Desmopressin nasal spray inhibiting parasympathetic function on isolated tracheal smooth muscle.

Objectives: Nocturia with or without asthma is one of the aging diseases. Desmopressin has been used as a nasal spray for patients who are suffering from nocturia. This study determined the effects of desmopressin on isolated tracheal smooth muscle in vitro. Methods: We evaluated desmopressin's efficiency on isolated rat tracheal smooth muscle. Desmopressin was evaluated for the following effects on tracheal smooth muscle: (1) effect on resting tension; (2) effect on contraction brought on by parasympathetic mimetic 10-6 M methacholine; and (3) effect on electrically produced tracheal smooth muscle contractions. Results: As the concentration grew, desmopressin by itself had no impact on the trachea's baseline tension. Addition of desmopressin at doses of 10-5 M or above elicited a significant relaxation response to 10-6 M methacholine-induced contraction. Desmopressin could also inhibit spike contraction of the trachea induced by electrical field. Conclusion: According to this study, desmopressin at high quantities may prevent the trachea's parasympathetic activity. Due to its ability to block parasympathetic activity and lessen the contraction of the tracheal smooth muscle brought on by methacholine, Desmopressin nasal spray might help nocturia sufferers experience fewer asthma attacks.

Accelerated Stability Assessment of Extemporaneously Compounded Amiloride Nasal Spray.

Amiloride is a U.S. Food and Drug Administration-approved diuretic agent used to treat hypertension and congestive heart failure. Recent human and animal studies have suggested that amiloride may also have a role in treating anxiety through its acid-sensing ion channel antagonism. Intranasal administration of amiloride nasal spray via an extemporaneously compounded preparation has the potential for rapid delivery to the site of action to achieve therapeutic outcomes in individual patients with anxiety disorders. However, these patient-specific preparations do not have the pre-formulation characterization, including chemical stability, that conventional manufactured dosage forms have. The objective of this study was to assess the estimated chemical stability of compounded amiloride nasal spray over 6 months and 12 months utilizing accelerated degradation with high heat and the Arrhenius equation. A stability-indicating highperformance liquid chromatography analytical method was employed at appropriate intervals over a 12-month period to reveal that amiloride remained chemically stable over the period tested and by extrapolation. Physical stability and compatibility with the preservative benzyl alcohol were also confirmed via visual inspection, pH monitoring, and measurement of turbidity.

Concentration-QTc and cardiac safety analysis of single and multiple zavegepant nasal spray doses in healthy participants to support approval.

Zavegepant is a novel gepant administered as a nasal spray approved in the United States at a 10 mg dose for the acute treatment of migraine with or without aura in adults. The cardiovascular safety of zavegepant nasal spray was assessed in both single-ascending dose (SAD) and multiple-ascending dose (MAD) studies in healthy participants. The SAD study included 72 participants (54 active/18 placebo) who received 0.1-40 mg zavegepant or placebo. The MAD study included 72 participants (56 active/16 placebo) who received 5-40 mg zavegepant or placebo for 1-14 days. Plasma zavegepant pharmacokinetics and electrocardiographic (ECG) parameters (Fridericia-corrected QT interval [QTcF], heart rate, PR interval, ventricular depolarization [QRS], T-wave morphology, and U-wave presence) were analyzed pre- and post-zavegepant administration. Using pooled data from the SAD and MAD studies, the relationship between time-matched plasma zavegepant concentrations and QTc interval was assessed using a linear mixed-effects model to evaluate the potential for QTc interval prolongation. Results showed that single and multiple doses of zavegepant had no significant impact on ECG parameters versus placebo, and there was no concentration-dependent effect on QTcF interval. The estimated slope of the plasma zavegepant concentration-QTcF model was -0.053 ms per ng/mL with a 90% confidence interval of -0.0955 to -0.0110 (p = 0.0415), which is not considered clinically meaningful. At doses up to four times the recommended daily dose, zavegepant does not prolong the QT interval to any clinically relevant extent.

Rose geranium in sesame oil nasal spray to improve nasal vestibulitis symptoms: a randomized controlled trial.

