Evaluation of transdermal application of glipizide in a pluronic lecithin gel to healthy cats

Plasma concentrations of tramadol after transdermal application of a single metered dose of a compounded tramadol gel to cats

OBJECTIVE

To determine plasma tramadol concentrations in cats following a single dose of oral and transdermal formulations and the pharmacokinetics for and the concentration of tramadol in the transdermal formulation.

ANIMALS

8 healthy client-owned domestic shorthair cats.

PROCEDURES

1 cat was orally administered 1 dose of tramadol (2 mg/kg), and 7 cats received 1 dose of a proprietary compounded tramadol gel product (median actual dose, 2.8 mg/kg) applied to their inner pinnae. Plasma tramadol concentrations were measured with high-performance liquid chromatography-mass spectrometry at fixed times over 24 hours.

RESULTS

Plasma tramadol concentrations were undetectable or much lower (range, < 1 to 4.3 ng/mL) following application of the transdermal formulation, compared with those following oral administration (maximum plasma tramadol concentration, 261.3 ng/mL [at 4 hours]). Tramadol pharmacokinetics for the transdermal formulation could not be determined. Tramadol concentrations of the transdermal gel product exceeded the estimated label dose in all analyzed gel samples, with concentrations greater than the 90% to 110% United States Pharmacopeia standard for compounded drugs.

CONCLUSIONS AND CLINICAL RELEVANCE

Application of 1 dose of the proprietary transdermal formulation did not yield clinically relevant plasma tramadol concentrations in cats. Although this proprietary formulation is currently available to prescribing veterinarians, it should be used with caution.

Serum theophylline after multiple dosing with transdermal gels in cats

OBJECTIVES

Our objectives were, first, to determine if therapeutic serum theophylline concentrations could be achieved using long-term, once-daily dosing of transdermal theophylline and, secondarily, to evaluate the difference between two transdermal theophylline formulations.

METHODS

Seven healthy cats, 1-10 years of age, were evaluated in a two-way, randomized, double-blinded, crossover study. Participants received transdermal theophylline at 15 mg/kg for 21 days in either pluronic lecithin organogel (PLO) or Lipoderm formulation. On day 22, blood was collected 2, 6, 14 and 24 h after dosing. After a 14 day washout period, blood was collected to verify non-detectible theophylline concentrations. The alternate formulation was administered for 21 days, and sampling was repeated. Serum theophylline concentrations were determined using an automated immunoassay. Serum concentrations were compared between formulations using a two-way random-measures ANOVA and over time within a formulation using a repeated-measures ANOVA.

RESULTS

Therapeutic serum theophylline concentrations were achieved for 2/7 cats in each group. Of 56 serum theophylline measurements obtained, only seven (13%) were within the therapeutic range. No significant difference was detected in drug concentrations achieved by the transdermal formulations at any time point. In addition, no significant difference in serum theophylline concentrations was noted between time points for PLO ( P = 0.751) or Lipoderm ( P = 0.107).

CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE

Once-daily transdermal dosing of theophylline does not reliably achieve therapeutic concentrations. Individual cats may achieve therapeutic concentrations. No significant difference was noted between PLO and Lipoderm formulations. Therefore, transdermal theophylline formulations should not be considered as a first-line therapy in feline asthma patients.

A double-blind, placebo-controlled, randomized study to evaluate the weight gain drug, mirtazapine transdermal ointment, in cats with unintended weight loss

Mirtazapine is classified as a weight gain drug in cats, and the purpose of this study was to evaluate its efficacy in cats experiencing unintended weight loss. This was a multi-center, double-blind, placebo-controlled, randomized clinical study in client-owned cats ≥1 year of age, weighing ≥2 kg, with a documented loss (≥5%) in body weight. Cats were treated once daily with either 2 mg/cat mirtazapine transdermal ointment (n = 83) or placebo (n = 94) (Per Protocol population) applied to the inner surface of the pinna for 14 ± 3 days. Physical examination, body weight, complete blood count, serum chemistry, and urinalysis were performed prior to treatment and on Day 14. Changes in body weight between the mirtazapine and placebo groups were evaluated from Day 1 to Day 14 and compared using a two-sample t test. The mean percent change in body weight was +3.9% (standard deviation ±5.4%) in the mirtazapine group and +0.4% (±3.3%) in the placebo group (p < 0.0001). The most common adverse event was mild erythema at the application site in 17.4% of placebo and 10.4% of mirtazapine-treated cats. Application of mirtazapine transdermal ointment was well tolerated both topically and systemically and resulted in significant weight gain in cats experiencing unintended weight loss associated with various underlying diseases.

