Rapid absorption of sumatriptan powder and effects on glyceryl trinitrate model of headache following intranasal delivery using a novel bi-directional device

Bi-directional nasal drug delivery systems: A scoping review of nasal particle deposition patterns and clinical application

Objectives

To compare the deposition patterns within the nasal cavity between the bi-directional and unilateral nasal delivery systems. And to summarize the clinical application of the bi-directional nasal drug delivery devices.

Data source

PubMed, Cochrane Library, Embase, and Web of Science databases.

Methods

A scoping review was conducted according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis (PRISMA). We included studies exploring patterns and influencing factors of particle depositions within the nasal cavity among patients, healthy controls, and nose cast models using the bi-directional and unilateral nasal delivery system. The clinical application of the bi-directional delivery devices was also summarized.

Results

A total of 24 studies were included in this review. Bi-directional nasal delivery systems utilize forced exhalation to power the delivery of drugs to deeper areas of the nasal cavity and paranasal sinuses. Unilateral nasal delivery systems included traditional liquid spray pumps, the aerosol mask system, nebulization, and conventional nasal inhalation. Compared with unilateral delivery systems, the bi-directional nasal delivery system provided a more extensive and efficient nasal deposition in the nasal cavity, especially in the olfactory cleft, without lung deposition. Several parameters, including particle size, pulsatile flow, and nasal geometry, could significantly influence nasal deposition. The bi-directional nasal delivery system enables better delivery of steroids or sumatriptan to the sinonasal cavity's high and deep target sites. This bi-directional delivery device demonstrated an effective and well-tolerated treatment that produced high drug utilization, rapid absorption, and sustained symptom improvement among patients with chronic rhinosinusitis (CRS) or migraine.

Conclusion

The bi-directional nasal drug delivery systems demonstrated significantly higher drug deposition in superior and posterior regions of the nasal cavity than unilateral nasal delivery systems. Further studies should explore its potential role in delivering drugs to the olfactory cleft among patients with olfactory disorders and central nervous system diseases.

Level of evidence

N/A.

The human NTG model of migraine in drug discovery and development

INTRODUCTION

Various triggers can originate a migraine attack. In healthy volunteers and patients with migraine, the nitroglycerin (NTG) provocation model induces a headache that resembles migraine in pain characteristics and vascular manifestations. This headache is reversible and treatable in monitored conditions, providing an opportunity to test novel antimigraine medications in early clinical development.

AREAS COVERED

This perspective covers the main characteristics and applications of the human NTG model of migraine with effective and ineffective antimigraine therapies.

EXPERT OPINION

The NTG model represents a potential de-risking strategy to test novel hypotheses for antimigraine mechanisms in humans. Considering previous studies conducted with effective and ineffective antimigraine therapies, the sensitivity of the model was 71% while the specificity was 100%. The probability that following an analgesic effect, that compound would truly be efficacious in individuals with migraine was 100%. Following a negative result, the probability that such compound would truly be ineffective in patients with individuals was 33%. A clinical trial testing the analgesic properties of novel compounds after a sublingual and/or intravenous NTG challenge in migraine patients may support a subsequent phase 2 trial for the treatment of migraine.

Nasally inhaled therapeutics and vaccination for COVID-19: Developments and challenges

The nose is the initial site of viral infection, replication, and transmission in the human body. Nasally inhaled vaccines may act as a promising alternative for COVID-19 management in addition to intramuscular vaccination. In this review, the latest developments of nasal sprays either as repurposed or antiviral formulations were presented. Nasal vaccines based on traditional medicines, such as grapefruit seed extract, algae-isolated carrageenan, and Yogurt-fermenting Lactobacillus, are promising and under active investigations. Inherent challenges that hinder effective intranasal delivery were discussed in detail, which included nasal device issues and human nose physiological complexities. We examined factors related to nasal spray administration, including the nasal angiotensin I converting enzyme 2 (ACE2) locations as the delivery target, nasal devices, medication translocation after application, delivery methods, safety issues, and other nasal delivery options. The effects of human factors on nasal spray efficacy, such as nasal physiology, disease-induced physiological modifications, intersubject variability, and mucociliary clearance, were also examined. Finally, the potential impact of nasal vaccines on COVID-19 management in the developing world was discussed. It is concluded that effective delivery of nasal sprays to ACE2-rich regions is urgently needed, especially in the context that new variants may become unresponsive to current vaccines and more refractory to existing therapies.

Secondary headache attributed to exposure to or overuse of a substance

BACKGROUND

Secondary headaches attributed to exposure to or the overuse of a substance are classified under chapter eight in the International Classification of Headache Disorders 3rd edition. Three distinct sub-chapters consider: 1. Headache attributed to exposure to a substance, 2. Medication overuse headache, and 3. Headache attributed to substance withdrawal. Headache attributed to exposure to a substance refers to a headache with onset immediately or within hours after the exposure, while medication overuse headache is a headache occurring on 15 or more days per month that has developed as a consequence of regular usage of acute headache medication(s) for more than three consecutive months in a patient with a pre-existing primary headache disorder. The withdrawal of caffeine, oestrogen, and opioids is most often associated with the development of headache.

