Potential clinical impact of compounded versus noncompounded intrathecal baclofen

The impact of strategies to manage the COVID-19 pandemic on patients with intrathecal baclofen therapy

BACKGROUND

The activities related to intrathecal baclofen (ITB) therapy could not be interrupted at the outbreak of COVID-19 pandemic due to possible life-threatening related complications such as withdrawal and over dosage syndromes. In this study we reported the different adopted strategies to manage patients with an ITB implanted infusion pump during the pandemic period and studied the impact of these strategies on experiences reported from patients and their caregivers, assessed through a specific survey.

METHODS

Thirty-five patients (mean age: 43.71±12.33 years) were included. Their clinical and medical data were recorded and observed from March 2020 to March 2021 and different strategies implemented in order to limit patients and providers risk of exposure to COVID-19. The impact of these strategies was assessed trough a survey that was performed after the first two months of pandemic (coinciding with the period of general lockdown) and after one year from the pandemic onset.

RESULTS

We observed a statistically significant improvement of the following items: difficulties in reaching medical clinic (P=0.0072), continuation of physical therapy (P=0.0021) and feelings of anxiety in medical conditions (P=0.0006). Considering the difficulties in communications with the medical staff we obtained optimal scores both at the beginning of pandemic and after one year from the pandemic onset without significant difference.

CONCLUSIONS

Our survey showed that the adopted strategies provided a feeling of confidence and safety among ITB patients and their caregivers during the COVID-19 pandemic. We think that a clear communication is always of paramount importance to manage these patients.

Pediatric intrathecal baclofen management during the COVID-19 pandemic in the US and Canada

The COVID-19 pandemic has been a challenge to healthcare systems around the world. Within pediatric rehabilitation medicine, management of intrathecal baclofen has been particularly challenging. This editorial reviews how programs in the US and Canada coped with the quickly changing healthcare environment and how we can learn from this pandemic to be prepared for future crises.

Baclofen Solution for Low-Volume Therapeutic Delivery

OBJECTIVES

Baclofen is a zwitterion molecule where increased ions in the excipient increase the solubility. We developed baclofen in a stable solution similar to cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) without bicarbonate and proteins to improve the solubility of the baclofen and to reduce the potential toxicity to the central nervous system (CNS) and subarachnoid space. The objective is to develop a solution of baclofen wherein baclofen is solubilized in a multivalent physiological ion solution such as artificial cerebrospinal fluid (aCSF) at a concentration from 2 mg/cc to 10 mg/cc.

METHODS

First, to determine the solubility of Baclofen in aCSF, solubility was determined at six different pH levels at 37°C, by the addition of aCSF to a known amount of Baclofen. The final concentrations were confirmed by high performance liquid chromatography (HPLC) analysis. Second, the stability of Baclofen at 4 mg/cc investigated in a test manufacturing batch utilizing standard methods of production of 1500 20 cc vials inverted for 18 months at 25°C at 60% humidity. The stability and purity of the baclofen was verified at 18 months by HPLC analysis.

RESULTS

Baclofen was initially soluble between pH of 6-8 above 7 mg/cc but fell back to 6.3-5.8 mg/cc level with time. Baclofen produced in vials with inversion were noted to be stable at 4 mg/cc at 18 months with less than 2% breakdown of the baclofen in solution.

CONCLUSION

Baclofen is much more soluble in artificial CSF than normal saline. The artificial CSF may also be less toxic to the subarachnoid space than saline.