PURPOSE: The purpose of this phase III randomized double-blinded controlled trial was to investigate the efficacy of a rose geranium in sesame oil (RG) nasal spray compared with an isotonic saline (IS) nasal spray for alleviating nasal vestibulitis symptoms among patients undergoing chemotherapy. METHODS: Patients undergoing active chemotherapy who reported associated nasal symptoms were randomized 1:1 to receive RG or IS, administered twice daily for 2 weeks. Consenting participants completed nasal symptom questionnaires at baseline and then weekly while on treatment. The proportion of patients experiencing improvements in their nasal symptoms 2 weeks after initiating the nasal spray, using a six-point global impression of change score, was estimated within and between each randomized arm, and compared between arms, using Fisher's exact test. The estimated odds ratio was determined (95% confidence interval). RESULTS: One hundred and six patients consented to this study; 43 participants in the RG arm and 41 in the IS arm were evaluable for the primary endpoint. Participants had a mean age of 57.8 years (SD 13.9). Demographic characteristics and baseline nasal symptoms were similar between arms. Of the evaluable participants who received RG, 67.4% reported improved nasal symptoms, compared with 36.6% of the participants who received IS (P = 0.009). Adverse events were sparse and did not differ between arms. CONCLUSION: Rose geranium in sesame oil significantly improves nasal vestibulitis symptoms among patients undergoing chemotherapy. TRIAL REGISTRATION: NCT04620369.

Barriers to Esketamine Nasal Spray Treatment Among Adults With Treatment-Resistant Depression.

Background: Under a risk evaluation and mitigation strategy program, esketamine nasal spray CIII requires self administration at a certified treatment center. Our objective was to identify factors associated with esketamine initiation and continuation.Methods: A retrospective observational cohort study was conducted among US adults who met treatment-resistant depression (TRD) criteria. Cases (n = 966) initiated esketamine between October 11, 2019, and February 28, 2022, and were compared to controls (n = 39,219) with TRD but no esketamine use. Outcomes included initiation, induction (8 administrations within 45 days), and interruptions (30-day treatment gap). Comorbid psychiatric conditions were identified using International Classification of Diseases, Tenth Revision, Clinical Modification, codes.Results: Cases resided significantly closer to treatment centers (8.9 vs 20.3 miles). Compared to 0-9 miles, initiation rate decreased by 11.9%, 50.8%, 68.1%, 75.9%, and 92.8% for individuals residing 10-19, 20-29, 30-39, 40-49, and 50+ miles from a center. After adjustment, factors associated with increased likelihood of initiation were posttraumatic stress disorder, major depressive disorder with suicidal ideation, and male sex, while increasing distance, substance use disorder, Medicaid, Charlson Comorbidity Index (CCI), and older age were associated with lower likelihood. Factors associated with lower likelihood of completing induction were Medicaid, low socioeconomic status (SES), CCI, and Hispanic communities. Factors associated with increased likelihood of interruption were alcohol use disorder, distance, and minority communities, while generalized anxiety disorder and Medicaid were associated with lower likelihood.Conclusions: Travel distance, insurance, low SES, and minority communities are potential barriers to treatment. Alternative care models may be needed to ensure adequate access to care.J Clin Psychiatry 2024;85(2):23m15102.

Managing children with frequent respiratory infections and associated wheezing: a preliminary randomized study with a new multicomponent nasal spray.

BACKGROUND: Preschoolers frequently have respiratory infections (RIs), which may cause wheezing in some subjects. Type 2 polarization may favor increased susceptibility to RIs and associated wheezing. Non-pharmacological remedies are garnering increasing interest as possible add-on therapies. The present preliminary study investigated the efficacy and safety of a new multi-component nasal spray in preschoolers with frequent RIs and associated wheezing. METHODS: Some preschoolers with these characteristics randomly took this product, containing lactoferrin, dipotassium glycyrrhizinate, carboxymethyl-beta-glucan, and vitamins C and D3 (Saflovir), two sprays per nostril twice daily for 3 months. Other children were randomly treated only with standard therapy. Outcomes included the number of RIs and wheezing episodes, use of medications, and severity of clinical manifestations. RESULTS: Preschoolers treated add-on with this multicomponent product experienced fewer RIs and used fewer beta-2 agonists than untreated children (P = 0.01 and 0.029, respectively). CONCLUSIONS: This preliminary study demonstrated that a multicomponent product, administered add-on as a nasal spray, could reduce the incidence of RIs and use of symptomatic drugs for relieving wheezing in children.