DISCUSSION

Despite the current headache classification, there is no certainty of a causal relationship between the use of any substance and the development of headache. Some substances are likely to provoke headache in patients that suffer from a primary headache disorder like migraine, tension-type headache or cluster headache, while others were described to cause headache even in people that generally do not get headaches. Toxic agents, such as carbon monoxide (CO) are difficult to investigate systematically, while other substances such as nitric oxide (NO) were specifically used to induce headache experimentally. If a patient with an underlying primary headache disorder develops a headache, in temporal relation to exposure to a substance, which is significantly worse than the usual headache it is considered secondary. This is even more the case if the headache phenotype is different from the usually experienced headache characteristics. Medication overuse headache is a well-described, distinct disease entity with only marginally understood pathophysiology and associated psychological factors. Managing medication overuse headache patients includes education, detoxification, prophylactic treatments and treating comorbidities, which is reflected in available guidelines. Viewing medication overuse headache as a separate entity helps clinicians and researchers better recognise, treat and study the disorder.

CONCLUSION

Identification of substances that may cause or trigger secondary headache is important in order to educate patients and health care professionals about potential effects of these substances and prevent unnecessary suffering, as well as deterioration in quality of life. Treatment in case of medication overuse and other chronic headache should be decisive and effective.

Olfactory Targeting of Microparticles Through Inhalation and Bi-directional Airflow: Effect of Particle Size and Nasal Anatomy

Background: Targeting drugs to the olfactory region in the nasal cavity can bypass the restrictive blood-brain barrier and enhance their direct delivery to the brain. However, complex nasal geometry and its demographical variations can pose challenges for targeted drug deposition in the olfactory region. Deposition of particles in the nasal cavity is influenced by particle size, airflow rate, and nasal geometry. Therefore, this study investigated the effect of these parameters on regional microparticle deposition with the view to provide insights into the nose-to-brain delivery of drugs. Methods: In this study, three anatomically accurate human nasal cavities were reconstructed in silico and deposition of microparticles under nebulization and bi-directional airflow conditions was simulated. Microparticle deposition data were analyzed to gain insight into the effect of particle size and nasal geometry. Results: Maximum olfactory deposition was observed with particles in the size range of 8 to 12 μm under nebulization and 14 to 18 μm under bi-directional airflow condition. Geometric differences between subjects were shown to significantly impact overall and regional particle deposition and introduced inter-subject variability. Significant intra-subject variability in microparticle deposition was also observed in the bi-directional delivery cases. Conclusions: The data from this study suggest that tailoring particle size, combined with a delivery protocol, may provide a unique and pragmatic way to target drugs to the olfactory region. Differences in nasal anatomy among humans can cause variability in particle deposition and need to be considered in any future applications.

How to characterize a nasal product. The state of the art of in vitro and ex vivo specific methods

Nasal delivery offers many benefits over other conventional routes of delivery (e.g. oral or intravenous administration). Benefits include, among others, a fast onset of action, non-invasiveness and direct access to the central nervous system. The nasal cavity is not only limited to local application (e.g. rhinosinusitis) but can also provide direct access to other sites in the body (e.g. the central nervous system or systemic circulation). However, both the anatomy and the physiology of the nose impose their own limitations, such as a small volume for delivery or rapid mucociliary clearance. To meet nasal-specific criteria, the formulator has to complete a plethora of tests, in vitro and ex vivo, to assess the efficacy and tolerance of a new drug-delivery system. Moreover, depending on the desired therapeutic effect, the delivery of the drug should target a specific pathway that could potentially be achieved through a modified release of this drug. Therefore, this review focuses on specific techniques that should be performed when a nasal formulation is developed. The review covers both the tests recommended by regulatory agencies (e.g. the Food and Drug Administration) and other complementary experiments frequently performed in the field.

Chitosan-coated liposome dry-powder formulations loaded with ghrelin for nose-to-brain delivery

The nose-to-brain delivery of ghrelin loaded in liposomes is a promising approach for the management of cachexia. It could limit the plasmatic degradation of ghrelin and provide direct access to the brain, where ghrelin's specific receptors are located. Anionic liposomes coated with chitosan in either a liquid or a dry-powder formulation were compared. The powder formulation showed stronger adhesion to mucins (89 ± 4% vs 61 ± 4%), higher ghrelin entrapment efficiency (64 ± 2% vs 55 ± 4%), higher enzymatic protection against trypsin (26 ± 2% vs 20 ± 3%) and lower ghrelin storage degradation at 25 °C (2.67 ± 1.1% vs 95.64 ± 0.85% after 4 weeks). The powder formulation was also placed in unit-dose system devices that were able to generate an appropriate aerosol characterized by a Dv50 of 38 ± 6 µm, a limited percentage of particles smaller than 10 µm of 4 ± 1% and a reproducible mass delivery (CV: 1.49%). In addition, the device was able to deposit a large amount of powder (52.04% w/w) in the olfactory zone of a 3D-printed nasal cast. The evaluated combination of the powder formulation and the device could provide a promising treatment for cachexia.

Nasal dilation effects on olfactory deposition in unilateral and bi-directional deliveries: In vitro tests and numerical modeling

The human nose can expand either actively or passively to increase airflow. Nasal dilation may alter drug delivery efficiencies in the nasal airway or olfactory region. However, the dosage enhancement from nasal dilations has not been quantified. The mechanisms underlying the dilation-induced deposition variation are also not clear. This study aims to quantify the nasal dilation effects on drug delivery in the nasal airway and olfactory region using in vitro tests and numerical analysis. Two variants of an existing normal nasal airway model were developed with different levels of airway dilation. Airway dimensions were quantified in terms of hydraulic diameter, cross-sectional area, and surface area to volume ratio. Sectional nose casts were prepared using a 3-D printer for visualizing deposition patterns and quantifying delivered dosages. A well-validated computational fluid-particle dynamics (CFPD) model was utilized to understand the underlying mechanisms in the unilateral and bi-directional deliveries. In vitro tests show that nasal dilation lowered the total dosage in the nose but increased the dosage to the olfactory region in both the unilateral and bi-directional deliveries. Compared to the normal nose with unilateral delivery, nasal dilation enhanced the olfactory deposition by a factor of 2.2, while nasal dilatation with the bi-directional delivery increased by a factor of 4. Complementary numerical analyses revealed the growth of a recirculation zone in the middle meatus of dilated noses, which induced lower pressure and increased ventilation to the upper nose. In bi-directional deliveries, a significantly higher fraction of airflow was ventilated to the upper airway in the outflow side of the nose and contributed to the elevated olfactory dosage. Nasal dilation in combination with the bi-directional delivery is recommended over the conventional unilateral method for olfactory targeting.