Potential risks of pharmacy compounding

Pharmacy compounding involves the preparation of customized medications that are not commercially available for individual patients with specialized medical needs. Traditional pharmacy compounding is appropriate when done on a small scale by pharmacists who prepare the medication based on an individual prescription. However, the regulatory oversight of pharmacy compounding is significantly less rigorous than that required for Food and Drug Administration (FDA)-approved drugs; as such, compounded drugs may pose additional risks to patients. FDA-approved drugs are made and tested in accordance with good manufacturing practice regulations (GMPs), which are federal statutes that govern the production and testing of pharmaceutical products. In contrast, compounded drugs are exempt from GMPs, and testing to assess product quality is inconsistent. Unlike FDA-approved drugs, pharmacy-compounded products are not clinically evaluated for safety or efficacy. In addition, compounded preparations do not have standard product labeling or prescribing information with instructions for safe use. Compounding pharmacies are not required to report adverse events to the FDA, which is mandatory for manufacturers of FDA-regulated medications. Some pharmacies engage in activities that extend beyond the boundaries of traditional pharmacy compounding, such as large-scale production of compounded medications without individual patient prescriptions, compounding drugs that have not been approved for use in the US, and creating copies of FDA-approved drugs. Compounding drugs in the absence of GMPs increases the potential for preparation errors. When compounding is performed on a large scale, such errors may adversely affect many patients. Published reports of independent testing by the FDA, state agencies, and others consistently show that compounded drugs fail to meet specifications at a considerably higher rate than FDA-approved drugs. Compounded sterile preparations pose the additional risk of microbial contamination to patients. In the last 11 years, three separate meningitis outbreaks have been traced to purportedly ‘sterile’ steroid injections contaminated with fungus or bacteria, which were made by compounding pharmacies. The most recent 2012 outbreak has resulted in intense scrutiny of pharmacy compounding practices and increased recognition of the need to ensure that compounding is limited to appropriate circumstances. Patients and healthcare practitioners need to be aware that compounded drugs are not the same as generic drugs, which are approved by the FDA. The risk-benefit ratio of using traditionally compounded medicines is favorable for patients who require specialized medications that are not commercially available, as they would otherwise not have access to suitable treatment. However, if an FDA-approved drug is commercially available, the use of an unapproved compounded drug confers additional risk with no commensurate benefit.

Quality of intrathecal baclofen from different sources

OBJECTIVE

To compare the quality of intrathecal baclofen obtained from a national compounding pharmacy (AnazaoHealth) with the manufactured product (Lioresal) with regard to accuracy and precision of baclofen concentration, and the content of the baclofen degradation product, 4-(4-chlorophenyl)-2-pyrrolidinone (PYR).

DESIGN

Samples of baclofen used for refilling intrathecal pumps were placed in 1.2-mL silicone gasket-sealed cryogenic vials and stored at or lower than -25°C. Each sample was a different lot number (Lioresal) or prescription number (AnazaoHealth). The laboratory was blinded to the source of the solutions. Coupled with electrospray ionization-mass spectrometry analyte confirmation, quantitation of baclofen and PYR in each sample was performed in duplicate by using high-performance liquid chromatography with ultraviolet detection via a photodiode array detector.

SETTING

Outpatient clinic.

PARTICIPANTS

Patients with intrathecal baclofen pumps.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

Accuracy and precision of baclofen concentration, and concentration of PYR.

RESULTS

The difference of mean concentrations from expected concentrations of 500 and 2000 μg/mL were significantly greater for samples from AnazaoHealth compared with Lioresal. Values are shown as mean (± standard error), with n the number samples, for AnazaoHealth compared with Lioresal: (537.1 ± 6.7 μg/mL [n = 8] versus 515.6 ± 0.82 μg/mL [n = 5]; P = .034, respectively) and (2211.4 ± 21.6 μg/mL [n = 12] versus 2055.3 ± 8.7 μg/mL [n = 4]; P = .004, respectively). AnazaoHealth samples with expected concentration of 4000 μg/mL were 3987.7 ± 79.9 μg/mL, n = 7. All 9 Lioresal samples were within 5% of the expected concentration. Of 27 AnazaoHealth samples, 22 were more than 5%, and 8 were more than 10% different from the expected concentration. No PYR was detected in any sample from AnazaoHealth. All samples of Lioresal contained PYR, but all solutions contained less PYR than 1% of the baclofen concentration.

CONCLUSIONS

Lioresal was more accurate in concentration and more precise among batches than compounded intrathecal baclofen but had higher levels of PYR.