Evaluation of Transdermal Administration of Phenobarbital in Healthy Cats

The purpose was to determine the safety and achievable serum concentrations of transdermally administered phenobarbital in healthy cats. The hypothesis was that transdermal phenobarbital would achieve therapeutic serum concentrations (15-45 µg/mL) with minimal short-term adverse effects. Enrolled cats had normal physical and neurologic exams and unremarkable bloodwork. Transdermal phenobarbital in a pluronic lecithin organogel-based vehicle was administered at a dosage of 3.0-3.1 mg/kg per ear pinna (total of 6.0-6.2 mg/kg) every 12 hr for 14 days. Serum phenobarbital concentrations were measured 3-6 hr after dosing at seven different times over 15 days. The mean and median serum concentration of phenobarbital at study completion were 5.57 and 4.08 µg/mL, respectively. Mean peak concentration and mean time to peak concentration were 5.94 µg/mL and 13.3 days, respectively. Mild adverse effects were observed. Potency was analyzed in three replicates of the transdermal phenobarbital gel administered; potencies ranged from 62.98 to 82.02%. Transdermal application of phenobarbital in healthy cats achieves a detectable, but subtherapeutic, serum concentration and appears safe in the short term. The use of therapeutic drug monitoring is recommended when this formulation of phenobarbital is used to ensure therapeutic serum concentrations are achieved.

Single and multiple dose pharmacokinetics of a novel mirtazapine transdermal ointment in cats

Single and multiple dose pharmacokinetics (PK) of mirtazapine transdermal ointment applied to the inner ear pinna of cats were assessed. Study 1 was a randomized, cross-over single dose study (n = 8). Cats were treated once with 0.5 mg/kg of mirtazapine transdermal ointment applied topically to the inner ear pinna (treatment) or administered orally (control) and then crossed over after washout. Plasma was collected predose and at specified intervals over 96 hr following dosing. Study 2 was a multiple dose study (n = 8). Cats were treated daily for 14 days with 0.5 mg/kg of mirtazapine transdermal ointment applied topically to the inner pinna. Plasma was collected on Day 13 predose and at specified intervals over 96 hr following the final dose. In Study 1, single transdermal administration of mirtazapine resulted in mean T_max = 15.9 hr, C_max = 21.5 ng/mL, AUC_0-24 = 100 ng*hr/mL, AUC_0-∞ = 260 ng*hr/mL and calculated half-life = 26.8 hr. Single oral administration of mirtazapine resulted in mean T_max = 1.1 hr, C_max = 83.1 ng/mL, AUC_0-24 = 377 ng*hr/mL, AUC_0-∞ = 434 ng*hr/mL and calculated half-life = 10.1 hr. Mean relative bioavailability (F) of transdermal to oral dosing was 64.9%. In Study 2, daily application of mirtazapine for 14 days resulted in mean T_max = 2.1 hr, C_max = 39.6 ng/mL, AUC_0-24 = 400 ng*hr/mL, AUC_0-∞ = 647 ng*hr/mL and calculated half-life = 20.7 hr. Single and repeat topical doses of a novel mirtazapine transdermal ointment achieve measurable plasma concentrations in cats.

Compounding and Extralabel Use of Drugs in Exotic Animal Medicine

Extralabel drug use is the use of a Food and Drug Administration (FDA)-approved drug in a manner different from what is stipulated on the approved label. Compounding is the process of preparing a medication in a manner not indicated on the label to create a formulation specifically tailored to the needs of an individual patient. Extralabel drug use and compounding are vital aspects of safe and effective drug delivery to patients in exotic animal practice. There are few FDA-approved drugs for exotic animal species, and many approved drugs for other species are not available in suitable formulations for use in exotic animals.