A multicenter, open-label, long-term safety and tolerability study of DFN-02, an intranasal spray of sumatriptan 10 mg plus permeation enhancer DDM, for the acute treatment of episodic migraine

BACKGROUND

DFN-02 is a novel intranasal spray formulation composed of sumatriptan 10 mg and a permeation-enhancing excipient comprised of 0.2% 1-O-n-Dodecyl-β-D-Maltopyranoside (DDM). This composition of DFN-02 allows sumatriptan to be rapidly absorbed into the systemic circulation and exhibit pharmacokinetics comparable to subcutaneously administered sumatriptan. Rapid rate of absorption is suggested to be important for optimal efficacy. The objective of this study was to evaluate the safety and tolerability of DFN-02 (10 mg) in the acute treatment of episodic migraine with and without aura over a 6-month period based on the incidence of treatment-emergent adverse events and the evaluation of results of clinical laboratory tests, vital signs, physical examination, and electrocardiograms.

METHODS

This was a multi-center, open-label, repeat-dose safety study in adults with episodic migraine with and without aura. Subjects diagnosed with migraine with or without aura according to the criteria set forth in the International Classification of Headache Disorders, 2nd edition, who experienced 2 to 6 attacks per month with fewer than 15 headache days per month and at least 48 headache-free hours between attacks, used DFN-02 to treat their migraine attacks acutely over the course of 6 months.

RESULTS

A total of 173 subjects was enrolled, 167 (96.5%) subjects used at least 1 dose of study medication and were evaluable for safety, and 134 (77.5%) subjects completed the 6-month study. A total of 2211 migraine attacks was reported, and 3292 doses of DFN-02 were administered; mean per subject monthly use of DFN-02 was 3.6 doses. Adverse events were those expected for triptans, as well as for nasally administered compounds. No new safety signals emerged. Dysgeusia and application site pain were the most commonly reported treatment-emergent adverse events over 6 months (21% and 30.5%, respectively). Most of the treatment-emergent adverse events were mild. There were 5 serious adverse events, all considered unrelated to the study medication; the early discontinuation rate was 22.5% over the 6-month treatment period.

CONCLUSION

DFN-02 was shown to be well tolerated when used over 6 months to treat episodic migraine acutely.

A review of clinical safety data for sumatriptan nasal powder administered by a breath powered exhalation delivery system in the acute treatment of migraine

INTRODUCTION

AVP-825 (sumatriptan nasal powder) is an FDA-approved intranasal medication delivery system containing low-dose sumatriptan powder for acute treatment of migraine with or without aura in adults. AVP-825 utilizes unique nasal anatomy features to avoid limitations of other intranasal delivery methods. Areas covered: Literature search terms: 'AVP-825', 'sumatriptan nasal powder', 'intranasal sumatriptan', 'sumatriptan safety', 'sumatriptan acute migraine'. Pharmacokinetic, Phase 2/3 studies, reviews (AVP-825) and metanalyses/reviews (sumatriptan) were evaluated. Expert opinion: AVP-825 provides a more efficient sumatriptan delivery method versus other formulations. Pharmacokinetics showed that a single dose of AVP-825 (22 mg) delivers 15-16 mg sumatriptan and produces significantly lower exposure than oral or injectable formulations, which may translate into a better safety/tolerability profile. AVP-825 was well tolerated in controlled trials, with the most common adverse events localized at the administration-site (abnormal taste, nasal discomfort); these were mostly mild, leading to only one discontinuation. Compared to 100 mg oral sumatriptan, AVP-825 had a significantly lower rate of atypical sensations across multiple attacks. AVP-825 has the advantage of early efficacy onset associated with faster absorption at a lower delivered dose than liquid nasal spray or oral formulations. AVP-825 provided earlier efficacy (within 30 min) vs. 100 mg oral sumatriptan and similar sustained efficacy. AVP-825 offers the benefits of a non-oral, low-dose, tolerable acute migraine medication.

The efficacy and safety of sumatriptan intranasal powder in adults with acute migraine

INTRODUCTION

There are multiple choices of agents for the acute management of migraine available. Patient-specific factors such as associated symptoms including nausea, vomiting, and gastroparesis are important considerations. Oral administration may often be the patient-preferred route of delivery because of comfort or convenience but when it is important to bypass gut absorption then either parenteral or intranasal administration may be appropriate delivery approaches. A new formulation of a low-dose sumatriptan intranasal powder administered via a novel breath-powered delivery device may be a viable option Areas covered: Our search of the available literature pertaining to the topic of intranasal sumatriptan powder yielded pharmacokinetic studies and randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trials (including The TARGET Study, The COMPASS study) published between 2010 and 2015. Expert commentary: A new formulation of a low-dose sumatriptan intranasal powder administered via a novel breath-powered delivery device appears to be a safe and efficacious option for the acute management of a migraine ideally suited for this situation. It appears to have superior efficacy to sumatriptan 100 mg oral tablets with superior pain freedom by 15 minutes and pain relief over the initial 30 minutes post-dose.

