Bioavailability and safety of diazepam intranasal solution compared to oral and rectal diazepam in healthy volunteers

Development of neffy, an Epinephrine Nasal Spray, for Severe Allergic Reactions

Epinephrine autoinjectors (EAIs) are used for the treatment of severe allergic reactions in a community setting; however, their utility is limited by low prescription fulfillment rates, failure to carry, and failure to use due to fear of needles. Given that delayed administration of epinephrine is associated with increased morbidity/mortality, there has been a growing interest in developing needle-free, easy-to-use delivery devices. neffy (epinephrine nasal spray) consists of three Food and Drug Administration (FDA)-approved components: epinephrine, Intravail A3 (absorption enhancer), and a Unit Dose Spray (UDS). neffy's development pathway was established in conjunction with the FDA and the European Medicines Agency and included multiple clinical trials to evaluate pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic responses under a variety of conditions, such as self-administration and allergic and infectious rhinitis, as well as an animal anaphylaxis model of severe hypotension, where neffy demonstrated a pharmacokinetic profile that is within the range of approved injection products and a pharmacodynamic response that is as good or better than injections. The increased pulse rate (PR) and blood pressure (BP) observed even one minute following the administration of neffy confirm the activation of α and β adrenergic receptors, which are the key components of epinephrine's mechanism of action. The results suggest that neffy will provide a safe and effective needle-free option for the treatment of severe allergic reactions, including anaphylaxis.

Development of a novel dosing paradigm to model diazepam rescue therapy in preclinical seizure and epilepsy models

Diazepam is a cornerstone immediate-use antiseizure rescue therapy that may extend the duration between seizure clusters in people living with epilepsy. However, our mechanistic understanding of intermittent rescue therapy on disease progression is limited by the lack of suitable preclinical models. Specifically, the pharmacokinetics of diazepam varies widely between humans and laboratory animals. Here, we developed a novel repeat rescue therapy dosing paradigm in rats to maintain prolonged therapeutic concentrations seen in humans. Rats received three diazepam doses separated by 1 h (0.75, 1.5, or 3 mg/kg, intraperitoneal); plasma and brains were collected at 10 min and 1, 3, or 6 h following the last dose. Plasma and brain concentrations followed a dose-dependent increase with peak concentrations following the repeat 3 mg/kg paradigm (180 ng/mL) being equivalent to plasma levels observed in human studies with diazepam nasal spray. Increased brain-to-plasma ratios in this paradigm indicate that diazepam accumulation in the brain may be long-acting at the site of action. Overall, our repeat diazepam dosing paradigm mimics drug concentrations and accumulation seen in humans, offering a preclinical tool to study the impact of benzodiazepine rescue therapy on seizure-cluster biology in rodent models of epilepsy. PLAIN LANGUAGE SUMMARY: There is more to learn about how diazepam works in the brains of people who use it only when they have two or more seizures in 24 h (this is called a seizure cluster). Ethical studies in animals can be used to learn more about medicines in the body. In this study, we showed that three doses of diazepam in rats give about the same amount of the drug as one dose for a person. We can now test rats with epilepsy to see how the drug might work in people who take it when needed for seizure clusters.

Diazepam nasal spray administration is effective to control seizure clusters irrespective of time of day

Introduction

Neurologic circadian influences, including sleep/wake transitions, processes (e.g., hormonal variation), and behavioral patterns (e.g., consumption of food and oral medications), may affect seizure patterns. Specific circadian patterns of seizures have been reported depending on type, onset location, and severity; however, data on patterns for patients with seizure clusters and effectiveness of rescue therapy by time of day are limited.

Methods

We conducted post hoc analyses using patient diary data from the phase 3 safety study of diazepam nasal spray, which is indicated for acute treatment of seizure clusters in patients with epilepsy aged ≥6 years. Patients were administered age- and weight-based doses; second doses could be administered if needed to control a seizure cluster. We assessed clock timing of seizure-cluster onset along with second-dose use as a proxy for effectiveness. Treatment-emergent adverse events were recorded.

Results

Seizure-cluster onset was observed to be generally highest during mornings and late evenings and lowest in the early evening and middle of the night. Second-dose use was not consistently associated with a specific time of day. The safety profile was consistent with that expected from previous studies of diazepam nasal spray.

Conclusion

These results suggest that diazepam nasal spray can be effectively administered at any time of day.

Advances and future perspectives of intranasal drug delivery: A scientometric review

Intranasal drug delivery is as a noninvasive and efficient approach extensively utilized for treating the local, central nervous system, and systemic diseases. Despite numerous reviews delving into the application of intranasal drug delivery across biomedical fields, a comprehensive analysis of advancements and future perspectives remains elusive. This review elucidates the research progress of intranasal drug delivery through a scientometric analysis. It scrutinizes several challenges to bolster research in this domain, encompassing a thorough exploration of entry and elimination mechanisms specific to intranasal delivery, the identification of drugs compatible with the nasal cavity, the selection of dosage forms to surmount limited drug-loading capacity and poor solubility, and the identification of diseases amenable to the intranasal delivery strategy. Overall, this review furnishes a perspective aimed at galvanizing future research and development concerning intranasal drug delivery.

Benzodiazepines for the Treatment of Seizure Clusters

Patients with epilepsy may experience seizure clusters, which are described by the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) as intermittent, stereotypic episodes of frequent seizure activity that are distinct from a patient's usual seizure pattern. Untreated seizure clusters may increase the risk for status epilepticus, as well as decrease quality of life and increase burden on patients and care partners. Benzodiazepine therapies are the mainstay for acute treatment of seizure clusters and are often administered by nonmedical care partners outside a healthcare facility. Three rescue therapies are currently FDA-approved for this indication, with diazepam rectal gel being the first in 1997, for patients aged ≥  2 years. Limitations of rectal administration (e.g., positioning and disrobing the patient, which may affect ease of use and social acceptability; interpatient variation in bioavailability) led to the investigation of the potential for nasal administration as an alternative. Midazolam nasal spray (MDS) was approved by the FDA in 2019 for patients aged ≥  12 years and diazepam nasal spray (DNS) in 2020 for patients aged ≥  6 years; these two intranasal therapies have differences in their formulations [e.g., organic solvents (MDS) vs. Intravail and vitamin E for absorption and solubility (DNS)], effectiveness (e.g., proportion of seizure clusters requiring only one dose), and safety profiles. In clinical studies, the proportion of seizure clusters for which only one dose of medication was used varied between the three approved rescue therapies with the highest single-dose rate for any time period for DNS; however, although studies for all three preparations enrolled patients with highly intractable epilepsy, inclusion and exclusion criteria varied, so the three cannot be directly compared. Treatments that have been used off-label for seizure clusters in the USA include midazolam for injection as an intranasal spray (indicated for sedation/anxiolysis/amnesia and anesthesia) and tablet forms of clonazepam (indicated for treatment for seizure disorders) and lorazepam (indicated for anxiety). In the European Union, buccal and intranasal midazolam are used for treating the indication of prolonged, acute convulsive seizures and rectal diazepam solution for the indication of epileptic and febrile convulsions; duration of effectiveness for these medications for the treatment of seizure clusters has not been established. This paper examines the literature context for understanding seizure clusters and their treatment and provides effectiveness, safety, and administration details for the three FDA-approved rescue therapies. Additionally, other medications that are used for rescue therapy in the USA and globally are discussed. Finally, the potential benefits of seizure action plans and candidates for their use are addressed. This paper is intended to provide details about the unique characteristics of rescue therapies for seizure clusters to help clarify appropriate treatment for individual patients.