Veterinary Compounding: Regulation, Challenges, and Resources

The spectrum of therapeutic need in veterinary medicine is large, and the availability of approved drug products for all veterinary species and indications is relatively small. For this reason, extemporaneous preparation, or compounding, of drugs is commonly employed to provide veterinary medical therapies. The scope of veterinary compounding is broad and focused primarily on meeting the therapeutic needs of companion animals and not food-producing animals in order to avoid human exposure to drug residues. As beneficial as compounded medical therapies may be to animal patients, these therapies are not without risks, and serious adverse events may occur from poor quality compounds or excipients that are uniquely toxic when administered to a given species. Other challenges in extemporaneous compounding for animals include significant regulatory variation across the global veterinary community, a relative lack of validated compounding formulas for use in animals, and poor adherence by compounders to established compounding standards. The information presented in this article is intended to provide an overview of the current landscape of compounding for animals; a discussion on associated benefits, risks, and challenges; and resources to aid compounders in preparing animal compounds of the highest possible quality.

ISFM consensus guidelines on the practical management of diabetes mellitus in cats

PRACTICAL RELEVANCE

Diabetes mellitus (DM) is a common endocrinopathy in cats that appears to be increasing in prevalence. The prognosis for affected cats can be good when the disease is well managed, but clinical management presents challenges, both for the veterinary team and for the owner. These ISFM Guidelines have been developed by an independent, international expert panel of clinicians and academics to provide practical advice on the management of routine (uncomplicated) diabetic cats.

CLINICAL CHALLENGES

Although the diagnosis of diabetes is usually straightforward, optimal management can be challenging. Clinical goals should be to limit or eliminate clinical signs of the disease using a treatment regimen suitable for the owner, and to avoid insulin-induced hypoglycaemia or other complications. Optimising bodyweight, feeding an appropriate diet and using a longer acting insulin preparation (eg, protamine zinc insulin, insulin glargine or insulin detemir) are all factors that are likely to result in improved glycaemic control in the majority of cats. There is also some evidence that improved glycaemic control and reversal of glucose toxicity may promote the chances of diabetic remission. Owner considerations and owner involvement are an important aspect of management. Provided adequate support is given, and owners are able to take an active role in monitoring blood glucose concentrations in the home environment, glycaemic control may be improved. Monitoring of other parameters is also vitally important in assessing the response to insulin. Insulin adjustments should always be made cautiously and not too frequently--unless hypoglycaemia is encountered.

EVIDENCE BASE

The Panel has produced these Guidelines after careful review of the existing literature and of the quality of the published studies. They represent a consensus view on practical management of cats with DM based on available clinical data and experience. However, in many areas, substantial data are lacking and there is a need for better studies in the future to help inform and refine recommendations for the clinical management of this common disease.

Percutaneous absorption of methimazole: an in vitro study of the absorption pharmacokinetics for two different vehicles

The use of transdermal medications in cats has become popular in veterinary medicine due to the ease of administration compared to oral medication. However, the research to support systemic absorption of drugs applied to the pinna after transdermal administration in cats is limited. The aim of this study was to characterize the percutaneous absorption pharmacokinetics of methimazole in a lipophilic vehicle compared to methimazole in Pluronic(®) lecithin organogel (PLO) using a finite dose applied to feline ear skin in an in vitro Franz cell model. The two formulations of methimazole (10 mg) were applied to the inner stratum corneum of six pairs of feline ears. The receptor medium was sampled up to 30 h post-administration, and methimazole concentrations were measured using high-performance liquid chromatography (HPLC). Histological examination of all ears was undertaken as small differences in the thickness of ear skin may have contributed to inter-individual differences in methimazole absorption between six cats. Methimazole was absorbed more completely across the pinnal skin when administered in the lipophilic vehicle compared to administration in the PLO gel (P < 0.001).