Surgery is better than nasal sprays for people with severely blocked airways caused by septal deviation.

The studyCarrie S, O'Hara J, Fouweather T, et al. Clinical effectiveness of septoplasty versus medical management for nasal airways obstruction: multicentre, open label, randomised controlled trial. BMJ 2023;383:e075445.To read the full NIHR Alert, go to: https://evidence.nihr.ac.uk/alert/surgery-is-better-than-nasal-sprays-for-people-with-severely-blocked-airways/.

Effects of esketamine nasal spray on depressive symptom severity in adults with treatment-resistant depression and associations between the Montgomery-Åsberg Depression Rating Scale and the 9-item Patient Health Questionnaire.

OBJECTIVE: To examine the effect of esketamine nasal spray (ESK) plus newly initiated oral antidepressant (OAD) versus OAD plus placebo nasal spray (PBO) on the association between Montgomery-Åsberg Depression Rating Scale (MADRS) and 9-item Patient Health Questionnaire (PHQ-9) scores in adults with treatment-resistant depression (TRD). METHODS: Data from TRANSFORM-1 and TRANSFORM-2 (two similarly designed, randomized, active-controlled TRD studies) and SUSTAIN-1 (relapse prevention study) were analyzed. Group differences for mean changes in PHQ-9 total score from baseline were compared using analysis of covariance. Associations between MADRS and PHQ-9 total scores from TRANSFORM-1/TRANSFORM-2 were assessed using simple parametric, nonparametric, and multiple regression models. RESULTS: In TRANSFORM-1/TRANSFORM-2 (ESK + OAD, n = 343; OAD + PBO, n = 222), baseline PHQ-9 mean scores were 20.4 for ESK + OAD and 20.6 for OAD + PBO (severe depression). At day 28, significant group differences were observed in least squares mean change (SE) in PHQ-9 scores from baseline (-12.8 [0.46] vs -10.3 [0.53], P < .001) and in clinically substantial change in PHQ-9 scores (≥6 points; 77.1% vs 64%, P < .001) in ESK + OAD and OAD + PBO groups, respectively. A nonlinear relationship between MADRS and PHQ-9 was observed; total scores demonstrated increased correlation over time. In SUSTAIN-1, 57.3% of patients receiving ESK + OAD (n = 89) versus 44.2% receiving OAD + PBO (n = 86) retained remission status (PHQ-9 score ≤4) at maintenance treatment end point (P = .044). CONCLUSIONS: In adults with TRD, ESK + OAD significantly improved severity of depressive symptoms, and more patients achieved clinically meaningful changes in depressive symptoms based on PHQ-9, versus OAD + PBO. PHQ-9 outcomes were consistent with those of clinician-rated MADRS. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT02417064, NCT02418585, NCT02493868.

AM-301, a barrier-forming nasal spray, versus saline spray in seasonal allergic rhinitis: A randomized clinical trial.