Opportunities for Community Pharmacists to Counsel Patients With Epilepsy and Seizure Clusters to Overcome Barriers and Foster Appropriate Treatment

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.

Practical Questions About Rescue Medications for Acute Treatment of Seizure Clusters in Children and Adolescents with Epilepsy in the USA: Expanding Treatment Options to Address Unmet Needs

Epilepsy is a common pediatric neurological condition, affecting approximately 470,000 children in the USA and having a prevalence of 0.9% in the global population of approximately 2.6 billion children. Epilepsy is associated with disruptions in several areas of a child's life, including medical burden, quality of life, cognitive outcomes, and higher risk of mortality. Additionally, some pediatric patients may experience acute seizure emergencies such as seizure clusters (also called acute repetitive seizures), which are intermittent increases in seizure activity that differ from the patient's usual seizure pattern and may occur despite daily antiseizure drug administration. Seizure clusters increase a patient's risk for status epilepticus and emergency room visits. Benzodiazepines are the main category of drugs used as acute seizure therapies for seizure clusters. This narrative review provides a practical discussion of care for pediatric patients with epilepsy and seizure clusters exploring such topics as details about the US Food and Drug Administration-approved acute seizure therapies, safety and ease of use of these medications, benefits of seizure action plans to help ensure optimal treatment, and considerations for transitioning a pediatric patient with acute seizure therapy to adult healthcare management.

Treatment of Seizure Clusters in Epilepsy: A Narrative Review on Rescue Therapies

Epilepsy is a common neurological disorder in the United States, affecting approximately 1.2% of the population. Some people with epilepsy may experience seizure clusters, which are acute repetitive seizures that differ from the person's usual seizure pattern. Seizure clusters are unpredictable, are emotionally burdensome to patients and caregivers (including care partners), and require prompt treatment to prevent progression to serious outcomes, including status epilepticus and associated morbidity (e.g., lacerations, fractures due to falls) and mortality. Rescue medications for community use can be administered to terminate a seizure cluster, and benzodiazepines are the cornerstone of rescue treatment. Despite the effectiveness of benzodiazepines and the importance of a rapid treatment approach, as many as 80% of adult patients do not use rescue medication to treat seizure clusters. This narrative review provides an update on rescue medications used for treatment of seizure clusters, with an emphasis on clinical development and study programs for diazepam rectal gel, midazolam nasal spray, and diazepam nasal spray. Results from long-term clinical trials have shown that treatments for seizure clusters are effective. Intranasal benzodiazepines provide ease of use and patient and caregiver satisfaction in pediatric and adult patients. Adverse events attributed to acute rescue treatments have been characterized as mild to moderate, and no reports of respiratory depression have been attributed to treatment in long-term safety studies. The implementation of an acute seizure action plan to facilitate optimal use of rescue medications provides an opportunity for improved management of seizure clusters, allowing those affected to resume normal daily activities more quickly.

Optimizing Absorption for Intranasal Delivery of Drugs Targeting the Central Nervous System Using Alkylsaccharide Permeation Enhancers

Intranasal delivery of drugs offers several potential benefits related to ease of delivery, rapid onset, and patient experience, which may be of particular relevance to patients with central nervous system (CNS) conditions who experience acute events. Intranasal formulations must be adapted to address anatomical and physiological characteristics of the nasal cavity, including restricted dose volume, limited surface area, and barriers to mucosal absorption, in addition to constraints on the absorption window due to mucociliary clearance. Development of an effective formulation may utilize strategies including the addition of excipients to address the physicochemical properties of the drug within the constraints of nasal delivery. Dodecyl maltoside (DDM) and tetradecyl maltoside are alkylsaccharide permeation enhancers with well-established safety profiles, and studies have demonstrated transiently improved absorption and favorable bioavailability of several compounds in preclinical and clinical trials. Dodecyl maltoside is a component of three US Food and Drug Administration (FDA)-approved intranasal medications: diazepam for the treatment of seizure cluster in epilepsy, nalmefene for the treatment of acute opioid overdose, and sumatriptan for the treatment of migraine. Another drug product with DDM as an excipient is currently under FDA review, and numerous investigational drugs are in early-stage development. Here, we review factors related to the delivery of intranasal drugs and the role of alkylsaccharide permeation enhancers in the context of approved and future intranasal formulations of drugs for CNS conditions.

The Potential of the Nose-to-Brain Delivery of PACAP for the Treatment of Neuronal Disease

Research on the neuroprotective effect of pituitary adenylate cyclase-activating polypeptide (PACAP) and its use as a therapeutic agent has grown over the past 30 years. Both in vitro and in vivo experiments have shown that PACAP exerts a strong neuroprotective effect in many central and peripheral neuronal diseases. Various delivery routes have been employed from intravenous (IV) injections to intracerebroventricular (ICV) administration, leading either to systemic or topical delivery of the peptide. Over the last decade, a growing interest in the use of intranasal (IN) administration of PACAP and other therapeutic agents has emerged as an alternative delivery route to target the brain. The aim of this review is to summarize the findings on the neuroprotective effect of PACAP and to discuss how the IN administration of PACAP could contribute to target the effects of this pleiotropic peptide.

Acute seizure therapies in people with epilepsy: Fact or fiction? A U.S. Perspective

Patients with epilepsy (PWE) may experience seizure emergencies including acute repetitive seizures despite chronic treatment with daily antiseizure medications. Seizures may adversely impact routine daily activities and/or healthcare utilization and may impair the quality of life of patients with epilepsy and their caregivers. Seizures often occur at home, school, or work in a community setting. Appropriate treatment that is readily accessible for patients with seizure urgencies and emergencies is essential outside the hospital setting. When determining the best acute antiseizure therapy for PWE, clinicians need to consider all of the available rescue medications and their routes of administration including the safety and efficacy profiles. Benzodiazepines are a standard of care as a rescue therapy, yet there are several misconceptions about their use and safety. Reevaluating potential misconceptions and formulating best practices are necessary to maximize usage for each available option of acute therapy. We examine common beliefs associated with traditional use of acute seizure therapies to refute or support them based on the current level of evidence in the published literature.

Nose-to-brain drug delivery for the treatment of CNS disease: New development and strategies

Delivering drugs to the brain has always been a challenging task due to the restrictive properties of the blood-brain barrier (BBB). Intranasal delivery is therefore emerging as an efficient method of administration, making it easy to self-administration and thus provides a non-invasive and painless alternative to oral and parenteral administration for delivering therapeutics to the central nervous system (CNS). Recently, drug formulations have been developed to further enhance this nose-to-brain transport, primarily using nanoparticles (NPs). Therefore, the purposes of this review are to highlight and describe the anatomical basis of nasal-brain pathway and provide an overview of drug formulations and current drugs for intranasal administration in CNS disease.