Early Onset of Efficacy and Consistency of Response Across Multiple Migraine Attacks From the Randomized COMPASS Study: AVP-825 Breath Powered® Exhalation Delivery System (Sumatriptan Nasal Powder) vs Oral Sumatriptan

OBJECTIVE

To further characterize the clinical utility of AVP-825 based on additional prespecified outcomes and post hoc analyses of COMPASS, a Phase 3 comparative efficacy trial of AVP-825 vs 100 mg oral sumatriptan (NCT01667679). AVP-825 was approved in January 2016 by the US Food and Drug Administration under the name ONZETRA^® Xsail^® (sumatriptan nasal powder) for the acute treatment of migraine with or without aura in adults.

BACKGROUND

AVP-825 is a delivery system that uses a patient's own breath to deliver low-dose sumatriptan powder to the upper posterior regions of the nasal cavity beyond the narrow nasal valve, areas lined with vascular mucosa conducive to rapid drug absorption into the systemic circulation. The recommended dose of AVP-825 is 22 mg sumatriptan powder administered as one 11 mg nosepiece in each nostril, which delivers approximately 15-16 mg of sumatriptan intranasally. The COMPASS trial compared AVP-825 22-100 mg oral sumatriptan across multiple migraine attacks for efficacy, safety, and tolerability endpoints.

DESIGN/METHODS

COMPASS was a randomized, multicenter, double-dummy, crossover, multiattack, comparative efficacy study with two 12-week double-blind periods. Patients with 2-8 migraine attacks/month were randomized 1:1 to AVP-825 (22 mg) plus oral placebo or an identical placebo delivery system plus 100 mg oral sumatriptan for the first period, and then patients switched treatments for the second period. Patients treated up to 5 qualifying migraines per period within 1 h of onset, even if the intensity of the attack was mild. Results from the primary endpoint (SPID-30, defined as the sum of pain intensity differences from dosing to 30 minutes), key secondary efficacy endpoints and safety assessments have been reported in the primary publication (Tepper et al., 2015). This article reports additional prespecified outcomes, including the SPID-30 for attacks treated when baseline severity was mild vs moderate/severe, measures of sustained response and consistency of effect in patients who experienced multiple migraine attacks, and the results of post hoc analyses performed to assess total migraine freedom (defined as no pain and no migraine-associated symptoms, including nausea, vomiting, photophobia, and phonophobia), time to pain freedom, time to meaningful pain relief, and local (occurring at the site of administration in the nose) vs systemic treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs).

RESULTS

A total of 185 patients completed both treatment periods, yielding 1,531 migraine attacks which were treated and assessed (765 AVP-825, 766 oral sumatriptan). Treatment with AVP-825 provided greater reduction in migraine pain intensity which was statistically significant vs oral sumatriptan in the first 30 minutes postdose regardless of whether attacks were treated when pain was mild (least squares mean SPID-30 = 3.90 vs 0.24, P = .0013) or moderate/severe (least squares mean SPID-30 = 13.83 vs 10.07, P = .0002). At every time point from 15 to 90 minutes postdose, the proportion of attacks achieving total migraine freedom was greater and statistically significant after treatment with AVP-825 vs 100 mg oral sumatriptan. AVP-825 treatment resulted in greater odds of achieving pain freedom (odds ratio, OR = 1.29, P < .01) and meaningful pain relief (OR = 1.32, P < .0001), which were also statistically significant compared with oral sumatriptan. In addition, a greater proportion of attacks treated with AVP-825 vs oral sumatriptan was associated with sustained pain freedom, achieving statistical significance when assessed from 1 h postdose through 24 hours postdose (33.3% vs 27.9%; P < .05) and through 48 hours postdose (32.7% vs 27.4%; P < .05). For patients who treated multiple migraine attacks in both treatment periods, a greater proportion had consistent pain relief and pain freedom following treatment with AVP-825 compared to oral sumatriptan across multiple attacks, a difference that achieved statistical significance at 30 minutes postdose. Local TEAEs of abnormal taste and nasal discomfort were more common following AVP-825 treatment. Of the patients experiencing either of these TEAEs, about 90% described the intensity as mild, and only one discontinued treatment because of either of these two TEAEs.

CONCLUSIONS

These results from the COMPASS study further demonstrate that treatment with AVP-825 provides earlier onset and more consistent across-episode improvement of pain and migraine-associated symptoms compared with oral sumatriptan, highlighting the clinical advantages of this newly approved intranasal delivery system for low-dose sumatriptan powder.

Nasal and Olfactory Deposition with Normal and Bidirectional Intranasal Delivery Techniques: In Vitro Tests and Numerical Simulations

BACKGROUND

Intranasal delivery protocols that can effectively deposit drugs to the olfactory region are severely lacking. Furthermore, it is still challenging to quantify nasal deposition on a regional or local basis, which is crucial in assessing the performance of targeted olfactory drug delivery.

OBJECTIVES

To visually and quantitatively compare drug depositions in the nose and olfactory region with normal and bidirectional breathing patterns with vibrating mesh and jet nebulizers.

METHODS

A sectional nose cast was developed based on an anatomically accurate nasal airway model to visualize deposition patterns and quantify regional doses. Sar-Gel was used to visualize the deposition pattern inside the nose and the delivered doses were measured using a high precision scale. Numerical modeling was performed to understand the underlying mechanisms in both the normal and bidirectional deliveries.