RATIONALE: Saline nasal sprays are frequently used in the management of seasonal allergic rhinitis (SAR) for the cleansing and clearing of aeroallergens from the nasal cavity. Also using a drug-free approach, AM-301 nasal spray is forming a thin film barrier on the nasal mucosa to prevent contact with allergens, trap them, and facilitate their discharge. A clinical trial compared the efficacy, safety, and tolerability of AM-301 and saline spray in SAR. METHODS: A total of 100 patients were randomized 1:1 to self-administer AM-301 or saline 3 × daily for 2 weeks. Primary efficacy endpoint: reduction in mean daily reflective Total Nasal Symptom Score (rTNSS). Secondary efficacy endpoints: reduction in mean instantaneous TNSS and Rhinoconjunctivitis Quality of Life Questionnaire (RQLQ), global impression of efficacy. Safety and tolerability: adverse events, relief medication use, symptom-free days, global impression of tolerability. RESULTS: AM-301-treated patients achieved a significantly lower rTNSS than the saline group (LS square means difference -1.1, 95% CI -1.959 to -0.241, p = .013) with improvement observed across all individual nasal symptoms. Likewise, all secondary endpoints showed statistical significance in favor of AM-301; for example, quality of life was significantly improved overall (p < .001) as well as for each individual RQLQ domain. Both treatments showed similarly good safety and tolerability. With AM-301, fewer patients used relief medication and more enjoyed symptom-free days compared to saline treatment. CONCLUSIONS: AM-301 was more effective than saline in improving SAR nasal symptoms and related quality of life while offering similar tolerability, demonstrating the benefits of a barrier approach.

A randomized, double-blind study to compare the efficacy and safety of nalbuphine nasal spray and injectable solution in patients after orthopaedic interventions and traumatological procedures.

AIMS: Our previous 3-period crossover study in healthy volunteers comparing the pharmacokinetics of nalbuphine nasal spray Apain with parenteral nalbuphine solution demonstrated high bioavailability of the nasal spray and close similarity of pharmacokinetic profiles after intranasal and intramuscular administration, especially within 30 min postdose. The aim of the present study was a noninferiority assessment of nalbuphine nasal spray vs. intramuscular injection for pain relief in postoperative patients. METHODS: Ninety orthopaedic and traumatology patients were enrolled in this double-blind, randomized study of the effectiveness and tolerance of a single 10.5 mg dose of nalbuphine nasal spray vs. 10 mg intramuscular injection. The summed pain intensity difference (SPID0-6) calculated using visual analogue scale scores was the primary study endpoint. RESULTS: Of 90 subjects enrolled, the per-protocol efficacy population comprised 79 patients; 6 patients in the reference group and 5 patients in the test group were excluded due to remedication. The mean values of study endpoints with 95% confidence interval were as follows in reference and test groups, respectively: SPID0-6 = 228.08 (205.73-250.43) vs. 248.73 9 (225.83-271.63), time to pain relief onset = 0.28 h (0.25-0.31) vs. 0.27 h (0.25-0.29), duration of analgesia = 5.55 h (5.17-5.93) vs. 5.51 h (5.10-5.92), area under the curve = 119.30 (91.17-147.43) vs. 99.81 (74.52-107.10). No statistically significant differences were revealed. CONCLUSION: Nalbuphine nasal spray Apain has been proven to be a safe, noninvasive alternative to intramuscular nalbuphine to relieve severe postoperative pain. Designed for self-administration and dose-adjusting, the noncontrolled opioid analgesic nalbuphine spray can be used for patient-controlled analgesia in out-of-hospital, field and home settings.

Rhinitis Control and Medication Use in a Real-World Sample of Patients With Persistent Rhinitis or Rhinosinusitis: A Community Pharmacy Study.

BACKGROUND: Little is known about rhinitis control in real-life, nor about the contribution of treatment-related and patient-related factors. OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to examine the level of rhinitis control and rhinitis medication utilization in patients with persistent rhinitis and to identify predictors of rhinitis control. METHODS: A cross-sectional observational study was conducted in patients with persistent rhinitis recruited in community pharmacies. Participants completed the Rhinitis Control Assessment Test, a questionnaire on patient/rhinitis characteristics, and rhinitis medication use. A visual analog scale for nasal symptoms was also completed. Pharmacy dispensing data were used to calculate adherence to intranasal glucocorticoids. Nasal spray technique was evaluated using a standardized checklist. Predictors of rhinitis control were explored using a linear regression model. RESULTS: A total of 1,514 patients, recruited in 215 pharmacies, participated in the study (mean age 48.7 y, 62% female). Almost 60% exhibited suboptimal rhinitis control (Rhinitis Control Assessment Test ≤ 21 of 30). A 50-mm cut-off on the visual analog scale yielded 78.1% sensitivity to identify suboptimal rhinitis control. Participants most frequently used intranasal glucocorticoids (55.6%) and intranasal decongestants (47.4%). Only 10.3% of current nasal spray users demonstrated perfect technique. More than half (54.8%) of glucocorticoid users were identified as underadherent. Female sex, self-reported nasal hyperreactivity, active asthma, and use of oral/intranasal decongestants or nasal saline were identified as predictors of worse rhinitis control. CONCLUSIONS: Suboptimal rhinitis control was common in this real-life sample of persistent rhinitis patients. Improving use of rhinitis medication may be key to increase disease control.

