Search

People with epilepsy may experience seizure clusters despite a stable regimen of antiseizure medications. Such clusters have the potential to last ≥24 hours, typically occur in the community setting, and may progress to medical emergencies, such as status epilepticus, if untreated. Thus, long-acting rescue therapy for seizure clusters is needed that can be administered by nonmedical individuals outside a hospital. Benzodiazepines are the foundation of rescue therapy for seizure clusters. The approved outpatient treatments (ie, diazepam, midazolam) have differing profiles that may affect multiple aspects of health-care utilization. The current labeling of these medications allows for a second dose if needed to control the cluster. Although no head-to-head studies directly comparing rescue treatments have been conducted, differences between studies with generally similar designs may provide context for the potential importance of second doses of rescue therapy on health-care utilization.For this analysis, large, long-term, open-label studies of approved seizure-cluster treatments designed for use by nonmedical caregivers were reviewed, and the percentage of seizure clusters for which a second dose was used or that were not controlled at 6, 12, and 24 hours was examined. Available data on hospitalizations were also collected.The 3 identified studies meeting the inclusion criteria were for use of diazepam rectal gel, intranasal midazolam, and diazepam nasal spray. Across these studies, the use of a second dose ranged from40% at 6 hours to13% at 24 hours. Hospitalizations and serious treatment-emergent adverse events were reported variably across these studies.These results demonstrate the importance of second doses of rescue therapy for seizure clusters for optimizing health-care utilization. Need for second doses should be included as one component. In turn, when second doses are needed, they have the potential to curtail emergency department use and hospitalization and to prevent further seizure clusters.

Intermittent rescue therapy may be used for seizure clusters, which are clinical emergencies that may persist ≥24 h and increase risk of status epilepticus, emergency room visits, and reduced quality of life for patients with epilepsy. Beyond effectiveness for aborting seizure clusters, no data exist on how intermittent rescue therapy may impact the long-term natural course of seizure clusters. This novel analysis explores SEIzure interVAL (SEIVAL; time between seizure clusters) in patients from a long-term safety study of diazepam nasal spray (Valtoco) to assess SEIVAL changes with intermittent rescue therapy across time.Patients were aged 6-65 years. Age- and weight-based doses of diazepam nasal spray were administered during a 12-month treatment period with an optional follow-up period. SEIVAL was evaluated in patients receiving two or more doses of diazepam nasal spray using 90-day periods.Of 163 treated patients, 151 had one or more SEIVALs. One hundred twenty had SEIVALs in Period 1 and one or more other periods. An increase in SEIVAL was noted from Period 1 compared with all subsequent periods (p ≤ .001). A consistent cohort (n = 76) had one or more SEIVALs in each of Periods 1-4 (360 days); mean SEIVALs increased significantly (p .01) from 12.2 days (Period 1) to 25.7 days (Period 4). Similar SEIVAL patterns occurred when repeat doses within a seizure cluster were eliminated and irrespective of age group, treatment duration, and change to concomitant medications. In adults, Quality of Life in Epilepsy scores were maintained with increased SEIVALs.Across 12 months, increases in SEIVAL were demonstrated in patients using diazepam nasal spray for seizure cluster treatment in a phase 3 safety study. Increased time between seizure clusters may reflect a previously unrecognized beneficial effect of intermittent rescue therapy. These results generate a range of biological and behavioral hypotheses and warrant exploration of the impact of intermittent rescue therapy.

To evaluate safety and tolerability of long-term treatment with diazepam nasal spray (Valtoco) for seizure clusters in patients aged six to 17 years.The study enrolled patients aged six to 65 years with frequent seizure clusters. Age- and weight-based doses of diazepam nasal spray were administered; second doses were permitted if needed. Safety assessments included treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs).Of 163 treated patients, 45 (27.6%) were aged six to 11 years and 33 (20.2%) were aged 12 to 17 years. Mean doses per month were 2.1 in the 6 to 11 subgroup and 2.4 in the 12 to 17 subgroup. Of 1634 seizure clusters in pediatric patients, 186 (11.4%) required a second dose of diazepam nasal spray within 24 hours of the first dose. Similar proportions of TEAEs and serious TEAEs were reported in 6 to 11 (91.1%, 40.0%) and 12 to 17 subgroups (81.8%, 30.3%), respectively. No serious TEAEs were considered treatment related, and no patients discontinued because of TEAEs. Treatment-related TEAEs were more frequent in the 12 to 17 subgroup; only epistaxis and somnolence occurred in two or more patients overall. TEAE rates were similar across subgroups that received concomitant clobazam (90.0%), received prior diazepam rectal gel (90.9%), and were administered less than two versus greater than or equal to two doses per month (87.2% for both) of diazepam nasal spray. Most survey respondents (88%) were satisfied or very satisfied with treatment.In this long-term safety analysis in pediatric patients with seizure clusters, repeated doses of diazepam nasal spray demonstrated a safety profile consistent across subgroups. These data support the dosing guidelines for diazepam nasal spray according to age and weight for pediatric patients.

An exploratory analysis from a long-term, phase 3, open-label, repeat-dose safety study of diazepam nasal spray for acute treatment of seizure clusters assessed the use of a second dose up to 24 hours after the initial dose and effectiveness in potentially reducing the number of seizures.Seizures and doses were recorded in diaries.Of 175 patients enrolled, 163 received ≥1 dose of diazepam nasal spray and were included in the safety population; those patients received a total of 4390 doses for a total of 3853 seizure clusters. Less than half of these patients used a second dose a least once during the study (79 patients [48.5%]), with a total of 485 second doses for seizure clusters (12.6% of all seizure clusters). Among these 79 patients, 33 (41.8%) used only one second dose during the study (range: 1-82). The proportion of seizure clusters treated with a second dose over time was consistently low across 24 h: 0-4 h, 152 (3.9%); 4-6 h, 72 (1.9%); 6-8 h, 39 (1.0%); 8-12 h, 55 (1.4%); 12-16 h, 42 (1.1%); 16-20 h, 42 (1.1%); 20-24 h, 83 (2.2%). Rates of treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs) and treatment-related TEAEs occurring within 1 day of a second dose were low (15.2% and 5.1%, respectively).Patients with epilepsy may experience seizure clusters lasting up to 24 hours, and little is known about the effectiveness of rescue therapies for that duration. The current labeling of the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA)-approved outpatient treatments for seizure clusters (rectal diazepam, intranasal midazolam, and diazepam nasal spray) allows for a second dose, if needed, for control. These findings support the safety profile of second doses, and the low use supports the effectiveness of diazepam nasal spray across 24 hours.

