Search

This March 2009 Workshop Summary Report was sponsored by Product Quality Research Institute (PQRI) based on a proposal by the Inhalation and Nasal Technology Focus Group (INTFG) of the American Association of Pharmaceutical Scientists (AAPS). Participants from the pharmaceutical industry, academia and regulatory bodies from the United States, Europe, India, and Brazil attended the workshop with the objective of presenting, reviewing, and discussing recommendations for demonstrating bioequivalence (BE) that may be considered in the development of orally inhaled drug products and regulatory guidances for new drug applications (NDAs), abbreviated NDAs (ANDAs), and postapproval changes. The workshop addressed areas related to in vitro approaches to demonstrating BE, biomarker strategies, imaging techniques, in vivo approaches to establishing local delivery equivalence and device design similarity. The workshop presented material that provided a baseline for the current understanding of orally inhaled drug products (OIPs) and identified gaps in knowledge and consensus that, if answered, might allow the design of a robust, streamlined method for the BE assessment of locally acting inhalation drugs. These included the following: (1) cascade impactor (CI) studies are not a good 2 predictor of the pulmonary dose; more detailed studies on in vitro/in vivo correlations (e.g., suitability of CI studies for assessing differences in the regional deposition) are needed; (2) there is a lack of consensus on the appropriate statistical methods for assessing in vitro results; (3) fully validated and standardized imaging methods, while capable of providing information on pulmonary dose and regional deposition, might not be applicable to the BE of inhaled products mainly due to the problems of having access to radiolabeled innovator product; (4) if alternatives to current methods for establishing local delivery BE of OIPs cannot be established, biomarkers (pharmacodynamic or clinical endpoints) with a sufficiently steep dose-response need to be identified and validated for all relevant drug classes; and (5) the utility of pharmacokinetic studies for evaluating "local pulmonary delivery" equivalence deserves more attention. A summary of action items for seminars and working groups to address these topics in the future is also presented.

Purpose: PulmoSphere™ particles are specifically engineered for delivery by the pulmonary route with a hollow and porous morphology, physical diameters < 5 μm, and low tap densities (circa 0.1 g.cm-3). Deposition of PulmoSphere particles in the human respiratory tract delivered by pressurized metered dose inhaler (pMDI) was compared with deposition of a conventional micronized drug pMDI formulation. Methods: Nine healthy nonsmoking subjects (5 male, 4 female) completed a two-way crossover gamma scintigraphic study, assessing the lung and oropharyngeal depositions of albuterol sulfate, formulated as 99mTc-radiolabeled PulmoSphere particles or micronized particles (Ventolin EvohalerTM, GlaxoSmithKline, Ltd.) suspended in HFA-134a propellant. Results: Mean (standard deviation) lung deposition, (% ex-valve dose) was doubled for the PulmoSphere formulation compared with Evohaler pMDI (28.5 (11.3) % vs. 14.5 (8.1) %, P < 0.01), whereas oropharyngeal deposition was reduced (42.6 (9.0) % vs. 72.0 (8.0) %, P < 0.01). Both PulmoSphere and Evohaler pMDIs gave uniform deposition patterns within the lungs. Conclusions: These data provided “proof of concept” in vivo for the PulmoSphere technology as a method of improving targeting of drugs to the lower respiratory tract from pMDIs, and suggested that the PulmoSphere technology may also be suitable for the delivery of systemically acting molecules absorbed via the lung.

Novel formulations of asthma drugs contained in pressurized metered dose inhalers (pMDIs) are being developed containing hydrofluoroalkane (HFA) propellants. The objectives of this study were to assess the deposition in the lungs and oropharynx of triamcinolone acetonide (TAA; Azmacort, Aventis Pharma, Collegeville, PA) delivered by pMDI formulated with HFA-134a, together with the pharmacokinetic profile of TAA, and to determine the extent to which the Azmacort spacer improves targeting of TAA to the lungs. The deposition of TAA, labelled with 99mTc, was assessed by gamma scintigraphy in 10 patients with mild to moderate asthma (mean forced expiratory volume in one second [FEV1] 76% predicted), who received in randomized order three delivered (ex-device) doses of 75 microg TAA via pMDI coupled to an Azmacort spacer (TAA-spacer), and three delivered doses of 230 microg TAA via the same device, but with the spacer removed (TAA-no spacer). Mean lung deposition expressed as mass of drug was similar for each regimen (TAA-no spacer 175 microg; TAA-spacer 188 microg), but when expressed as percentage delivered dose, lung deposition was higher for TAA-spacer (53.8%) versus TAA-no spacer (26.0%), indicating superior drug targeting for TAA-spacer. The spacer reduced oropharyngeal deposition. The pharmacokinetic data showed higher plasma levels of drug for TAA-no spacer, resulting from higher oropharyngeal deposition. "Pharmacoscintigraphic" data showed proof of concept for a novel HFA delivery system for an inhaled corticosteroid based on pulmonary targeting of drug.