Pediatric Status Epilepticus: Treat Early and Avoid Delays

Pediatric convulsive status epilepticus (cSE) is a neurologic emergency with potential for morbidity and mortality. Rapid treatment and escalation of therapies to achieve early seizure control is paramount in preventing complications and providing the best patient outcomes. Although guidelines recommend early treatment, cessation of out-of-hospital SE is undermined by treatment delay and inadequate dosing. Logistical challenges include prompt seizure recognition, first-line benzodiazepine (BZD) availability, comfort and expertise in administration of BZD, and timely arrival of emergency personnel. In-hospital, SE onset is additionally impacted by delays to first- and second-line treatment and availability of resources. This review presents an evidence-based, clinically oriented review of pediatric cSE, including its definitions and treatments. It provides evidence and rationale for timely treatment of first-line BZD treatment followed by prompt escalation to second-line antiseizure medication therapies for established SE. Treatment delays and barriers to care are discussed, with practical considerations for opportunities for areas of improvement in the initial treatment of cSE.

Overcoming barriers to the management of seizure clusters: ease of use and time to administration of rescue medications

INTRODUCTION

Patients with epilepsy can experience seizure clusters (acute repetitive seizures), defined as intermittent, stereotypic episodes of frequent seizure activity that are distinct from typical seizure patterns. There are three FDA-approved rescue medications, diazepam rectal gel, midazolam nasal spray, and diazepam nasal spray, that can be administered to abort a seizure cluster in a nonmedical, community setting. Despite their effectiveness and safety, rescue medications are underutilized, and patient/caregiver experiences and perceptions of ease of use may constitute a substantial barrier to greater utilization.

AREAS COVERED

The literature on rescue medications for seizure clusters is reviewed, including the effectiveness and safety, with an emphasis on ease and timing of treatment and associated outcomes. Barriers to greater utilization of rescue medication and the role of seizure action plans are discussed.

EXPERT OPINION

Intranasal rescue medications are easier to use and can be administered more rapidly than other routes (rectal, intravenous). Importantly, rapid administration of intranasal rescue medications has been associated with shorter durations of seizure activity as compared with rectal/intravenous routes. Intranasal rescue medications are also easy to use and socially acceptable. These factors potentially remove or reduce barriers to use and optimize the management of seizure clusters.

A randomized, open-label, two-treatment crossover study to evaluate the effect of food on the pharmacokinetics of diazepam nasal spray in healthy adults

OBJECTIVE

The pharmacokinetics of oral diazepam are affected by food, but food-effect studies have not been conducted for diazepam nasal spray because it is believed that most absorption occurs via the nasal mucosa. However, gastrointestinal side effects reported with nasal diazepam suggest that at least a portion of the drug may be absorbed enterally and thus subject to food effects. The objective of this study was to evaluate the possible effects of food on the pharmacokinetics of diazepam nasal spray in healthy adults.

METHODS

This randomized, open-label crossover study compared equal doses of diazepam nasal spray after an overnight fast and after a standardized high-fat, high-calorie breakfast. Each participant served as their own control, and there was a washout period of at least 21 days between treatments.

RESULTS

Twenty-four healthy adults enrolled in this study. Two participants withdrew consent, and two had pre-dose diazepam concentrations that exceeded the protocol-defined minimum after the washout period and were excluded from the final analysis population of 20 participants. Under fed conditions, the mean maximum plasma diazepam concentration was decreased by 48% (p < .0001) and the overall diazepam exposure during the first 4 h was reduced by 57% (p < .0001) compared with fasted conditions. The time to maximum plasma concentration was 4.0 h in the fed state compared with 2.0 h in the fasted state (p < .0001). At 2 h post-dose, diazepam concentrations were ≥150 ng/mL for 100% of the participants when in the fasted state and 30% when in the fed state. Significantly more participants experienced adverse events under fasted conditions (83.3%) than under fed conditions (54.5%; p = .0340).

SIGNIFICANCE

This study in healthy volunteers demonstrated that food significantly decreases and delays the absorption of diazepam dosed via nasal spray. Patients using diazepam nasal spray after eating may obtain diazepam concentrations that are below those needed for seizure control.

Drug delivery to the brain via the nasal route of administration: exploration of key targets and major consideration factors

Background

Cranial nerve-related diseases such as brain tumors, Alzheimer's disease, and epilepsy are serious diseases that continue to threaten human. Brain-related diseases are increasing worldwide, including in the United States and Korea, and these increases are closely related to the exposure to harmful substances and excessive stress caused by rapid industrialization and environmental pollution. Drug delivery to the brain is very important for the effective prevention and treatment of brain-related diseases. However, due to the presence of the blood-brain barrier and the extensive first-pass metabolism effect, the general routes of administration such as oral and intravenous routes have limitations in drug delivery to the brain. Therefore, as an alternative, the nasal-brain drug delivery route is attracting attention as a route for effective drug delivery to the brain.

Areas covered

This review includes physiological factors, advantages, limitations, current application status, especially in clinical applications, and the necessary factors for consideration in formulation development related to nasal-brain drug delivery.

Expert opinion

The nasal-brain drug delivery route has the advantage of enhancing drug delivery to the brain locally, mainly through the olfactory route rather than the systemic circulation. The nasal-brain lymphatic system has recently attracted attention, and it has been implied that the delivery of anticancer drugs to the brain nervous system is possible effectively. However, there are limitations such as low drug permeability, as well as nasal mucosa and the mucociliary system, as obstacles in nasal-brain drug delivery. Therefore, to overcome the limitations of nasal-brain drug delivery, the use of nanocarriers and mucoadhesive agents is being attempted. However, very few drugs have been officially approved for clinical application via the nasal-brain drug delivery route. This is probably because the understanding of and related studies on nasal-brain drug delivery are limited. In this review, we tried to explore the major considerations and target factors in drug delivery through the nasal-brain route based on physiological knowledge and formulation research information. This will help to provide a mechanistic understanding of drug delivery through the nasal-brain route and bring us one step closer to developing effective formulations and drugs in consideration of the key factors for nasal-brain drug delivery.

Prevalence and Predictors of Seizure Clusters in Pediatric Patients With Epilepsy: The Harvard-Yale Pediatric Seizure Cluster Study

BACKGROUND

Determine the prevalence of seizure clusters (two or more seizures in six hours), use of rescue medications, and adverse outcomes associated with seizure clusters in pediatric patients with a range of epilepsy severities, and identify risk factors predictive of seizure clusters.

METHODS

Prospective observational two-center study, including phone call and seizure diary follow-up for 12 months in patients with epilepsy aged one month to 18 years. We classified patients into three risk groups based on seizures within the prior year: high, seizure cluster (two or more seizures within one day); intermediate, at least one seizure but no days with two or more seizures; low, no seizures.