RESULTS

Results show that the bidirectional technique yielded higher deposition in both the nasal cavity and the olfactory region for both nebulizers. However, the vibrating mesh nebulizer was found to be more responsive to the bidirectional breathing and elicited more increase in the olfactory delivery than the PARI Sinus. The deposition patterns under the bidirectional breathing are highly different between the two nasal passages, with more dispersed distributions in the nasal passage with exiting flows. For both nebulizers, reducing the inhalation flow rates increased the nasal dose, but decreased the olfactory dose, which was consistent between in vitro measurements and numerical simulations.

CONCLUSIONS

The bi directional technique with a vibrating mesh nebulizer is recommended for both nasal systematic and olfactory drug deliveries. The Sar-Gel based method in combination with sectional nasal casts appears to be a practical approach to visualize local depositions.

The pharmacokinetics and clinical efficacy of AVP-825: a potential advancement for acute treatment of migraine

INTRODUCTION

Oral triptans have dominated the prescription market for acute treatment of migraine for nearly 25 years. Today, patients often express dissatisfaction with prescribed acute treatment in part because they do not have confidence that the therapy will provide consistent efficacy over time. Major limitations to sustained successful use of oral triptans are their relatively slow onset of meaningful clinical benefit and variable absorption/efficacy due to impaired gastrointestinal function during migraine. AVP-825, a new intranasal delivery system for sumatriptan , may be an effective alternative to oral triptans.

AREAS COVERED

This article reviews AVP-825, which deposits low-dose sumatriptan powder deep into the vascular mucosa of the posterior nose, allowing rapid absorption of drug into the systemic circulation. Studies suggest that AVP-825 is a highly effective, well-tolerated acute treatment for episodic migraine.

EXPERT OPINION

Oral triptans are limited in providing effective patient-centered outcomes to migraine patients. Failed or suboptimal abortive treatment of migraine is a major driver of migraine chronification and increases in healthcare costs. AVP-825 is an easy to use, novel, breath-powered intranasal delivery system that provides early onset of efficacy with low systemic drug exposure and few triptan-associated adverse events. AVP-825 will be a welcomed therapeutic tool for the acute treatment of migraine.

A novel intranasal breath-powered delivery system for sumatriptan: a review of technology and clinical application of the investigational product AVP-825 in the treatment of migraine

INTRODUCTION

AVP-825, formerly 'OptiNose Sumatriptan,' is an investigational Breath-Powered(TM) Bi-Directional(TM) intranasal delivery system containing low-dose sumatriptan (22 mg intranasal powder) that avoids limitations of other types of intranasal administration by taking advantage of unique features of nasal anatomy and physiology.

AREAS COVERED

This review summarizes intranasal drug delivery for migraine, how the breath-powered technology works, and AVP-825 pharmacokinetic, efficacy and safety/tolerability findings. To identify AVP-825 clinical studies, a PubMed/MEDLINE database search was conducted with the terms AVP-825, OptiNose, OptiNose Sumatriptan, Breath-Powered Nasal Delivery or sumatriptan powder. Of 20 articles, 5 clinical studies were identified, including the head-to-head comparative COMPASS trial (AVP-825 vs oral sumatriptan) and two placebo-controlled studies.

EXPERT OPINION

AVP-825 has faster sumatriptan absorption versus oral tablets or traditional liquid nasal spray. In Phase II/III randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trials, AVP-825 produced early and sustained efficacy with minimal triptan-related adverse effects. In COMPASS, AVP-825 produced earlier reduction of migraine pain intensity and migraine-associated symptoms than 100 mg oral sumatriptan, and higher early rates of pain relief and pain freedom, similar sustained efficacy, and fewer atypical sensations. AVP-825 has the potential to provide migraine patients with improved intranasal administration of sumatriptan that may enhance efficacy and tolerability.

New treatments for headache

Migraine and cluster headache are primary headache disorders commonly encountered in clinical practice. Despite the profound disability caused by these primary headache disorders, available acute and preventive treatment options are limited. Recent understanding of headache pathophysiology has led to the development of new drug formulations and novel drug targets that are extremely promising. This article will highlight several of the new treatments that are currently under investigation including novel delivery mechanisms of already existing medications, calcitonin gene-related peptide (CGRP) receptor antagonists, antibodies to CGRP and its receptor, serotonin receptor agonists, transient receptor potential vanilloid receptor modulators, orexin receptor antagonists, glial cell modulators, and neuromodulation. If data is supportive, these therapies will be welcome additions to the headache specialist's armamentarium.

A randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled study of breath powered nasal delivery of sumatriptan powder (AVP-825) in the treatment of acute migraine (The TARGET Study)

Objective

To evaluate the efficacy and safety of AVP-825, a drug–device combination of low-dose sumatriptan powder (22 mg loaded dose) delivered intranasally through a targeted Breath Powered device vs an identical device containing lactose powder (placebo device) in the treatment of migraine headache.

Background

Early treatment of migraine headaches is associated with improved outcome, but medication absorption after oral delivery may be delayed in migraineurs because of reduced gastric motility. Sumatriptan powder administered with an innovative, closed-palate, Bi-Directional, Breath Powered intranasal delivery mechanism is efficiently absorbed across the nasal mucosa and produces fast absorption into the circulation. Results from a previously conducted placebo-controlled study of AVP-825 showed a high degree of headache relief with an early onset of action (eg, 74% AVP-825 vs 38% placebo device at 1 hour, P < .01).