Intranasal drug administration is a commonly used route for therapeutic formulations, but there may be challenges associated with a lack of absorption and bioavailability, as well as damage to mucosal tissue. To address these issues, potential absorption enhancers that are generally nonirritating to nasal mucosal tissue have been investigated as excipients in intranasal formulations. Among those studied are alkylsaccharides, which are composed of sugars covalently coupled to at least one alkyl chain. Alkylsaccharides have been shown to be nontoxic and have been used in food products as emulsifiers. In clinical trials, alkylsaccharide excipients have demonstrated substantially increased absorption of therapeutic agents across mucosal membranes and have been shown to be applicable to a wide range of types of molecules and molecular weights. Because they are water and oil soluble, alkylsaccharide excipients can be used in formulations with both hydrophilic and hydrophobic drugs. They are also effective in safely stabilizing protein therapeutics. An example of an alkylsaccharide excipient is dodecyl maltoside (Intravail®; 511 Da, stable long term when stored cold), which provides absorption enhancement by paracellular and transcellular routes. Dodecyl maltoside has been shown to be generally nonirritating to the nose and to promote systemic bioavailability. Dodecyl maltoside is used in US Food and Drug Administration-approved intranasal formulations of sumatriptan for migraine headaches and diazepam nasal spray for patients with epilepsy with acute seizure clusters.

Some patients with epilepsy experience seizure clusters, which may be defined as 2 or more seizures occurring within 24 hours. Left untreated, seizure clusters increase the risk for physical injury and may progress to status epilepticus, irreversible neurologic injury, and death. Rescue therapy is based on benzodiazepine treatment. Prompt, appropriate use should be specified in patients’ individualized seizure action plans. Most seizure clusters occur outside the hospital setting. The ideal rescue therapy allows for easy and quick administration by a nonmedical person, which may minimize the need for intervention by emergency medical personnel or transportation to the hospital. In the 2 decades before the approval of 2 intranasal benzodiazepines in 2019 and 2020, rectal diazepam was the only route of administration approved by the US Food and Drug Administration specifically for seizure clusters. Each of the approved intranasal formulations has a unique profile. Both offer a convenient and socially acceptable route of administration. Recognition of seizure clusters and timing of proper administration are key to successful use of rescue therapy. Pharmacists’ counseling plays an important role in reinforcing when and how to appropriately administer rescue therapies and the importance of consistently using rescue treatment when indicated to promote effective management. This review includes resources for pharmacists, patients, and caregivers; reviews currently available treatments; and discusses seizure action plans that support effective treatment of seizure clusters.

Clinical studies of rescue medications for seizure clusters are limited and are designed to satisfy regulatory requirements, which may not fully consider the needs of the diverse patient population that experiences seizure clusters or utilize rescue medication. The purpose of this narrative review is to examine the factors that contribute to, or may influence the quality of, seizure cluster research with a goal of improving clinical practice. We address five areas of unmet needs and provide advice for how they could enhance future trials of seizure cluster treatments. The topics addressed in this article are: (1) unaddressed end points to pursue in future studies, (2) roles for devices to enhance rescue medication clinical development programs, (3) tools to study seizure cluster prediction and prevention, (4) the value of other designs for seizure cluster studies, and (5) unique challenges of future trial paradigms for seizure clusters. By focusing on novel end points and technologies with value to patients, caregivers, and clinicians, data obtained from future studies can benefit the diverse patient population that experiences seizure clusters, providing more effective, appropriate care as well as alleviating demands on health care resources.

Objective Need for rescue therapy differs among patients with seizure clusters. Diazepam nasal spray is approved to treat seizure clusters in patients with epilepsy ≥6 years of age. This analysis used interim data from a phase 3 safety study to assess safety profile and effectiveness of diazepam nasal spray using average number of doses/month as a proxy measurement. Methods This phase 3, open‐label, repeat‐dose, safety study of diazepam nasal spray enrolled patients (6‐65 years) with epilepsy and need of benzodiazepine rescue. Patients were stratified by average number of doses/month (5, very‐high frequency). Safety was evaluated based on treatment‐emergent adverse events (TEAEs), assessed nasal irritation, and olfaction. The proportion of treatments given as a second dose was used as an exploratory proxy for effectiveness. Results Of 175 enrolled patients (data cutoff, October 31, 2019), 158 received ≥1 dose of diazepam nasal spray. Frequency of use was moderate in 43.7% of patients, high in 50.6% of patients, and very high in 5.7% of patients. Patients treated 3397 seizure episodes (moderate frequency, 14.2%; high frequency, 59.9%; very high frequency, 25.8%). Nasal discomfort was the most common treatment‐related TEAE in all groups. No notable changes in nasal irritation or olfaction were observed. Second doses represented only 2.5%, 7.5%, and 17.2% of all doses in the moderate‐, high‐, and very‐high‐frequency groups, respectively. Overall retention rate was 82.9%, without an observed relationship to frequency of use. Significance Frequency of dosing diazepam nasal spray had little impact on the safety/tolerability profile across a range of 5 doses/month. Effectiveness was suggested for all dosing frequencies by the high proportion of seizure clusters not treated with a second dose. These results support the utility, safety profile, and effectiveness of diazepam nasal spray across frequencies of seizure cluster burden.