RESULTS

One-third (32.3%; high risk, 72.4%; intermediate risk, 30.4%; low risk, 3.1%) of 297 patients had a seizure cluster during the study, including half (46.2%) of the patients with active seizures at baseline (intermediate- and high-risk groups combined). Emergency room visits or injuries were no more likely due to a seizure cluster than an isolated seizure. Rescue medications were utilized in 15.8% of patients in the high-risk group and 19.2% in the intermediate-risk group. History of status epilepticus (adjusted odds ratio [aOR], 2.13; confidence interval [CI], 1.09 to 4.16]), seizure frequency greater than four per month (aOR, 4.27; CI, 1.92 to 9.50), and high-risk group status (aOR, 6.42; CI, 2.97 to 13.87) were associated with greater odds of seizure cluster.

CONCLUSIONS

Seizure clusters are common in pediatric patients with epilepsy. High seizure frequency was the strongest predictor of clusters. Rescue medications were underutilized. Future studies should evaluate the applicability and effectiveness of these medications for optimization of pediatric seizure cluster treatment and reduction of seizure-related emergency department visits, injuries, and mortality.

Preparation of Protein Aerogel Particles for the Development of Innovative Drug Delivery Systems

The research was oriented towards the preparation of aerogel particles based on egg white and whey protein isolate using various dispersion methods: dripping, spraying, and homogenization. Based on the results of analytical studies, the most appropriate samples were selected to obtain aerogels loaded with the drug. The results of the experimental research were used to study methods for obtaining nasal drug delivery systems based on aerogels. Protein aerogels were obtained by thermal gelation followed by supercritical drying. The obtained particles of protein aerogels have a specific surface area of up to 350 m²/g with a pore volume of up to 2.9 cm³/g, as well as a porosity of up to 95%. The results of experimental studies have shown that changing the dispersion method makes it possible to control the structural characteristics of protein aerogel particles. The results of the studies were applied to obtain innovative nasal drug delivery systems for the treatment of socially significant diseases. Analytical studies were conducted to determine the amount and state of adsorbed drugs in protein aerogel particles, as well as in vivo experiments on the distribution of clomipramine in blood plasma and brain tissue of rats to study the pharmacokinetics and bioavailability of the resulting drug-loaded protein aerogel.

A bibliometric analysis of the recent advances in diazepam from 2012 to 2021

Background: Diazepam is a classic benzodiazepine drug that has been widely used for disorders such as anxiety, sleep disorders, and epilepsy, over the past 59 years. The study of diazepam has always been an important research topic. However, there are few bibliometric analyses or systematic studies in this field. This study undertook bibliometric and visual analysis to ascertain the current status of diazepam research, and to identify research hotspots and trends in the past 10 years, to better understand future developments in basic and clinical research.

Methods: Articles and reviews of diazepam were retrieved from the Web of Science core collection. Using CiteSpace, VOSviewer, and Scimago Graphica software, countries, institutions, authors, journals, references, and keywords in the field were visually analyzed.

Results: A total of 3,870 publications were included. Diazepam-related literature had high volumes of publications and citations. The majority of publications were from the USA and China. The highest number of publications and co-citations, among the authors, was by James M Cook. Epilepsia and the Latin American Journal of Pharmacy were the journals with the most publications on diazepam and Epilepsia was the most frequently cited journal. Through a comprehensive analysis of keywords and references, we found that current research on diazepam has focused on its mechanism of action, application in disease, pharmacokinetics, risk, assessment, and management of use, status epilepticus, gamma-aminobutyric acid receptors (GABAR), intranasal formulation, gephyrin, and that ultra-performance liquid chromatography-tandem mass spectrometry (UPLC-MS/MS) is the current research hotspot.

Conclusion: Research on diazepam is flourishing. We identified research hotspots and trends in diazepam research using bibliometric and visual analytic methods. The clinical applications, mechanisms of action, pharmacokinetics, and assessment and management of the use of diazepam are the focus of current research and the development trend of future research.

Rescue therapies for seizure clusters: Pharmacology and target of treatments

The primary goal of treatment for seizure clusters is cessation of the cluster to avoid progression to more severe conditions, such as prolonged seizures and status epilepticus. Rescue therapies are key components of treatment plans for patients with seizure clusters. Three rescue therapies are approved in the United States for the treatment of seizure clusters: diazepam rectal gel, midazolam nasal spray, and diazepam nasal spray. This review characterizes the pharmacological function of rescue therapies for seizure clusters, as well as describing γ‐aminobutyric acid A (GABA_A) receptor functions. GABA_A receptors are heteropentamers, consisting primarily of α1‐6, β1‐3, γ2, and δ subunits in the central nervous system. These subunits can traffic to and from the membrane to regulate membrane potential. Benzodiazepines, such as diazepam and midazolam, are positive allosteric modulators of GABA_A receptors, the activation of which leads to an increase in intracellular chloride, hyperpolarization of the cell membrane, and a reduction in excitation. GABA_A receptor subunit mutations, dysregulation of trafficking, and degradation are associated with epilepsy. Although benzodiazepines are effective GABA_A receptor modulators, individual formulations have unique profiles in practice. Diazepam rectal gel is an effective rescue therapy for seizure clusters; however, adults and adolescents may have social reservations regarding its administration. Intranasal delivery of midazolam or diazepam is a promising alternative to rectal administration because these formulations offer easy, socially acceptable administration and exhibit a rapid onset. Off‐label benzodiazepines, such as orally disintegrating lorazepam and intranasal use of an intravenous formulation of midazolam via nasal atomizer, are less well characterized regarding bioavailability and tolerability compared with approved agents.

Use of new intranasal benzodiazepines at a typical adult epilepsy center

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this study was to review out-of-hospital use of intranasal diazepam and midazolam for treatment of acute repetitive seizures (ARS) at a typical adult epilepsy center.

METHODS

Data were collected through chart review and by telephone calls to either the patient or the caregiver regarding drug effectiveness, overall satisfaction, and adverse events.

RESULTS

We identified 96 patients who were prescribed either benzodiazepine. Thirty-nine patients in the diazepam group and 38 patients in the midazolam group were able to be contacted and were included in the study. Sixty-two percent of patients in the diazepam group and 55% of patients in the midazolam group had used the medication at the time of data collection. Of these patients, 83% of patients in the diazepam group and 85% of patients in the midazolam group reported cessation of seizures after either the first or second dose. In comparison of the average patient satisfaction between intranasal diazepam and midazolam, there was no statistical significance (4.25 ± 1.22 vs 3.95 ± 1.35; p = 0.42). Adverse events were minor, included fatigue, nasal discomfort, headache, and dizziness.

DISCUSSION

The use of the two new intranasal benzodiazepines was roughly divided equally. Slightly more than half of the patients who were prescribed the medication had used it. The overall satisfaction of the two medications was comparable. These findings highlight the principal usability of intranasal diazepam and midazolam in adults with ARS.