Dosimetry, safety and the efficacy of drugs in the lungs are critical factors in the development of inhaled medicines. This article considers the challenges in each of these areas with reference to current industry practices for developing inhaled products, and suggests collaborative scientific approaches to address these challenges. The portfolio of molecules requiring delivery by inhalation has expanded rapidly to include novel drugs for lung disease, combination therapies, biopharmaceuticals and candidates for systemic delivery via the lung. For these drugs to be developed as inhaled medicines, a better understanding of their fate in the lungs and how this might be modified is required. Harmonised approaches based on ‘best practice’ are advocated for dosimetry and safety studies; this would provide coherent data to help product developers and regulatory agencies differentiate new inhaled drug products. To date, there are limited reports describing full temporal relationships between pharmacokinetic (PK) and pharmacodynamic (PD) measurements. A better understanding of pulmonary PK and PK/PD relationships would help mitigate the risk of not engaging successfully or persistently with the drug target as well as identifying the potential for drug accumulation in the lung or excessive systemic exposure. Recommendations are made for (i) better industry-academia-regulatory co-operation, (ii) sharing of pre-competitive data, and (iii) open innovation through collaborative research in key topics such as lung deposition, drug solubility and dissolution in lung fluid, adaptive responses in safety studies, biomarker development and validation, the role of transporters in pulmonary drug disposition, target localisation within the lung and the determinants of local efficacy following inhaled drug administration.

To compare the pulmonary pharmacokinetics and relative bioavailability of salmon calcitonin delivered as aqueous droplets, pH 6.6 and pH 4.8 with that of a spray dried powder in healthy volunteers.Spray dried powders (1.6 microm [GSD 2.1]) containing 5% by wt. sCal, 6.25% human serum albumin, 73.55% mannitol and 15% citric acid/sodium citrate were prepared using a Buchi model 190 spray drier. Aqueous solutions were prepared by dissolving the spray dried powder at a sCal concentration of 1.25 mg/ml, pH was adjusted using 21 mM sodium hydroxide. Aerosols were delivered as part of a 4 way cross-over study to 16 healthy volunteers. The Nektar pulmonary delivery device was used to deliver the dry powder aerosol. A Salter nebulizer controlled by a Rosenthal dosimeter was used to deliver the aqueous aerosols. Miacalcin injection was used as the subcutaneous control. Dose delivered to the lung was estimated by gamma scintigraphy. Plasma concentrations of sCal were measured using a radioimmunoassay.Aerosol size distributions were matched, 3.3 microm MMAD and approximately 2.2 GSD. Inhaled flow rates were similar, although not equal, 5.8 and approximately 9.8 l/min respectively for dry powder and liquid inhalations. Lung doses of sCal ranged from 53 to 88 microgm, peripheral lung doses from 25 to 51 microgm. Pharmacokinetic profiles and lung bioavailability relative to subcutaneous injection for all formulations were similar (not statistically significantly different p0.05), relative lung bioavailability ranged from 11% to 18%, estimates of relative bioavailability based on peripheral lung dose ranged from 20% to 33%.The study showed no difference in pharmacokinetic profiles between the various aerosol dosage forms. pH of the aqueous solutions did not affect kinetics or relative bioavailability.

Drugs are given intranasally for both local and systemic applications, and the use of the intranasal route is predicted to rise dramatically in the next 10 years. Nasal drug delivery may be assessed by a variety of means, but high reliance is often placed upon in vitro testing methodology (emitted dose, droplet or particle size distribution, spray pattern, and plume geometry). Spray pattern and plume geometry define the shape of the expanding aerosol cloud, while droplet size determines the likelihood of deposition within the nasal cavity by inertial impaction. Current FDA guidance recommends these methods as a means of documenting bioavailability (BA) and bioequivalence (BE) for topically acting solution formulations, because they can be performed reproducibly and are more discriminating among products. Nasal drug delivery in vivo may be determined by several radionuclide imaging methods: the two-dimensional imaging technique of gamma scintigraphy has been used most widely, but the three-dimensional method of positron emission tomography (PET) is being used increasingly often. In some situations a good in vitro/in vivo correlation (IVIVC) exists; for instance, negligible penetration into the lungs has been demonstrated in the case of nasal pump sprays delivering large droplets, while a clear difference may be shown in intranasal deposition between two aerosols with markedly different size distributions. However, recent studies have shown a poorer IVIVC for two similar nasal pump sprays, where significant differences in in vitro parameters were not reflected in differences in nasal deposition in vivo. It is suggested that radionuclide imaging data may have an important role to play as an adjunct to in vitro testing in BA and BE assessments and may provide a clearer understanding of the changes in in vitro parameters that are important for predicting differences in in vivo performance.