Objective Diazepam nasal spray (Valtoco), indicated for acute treatment of frequent seizure activity (seizure clusters) in patients with epilepsy ≥6 years of age, is designed to be a rapid, noninvasive, socially acceptable route of administration. This interim analysis evaluated the safety profile of diazepam nasal spray in patients with and without concomitant use of benzodiazepines, with use of a second dose for a seizure cluster as a proxy for effectiveness. Methods A long‐term, phase 3, open‐label safety study enrolled patients with epilepsy who had seizures despite a stable antiseizure medication regimen. Results Among 175 patients enrolled by October 31, 2019, a total of 158 were treated with diazepam nasal spray (aged 6–65 years; 53.8% female). Of those, 119 (75.3%) received concomitant benzodiazepines (60, chronic; 59, intermittent); 39 (24.7%) did not. Use of a second dose was similar in patients using chronic concomitant benzodiazepines (second dose in 11.1% [144/1299]) and those with no concomitant benzodiazepines (second dose in 10.3% [41/398]). Treatment emergent adverse events (TEAEs) occurred for 80.0% with chronic use of concomitant benzodiazepines and 61.5% without. Cardiorespiratory depression was not reported, and no serious TEAEs were treatment related. Study retention was high: 83.3% in the chronic benzodiazepine group and 76.9% in the no‐benzodiazepine group. Findings were similar in a sub‐analysis of patients who were (n = 44) or were not (n = 75) taking clobazam. Significance This analysis of patients from a long‐term study shows a similar safety profile of diazepam nasal spray in patients with and without concomitant benzodiazepines, and consistent with the established profile for diazepam. Use of a single dose of diazepam nasal spray and high study retention rates suggest the effectiveness of diazepam nasal spray in patients irrespective of chronic daily benzodiazepine use. Results were similar in the clobazam sub‐analysis. These results support the safety and effectiveness of diazepam nasal spray in patients with concomitant benzodiazepine use.

Seizure clusters must be treated quickly and effectively to prevent progression to prolonged seizures and status epilepticus. Rescue therapy for seizure clusters has focused on the use of benzodiazepines. Although intravenous benzodiazepine administration is the primary route in hospitals and emergency departments, seizure clusters typically occur in out‐of‐hospital settings, where a more portable product that can be easily administered by nonmedical caregivers is needed. Thus, other methods of administration have been examined, including rectal, intranasal, intramuscular, and buccal routes. Following US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) approval in 1997, rectal diazepam became the mainstay of out‐of‐hospital treatment for seizure clusters in the United States. However, social acceptability and consistent bioavailability present limitations. Intranasal formulations have potential advantages for rescue therapies, including ease of administration and faster onset of action. A midazolam nasal spray was approved by the FDA in 2019 for patients aged 12 years or older. In early 2020, the FDA approved a diazepam nasal spray for patients aged 6 years or older, which has a different formulation than the midazolam nasal product and enhances aspects of bioavailability. Benzodiazepines, including diazepam, present significant challenges in developing a suitable intranasal formulation. Diazepam nasal spray contains dodecyl maltoside (DDM) as an absorption enhancer and vitamin E to increase solubility in an easy‐to‐use portable device. In a Phase 1 study, absolute bioavailability of the diazepam nasal spray was 97% compared with intravenous diazepam. Subsequently, the nasal spray demonstrated less variability in bioavailability than rectal gel (percentage of geometric coefficient of variation of area under the curve = 42%–66% for diazepam nasal spray compared with 87%–172% for rectal gel). The diazepam nasal spray safety profile is consistent with that expected for rectal diazepam, with low rates of nasal discomfort (≤6%). To further improve the efficacy of rescue therapy, investigation of novel intranasal benzodiazepine formulations is underway.

The impact of seizure clusters and the use of intermittent rescue therapy for clusters on the quality of life (QoL) of patients with epilepsy has not been widely studied. The present analysis assessed QoL as a secondary endpoint among adult patients with seizure clusters enrolled in a long-term, phase 3, open-label safety study (NCT02721069) of diazepam nasal spray (Valtoco®). The QoL aspect of patients in this study has not been previously published.The 12-month safety study of diazepam nasal spray enrolled patients aged 6-65 years with seizure clusters. Adults aged ≥18 years completed the Quality of Life in Epilepsy (QOLIE)-31-P at baseline (day 0) and days 30, 150, 270, and 365. This instrument includes questions about patient health and daily activities with numeric values (1-100) assigned to responses; higher scores indicate better QoL. The QOLIE-31-P includes 7 subscales: Seizure Worry, Overall QoL, Emotional Well-Being, Energy/Fatigue, Cognitive Functioning, Medication Effects, and Social Functioning; an Overall Score is calculated as a weighted composite of the 7 subscales. Comparisons were made between subgroups of patients who had frequent (≥2) and infrequent (2) monthly dosing of diazepam nasal spray and those whose doses were administered by the patient or a care partner. This safety study was not powered to assess efficacy endpoints; descriptive statistics were calculated across time points. In addition, safety measures, including treatment-emergent adverse events, are reported.Seventy-two adults who responded to the QOLIE-31-P were included in the analyses. Mean QOLIE-31-P scores were stable or increased across time points. The mean total scores increased from day 0 to day 365 by 5.2 among patients providing data for ≥1 time point (follow-up group) and 2.2 among patients providing data at all time points (QOLIE all-assessments subgroup). Subscale means for Seizure Worry and Social Functioning showed the greatest numeric increase from baseline. Mean QOLIE-31-P scores were similar in all subgroups. The safety profile in the follow-up group was similar to that seen in all study adults.Adults with refractory epilepsy who were treated with diazepam nasal spray for seizure clusters maintained or improved QOLIE subscale scores across the 12-month study period. Seizure Worry and Social Functioning subscale scores increased over time, suggesting improvement in these domains for this population with intractable epilepsy. Changes among subscale results suggest differences in sensitivity to the use of an intermittent treatment. The potential to improve patient function with treatment for seizure clusters warrants further study.