QbD-based rivastigmine tartrate-loaded solid lipid nanoparticles for enhanced intranasal delivery to the brain for Alzheimer's therapeutics

Alzheimer's disease (AD) is a neurodegenerative disease that affects a wide range of populations and is the primary cause of death in various countries. The treatment of AD is still restricted to oral conventional medicines that act only superficially. Fabrication of intranasal solid lipid nanoparticulate system for the uptake of therapeutic agents will act as a convincing approach with limited off-site toxicity and increased pharmacological activity. The objective of this study was to formulate, optimize, and evaluate the efficiency of rivastigmine tartrate (RT)-loaded intranasal solid lipid nanoparticles (SLNs) employing the solvent-evaporation diffusion method. To optimize the formulation parameters, the central composite design (CCD) was used. Lipid concentration (X1) and surfactant concentration (X2) were considered to be independent variables, while particle size (Y1), percentage entrapment efficiency (Y2), and percentage drug release (Y3) were considered as responses. The solid lipid was glyceryl monostearate, while the surfactant was polysorbate 80. The optimized formulation has a particle size of 110.2 nm, % entrapment efficiency of 82.56%, and % drug release of 94.86%. The incompatibility of drug excipients was established by differential scanning calorimetry (DSC) and Fourier-transform infrared spectroscopy (FTIR). Nasal histopathology tests on sheep mucosa revealed that the developed SLNs were safe to utilize for intranasal delivery with no toxicity. Ex vivo permeation investigations revealed that the flux and diffusion coefficients for RT solid lipid nanoparticles and RT solution were 3.378 g/cm2 /h and 0.310-3 cm2 /h, respectively. Stability studies demonstrated that the developed SLNs were stable when stored under various storage conditions. The viability and vitality of adopting a lipid particle delivery system for improved bioavailability via the intranasal route were also established in the in vivo pharmacokinetic investigations. According to the histopathological and pharmacokinetic investigations, the developed formulations were safe, non-lethal, efficient, and robust. These results suggest the potentiality provided by rivastigmine tartrate-loaded solid lipid nanoparticles for nasal delivery.

Updated review of rescue treatments for seizure clusters and prolonged seizures

INTRODUCTION

Although the treatment of epilepsy primarily focuses on prevention, recurrent seizures are unfortunately an ongoing reality, particularly in people with epilepsy who live with chronic refractory seizures. Rescue medications are agents which can be administered in urgent/emergent seizure episodes such as seizure clusters or prolonged seizures with the goal of terminating seizure activity, preventing morbidity, and decreasing the risk of further seizures.

AREAS COVERED

This review first discusses clinical opportunities for rescue medications, with particular attention focused on seizure clusters and prolonged seizures, including their epidemiology, risk factors, and associated morbidity. Current rescue medications, their indications, efficacy, and adverse effects are discussed. We then discuss rescue medications and formulations which are currently under development, concentrating on practical aspects relevant for clinical care.

EXPERT OPINION

Rescue medications should be considered for all people with epilepsy with ongoing seizures. Recent rescue medications including intranasal formulations provide considerable advantages. New rescue medications are being developed which may expand opportunities for effective treatment. In the future, combining rescue medications with seizure detection and seizure prediction technologies should further expand opportunities for use and should reduce the morbidity of seizures and provide increased comfort, control, and quality of life for people living with epilepsy.

Safety of Diazepam Nasal Spray in Children and Adolescents With Epilepsy: Results From a Long-Term Phase 3 Safety Study

BACKGROUND

To evaluate safety and tolerability of long-term treatment with diazepam nasal spray (Valtoco) for seizure clusters in patients aged six to 17 years.

METHODS

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).

RESULTS

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.

CONCLUSIONS

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.

Lack of Clinically Relevant Differences in Safety and Pharmacokinetics After Second-Dose Administration of Intranasal Diazepam Within 4 Hours for Acute Treatment of Seizure Clusters: A Population Analysis

Objective

Current diazepam nasal spray labeling requires waiting 4 h before administering a second dose. The objective of the current analyses was to examine safety and pharmacokinetic profiles of second doses of diazepam nasal spray given 0−4 h after the first dose.

Methods

Two datasets were analyzed. The first, a long‐term, repeat‐dose safety study of diazepam nasal spray, compared rates of treatment‐emergent adverse events (TEAEs), serious TEAEs, and treatment‐related TEAEs for patients receiving ≥1 second dose ≤4 h versus all second doses >4 h after the first. The second was a population pharmacokinetic analysis using data from three phase 1 studies to model drug exposure when a second dose of diazepam nasal spray was administered across multiple time points (1 min−4 h) following the first dose.

Results

In the repeat‐dose safety study, a second dose of diazepam nasal spray was administered ≤24 h after the first to treat 485 seizure clusters in 79 patients. Rates of TEAEs were similar between patients receiving ≥1 second dose in ≤4 h (89.5%, n = 38) compared with >4–24 h only (80.5%, n = 41). The most common treatment‐related TEAEs were associated with nasal discomfort, which was mild or moderate and transient. There were no reports of respiratory or cardiac depression. The pharmacokinetic simulations of second doses predicted comparable elevations of plasma diazepam concentrations with administrations across a range of intervals after the first dose (1 min−4 h).

Significance

These data indicate that the safety and pharmacokinetic profiles of a second dose of diazepam nasal spray administered within 4 h of the first dose are consistent with those associated with current labeling. This is potentially important for patients with seizure clusters who have a recurrent seizure within 4 h of first treatment and might benefit from immediate retreatment to reduce the risk of progression to status epilepticus.

New idea to promote the clinical applications of stem cells or their extracellular vesicles in central nervous system disorders: combining with intranasal delivery

The clinical translation of stem cells and their extracellular vesicles (EVs)-based therapy for central nervous system (CNS) diseases is booming. Nevertheless, the insufficient CNS delivery and retention together with the invasiveness of current administration routes prevent stem cells or EVs from fully exerting their clinical therapeutic potential. Intranasal (IN) delivery is a possible strategy to solve problems as IN route could circumvent the brain‒blood barrier non-invasively and fit repeated dosage regimens. Herein, we gave an overview of studies and clinical trials involved with IN route and discussed the possibility of employing IN delivery to solve problems in stem cells or EVs-based therapy. We reviewed relevant researches that combining stem cells or EVs-based therapy with IN administration and analyzed benefits brought by IN route. Finally, we proposed possible suggestions to facilitate the development of IN delivery of stem cells or EVs.

