective of this study was to compare the pharmacokinetics and safety of galantamine in subjects with hepatic impairment with those in healthy subjects. This was an open-label study in which a single oral 4-mg dose of galantamine was administered to volunteers with mild (Child-Pugh score of 5-6, n = 8), moderate (Child-Pugh score of 7-9, n = 8), or severe hepatic impairment (Child-Pugh score of 10-15, n = 1) and to healthy, matched control subjects (n = 8). Galantamine pharmacokinetics and safety (adverse events, laboratory test results, electrocardiograms, vital signs, and cardiac events) were assessed over 6 days after administration of galantamine. The pharmacokinetic parameters of galantamine were similar in subjects with mild hepatic impairment compared with healthy controls. Compared with the healthy control group, subjects with moderate hepatic impairment showed relative increases in the area under the plasma-concentration curve from zero to infinity (AUC0-infinity) (+33%) and terminal half-life (t1/2) (+30%) (p = 0.051 and p = 0.003, respectively), a 23% relative decrease in total plasma clearance (p = 0.061), and a small but significant relative increase in the fraction of free plasma galantamine (p = 0.009). Galantamine was well tolerated by all subjects. There were no serious adverse events (AEs) or premature withdrawals from the study because of AEs. Reported AEs were headache (three cases), nausea (one case), and paresthesia (one case). There were no clinically relevant changes in clinical laboratory findings, vital signs, and electrocardiograms. Low patient recruitment (n = 1) precluded statistical analysis of galantamine pharmacokinetics and safety in severe hepatic impairment. It was concluded that the pharmacokinetics of galantamine in subjects with mild hepatic impairment was similarto those in healthy subjects. In subjects with moderate hepatic impairment, galantamine clearance was decreased by approximately 23% compared with normal volunteers. Galantamine was also well tolerated and appeared to be safe in subjects with mild ormoderate hepatic impairment. Based on the study results, it appears that it would not be necessary to adjust doses of galantamine during administration to subjects with mild hepatic impairment. In subjects with moderately impaired hepatic function, dose titration should proceed cautiously. Unfortunately, difficulties with patient recruitment did not allow adequate assessment of the safety of galantamine in subjects with severe hepatic impairment in this study. Therefore, the use of galantamine in subjects with severe hepatic impairment is not recommended.