EFFECT OF ENVIRONMENT AND CLOZAPINE ON BASAL AND STIMULATED MEDIAL PREFRONTAL GABA RELEASE IN TWO...
-
Upload
corey-mccormick -
Category
Documents
-
view
237 -
download
4
Transcript of EFFECT OF ENVIRONMENT AND CLOZAPINE ON BASAL AND STIMULATED MEDIAL PREFRONTAL GABA RELEASE IN TWO...
EFFECT OF ENVIRONMENT AND CLOZAPINE ON BASAL AND STIMULATED MEDIAL PREFRONTAL GABA RELEASE IN TWO
RAT MODELS OF SCHIZOPHRENIA
Ocular Implants – Vision For The Future A view on why implants are currently the most effective treatment for chronic
diseases of the eyeAdedoyin Awodele, Faye Carrington, Alanna Cavanagh, Constance Gaya Cremers, Sarah Killeen, Melissa
MacPherson.Pharmacology, UCD School of Biomolecular and Biomedical Science, University College Dublin, Ireland.
Why Implants?
What are they?•.Usually made of polymers that release a drug over a prolonged period of time. There are two types:
• Provide sustained drug delivery to the posterior or anterior segment of the eye.
• Localised drug delivery, therefore reduced dose.
• Can be applied to various ocular layers depending on disease: subconjuctival/intravitreal/intrasceral.
• Implants reduce frequency of administration and the risk of side effects.
• Minimise the importance of patient compliance.
Above: Insertion of RetisertRef: http://medgadget.com/2009/02/eye_implant_prevents_lost_vision.html
Ocular drug barriers:
FDA approved 1996, Vitrasert was first non-biodegradable, intravitreal
implant. Used for the delivery of the anti-viral
drug, ganciclovir to treat AIDs-related Cytomegalovirus (CMV) Retinitis.
Ganciclovir is a synthetic analogue of the nucleoside 2-deoxyguanosine, which causes chain termination,
preventing replication. Implant holds 4.5-5 mg of the prodrug
which is released at a rate of approx. 1-1.5 µg/hr over 5-8 months.
The 4 mm device consists of a compressed drug pellet core which is completely covered, except at its top
surface, with the impermeable polymer; EVA. This entire assembly is
then coated by the permeable polymer; (PVA).
Surgical Implantation The implant is inserted by making a 5-6mm scleral incision into the pars plana.
It is then fixed into place using sutures. The wound is closed and a saline solution is injected to restore normal ocular pressure.
Most patients experience blurred vision which usually clears between 2-4 weeks
Retisert• For treatment of chronic, non-infectious uveitis (inflammation) including
sympathetic ophthalmia. • 3mm x 2mm x 5mm in size• Reservoir of fluocinolone acetonide (corticosteroid thought to act by
inducing phospholipase A2 inhib. proteins). 600ng a day decreasing to 300-400ng over the first month.
• Inserted through the pars plana into the vitreous humour• Active for 2 and a half years• Removal can cause problems• SEs = Cataracts (observed in 90% of patients after 3 years), increased I.O
pressure, eye pain, headache, nasopharyngitis and joint pain.
Top View
Side View
Silicone cup containing
drug Release orifice
PVA structure
tab
5mm
2mm
3mm
• 0.59mg tablet is held in a silicone elastomer
cup.
• The release orifice is separated from the
drugby a PVA membrane.
• The structure is held together with silicone
glue
Ozurdex
Ozurdex is a biodegradable intravitreal implant that delivers a sustained release of demaxaethasone (700ml) to the retina and vitreous humour. Ozurdex can improve visual acuity and macular thickness. It is used to treat macular edema, Retinal vein occlusion and non-infectious uveitis (posterior).
Iluvien
• Recently approved as a treatment for DME (Diabetic Macular Edema)
• It weighs 0.18mg and dispenses 0.2µg of the drug daily• It is the only drug therapy for DME treatment• In phase II trials for the treatment of wet and dry AMD and
RVO• Active ingredient is fluocinolone acetonide
DELIVERY• injected intra-vitreally using a 25 gauge needle.• minimally invasive procedure, no need for suture• Non-erodible insert• Designed to deliver drug for up to 3 years• Easier to deliver then retisert because of its smaller size
Diseases of the Eye• Age-related Macular Degeneration (AMD)
:• Diabetic
Retinopathy:
• Glaucoma:
• CMV Retinitis:
• Diabetic Macular Oedema (DME):
• Uveitis:
Retinal Detachmenthttp://www.beltina.org/health-dictionary/retinal-detachment-symptoms-treatment-surgery-recovery.html
Vitreous Haemorrhagehttp://medweb.bham.ac.uk/easdec/vitreous_hemorrhage.html
Cystoid Macular Oedemahttp://www.mvretina.com/education/12.html
Endophthalimitishttp://www.primehealthchannel.com/endophthalmitis.html
Implant Type: Biodegradable Non-Biodegradable
Pros: Will be cleared from body naturally, no need for surgical removal.
Drug release can be controlled more precisely.
Cons: Controlof drug release from degradable systems is more difficult.
Must be surgically removed.
Non
-Bio
deg
rad
able
Im
pla
nts
Bio
deg
rad
able
Im
pla
nt
Vitrasert
Structure
Dynamic: Static:
•Tear Dilution- max. only 30µl tear volume comfortably accommodated. In eye when the average eye drop is 50 µl in volume – inevitable spillage!•Naso-lacrimal duct- when tears exceed normal tear volume of 7-10 µl•Systemic Removal – the conjunctiva is highly vascularised and any drug permeating it is rapidly removed by the systemic circulation and eventually transported to the GIT.