Absorption of Transdermal and Oral Cyclosporine in Six Healthy Cats

Cyclosporine is commonly used orally to treat feline dermatoses. Due to difficulties administering oral medications, veterinarians sometimes prescribe compounded transdermal cyclosporine, despite studies showing limited absorption. The study objective was to compare cyclosporine blood concentrations after oral administration to concentrations after transdermal application of cyclosporine (prepared in pluronic lecithin organogel [PLO]) in six cats using a controlled, cross-over design with a 2 wk washout period. Cats were dosed at 5.1–7.4 mg/kg of cyclosporine q 24 hr either per os for 7 days or transdermally for 21 days. Cyclosporine blood concentrations were measured q 7 days and after the washout period. A monoclonal-based immunoassay (lower limit of quantitation was 25 ng/mL) was used. Median concentrations on the seventh day were 2,208 ng/mL (range, 1,357–3,419 ng/mL) 2 hr after orally administered cyclosporine and 37 ng/mL (range, 25–290 ng/mL) 2 hr after transdermally applied cyclosporine. Median concentration on day 21 was 58 ng/mL (range, 51–878 ng/mL) 2 hr after transdermally applied cyclosporine. Concentrations were quantifiable for transdermally applied cyclosporine, but considered therapeutic in only one of six cats. Based on those results, transdermally applied cyclosporine was not recommended in cats because of inconsistent absorption.

A comparative study evaluating the esophageal transit time of eight healthy cats when pilled with the FlavoRx pill glide versus pill delivery treats

Retention of tablets or capsules in the feline esophagus can be associated with esophagitis and esophageal stricture formation. The objective of this study was to evaluate the esophageal passage of tablets and capsules when administered with either a one-step pill gun with flavored liquid (FlavoRx pill glide) or a pill delivery treat (Pill Pockets). Four different medication administrations were evaluated on different days in eight normal cats: tablets with FlavoRx pill glide (T-FG), tablets with pill delivery treats (T-PP), capsules with FlavoRx pill glide (C-FG) and capsules with pill delivery treats (C-PP). The estimated average transit time was 36s for T-FG, 60s for T-PP, 16s for C-FG, and 24s for C-PP. The results of this study suggest that either pill delivery method is acceptable for successful passage of tablets or capsules into the stomach of cats using a single replicate.

Treatment of Feline Hypertension With Transdermal Amlodipine: A Pilot Study

This prospective study evaluated transdermal amlodipine for the control of hypertension in six cats. Cats were treated with oral amlodipine until blood pressures decreased to &lt;180 mm Hg. They were maintained on this dose for 7 days and then administered identical doses of transdermal amlodipine for 7 days. Oral amlodipine decreased pressure by a median of 73 mm Hg, which subsequently increased by 20 mm Hg after 7 days of transdermal amlodipine. Plasma concentrations of amlodipine were measured after oral and transdermal dosing. Additional studies are needed to determine dosing, pharmacokinetics, and efficacy.

Veterinary Compounding in Small Animals: A Clinical Pharmacologist's Perspective

The advent and growth of veterinary compounding and the increasing role of the pharmacist in drug dispensing, including compounding, should be embraced by the veterinary profession. For selected patients, extemporaneous compounding of prescriptions is necessary and beneficial for optimal treatment. By its nature, however, compounding is individualized and fraught with risks of failure. Pet owners should be informed of the risks associated with using a compounded product and consent to therapy based on disclosure that the use of the product may be scientifically unproven. As the pharmacy profession increases its efforts to define and ensure its role in veterinary medicine, and as the regulatory agencies consider changes in the regulations that increase the flexibility of animal drug compounding, the veterinary profession must implement actions that protect the patient and the public. It is indeed the responsibility of the veterinarian to ensure the safety and therapy of any prescribed therapeutic intervention, and failure to do otherwise places the patient and pet owner as well as the veterinarian at risk.

Drug compounding for veterinary patients

Drugs have been compounded for veterinary practice for many years because it has been necessary in the course of routine practice. However, regulations and compliance policy guidelines (CPGs) should be recognized. A new CPG issued in July 2003 listed the current Food and Drug Administration (FDA) limitations on compounding for veterinary medicine. To summarize the guideline: drugs must not be compounded from bulk substances, and the compounding must not constitute manufacture of a new animal drug. Drug compounding on a case-by-case basis is allowed under the CPG. However, veterinarians and pharmacists must be aware of potential incompatibilities and practices that may interfere with the drug's stability, purity, and/or potency.