Background Ideal rescue treatments for acute treatment of seizure clusters should be easy to administer, so it is important to assess user perceptions of these treatments. Diazepam nasal spray is designed to have a rapid, noninvasive, and socially acceptable route of administration. Patient and caregiver (including care partner) responses to surveys from a phase 3 safety study of diazepam nasal spray are reported. Methods The study enrolled patients aged 6–65 years with seizure clusters. Surveys distributed to patients and caregivers at study end, completion, or discontinuation collected data on comfort using diazepam nasal spray outside the home, timing of administration and return to their usual selves, and comfort of use compared with rectal diazepam. Safety was assessed. Results Of 175 patients enrolled at the October 31, 2019, interim cutoff, 158 received diazepam nasal spray. Sixty-seven (42.4%) patients and 84 (53.2%) caregivers responded to the surveys (including 35 matched pairs). Most patients (78.8%, 52/66) responded that they were very comfortable doing activities outside the home with diazepam nasal spray available; 59.4% of patients returned to their usual selves within an hour of administration. Twenty-seven (40.3%) of these patients reported self-administration, 48% doing so at the first sign of a seizure. Administration of diazepam nasal spray was rated extremely or very easy by 93.8% of caregivers. Safety profile was consistent with diazepam rectal gel; no patient discontinued owing to treatment-emergent adverse events. Nasal discomfort was typically mild and transient. Among patients who had used diazepam rectal gel, most were not at all comfortable using it outside the home (86.7%) or at home (64.5%) compared with diazepam nasal spray, whereas caregivers reported that diazepam rectal gel was not at all easy to use compared with diazepam nasal spray. Conclusions This survey from the phase 3 safety study of diazepam nasal spray shows that patients and caregivers were satisfied with, and more comfortable using, diazepam nasal spray than rectal diazepam in public. NCT02721069.

Tolerance is a known consideration for maintenance use of benzodiazepines and other antiseizure drugs; however, clinical experience suggests that tolerance may not be anticipated with long-term intermittent use of benzodiazepines as rescue therapy. Diazepam nasal spray (Valtoco®) is a proprietary intranasal formulation approved for the acute treatment of intermittent, stereotypic episodes of frequent seizure activity (ie, seizure clusters, acute repetitive seizures) in patients with epilepsy aged ≥6 years. Reported here are exploratory analyses investigating whether there was evidence of development of tolerance in an interim analysis of a long-term, phase 3, open-label safety study of diazepam nasal spray.Patients and care partners were trained to administer 5, 10, 15, or 20 mg of diazepam nasal spray (age- and weight-based dosing), with a second dose administered 4-12 hours later if needed. A series of analyses were performed to assess evidence of tolerance using 2 equal, adjacent time periods and data for each patient to compare the proportion of events for which second doses of diazepam nasal spray (as a proxy for effectiveness) were administered in period 1 compared with period 2.A total of 175 patients were enrolled at interim cutoff, and 158 were treated with diazepam nasal spray for 3370 seizure-cluster events. For 73.4% of patients, duration of exposure to diazepam nasal spray was ≥12 months. A total of 191 analyses were conducted; the proportion of analyses in which second doses in period 2 were lower than in period 1 was 72.8%. Only 5 analyses showed nominally statistically significant changes (P 0.05); this is fewer than expected by chance, and these differences were not directionally consistent. There was no safety signal with continued use.These analyses found no statistical evidence of tolerance with the use of diazepam nasal spray over time based on use of a second dose in an initial period of the study compared with a subsequent period for each patient. These results are in agreement with prior studies of benzodiazepine rescue therapy.

Objective To assess pharmacokinetics and safety of diazepam nasal spray (NRL‐1; VALTOCO®) in pediatric and adult patients with epilepsy in seizure and nonseizure states. Methods A single dose of diazepam nasal spray (5, 10, 15, or 20 mg based on weight) was administered during each of two conditions (ictal/peri‐ictal and interictal condition) to patients 6‐65 years old with partial or generalized epilepsy with motor seizures or seizures with clear alteration of awareness; a second dose was permitted if needed for persistent seizures. Dosing could be interictal or ictal/peri‐ictal first, with a washout of ≥14 days. Blood samples for pharmacokinetic analysis were taken at prespecified time points. Treatment‐emergent adverse events (TEAEs), sedation, nasal irritation, nasal mucosal pain, and olfactory changes were assessed. Results Of 57 patients in the study (mean age = 28.1 years [range = 6‐59], 54.4% female, 80.7% white), 49 were included in the primary pharmacokinetic analyses. Diazepam pharmacokinetic profiles were similar under both conditions, with approximately 2‐hour median time to mean (SD) maximum plasma concentrations of 164 (88) and 189 (110) ng/mL for ictal/peri‐ictal and interictal conditions, respectively; drug exposure during the first 6 hours postdosing was 532 (313) and 615 (368) h•ng/mL, respectively. Seventeen patients (29.8%) reported TEAEs, of whom eight (14%) had treatment‐related TEAEs, with those reported in ≥2 patients being dysgeusia (n = 3, 5.3%) and nasal discomfort (n = 2, 3.5%). One patient had serious TEAEs (recurrent seizures, metabolic encephalopathy), which were deemed unrelated to study treatment. No changes in respiratory rate were observed, nor were there clinically relevant changes in sedation, olfaction, nasal irritation, or acute nasal mucosal pain. Significance The epileptic conditions (ictal/peri‐ictal, interictal) had minimal impact on diazepam nasal spray pharmacokinetics in patients with epilepsy. Therefore, diazepam nasal spray can be administered ictally and interictally. Diazepam nasal spray safety was consistent with the profile of diazepam.

Purpose of review Disease-related treatment action plans for acute exacerbations providing information that may be helpful for self-management for patients and caregivers are commonly used for chronic conditions such as asthma and diabetes. However, among patients with epilepsy, a review of the literature suggested that the majority did not have an action plan in place for acute seizure treatment. Recent findings Currently, there is a lack of unified guidance on seizure action plans (SAPs) in the literature. In the authors’ opinion, available formats have limitations for practical use and may not be easily customizable to individual patients, and they are not often designed to provide simple-to-follow steps for rapid immediate steps to determine and initiate appropriate treatment of seizure emergencies. Our group reviewed current examples of SAPs and provided guidance on the development of acute seizure action plans (ASAPs) designed to facilitate rapid, appropriate acute care in the community and to be as useful as possible for a wide range of care partners, including those with limited experience. Summary This paper provides agreed upon expert opinion recommendations and considerations for goals, development process, types of content, and format for an ASAP.