Methods

In this double-blind, placebo-controlled, parallel-group study in adults with a history of migraine with or without aura, participants were randomized via computer-generated lists to AVP-825 or placebo device to treat a single migraine headache of moderate or severe intensity. The primary endpoint was headache relief (defined as reduction of headache pain intensity from severe or moderate migraine headache to mild or none) at 2 hours post-dose.

Results

Two hundred and thirty patients (116 AVP-825 and 114 placebo device) were randomized, of whom 223 (112 and 111, respectively) experienced a qualifying migraine headache (their next migraine headache that reached moderate or severe intensity). A significantly greater proportion of AVP-825 patients reported headache relief at 2 hours post-dose compared with those using the placebo device (68% vs 45%, P = .002, odds ratio 2.53, 95% confidence interval [1.45, 4.42]). Between-group differences in headache relief were evident as early as 15 minutes, reached statistical significance at 30 minutes post-dose (42% vs 27%, P = .03), and were sustained at 24 hours (44% vs 24%, P = .002) and 48 hours (34% vs 20%, P = .01). Thirty-four percent of patients treated with AVP-825 were pain-free at 2 hours compared with 17% using the placebo device (P = .008). More AVP-825 patients reported meaningful pain relief (patient interpretation) of migraine within 2 hours of treatment vs placebo device (70% vs 45%, P < .001), and fewer required rescue medication (37% vs 52%, P = .02). Total migraine freedom (patients with no headache, nausea, phonophobia, photophobia, or vomiting) reached significance following treatment with AVP-825 at 1 hour (19% vs 9%; P = .04). There were no serious adverse events (AEs), and no systemic AEs occurred in more than one patient. Chest pain or pressure was not reported, and only one patient taking AVP-825 reported mild paresthesia. No other triptan sensations were reported.

Conclusions

Targeted delivery of a low-dose of sumatriptan powder via a novel, closed-palate, Breath Powered, intranasal device (AVP-825) provided fast relief of moderate or severe migraine headache in adults that reached statistical significance over placebo by 30 minutes. The treatment was well tolerated with a low incidence of systemic AEs.

The nasal approach to delivering treatment for brain diseases: an anatomic, physiologic, and delivery technology overview

The intricate pathophysiology of brain disorders, difficult access to the brain, and the complexity and high risks and costs of drug development represent major hurdles for improving therapies. Nose-to-brain drug transport offers an attractive alternative or addition to formulation-only strategies attempting to enhance drug penetration into the CNS. Although still a matter of controversy, many studies in animals claim direct nose-to-brain transport along the olfactory and trigeminal nerves, circumventing the traditional barriers to CNS entry. Some clinical trials in man also suggest nose-to-brain drug delivery, although definitive proof in man is lacking. This review focuses on new nasal delivery technologies designed to overcome inherent anatomical and physiological challenges and facilitate more efficient and targeted drug delivery for CNS disorders.

Breath powered nasal delivery: a new route to rapid headache relief

The nose offers an attractive noninvasive alternative for drug delivery. Nasal anatomy, with a large mucosal surface area and high vascularity, allows for rapid systemic absorption and other potential benefits. However, the complex nasal geometry, including the narrow anterior valve, poses a serious challenge to efficient drug delivery. This barrier, plus the inherent limitations of traditional nasal delivery mechanisms, has precluded achievement of the full potential of nasal delivery. Breath Powered bi-directional delivery, a simple but novel nasal delivery mechanism, overcomes these barriers. This innovative mechanism has now been applied to the delivery of sumatriptan. Multiple studies of drug deposition, including comparisons of traditional nasal sprays to Breath Powered delivery, demonstrate significantly improved deposition to superior and posterior intranasal target sites beyond the nasal valve. Pharmacokinetic studies in both healthy subjects and migraineurs suggest that improved deposition of sumatriptan translates into improved absorption and pharmacokinetics. Importantly, the absorption profile is shifted toward a more pronounced early peak, representing nasal absorption, with a reduced late peak, representing predominantly gastrointestinal (GI) absorption. The flattening and “spreading out” of the GI peak appears more pronounced in migraine sufferers than healthy volunteers, likely reflecting impaired GI absorption described in migraineurs. In replicated clinical trials, Breath Powered delivery of low-dose sumatriptan was well accepted and well tolerated by patients, and onset of pain relief was faster than generally reported in previous trials with noninjectable triptans. Interestingly, Breath Powered delivery also allows for the potential of headache-targeted medications to be better delivered to the trigeminal nerve and the sphenopalatine ganglion, potentially improving treatment of various types of headache. In brief, Breath Powered bi-directional intranasal delivery offers a new and more efficient mechanism for nasal drug delivery, providing an attractive option for improved treatment of headaches by enabling or enhancing the benefits of current and future headache therapies.

A review of needle-free sumatriptan injection for rapid control of migraine

The treatment of migraine was transformed in 1992 with the introduction of the first triptan-based therapy, subcutaneous (SC) sumatriptan. SC sumatriptan has high efficacy and a rapid onset of action compared with other available triptans and formulations presumably because of its short Tmax, high Cmax, and avoidance of enteral absorption. Because of these characteristics, SC sumatriptan is still considered the most reliably and rapidly effective self-administered medication available for acute migraine. Even so, it is relatively little used possibly in part because of patient "needle-phobia." The needle-free sumatriptan injection system (Sumavel DosePro) was developed to address this concern. Clinical trials have shown that the needle-free system is bioequivalent to needle-based injection systems, easy to use, and capable of providing rapid and effective symptom relief for many migraine episodes. Sumavel DosePro is an effective treatment for migraine and should be part of the therapeutic armamentarium, particularly in cases where a rapid onset of action is critical or where oral administration is problematic.