Benzodiazepines in the Management of Seizures and Status Epilepticus: A Review of Routes of Delivery, Pharmacokinetics, Efficacy, and Tolerability

Status epilepticus (SE) is an acute, life-threatening medical condition that requires immediate, effective therapy. Therefore, the acute care of prolonged seizures and SE is a constant challenge for healthcare professionals, in both the pre-hospital and the in-hospital settings. Benzodiazepines (BZDs) are the first-line treatment for SE worldwide due to their efficacy, tolerability, and rapid onset of action. Although all BZDs act as allosteric modulators at the inhibitory gamma-aminobutyric acid (GABA)_A receptor, the individual agents have different efficacy profiles and pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic properties, some of which differ significantly. The conventional BZDs clonazepam, diazepam, lorazepam and midazolam differ mainly in their durations of action and available routes of administration. In addition to the common intravenous, intramuscular and rectal administrations that have long been established in the acute treatment of SE, other administration routes for BZDs-such as intranasal administration-have been developed in recent years, with some preparations already commercially available. Most recently, the intrapulmonary administration of BZDs via an inhaler has been investigated. This narrative review provides an overview of the current knowledge on the efficacy and tolerability of different BZDs, with a focus on different routes of administration and therapeutic specificities for different patient groups, and offers an outlook on potential future drug developments for the treatment of prolonged seizures and SE.

Using the Intranasal Route to Administer Drugs to Treat Neurological and Psychiatric Illnesses: Rationale, Successes, and Future Needs

While the intranasal administration of drugs to the brain has been gaining both research attention and regulatory success over the past several years, key fundamental and translational challenges remain to fully leveraging the promise of this drug delivery pathway for improving the treatment of various neurological and psychiatric illnesses. In response, this review highlights the current state of understanding of the nose-to-brain drug delivery pathway and how both biological and clinical barriers to drug transport using the pathway can been addressed, as illustrated by demonstrations of how currently approved intranasal sprays leverage these pathways to enable the design of successful therapies. Moving forward, aiming to better exploit the understanding of this fundamental pathway, we also outline the development of nanoparticle systems that show improvement in delivering approved drugs to the brain and how engineered nanoparticle formulations could aid in breakthroughs in terms of delivering emerging drugs and therapeutics while avoiding systemic adverse effects.

Implications of Seizure-Cluster Treatment on Healthcare Utilization: Use of Approved Rescue Medications

PURPOSE

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.

METHODS

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.

RESULTS

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 from <40% at 6 hours to <13% at 24 hours. Hospitalizations and serious treatment-emergent adverse events were reported variably across these studies.

CONCLUSION

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.

Convolutions in the rendition of nose to brain therapeutics from bench to bedside: Feats & fallacies

Brain, a subtle organ of multifarious nature presents plethora of physiological, metabolic and bio-chemical convolutions that impede the delivery of biomolecules and thereby resulting in truncated therapeutic outcome in pathological conditions of central nervous system (CNS). The absolute bottleneck in the therapeutic management of such devastating CNS ailments is the BBB. Another pitfall is the lack of efficient technological platforms (due to high cost and low approval rates) as well as limited clinical trials (due to failures of neuro‑leads in late-stage pipelines) for CNS disorders which has become a literal brain drain with poorest success rates compared to other therapeutic areas, owing to time consuming processes, tremendous convolutions and conceivable adverse effects. With the advent of intranasal delivery (via direct N2B or indirect nose to blood to brain), several novel drug delivery carriers viz. unmodified or surface modified nanoparticle based carriers, lipid based colloidal nanocarriers and drysolid/liquid/semisolid nanoformulations or delivery platforms have been designed as a means to deliver therapeutic agents (small and large molecules, peptides and proteins, genes) to brain, bypassing BBB for disorders such as Alzheimer's disease (AD), Parkinson's disease (PD), epilepsy, schizophrenia and CNS malignancies primarily glioblastomas. Intranasal application offers drug delivery through both direct and indirect pathways for the peripherally administered psychopharmacological agents to CNS. This route could also be exploited for the repurposing of conventional drugs for new therapeutic uses. The limited clinical translation of intranasal formulations has been primarily due to existence of barriers of mucociliary clearance in the nasal cavity, enzyme degradation and low permeability of the nasal epithelium. The present review literature aims to decipher the new paradigms of nano therapeutic systems employed for specific N2B drug delivery of CNS drugs through in silico complexation studies using rationally chosen mucoadhesive polymers (exhibiting unique physicochemical properties of nanocarrier's i.e. surface modification, prolonging retention time in the nasal cavity, improving penetration ability, and promoting brain specific delivery with biorecognitive ligands) via molecular docking simulations. Further, the review intends to delineate the feats and fallacies associated with N2B delivery approaches by understanding the physiological/anatomical considerations via decoding the intranasal drug delivery pathways or critical factors such as rationale and mechanism of excipients, affecting the permeability of CNS drugs through nasal mucosa as well as better efficacy in terms of brain targeting, brain bioavailability and time to reach the brain. Additionally, extensive emphasis has also been laid on the innovative formulations under preclinical investigation along with their assessment by means of in vitro /ex vivo/in vivo N2B models and current characterization techniques predisposing an efficient intranasal delivery of therapeutics. A critical appraisal of novel technologies, intranasal products or medical devices available commercially has also been presented. Finally, it could be warranted that more reminiscent pharmacokinetic/pharmacodynamic relationships or validated computational models are mandated to obtain effective screening of molecular architecture of drug-polymer-mucin complexes for clinical translation of N2B therapeutic systems from bench to bedside.

Improvement of Intranasal Drug Delivery with Intravail® Alkylsaccharide Excipient as a Mucosal Absorption Enhancer Aiding in the Treatment of Conditions of the Central Nervous System

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.

Final results from a Phase 3, long-term, open-label, repeat-dose safety study of diazepam nasal spray for seizure clusters in patients with epilepsy

Objective

A Phase 3 open‐label safety study (NCT02721069) evaluated long‐term safety of diazepam nasal spray (Valtoco) in patients with epilepsy and frequent seizure clusters.

Methods

Patients were 6–65 years old with diagnosed epilepsy and seizure clusters despite stable antiseizure medications. The treatment period was 12 months, with study visits at Day 30 and every 60 days thereafter, after which patients could elect to continue. Doses were based on age and weight. Seizure and treatment information was recorded in diaries. Treatment‐emergent adverse events (TEAEs), nasal irritation, and olfactory changes were recorded.

Results

Of 163 patients in the safety population, 117 (71.8%) completed the study. Duration of exposure was ≥12 months for 81.6% of patients. There was one death (sudden unexpected death in epilepsy) and one withdrawal owing to a TEAE (major depression), both considered unlikely to be related to treatment. Diazepam nasal spray was administered 4390 times for 3853 seizure clusters, with 485 clusters treated with a second dose within 24 h; 53.4% of patients had monthly average usage of one to two doses, 41.7% two to five doses, and 4.9% more than five doses. No serious TEAEs were considered to be treatment related. TEAEs possibly or probably related to treatment (n = 30) were most commonly nasal discomfort (6.1%); headache (2.5%); and dysgeusia, epistaxis, and somnolence (1.8% each). Only 13 patients (7.9%) showed nasal irritation, and there were no relevant olfactory changes. The safety profile of diazepam nasal spray was generally similar across subgroups based on age, monthly usage, concomitant benzodiazepine therapy, or seasonal allergy/rhinitis.

Significance

In this large open‐label safety study, the safety profile of diazepam nasal spray was consistent with the established profile of rectal diazepam, and the high retention rate supports effectiveness in this population. A second dose was used in only 12.6% of seizure clusters.