Intranasal formulations are commonly used for drug delivery, and the literature has shown that seasonal allergies do not affect nasal administration of some agents. Diazepam nasal spray (Valtoco®) is a proprietary intranasal formulation with n-dodecyl-beta- d -maltoside (Intravail® A3) that is indicated for acute treatment of seizure clusters in patients with epilepsy aged 6 years and older. The analysis presented here is from an interim cutoff of a phase 3 open-label study evaluating the safety and tolerability of diazepam nasal spray. This analysis assessed whether seasonal allergies alter control of seizures with an intranasal formulation, using administration of a second dose as a surrogate efficacy endpoint. Of 158 evaluated patients with epilepsy having seizures despite a stable anti-seizure regimen, 62 patients had medical histories that included seasonal allergies or rhinitis. The results of this analysis show that seasonal allergies did not appear to influence use of a second dose; the groups of patients with and without a history of seasonal allergies both presented with low rates of seizure episodes for which a second dose was used, which suggests that there is not a major difference in pattern of use. Diazepam nasal spray demonstrated a similar safety and tolerability profile in patients with and without a history of seasonal allergies.

Purpose The US Food and Drug Administration has approved several highly purified ω-3 fatty acid prescription drugs for the treatment of severe hypertriglyceridemia. These differ in the amounts and forms of docosahexaenoic acid (DHA) and/or eicosapentaenoic acid (EPA). This study compared the bioavailability of SC401 (1530 mg EPA-ethyl esters [EEs] and DHA-EEs plus Advanced Lipid Technologies ⁎ *Trademark: Advanced Lipid Technologies TM (Sancilio and Company, Inc, Riviera Beach, Florida) [ALT † †Trademark: ALT ® (Sancilio and Company, Inc, Riviera Beach, Florida).], a proprietary lipid-delivery platform to improve absorption), with. Lovaza ‡ ‡Trademark: Lovaza ® (GlaxoSmithKline, Research Triangle Park, North Carolina). (3600 mg ω-3, primarily EPA-EEs and DHA-EEs) under low-fat feeding conditions. Methods This was a Phase I, randomized, open-label, single-dose, 2-way crossover study in healthy participants housed from day –3 to day 2 in each treatment period. Blood samples for pharmacokinetic measurements were collected before and after dosing, and safety profile and tolerability were assessed. Findings In unadjusted analyses, SC401 had 5% lower C max and approximately the same AUC 0–last of EPA + DHA total lipids compared with Lovaza. When adjusted for baseline, SC401 had ~6% higher C max and 18% higher AUC 0–last for EPA + DHA total lipids, and dose- and baseline-adjusted analyses found that SC401 had ~149% higher C max and 178% higher AUC 0–last than Lovaza for EPA + DHA total lipids. The T max was also substantially longer with Lovaza (~10 hours) than with SC401 (~6 hours). Implications These results indicate that SC401, an ω-3 acid EE formulation containing ALT † achieved high bioavailability of EPA and DHA, at a lower dose (1530 mg) than Lovaza (3600 mg), under low-fat feeding conditions.

Background The absorption of eicosapentaenoic acid (EPA; 20:5n-3) and docosahexaenoic acid (DHA; 22:6n-3) omega-3–acid ethyl esters (EEs) is influenced by food. There is a need for a formulation of EE that is less impacted by food effect. SC401 is a novel Advanced Lipid Technologies–based formulation of EPA-EE and DHA-EE. In the presence of an aqueous medium, Advanced Lipid Technologies forms stable micelles in situ independent of bile salt secretion. This effect is hypothesized to improve EPA-EE and DHA-EE bioavailability while it helps mitigate the food effect associated with their consumption. Objective The aim of the article was to assess the effect of food on the bioavailability of DHA and EPA after a single oral dose of 1530 mg omega-3 fatty acids EE (SC401) in 24 healthy subjects under fasted and low-fat (9% of total calories from fat) and high-fat (50% of total calories from fat) meal conditions. Methods This was a randomized, open-label, single-dose, 3-period, 3-way crossover study. Blood samples for pharmacokinetic analyses were taken at predose and at 0.5, 1, 2, 3, 3.5, 4, 4.5, 5, 5.5, 6, 6.5, 7, 8, 10, 12 and 24 hours postdose. To assess the safety of the intervention, active monitoring of adverse events, physical examinations, vital signs, clinical laboratory assessments (chemistry, hematology, and urinalysis), and 12-lead electrocardiograms were conducted. Results SC401 showed high bioavailability of both EPA and DHA in fasted, low-fat meal, and high-fat meal conditions. No differences were found in SC401 DHA AUC 0–t ( t = 24 hours) among the 3 conditions (91.69% high-fat/fasted, 97.12% low-fat/fasted, and 105.92% low-fat/high-fat; P > .05 in all cases). In contrast, SC401 EPA AUC 0–t was affected by food intake (179.06% high-fat/fasted, P P P = .0009). SC401 was safe and well tolerated. Conclusions A single dose of SC401 resulted in high levels of EPA and DHA total lipids in plasma in fasting and fed conditions. SC401 overcame the food effect for DHA and partially ameliorated it for EPA. SC401 represents a convenient option for treatment of severe hypertriglyceridemia, especially for patients under a restricted intake of dietary fat.

NRL‐1 is a novel intranasal formulation of diazepam that is being evaluated as rescue medication in patients with epilepsy who experience bouts of increased seizure activity despite stable regimens of antiepileptic drugs. This phase 1, open‐label, randomized, crossover study in healthy adult volunteers consisted of 3 single‐dose periods (5, 10, and 20 mg) followed by a 2‐dose period (2 × 10 mg) with a minimum 28‐day washout between treatments. Blood samples were taken at prespecified time points after intranasal dosing, and bioanalytic analysis of diazepam and nordiazepam was conducted using a validated liquid chromatography–tandem mass spectrometry method. Plasma pharmacokinetic parameters were summarized using descriptive statistics, and dose proportionality (peak concentration [Cmax] and area under the plasma concentration–time curve [AUC0‐∞]) was evaluated based on a power model within a 90%CI of 0.84 to 1.16. Comparisons were also conducted between single 10‐mg dose and multidose (2 × 10 mg) treatments. NRL‐1 administration resulted in rapid diazepam absorption (median time to peak concentration 1.4‐1.5 hours). Plasma concentration‐time profiles showed similar patterns of exposure that appeared to be dose dependent, with Cmax of 85.6, 133.6, and 235.3 ng/mL for the 5‐, 10‐, and 20‐mg doses, respectively, although the lower 90%CI for Cmax and AUC0‐∞ exceeded dose proportionality criteria. The coefficient of variation ranged from 59% to 67% for Cmax and 48% to 56% for AUC parameters. Dose‐normalized AUC0–∞ values were comparable between the 2 × 10‐mg and single 10‐mg doses. Treatment‐emergent adverse events were consistent with those expected for diazepam, with transient somnolence the most frequent adverse event (94.4%). These results support NRL‐1 as a potential therapy for managing seizure emergencies.