Update on future headache treatments

Headache disorders are common and heterogenous neurologic entities. The complexities of management are further encumbered by the relatively few effective choices for acute and preventive therapies available to the headache specialist to treat these diverse disorders. As advances have been made in uncovering headache pathophysiology, new therapies have surfaced and others are forthcoming. This article will highlight new lines of care in development. There are several novel delivery mechanisms of familiar medications which bypass the limitations of current delivery systems, including the sumatriptan iontophoretic patch Zecuity, the intranasal sumatriptan OptiNose system, the zolmitriptan Rapidfilm orally dissolvable film and the orally inhaled dihydroergotamine Levadex system. New lines of care based upon recently discovered therapeutic targets will also be discussed including calcitonin gene-related peptide (CGRP) receptor antagonists, serotonin receptor agonists, and sphenopalatine ganglion (SPG) intermittent stimulation. Finally, emerging targets for future therapeutics will be explored including transient receptor potential vanilloid (TRPV1) receptor modulators, nitric oxide (NO) antagonists, gap junction modulators, glutamate receptor antagonists, orexin receptor antagonists and prostanoid receptor antagonists. Therapies developing over the next several years will be welcome additions to the headache specialist's armamentarium.

The pipeline in headache therapy

Migraine is a common, disabling, neurovascular disorder characterized by episodic attacks of head pain and associated disability plus systemic autonomic and neurologic symptoms. The advent of the triptan class of medication in the 1990s revolutionized the acute treatment of migraine, but many migraineurs do not respond optimally or at all to triptans, have intolerable adverse effects, or have contraindications to their use. Preventive pharmacotherapy has advanced mostly through serendipity, with new drugs being found effective while being used for other indications. There remains a significant need for new medications and devices that can provide effective, rapid, and sustained pain relief without adverse effects or recurrence. Several new acute and preventive therapies for the treatment of migraine and cluster headaches have shown promise and are currently under investigation. This article covers innovative delivery mechanisms, calcitonin gene-related peptide receptor antagonists, antibodies to calcitonin gene-related peptide and its receptor, 5-HT1F receptor agonists, transient receptor potential vanilloid receptor modulators, orexin receptor antagonists, glial cell modulators, and neurostimulation.

Improved pharmacokinetics of sumatriptan with Breath Powered™ nasal delivery of sumatriptan powder

Objectives.—

The purpose of this study was to directly compare the pharmacokinetic (PK) profile of 22-mg sumatriptan powder delivered intranasally with a novel Breath Powered™ device (11 mg in each nostril) vs a 20-mg sumatriptan liquid nasal spray, a 100-mg oral tablet, and a 6-mg subcutaneous injection.

Background.—

A prior PK study found that low doses of sumatriptan powder delivered intranasally with a Breath Powered device were efficiently and rapidly absorbed. An early phase clinical trial with the same device and doses found excellent tolerability with high response rates and rapid onset of pain relief, approaching the benefits of injection despite significantly lower predicted drug levels.

Methods.—

An open-label, cross-over, comparative bioavailability study was conducted in 20 healthy subjects at a single center in the USA. Following randomization, fasted subjects received a single dose of each of the 4 treatments separated by a 7-day washout. Blood samples were taken pre-dose and serially over 14 hours post-dose for PK analysis.

Results.—

Quantitative measurement of residuals in used Breath Powered devices demonstrated that the devices delivered 8 ± 0.9 mg (mean ± standard deviation) of sumatriptan powder in each nostril (total dose 16 mg). Although the extent of systemic exposure over 14 hours was similar following Breath Powered delivery of 16-mg sumatriptan powder and 20-mg liquid nasal spray (area under the curve [AUC]0-∞ 64.9 ng*hour/mL vs 61.1 ng*hour/mL), sumatriptan powder, despite a 20% lower dose, produced 27% higher peak exposure (Cmax 20.8 ng/mL vs 16.4 ng/mL) and 61% higher exposure in the first 30 minutes compared with the nasal spray (AUC0-30 minutes 5.8 ng*hour/mL vs 3.6 ng*hour/mL). The magnitude of difference is larger on a per-milligram basis. The absorption profile following standard nasal spray demonstrated bimodal peaks, consistent with lower early followed by higher later absorptions. In contrast, the profile following Breath Powered delivery showed higher early and lower late absorptions. Relative to the 100-mg oral tablet (Cmax 70.2 ng/mL, AUC0-∞, 308.8 ng*hour/mL) and 6-mg injection (Cmax 111.6 ng/mL, AUC0-∞ 128.2 ng*hour/mL), the peak and overall exposure following Breath Powered intranasal delivery of sumatriptan powder was substantially lower.

Conclusions.—

Breath Powered intranasal delivery of sumatriptan powder is a more efficient form of drug delivery, producing a higher peak and earlier exposure with a lower delivered dose than nasal spray and faster absorption than either nasal spray or oral administration. It also produces a significantly lower peak and total systemic exposure than oral tablet or subcutaneous injection.

Chemical mediators of migraine: preclinical and clinical observations

Migraine is a neurovascular disorder, and although the pathophysiology of migraine has not been fully delineated, much has been learned in the past 50 years. This knowledge has been accompanied by significant advancements in the way migraine is viewed as a disease process and in the development therapeutic options. In this review, we will focus on 4 mediators (nitric oxide, histamine, serotonin, and calcitonin gene-related peptide) which have significantly advanced our understanding of migraine as a disease entity. For each mediator we begin by reviewing the preclinical data linking it to migraine pathophysiology, first focusing on the vascular mechanisms, then the neuronal mechanisms. The preclinical data are then followed by a review of the clinical data which support each mediator's role in migraine and highlights the pharmacological agents which target these mediators for migraine therapy.