Seizure clusters

Acute repetitive seizures, also called seizure clusters, are common phenomena in patients with epilepsy. They are a burden on patients and their caregivers and may be very disruptive to the patients' lives. They may progress to prolonged seizures or status epilepticus if they are not aborted as soon as possible. However, their definition, recognition, and classification still suffer from a lack of consensus among healthcare professionals in the field. This review aims to shed light on various aspects of seizure clusters with particular attention to their treatments.

A review of a diazepam nasal spray for the treatment of acute seizure clusters and prolonged seizures

INTRODUCTION

Some people with epilepsy experience acute repetitive seizures (ARS), also termed seizure clusters, which have a negative impact on patient and caregiver quality of life, emotional wellbeing, daily function, and may pose risk of injury or death. In addition, these events increase healthcare utilization in emergency departments and hospitals, which might be avoided with use of an at-home rescue medication. Intranasal formulations of benzodiazepines used as rescue medications provide a means of delivering rescue medication that is socially acceptable and more easily administered than rectal drug.

AREAS COVERED

This article provides a review of intranasal diazepam covering development, pharmacokinetics, dosing, safety, adverse effects, and efficacy. The authors compare it with rectal diazepam and intranasal midazolam.

EXPERT OPINION

Intranasal rescue drugs are a valuable treatment modality for seizure clusters and prolonged seizures that are effective and well tolerated with the potential to enhance patient quality of life, reduce the incidence of seizure-related injury, and lessen the need for hospital visits. The literature does not provide evidence comparing the various rescue agents, and head-to-head comparison studies are needed. An inhaled benzodiazepine as a seizure rescue drug is currently undergoing clinical trials.

Consistent safety and tolerability of Valtoco® (diazepam nasal spray) in relationship to usage frequency in patients with seizure clusters: Interim results from a phase 3, long-term, open-label, repeat-dose safety study

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 (<2, moderate frequency; 2‐5, high frequency; >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 <2 to >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.

Evaluation of diazepam nasal spray in patients with epilepsy concomitantly using maintenance benzodiazepines: An interim subgroup analysis from a phase 3, long-term, open-label safety study

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.

Time Is Brain: Acute Control of Repetitive Seizures and Status Epilepticus Using Alternative Routes of Administration of Benzodiazepines

Time plays a major role in seizure evaluation and treatment. Acute repetitive seizures and status epilepticus are medical emergencies that require immediate assessment and treatment for optimal therapeutic response. Benzodiazepines are considered the first-line agent for rapid seizure control. Thus, various routes of administration of benzodiazepines have been studied to facilitate a quick, effective, and easy therapy administration. Choosing the right agent may vary based on the drug and route properties, patient’s environment, caregiver’s skills, and drug accessibility. The pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic aspects of benzodiazepines are essential in the decision-making process. Ultimately, agents and routes that give the highest bioavailability, fastest absorption, and a modest duration are preferred. In the outpatient setting, intranasal and buccal routes appear to be equally effective and more rapidly administered than rectal diazepam. On the other hand, in the inpatient setting, if available, the IV route is ideal for benzodiazepine administration to avoid any potential absorption delay. In this article, we will provide an overview and comparison of the various routes of benzodiazepine administration for acute control of repetitive seizures and status epilepticus.

Overcoming the challenges of developing an intranasal diazepam rescue therapy for the treatment of seizure clusters

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.

VALTOCO® (Diazepam Nasal Spray) for the Acute Treatment of Intermittent Stereotypic Episodes of Frequent Seizure Activity

Valtoco^® is a new FDA-approved nasal spray version of diazepam indicated for the treatment of acute, intermittent, and stereotypic episodes of frequent seizure activity in epilepsy patients six years of age and older. Although IV and rectal diazepam are already used to treat seizure clusters, Valtoco^® has less variability in plasma concentration compared to rectal diazepam. Furthermore, the intranasal administration of Valtoco^® is more convenient and less invasive than rectal or IV diazepam, making it ideal for self-administration outside of a hospital setting. Multiple clinical trials have taken place comparing Valtoco^® to the oral, rectal, and IV forms of diazepam. Aside from mild nasal irritation and lacrimation, Valtoco^® was found to have no increased safety risk in comparison to traditional forms of diazepam. This review of Valtoco^® will include a history of diazepam prescribing and withdrawal treatment, Valtoco^® drug information, its mechanism of action, pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics, and a comprehensive review of clinical studies.

Intranasal drug delivery: opportunities and toxicologic challenges during drug development

Over the past 10 years, the interest in intranasal drug delivery in pharmaceutical R&D has increased. This review article summarises information on intranasal administration for local and systemic delivery, as well as for CNS indications. Nasal delivery offers many advantages over standard systemic delivery systems, such as its non-invasive character, a fast onset of action and in many cases reduced side effects due to a more targeted delivery. There are still formulation limitations and toxicological aspects to be optimised. Intranasal drug delivery in the field of drug development is an interesting delivery route for the treatment of neurological disorders. Systemic approaches often fail to efficiently supply the CNS with drugs. This review paper describes the anatomical, histological and physiological basis and summarises currently approved drugs for administration via intranasal delivery. Further, the review focuses on toxicological considerations of intranasally applied compounds and discusses formulation aspects that need to be considered for drug development.

Intranasal Allopregnanolone Confers Rapid Seizure Protection: Evidence for Direct Nose-to-Brain Delivery

Allopregnanolone, a positive modulator of GABAA receptors with antiseizure activity, has potential in the treatment of seizure emergencies. Instillation of allopregnanolone in 40% sulfobutylether-β-cyclodextrin into the nose in mice rapidly elevated the seizure threshold in the timed intravenous pentylenetetrazol (ED50, 5.6 mg/kg), picrotoxin (ED50, 5.9 mg/kg), and bicuculline seizure tests. The effect peaked at 15 min, decayed over 1 h, and was still evident in some experiments at 6 h. Intranasal allopregnanolone also delayed the onset of seizures in the maximal PTZ test. At an allopregnanolone dose (16 mg/kg) that conferred comparable effects on seizure threshold as the benzodiazepines midazolam and diazepam (both at doses of 1 mg/kg), allopregnanolone caused minimal sedation or motor toxicity in the horizontal screen test whereas both benzodiazepines produced marked behavioral impairment. In addition, intranasal allopregnanolone failed to cause loss-of-righting reflex in most animals, but when the same dose was administered intramuscularly, all animals became impaired. Intranasal allopregnanolone (10 mg/kg) caused a rapid increase in brain allopregnanolone with a Tmax of ~5 min after initiation of the intranasal delivery. High levels of allopregnanolone were recovered in the olfactory bulb (Cmax, 16,000 ng/mg) whereas much lower levels (Cmax, 670 ng/mg) were present in the remainder of the brain. We conclude that the unique ability of intranasal allopregnanolone to protect against seizures without inducing behavioral adverse effects is due in part to direct nose-to-brain delivery, with preferential transport to brain regions relevant to seizures. Benzodiazepines are commonly administered intranasally for acute seizure therapy, including for the treatment of acute repetitive seizures, but are not transported from nose-to-brain. Intranasal allopregnanolone acts with greater speed, has less propensity for adverse effects, and has the ability to overcome benzodiazepine refractoriness. This is the first study demonstrating rapid functional central nervous system activity of a nose-to-brain-delivered steroid. Intranasal delivery circumvents the poor oral bioavailability of allopregnanolone providing a route of administration permitting its evaluation as a treatment for diverse neuropsychiatric indications.