Despite recent advances, the drug development process continues to face significant challenges to efficiently improve the poor solubility of active pharmaceutical ingredients (API) in aqueous media or to improve the bioavailability of lipid-based formulations. The inherent high intra- and interindividual variability of absorption of oral lipophilic drug leads to inconsistent and unpredictable bioavailability and magnitude of the therapeutic effect. For this reason, the development of lipid-based drugs remains a challenging endeavour with a high risk of failure. Therefore, effective strategies to assure a predictable, consistent, and reproducible bioavailability and therapeutic effect for lipid-based medications are needed. Different solutions to address this problem have been broadly studied, including the approaches of particle size reduction, prodrugs, salt forms, cocrystals, solid amorphous forms, cyclodextrin clathrates, and lipid-based drug delivery systems such as self-emulsifying systems and liposomes. Here, we provide a brief description of the current strategies commonly employed to increase the bioavailability of lipophilic drugs and present Advanced Lipid Technologies® (ALT®), a combination of different surfactants that has been demonstrated to improve the absorption of omega-3 fatty acids under various physiological and pathological states.

Sickle cell disease (SCD) is one of the most common inherited blood disorder among African Americans affecting 70,000–100,000 individuals in the United States. It is characterized by abnormal hemoglobin (HbS) which develops into severe hemolytic anemia and vaso-occlusive crisis. Therefore, patients with SCD suffer from a chronic state of inflammation, which is responsible for multiple organ damage, ischemic attacks, and premature death. Another major hallmark of SCD patients is the abnormally low levels of omega-3 fatty acids, especially docosahexaenoic acid (DHA) in their red blood cell membranes. Treatment with DHA can reduce red blood cell adhesion and enhance cerebral blood flow, thus, our main goal is to investigate the effect of SC411, which is a novel, highly purified DHA ethyl ester formulation with a proprietary delivery platform in SCD. Utilizing a transgenic mouse model of SCD (HbSS-Townes) and recurrent hypoxic challenges (10%O2, 0.5% CO2 and balance N2 for 3 h) to mimic ischemic-like conditions, our data suggest that SC411 can elevate blood DHA and eicosapentaenoic acid (EPA) levels after 8 weeks of treatment. SC411 can also decrease arachidonic acid (AA) and sickling of red blood cells. In addition, SC411-treated SCD mice showed presented with cerebral blood flow, alleviated neuroinflammation, and revived working memory which ultimately enhanced overall survival. In summary, this study suggests that treatment with SC411 improves cellular and functional outcomes in SCD mice. This finding may provide novel therapeutic opportunities in the treatment against ischemic injury elicited by SCD.

A correspondence letter to “Nature Reviews Disease Primers” about the therapeutic potential of omega 3 fatty acids for patients with sickle cell disease.

Objectives The omega-3 (n − 3) fatty acids, eicosapentaenoic acid (EPA) and docosahexaenoic acid (DHA), are known to play an important role in maintenance and modulation of neuronal functions. There is evidence that omega-3 fatty acids may have anticonvulsant effects. The effect of DHA and EPA on seizure rate in patients with drug-resistant epilepsy (DRE) was investigated. Methods A double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled clinical trial included ninety-nine (n = 99) subjects with DRE, aged 5–16 years (n = 85) and 17–45 years (n = 14). After randomization, subjects were given two, four, or six capsules per day of DHA (417.8 mg DHA and 50.8 mg EPA/capsule, n = 33), EPA (385.6 mg EPA and 81.2 mg DHA/capsule, n = 33), or placebo (high oleic acid sunflower oil, n = 33) for one year. The primary endpoint was the effect of treatment on rate of seizure. Random-effects negative binomial regression models were fitted to model the patients' total count of seizures per month. The treatment effects on seizure incidence rate ratio (IRR) were tested after controlling for the covariate effects of gender, age, rate of seizure per week at enrollment, type of seizure, and number of antiepileptic drug (AED) combinations used at enrollment. Results Fifty-nine subjects (n = 59) completed the study (59.6%). The average number of seizures per month were 9.7 ± 1.2 in the EPA group, 11.7 ± 1.5 in the DHA group, and 16.6 ± 1.5 in the placebo group. Age, gender, and seizure-type adjusted seizure IRRs of the EPA and DHA groups compared with the placebo group were 0.61 (CI = 0.42–0.88, p = 0.008, 42% reduction) and 0.67 (CI = 0.46–1.0, p = 0.04, 39% reduction), respectively. There was no difference in IRR between the EPA and DHA groups (p = 0.56). Both treatment groups had a significantly higher number of seizure-free days compared with the placebo group (p Significance This study demonstrates that EPA and DHA are effective in reducing seizure frequency in patients with DRE.

Urinary tract infections (UTIs) were reported frequently with dalfampridine extended-release (dalfampridine-ER) 10 mg relative to placebo in previous multiple sclerosis (MS) studies. The objective of this study was to determine whether dalfampridine-ER is associated with increased incidence of confirmed UTIs in MS patients. This post hoc analysis used UTI data from a study comparing the 4-week safety and efficacy of 5 mg (n = 144) and 10 mg (n = 142) twice-daily dalfampridine-ER versus placebo (n = 143). To confirm UTIs, three clinical assessments were used: standard urinalysis (leukocytes > 5/high-power field); urine culture (≥ 100,000 and ≥ 10,000 colony-forming units [CFUs]/mL) for those who reported UTIs as adverse events (AEs) or had positive urinalysis; and UTI symptomatology. Fisher's exact test assessed statistical significance. The proportion of patients who reported UTIs as AEs in the placebo and dalfampridine-ER 5 mg and 10 mg groups were 5.6%, 6.3%, and 9.9%, respectively. In comparison, those with laboratory-confirmed UTIs were lower: ≥ 100,000 CFUs/mL: 4.2%, 2.8%, and 2.8%; and ≥ 10,000 CFUs/mL: 4.2%, 3.5%, and 4.9%, respectively (no significant statistical difference across treatments). The proportion of patients with confirmed UTI was similar between dalfampridine-ER and placebo, thus suggesting that the treatment does not increase the risk of UTIs.