What's new in the migraine attack treatment

This short review aims to give a focus on news in the migraine attack treatment and discusses the CGRP receptor antagonists (gepants), the 5-HT1F receptors agonists (ditans), the transcranial magnetic stimulation for the treatment of migraine attack with aura, innovative delivery systems for sumatriptan and the oral inhalation of dihydroergotamine.

Nasal drug delivery devices: characteristics and performance in a clinical perspective-a review

Nasal delivery is the logical choice for topical treatment of local diseases in the nose and paranasal sinuses such as allergic and non-allergic rhinitis and sinusitis. The nose is also considered an attractive route for needle-free vaccination and for systemic drug delivery, especially when rapid absorption and effect are desired. In addition, nasal delivery may help address issues related to poor bioavailability, slow absorption, drug degradation, and adverse events in the gastrointestinal tract and avoids the first-pass metabolism in the liver. However, when considering nasal delivery devices and mechanisms, it is important to keep in mind that the prime purpose of the nasal airway is to protect the delicate lungs from hazardous exposures, not to serve as a delivery route for drugs and vaccines. The narrow nasal valve and the complex convoluted nasal geometry with its dynamic cyclic physiological changes provide efficient filtration and conditioning of the inspired air, enhance olfaction, and optimize gas exchange and fluid retention during exhalation. However, the potential hurdles these functional features impose on efficient nasal drug delivery are often ignored. With this background, the advantages and limitations of existing and emerging nasal delivery devices and dispersion technologies are reviewed with focus on their clinical performance. The role and limitations of the in vitro testing in the FDA guidance for nasal spray pumps and pressurized aerosols (pressurized metered-dose inhalers) with local action are discussed. Moreover, the predictive value and clinical utility of nasal cast studies and computer simulations of nasal airflow and deposition with computer fluid dynamics software are briefly discussed. New and emerging delivery technologies and devices with emphasis on Bi-Directional™ delivery, a novel concept for nasal delivery that can be adapted to a variety of dispersion technologies, are described in more depth.

Nasal deposition and clearance in man: comparison of a bidirectional powder device and a traditional liquid spray pump

BACKGROUND

Delivery of powder formulations to the nose is an attractive alternative for many drugs and vaccines. This study compared the regional nasal deposition and clearance patterns of lactose powder delivered by the OptiNose powder device (Opt-Powder; OptiNose US Inc., Yardley, PA, USA) to that of liquid aerosol administered via a traditional hand-actuated liquid spray pump (Rexam SP270, Rexam Pharma, France).

METHODS

The study was an open-label, crossover design in seven healthy subjects (five females, two males). The regional nasal deposition and clearance patterns of the Opt-Powder device were compared to a traditional liquid spray pump by dynamic gamma camera imaging after administration of either (99m)Tc-labeled lactose powder or liquid (99m)Tc- diethelyne triamine pentaacetic acid-aerosol. The gamma camera images were scaled and aligned with sagittal magnetic resonance images to identify nasal regions. Possible deposition of radiolabeled material in the lungs following both methods of delivery was also evaluated.

RESULTS

Both powder and spray were distributed to all of the nasal regions. The Opt-Powder device, however, achieved significantly larger initial deposition in the upper and middle posterior regions of the nose than spray (upper posterior region; Opt-Powder 18.3% ± 11.5 vs. Spray 2.4% ± 1.8, p<0.02; sum of upper and middle posterior regions; Opt-Powder 53.5% ± 18.5 vs. Spray 15.7% ± 13.8, p<0.02). The summed initial deposition to the lower anterior and posterior regions for spray was three times higher compared to Opt-Powder (Opt-Powder 17.4% ± 24.5 vs. Spray 59.4% ± 18.2, p<0.04). OptiNose powder delivery resulted in more rapid overall nasal clearance. No lung deposition was observed.

CONCLUSIONS

The initial deposition following powder delivery was significantly larger in the ciliated mucosa of the upper and posterior nasal regions, whereas less was deposited in the lower regions. Overall nasal clearance of powder was slower initially, but due to retention in anterior nonciliated regions the overall nasal clearance after spray was slower.

Intranasal sumatriptan powder delivered by a novel breath-actuated bi-directional device for the acute treatment of migraine: A randomised, placebo-controlled study

Introduction: Intranasal sumatriptan is an option for the treatment of migraine; however, nasal delivery using conventional spray pumps is suboptimal.

Methods: Adult subjects ( n = 117) with migraine were enrolled in a multicentre, randomised, double-blind, parallel group, placebo-controlled study. A single migraine attack was treated in-clinic with sumatriptan 10 mg, sumatriptan 20 mg or placebo administered intranasally by a novel bi-directional powder delivery device when migraine was moderate or severe.

Results: A greater proportion of subjects who received sumatriptan were pain-free at 120 minutes compared with those who received placebo (10 mg/20 mg sumatriptan vs. placebo = 54%/57% vs. 25%, P < .05). Significant benefits were also observed for pain relief at 120 minutes (84%/80% vs. 44%, P < .001/.01) and as early as 60 minutes (73%/74% vs. 38%, P < .01) and for 48 hours sustained pain-free ( P < .05). Treatment-related adverse events were rare, with a metallic taste being the most commonly reported (10%/13%).

Conclusions: Sumatriptan nasal powder administered using the new device during a migraine attack was effective and well tolerated.