A Short Review on the Intranasal Delivery of Diazepam for Treating Acute Repetitive Seizures

Benzodiazepines such as diazepam, lorazepam and midazolam remained the mainstay of treatment for acute repetitive seizures (ARS). The immediate care for ARS should often begin at home by a caregiver. This prevents the progression of ARS to prolonged seizures or status epilepticus. For a long time and despite social objections rectal diazepam gel remained only FDA-approved rescue medication. Intranasal administration of benzodiazepines is considered attractive and safe compared with rectal, buccal and sublingual routes. Intranasal delivery offers numerous advantages such as large absorptive surface area, bypass the first-pass metabolism and good patient acceptance as it is needle free and painless. Recent clinical studies have demonstrated that diazepam nasal spray (NRL-1; Valtoco^®, Neurelis Inc.,San Diego, CA, USA) showed less pharmacokinetic variability and reliable bioavailability compared with the diazepam rectal gel. Diazepam nasal spray could be considered as a suitable alternative for treating seizure emergencies outside the hospital. This review summarizes the treatment options for ARS and findings from clinical studies involving intranasal diazepam for treating seizure emergencies.

The Nose Knows: Intranasal Midazolam To Treat Acute Seizures During Inpatient Epilepsy Monitoring

Efficacy, Tolerability, and Safety of Concentrated Intranasal Midazolam Spray as Emergency Medication in Epilepsy Patients During Video-EEG Monitoring

von Blomberg A, Kay L, Knake S, Fuest S, Zöllner JP, Reif PS, Herrmann E, Balaban Ü, Schubert-Bast S, Rosenow F, Strzelczyk A. CNS Drugs. 2020;34(5):545-553. doi: 10.1007/s40263-020-00720-w

Background:

An efficient, well tolerated, and safe emergency treatment with a rapid onset of action is needed to prevent seizure clusters and to terminate prolonged seizures and status epilepticus. Objectives: This study aimed to examine the efficacy, tolerability, and safety of intranasal midazolam (in-MDZ) spray in clinical practice.

Methods:

In this retrospective, multicenter observational study, we evaluated all patients with peri-ictal application of in-MDZ during video-electroencephalography (EEG) monitoring at the epilepsy centers in Frankfurt and Marburg between 2 014 and 2017. For every patient, we analyzed the recurrence of any seizure or generalized tonic-clonic seizures after index seizures with and without in-MDZ administration. Treatment-emergent adverse events were also evaluated.

Results:

Intranasal MDZ was used in 243 patients with epilepsy (mean age 35.5 years; range 5-76 years; 46.5% female) for treatment of 459 seizures. A median dose of in-MDZ 5 mg (ie, 2 puffs; range 2.5-15 mg) was administered within a median time from EEG seizure onset until in-MDZ application of 1.18 minutes (interquartile range [IQR] 1.27), while median time from clinical seizure onset until in-MDZ administration was 1.08 minutes (IQR 1.19). Intranasal MDZ was given within 1 minute after EEG seizure onset in 171 seizures. An intraindividual comparison of seizures with and without application of in-MDZ was feasible in 171 patients, demonstrating that in-MDZ reduced the occurrence of any (Cox proportional-hazard model P < .001) and generalized tonic-clonic seizure (Cox proportional-hazard model P = .0167) over a period of 24 hours. The seizure-free time span was doubled from a median of 5.0 hours in controls to a median of 10.67 hours after in-MDZ administration. We additionally clustered in-MDZ administrations for the 119 patients who received in-MDZ more than once, comparing them with the index cases without in-MDZ. Even when considering subsequent seizures with in-MDZ administration, a patient receiving in-MDZ is still half as likely to incur another seizure in the upcoming 24 hours as compared with when the same patient does not receive in-MDZ (hazard ratio 0.50; 95% CI: 0.42-0.60; P < .01). Intranasal MDZ was well tolerated without major adverse events. The most common side effects were irritation of the nasal mucosa (37 cases [8.1%]), prolonged sedation (26 cases [5.7%]), and nausea and vomiting (12 cases [2.6%]). A decline in oxygen saturation was measured after 78 seizures (17%).

Conclusion:

We conclude that in-MDZ is a safe and efficient treatment option to prevent short-term recurrence of seizures. Intranasal MDZ can be administered very quickly by trained staff within 1 to 2 minutes after seizure onset. No major cardiocirculatory or respiratory adverse events were observed.

Pharmacokinetics and safety of VALTOCO (NRL-1; diazepam nasal spray) in patients with epilepsy during seizure (ictal/peri-ictal) and nonseizure (interictal) conditions: A phase 1, open-label study

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.

Bioavailability and safety of diazepam intranasal solution compared to oral and rectal diazepam in healthy volunteers

Objective

The study assesses the bioavailability of diazepam after intranasal administration (diazepam nasal spray) in healthy volunteers. Comparative agents were diazepam rectal gel, which served as the regulatory reference product; and oral diazepam, a product with decades of clinical use. Tolerability of diazepam nasal spray was also assessed.

Methods

This was a phase 1, open‐label, randomized, single‐dose, three‐treatment, three‐period, six‐sequence crossover study in 48 healthy adult subjects that consisted of a screening period, a baseline period, and an open‐label treatment period. Interperiod intervals were at least 28 days.

Results

Forty‐eight healthy volunteer subjects were enrolled, two of whom discontinued before receiving study medication. For all routes of administration, the onset of diazepam absorption was rapid, with measurable concentrations of drug present by the first sample time point. The t_max (time to reach maximum plasma concentration) was similar for diazepam nasal spray and diazepam rectal gel, both of which were slower than oral diazepam in fasted individuals. Variability (as defined by % coefficient of variation of geometric mean) in peak plasma concentration and area under the curve_0‐∞ was lowest with oral diazepam, followed by diazepam nasal spray, with diazepam rectal gel showing the greatest variability. Overall, 131 treatment‐emergent adverse events (TEAEs) were considered mild (42 subjects, 91.3%), four TEAEs were considered moderate (four subjects, 8.3%), and no TEAEs were considered severe. The most commonly reported TEAE was somnolence at 56.5% (26/46) during diazepam nasal spray treatment, 89.1% (41/46) with the rectal diazepam gel treatment, and 82.6% (38/46) with oral diazepam treatment. No nasal irritation was observed for the majority of the subjects at any time point after administration, with no score higher than 2 (“minor bleeding that stops within 1 minute”).

Significance

Diazepam nasal spray shows predicable pharmacokinetics and represents a potential novel therapeutic approach to control bouts of increased seizure activity (cluster seizures, acute repetitive seizures).