Diazepam rectal gel (RG) is currently the only approved rescue therapy for outpatient management of seizure clusters in the United States. There is an unmet medical need for an alternative rescue therapy for seizure clusters that is effective, and more convenient to administer with a socially acceptable method of delivery. An intranasal diazepam formulation has been developed, and this study evaluates the tolerability and bioavailability of diazepam nasal spray (NS) relative to an equivalent dose of diazepam-RG in healthy adults. Twenty-four healthy adults were enrolled in a phase 1, open-label, 3-period crossover study. Plasma diazepam and metabolite concentrations were measured by serial sampling. Dose proportionality for 5- and 20-mg intranasal doses and the bioavailability of 20mg diazepam-NS relative to 20mg diazepam-RG were assessed by maximum plasma concentration (Cmax) and systemic exposure parameters (AUC0-∞ and AUC0-24). The mean Cmax values for 20mg diazepam-NS and 20mg diazepam-RG were 378 ± 106 and 328 ± 152 ng/mL, achieved at 1.0 and 1.5h, respectively. Subjects administered intranasal and rectal gel formulations experienced nasal and rectal leakage, respectively. Diazepam absorption following intranasal administration was consistent but 3 subjects with diazepam-RG had low plasma drug levels at the earliest assessment of 5 min, due to poor retention, and were excluded from analysis. Excluding them, the treatment ratios (20mg diazepam-NS:20mg diazepam-RG) and 90% confidence intervals for diazepam Cmax and AUC0-24 were 0.98 (0.85-1.14) and 0.89 (0.80-0.98), respectively, suggesting that the bioavailability was comparable between the two formulations. Dose proportionality was observed between the lowest and highest dose-strengths of intranasal formulation. Both intranasal and rectal treatments were well tolerated with mild to moderate adverse events. Results suggest that a single-dose of 20mg diazepam-NS is tolerable and comparable in bioavailability to that of diazepam-RG. The intranasal formulation may provide caregivers and patients with a more socially acceptable and convenient alternative rescue therapy in the acute treatment of seizure clusters.

Summary Objective To determine the feasibility of administering a diazepam nasal spray formulation (diazepam-NS) to adults with epilepsy during a generalized tonic–clonic seizure or in the postictal period following a tonic–clonic or other seizure type, to assess pharmacokinetics and to assess tolerability. Methods An open-label study was conducted in patients admitted to the epilepsy monitoring unit. Eligible patients received a single dose of diazepam-NS approximating 0.2 mg/kg. Plasma diazepam concentrations were measured serially up to 12 h postdose, and maximum observed plasma concentration (Cmax); time to maximum concentration (Tmax); and the area under the plasma concentration–time curve for time zero to last sampling time (AUC0–12) were estimated and dose-normalized. Pharmacodynamic assessments included Kaplan-Meier analysis to determine the time-to-next seizure. Safety and tolerability were assessed. Results Of the 78 patients who consented, 30 had treatment and pharmacokinetic data. Ten patients were treated during a convulsive tonic–clonic seizure, seven within 5 min following the last clonic jerk, and 13 in the postictal period ≥5 min after a tonic–clonic or following other seizure-types. Diazepam median Tmax was 45 min. Dose-normalized mean Cmax and AUC0–12 values of diazepam were comparable among patients regardless of the timing of diazepam-NS administration in relation to seizure. Of those treated, 65% were seizure-free during the 12-h observation period and 35% had post-dose seizures. Treatment was well tolerated, with no unexpected safety findings: 74% had mild and 25% had moderate adverse events. Nasopharyngeal signs were resolved by 12 h postdose. Significance Diazepam can be delivered in effective therapeutic concentrations by a nasal spray device during the convulsive phase of tonic–clonic seizures or in the postictal periods following tonic–clonic or other seizure types.

The US Food and Drug Administration has approved several highly purified ω-3 fatty acid prescription drugs for the treatment of severe hypertriglyceridemia. These differ in the amounts and forms of docosahexaenoic acid (DHA) and/or eicosapentaenoic acid (EPA). This study compared the bioavailability of SC401 (1530 mg EPA-ethyl esters [EEs] and DHA-EEs plus Advanced Lipid TechnologiesThis was a Phase I, randomized, open-label, single-dose, 2-way crossover study in healthy participants housed from day -3 to day 2 in each treatment period. Blood samples for pharmacokinetic measurements were collected before and after dosing, and safety profile and tolerability were assessed.In unadjusted analyses, SC401 had 5% lower CThese results indicate that SC401, an ω-3 acid EE formulation containing ALT

The US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) draft guidance for establishing bioequivalence (BE) of ω-3 acid ethyl esters (containing both eicosapentaenoic acid [EPA] and docosahexaenoic acid [DHA] as ethyl esters), used to treat severe hypertriglyceridemia, recommends the conduct of 2 studies: one with participants in the fasting state and one with participants in the fed state. For the fasting study, the primary measures of BE are baseline-adjusted EPA and DHA levels in total plasma lipids. For the fed study, the primary measures of BE are EPA and DHA ethyl esters in plasma. This guidance differs from that established for icosapent ethyl (EPA ethyl esters) in which the primary measure of BE is baseline-adjusted total EPA in plasma lipids for both the fasting and fed states. The FDA guidance for ω-3 acid ethyl esters is not supported by their physiologic characteristics and triglyceride-lowering mechanisms because EPA and DHA ethyl esters are best characterized as pro-drugs. This article presents an argument for amending the FDA draft guidance for ω-3 acid ethyl esters to use baseline-adjusted EPA and DHA in total plasma lipids as the primary measures of BE for both fasting and fed conditions. This change would harmonize the approaches for demonstration of BE for ω-3 acid ethyl esters and icosapent ethyl (EPA ethyl esters) products for future development programs and is the most physiologically rational approach to BE testing.

