Background Oral finasteride is a well-established treatment for men with androgenetic alopecia (AGA), but long-term therapy is not always acceptable to patients. A topical finasteride formulation has been developed to minimize systemic exposure by acting specifically on hair follicles.Objectives To evaluate the efficacy and safety of topical finasteride compared with placebo, and to analyse systemic exposure and overall benefit compared with oral finasteride.Methods This randomized, double-blind, double dummy, parallel-group, 24-week study was conducted in adult male outpatients with AGA at 45 sites in Europe. Efficacy and safety were evaluated. Finasteride, testosterone and dihydrotestosterone (DHT) concentrations were measured.
ResultsOf 458 randomized patients, 323 completed the study and 446 were evaluated for safety. Change from baseline in target area hair count (TAHC) at week 24 (primary efficacy endpoint) was significantly greater with topical finasteride than placebo (adjusted mean change 20.2 vs. 6.7 hairs; P < 0.001), and numerically similar between topical and oral finasteride.Statistically significant differences favouring topical finasteride over placebo were observed for change from baseline in TAHC at week 12 and investigator-assessed change from baseline in patient hair growth/loss at week 24. Incidence and type of adverse events, and cause of discontinuation, did not differ meaningfully between topical finasteride and placebo.No serious adverse events were treatment related. As maximum plasma finasteride concentrations were >100 times lower, and reduction from baseline in mean serum DHT concentration was lower (34.5 vs. 55.6%), with topical vs. oral finasteride, there is less likelihood of systemic adverse reactions of a sexual nature related to a decrease in DHT with topical finasteride.Conclusion Topical finasteride significantly improves hair count compared to placebo and is well tolerated. Its effect is similar to that of oral finasteride, but with markedly lower systemic exposure and less impact on serum DHT concentrations.
Following intensive discussions, review, alignment of procedures and multiple surveys among their member companies, the European Bioanalysis Forum (EBF) is providing a recommendation on how to integrate incurred sample reproducibility (ISR) in the bioanalytical process. The recommendation aims to provide guidance throughout the lifecycle of a validated method, including the application of the method in study support. In its recommendation, the EBF considers both the internal discussions with EBF member companies, as well as the input provided in international meetings where ISR was discussed. The ultimate goal of the EBF recommendation is to ensure that bioanalytical methods can provide accurate and reproducible concentration data for pharmacokinetic and/or toxicokinetic evaluation, without any compromise, while safeguarding the optimal use of laboratory resources.
Aims To assess the effect of a reversible MAO-A inhibitor, moclobemide, on the single-dose pharmacokinetics of almotriptan and assess the clinical consequences of any interaction. Methods Twelve healthy volunteers received the following treatments in a randomized, open-label, two-way crossover design (with a 1 week washout between treatments): (A) one 150 mg moclobemide tablet every 12 h for 8 days and one 12.5 mg almotriptan tablet on the morning of day 8; and (B) one 12.5 mg almotriptan tablet on day 8. Plasma almotriptan was quanti®ed by h.p.l.c.-MS-MS, while urinary concentrations were measured by h.p.l.c.-u.v. Vital signs, ECGs, and adverse events were evaluated after almotriptan administration. Treatment effects on pharmacokinetics and vital signs were assessed by analysis of variance. Results Mean almotriptan AUC was higher (483t99.9 vs 352t75.4 ng ml x1 h, P=0.0001) and oral clearance was lower (26.6t4.00 vs 36.6t5.89 l h x1 , P=0.0001) when almotriptan was administered with moclobemide. Mean half-life was longer (4.22t0.78 vs 3.41t0.45 h, P=0.0002) after coadministration with moclobemide. Renal clearance of almotriptan was unaffected by moclobemide. No serious adverse events occurred and no clinically signi®cant vital sign changes were observed. Conclusions Moclobemide increased plasma concentrations of almotriptan on average by 37%, but the combined administration of these two compounds was well tolerated. The degree of interaction was much less than that seen previously for sumatriptan or zolmitriptan given with moclobemide.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.