Systemic absorption of epinephrine compared between the intranasal and intramuscular routes of administration in healthy adults.

BACKGROUND: Epinephrine 5 mg administered via the intranasal (IN) route was shown to be bioequivalent to epinephrine 0.3 mg administered via the intramuscular (IM) route in our preliminary study. OBJECTIVE: To investigate the pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics of IN and IM epinephrine absorption in a larger group of healthy adults (n = 12). METHODS: Each subject was administered IN saline, IN epinephrine (5 mg), and IM epinephrine (0.3 mg) on 3 separate days. Plasma epinephrine levels were determined using liquid chromatography-tandem mass spectrometry. RESULTS: IN epinephrine administration showed significant systemic absorption compared to IN saline control with the areas under the curve (AUC0-180 min) of 4.4 (4.9) ± 4.0 and 0.2 (0.5) ± 0.3 ng.min/mL, respectively; the values are mean (median) ± standard deviation. IN epinephrine absorption was about 0.5-fold that of IM epinephrine (AUC0-180 min 10.0 (9.2) ± 8.6 ng.min/mL), but the difference was not statistically significant (p = 0.16). The mean peak epinephrine concentration and the time to reach it were also not significantly different between the IN and IM routes. The corresponding values were 120 pg/mL and 41 min for IN, and 209 pg/mL and 41 min for IM, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: The systemic absorption of IN epinephrine 5 mg was significantly different from the control IN saline and about 0.5-fold that of IM epinephrine 0.3 mg. Although epinephrine administration via the less invasive IN route is safe and feasible, further investigations are necessary to achieve an adequate and consistent systemic absorption comparable to that of the conventional IM injection.

Randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled study of aprepitant versus two dosages of olanzapine with ondansetron plus dexamethasone for prevention of chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting in patients receiving high-emetogenic chemotherapy.

PURPOSE: We assessed the efficacy of aprepitant (APR) or 10 or 5 mg OLN (OLN10 or OLN5) plus ondansetron and dexamethasone for chemotherapy-induced nausea/vomiting (CINV) prophylaxis in patients receiving high-emetogenic chemotherapy (HEC). METHODS: Patients who received doxorubicin + cyclophosphamide or cisplatin were given intravenous ondansetron and dexamethasone prior to chemotherapy and oral dexamethasone on days 2-4 and randomized 1:1:1 to receive APR125 on day 1 and APR80 on days 2-3 or OLN10 or OLN5 on days 1-4. Matched placebo controls were used. The primary endpoint was no nausea in ≤ 120 h. Secondary endpoints included CINV severity, complete response (CR) rate, adverse effects (AE), and quality of life. RESULTS: Of 141 patients, 104 received AC and 37 received cisplatin. The no-nausea rates were 33% (APR), 43.2% (OLN10; p = 0.24), and 37% (OLN5; p = 0.87). Grades 2-4 nausea were experienced by fewer patients for OLN10 than for APR (24-120 h, 8.7% vs. 27.7%, respectively; p = 0.02; overall period, 19.6% vs. 40.4%, respectively; p = 0.03). The median visual analog scale nausea score from 24 to 120 h was significantly lower for OLN10 (2.3) than for APR (1.2, p = 0.03). The degrees of vomiting, CR, and AE were similar between the APR and OLN10 groups. CINV was similar between the OLN5 and APR groups. CONCLUSIONS: Nausea was less severe for OLN10 than for APR in patients receiving HEC, but other measures were similar. CINV prevention efficacy was comparable between OLN5 and APR.

A preliminary study of intranasal epinephrine administration as a potential route for anaphylaxis treatment.

BACKGROUND: The intranasal (IN) administration of epinephrine could be an alternative route for anaphylaxis treatment. Although IN epinephrine absorption has been demonstrated in animals, such data in humans are still lacking. OBJECTIVE: To study the pharmacokinetics of IN epinephrine absorption in humans. METHODS: Each healthy adult (n = 5) was administered IN saline, IN epinephrine at various doses (i.e., 0.3, 0.6, 1.25, 2.5 and 5 mg), and intramuscular (IM) epinephrine at 0.3 mg. Plasma epinephrine levels at baseline and various time points up to 120 minutes after administration were determined using high-performance liquid chromatography with electrochemical detection. RESULTS: Significant systemic absorption of epinephrine via IN route was observed only at the dose of 5 mg, and the absorption thereof was comparable to that of IM epinephrine; the average area-under-curve (AUC) values at 0-120 minutes for IN saline, IM epinephrine, and 5 mg IN epinephrine were 0.3, 18.3, and 19.4 ng.min/mL, respectively. In addition, the peak epinephrine concentrations and the time to reach them were also not significantly different between IM and 5-mg IN epinephrine; the corresponding values (mean ± SD) were 309 ± 88 pg/mL and 67 ± 43 min for IM epinephrine, and 386 ± 152 pg/mL and 70 ± 17 min for 5 mg IN epinephrine. CONCLUSION: This preliminary study showed that epinephrine can be significantly absorbed via the IN route in humans. However, it requires a higher IN dose (5 mg) than the usual IM dose (0.3 mg) to achieve comparable systemic epinephrine absorption.