The absorption of eicosapentaenoic acid (EPA; 20:5n-3) and docosahexaenoic acid (DHA; 22:6n-3) omega-3-acid ethyl esters (EEs) is influenced by food. There is a need for a formulation of EE that is less impacted by food effect. SC401 is a novel Advanced Lipid Technologies-based formulation of EPA-EE and DHA-EE. In the presence of an aqueous medium, Advanced Lipid Technologies forms stable micelles in situ independent of bile salt secretion. This effect is hypothesized to improve EPA-EE and DHA-EE bioavailability while it helps mitigate the food effect associated with their consumption.The aim of the article was to assess the effect of food on the bioavailability of DHA and EPA after a single oral dose of 1530 mg omega-3 fatty acids EE (SC401) in 24 healthy subjects under fasted and low-fat (9% of total calories from fat) and high-fat (50% of total calories from fat) meal conditions.This was a randomized, open-label, single-dose, 3-period, 3-way crossover study. Blood samples for pharmacokinetic analyses were taken at predose and at 0.5, 1, 2, 3, 3.5, 4, 4.5, 5, 5.5, 6, 6.5, 7, 8, 10, 12 and 24 hours postdose. To assess the safety of the intervention, active monitoring of adverse events, physical examinations, vital signs, clinical laboratory assessments (chemistry, hematology, and urinalysis), and 12-lead electrocardiograms were conducted.SC401 showed high bioavailability of both EPA and DHA in fasted, low-fat meal, and high-fat meal conditions. No differences were found in SC401 DHA AUCA single dose of SC401 resulted in high levels of EPA and DHA total lipids in plasma in fasting and fed conditions. SC401 overcame the food effect for DHA and partially ameliorated it for EPA. SC401 represents a convenient option for treatment of severe hypertriglyceridemia, especially for patients under a restricted intake of dietary fat.

Purpose The goal of this study was to evaluate the safety and tolerability of dalfampridine extended release (D-ER) in a pilot study of adults with cerebral palsy (CP) and limited ambulatory ability, and to explore drug effects on sensorimotor function. Methods An initial double-blind, single-dose crossover study was performed in 11 individuals randomized 1:1 to receive D-ER (10 mg) or placebo, followed by a 2-day washout period and the opposite treatment, with evaluation for safety and tolerability. A twice daily dosing, double-blind, placebo-controlled, crossover study was then performed. Participants were randomized in a 1:1 ratio to 1 of 2 sequences: 1 week of D-ER (10 mg BID) or placebo, followed by a 1-week washout and 1 week of the opposite treatment. Key inclusion criteria were age 18 to 70 years, body mass index 18.0 to 30.0 kg/m 2 , diagnosis of CP, and ability to perform all study procedures. Key exclusion criteria were severe CP, moderate or severe renal impairment, history of nonfebrile seizures, and prior dalfampridine use. Primary outcomes were safety profile and tolerability. Exploratory functional outcomes comprised changes in upper and lower extremity sensorimotor function (grip and pinch strength tests), manual dexterity (Box and Block Tests), and walking speed (Timed 25-Foot Walk). The most pronounced measured functional deficit in each individual was defined as the exploratory primary functional end point. Full crossover data were analyzed by using a mixed effects model. Findings Among the 24 total participants who were randomized to treatment and completed the twice daily dosing phase study, their mean age was 38.6 years (range, 20–62 years), 54% were women, and 83% had spastic CP. Adverse events were consistent with previous D-ER trials, most commonly headache (13% D-ER, 4% placebo), fatigue (13% D-ER, 0% placebo), insomnia (8% D-ER, 4% placebo), diarrhea (4% D-ER, 4% placebo), and nausea (4% D-ER, 4% placebo). The mixed model analysis of full crossover data identified no significant difference between D-ER and placebo in the primary functional analysis (the most pronounced deficit; P = 0.70) or in the secondary analyses (hand strength [ P = 0.48], manual dexterity [ P = 0.13], or walking speed [ P = 0.42]). Implications In this preliminary study of adults with CP, a BID dose of 10-mg D-ER was generally safe and well tolerated. The exploratory functional assessments for upper and lower sensorimotor deficits did not establish that the study population was markedly responsive to D-ER relative to placebo. These findings do not provide the proof-of-concept that would support further evaluation of D-ER as a potential intervention to improve function in adults with CP. ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT01468350.

Michele Jara, Thomas Aquilina, Peter Aupperle, Adrian L Rabinowicz Acorda Therapeutics, Inc., Ardsley, NY, USA Background: Dalfampridine extended release tablets (dalfampridine-ER; prolonged-, modified, or sustained-release fampridine outside the US), 10 mg twice daily, was approved by the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) in January 2010 to improve walking in people with multiple sclerosis, as determined by an increase in walking speed. Objective: To provide a descriptive analysis of reported adverse events (AEs) for commercially available dalfampridine-ER from March 2010 through March 31, 2015. Methods: Five-year postmarketing data for dalfampridine-ER were available from the exposure of approximately 107,000 patients in the US (103,700 patient-years). Commonly reported AEs (≥2% of all reported AEs) and serious AEs were determined. The incidence of reported seizures was determined and the events were further investigated. Results: Among the 107,000 patients exposed to dalfampridine-ER (70% female; mean age 52.1), the most common AEs were dizziness (3.7%), insomnia (3.2%), balance disorder (3%), fall (2.4%), headache (2.4%), nausea (2.1%), and urinary tract infection (2%). Other common AEs were drug ineffectiveness (5.8%), gait disturbance (4.6%), and inappropriate dosing (3.1%). Serious AEs included rare anaphylactic reactions (five cases) and drug hypersensitivity reactions (eight cases). A total of 657 seizure cases were reported (6.3/1,000 patient-years); of these, 324 were medically confirmed (3.1/1,000 patient-years). Incidence of reported seizures was stable over time. Duration of treatment prior to a seizure ranged from a single dose to >4 years; 12% of the seizures occurred within a week of starting treatment. Conclusion: The 5-year US postmarketing safety data of dalfampridine-ER is consistent with the safety profile observed in clinical trials. Incidence of reported seizures remained stable over time. Since commercial availability in March 2010, a warning regarding the risk of anaphylaxis and severe allergic reactions was added to the US prescribing information. Keywords: dalfampridine, fampridine, multiple sclerosis, adverse events, postmarketing safety