•Cornea-Hydrophobic and hydrophilic layers connected by tight junctions and containing efflux pumps inducing multidrug resistance. (p-glycoprotein and MRP)•Sclera-Opaque matrix of proteoglycans and collagen that acts as a filter with preferred permeability for small, hydrophilic and positively charged molecules due to it’s structure.•Blood-Ocular Barriers –the blood-retinal barrier arises from the retinal pigment epithelium prevents transfer of molecules between itself and choroidal blood with tight junctions and according to some studies show P-gp efflux pumps present also.
Introduction
Implants: The Way Forward?
Side Effects and Complications of
Implants
Pros Cons
Self-administration Patient compliance poor
Easy accessibility Limited Bioavailability due to barriers
Limited adverse systemic effects Does not reach the posterior of the eye
Pros Cons
Does not need to be administered daily. Administration is an invasive procedure
Some can deliver drug for up to 3 years Surgically implanted.
Some don’t need surgical extraction Some need surgical procedure to extract
Localised dispersion of the drug Most are specific to the drugs they carry.
Pros Cons
Non-invasive method of drug delivery Poor bioavailability to eye.
Treats the posterior segment of the eye Difficulty crossing the blood-retinal barrier.
Easy for drugs to penetrate the choroid. Higher risk of adverse effect
Topical administration
Implant Administration
Systemic administration
Implants Vs. Other Deliveries
Pros Cons
Longer duration than drops Must be given several times a month
More drug availability to eye than systemic drugs
Must be administered by a physician
Limited adverse systemic effects Not as long lasting as implants
Intraocular Injections
Conclusion
Ref: http://computerkiddoswiki.pbworks.com/w/page/16304712/Five%20Senses
Ref: http://www.engagesite.com/healthwork.
html
References: http://www.oculist.net/downaton502/prof/ebook/duanes/pages/v3/v3c028a.html, http://www.carolinaretinacenter.com/PE_article5.html, http://www.bausch.co.nz/en_US/ecp/pharma/product/vitrasert.aspx, "Ocular Drug Delivery" Authors : Ripal Gaudana, Hari Krishna Ananthula, Ashwin Parenky, and Ashim K. Mitra (http://www.helsinki.fi/farmasia/biofarmasia/opiskelu/provopinnot/bjktentti/ocular+PK.pdf) "THE CHALLENGES OF OPHTHALMIC DRUG DELIVERY: A REVIEW” AUTHORS: SINGH, AHMAD, HEMING (http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2895432/), Critical appraisal of the clinical utility of the dexamethasone intravitreal implant (Ozurdex®) for the treatment of macular edema related to branch retinal vein occlusion or central retinal vein occlusion Annie Chan, Loh-Shan Leung, and Mark S Blumenkranz (Published online 2011 July 26), Dexamethasone intravitreal implant for the treatment of noninfectious uveitis Rebecca S Hunter and Ann-Marie Lobo (published online 2011 November 11), http://www.bauschvrx.com/, http://www.ema.europa.eu/docs/en_GB/document_library/Application_withdrawal_assessment_report/2010/01/WC500068245.pdf , Shalin, S et al. (2010). Drug delivery to the posterior segment of the eye for pharmacologic therapy. Expert Rev Ophthalmol.. 1 (5(1)), 75–93, Kompella, Uday B et al. (2010). Recent advances in ophthalmic drug delivery. Ther Deliv. 1 (3), 435-456, Short, Brian G. (2008). Safety Evaluation of Ocular Drug Delivery Formulations: Techniques and Practical Considerations. Toxicologic Pathology. 36 (49), 49-64.
.http://www.psivida.com/products-iluvien.html
1.Iluvien ™ : a new sustained delivery technology for posterior eye disease Frances E Kane † , Judith Burdan , Antonio Cutino & Kenneth E.Green
†Alimera Sciences, Inc.
Above : Implant on day 3 (A) and day 180 (B)
Ozurdex is made using a solid biodegradable polymer. This polymer is composed of an apolylactic acid-co-glycolic acid (PLGA) matrix. This dissolves completely in vivo. The products of this are lactic acid and glycolic acid, which are converted into Carbon dioxide and Water
http://tpx.sagepub.com/content/36/1/49.full
http://depts.washington.edu/hivaids/oit/case7/fig7d.html
Pros: Slows down the median time to disease progression in comparison to I.V. Con: Increased risk of developing contralateral eye retinitis and systemic CMV.
IOVS- Investigative Ophthalmology & Visual Science (An ARVO Journal)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Macular_degeneration
http://diabetestesting-578.com/warning-diabetic-peripheral-neuropathy
http://od.pcli.com/articles/a-new-doctor/diabetes-and-cataract-surgery
http://www.otm1.com/page/services_otm
http://www.medicinenet.com/script/main/art.asp?articlekey=121809
http://www.eyesite.ca/7modules/Module7/html/Mod7Case7Ref.html
Due to the physiology of the eye, ocular drug delivery poses a challenge. For this reason, routes which are favoured by patients for ease of administration are
not the most effective forms of treatment. The bioavailability of drugs administered topically and systemically reaches a level which is far inferior to implant bioavailability. Intraocular injections also fall short of implants as they must be given every few weeks by a physician which is time consuming and unpleasant for patients. Until these issues are addressed or new less invasive techniques are developed, ocular implants appear to be the most favourable choice for chronic diseases of the eye. They are long lasting and eliminate patient compliance issues while bypassing many of the barriers which limit
bioavailability of other administration routes.