Dihydroergotamine mesylate nasal spray: an acute treatment option for migraine in adults.

INTRODUCTION: Although the landscape of migraine symptomatic treatment has been enriched by novel effective drugs, it is mandatory to critically reappraise older molecules to ascertain whether they could still represent reliable alternatives in specific endophenotypes of patients or migraine attacks. Among these, dihydroergotamine (DHE) nasal spray has been shown to be effective and is characterized by greater tolerability and manageability than the parenteral DHE formulation. AREAS COVERED: In this narrative review, the authors describe the pharmacodynamic and pharmacokinetic properties of DHE nasal spray and explore the results of the trials which explored its efficacy, safety and tolerability as migraine symptomatic treatment. They also discuss the limitations of the classically used device and the attempts that several companies are carrying out to generate devices warranting a more reproducible drug absorption. EXPERT OPINION: DHE nasal spray could be considered as rescue treatment in patients who have failed other symptomatic therapeutic strategies. Nevertheless, in the perspective of tailored therapy, the intranasal route of administration and the consequent rapid onset of action may represent benefits putatively making DHE a treatment of choice for challenging migraine attacks such as those with nocturnal onset or quickly reaching the climax of both headache and neurovegetative associated symptoms.

Comparative study of nasal cavity drug delivery efficiency with different nozzles in a 3D printed model.

Background: Nasal sprays are widely used in treating nasal and sinus diseases; however, there are very few studies on the drug delivery efficiency of nasal sprays. In this study, the drug delivery efficiency of three different nasal spray devices was evaluated in vitro using a 3D printed cast model of nasal cavity. Methods: Three nasal spray devices with different nozzles and angles of administration were used in the 3D model of the nasal cavity and paranasal sinuses. The spraying area (SA), maximal spraying distance (MSD), and spraying distribution scores on the nasal septum and lateral nasal wall were recorded. Results: Different nasal spray devices have their own characteristics, including volume of each spray, SA, and plume angle. The SA of the three nozzles on the nasal septum increased with an increasing angle of administration. When the angle of administration was 50°, each nozzle reached the maximal SA. There was no statistically significant difference in MSD among the three nozzles at the three angles. The total scores for each nozzle using the three different spraying angles were as follows: nozzle A, 40° > 30° > 50°; nozzle B, 30° > 40° > 50°; and nozzle C, 30° > 40° > 50°. The total scores for different nozzles using the same angle were statistically significantly different and the scores for nozzle C were the highest. Nozzle C had the minimum plume angle. None of the three nozzles could effectively delivered drugs into the middle meatus at any angle in this model. Conclusions: The design of the nozzle affects drug delivery efficiency of nasal spray devices. The ideal angle of administration is 50°. The nozzle with smaller plume angle has higher drug delivery efficiency. Current nasal spray devices can easily deliver drugs to most areas of the nasal cavity, such as the turbinate, nasal septum, olfactory fissure, and nasopharynx, but not the middle meatus. These findings are meaningful for nozzle selection and device improvements.

Prophylactic efficacy of an intranasal spray with 2 synergetic antibodies neutralizing Omicron.

BACKGROUNDAs Omicron is prompted to replicate in the upper airway, neutralizing antibodies (NAbs) delivered through inhalation might inhibit early-stage infection in the respiratory tract. Thus, elucidating the prophylactic efficacy of NAbs via nasal spray addresses an important clinical need.METHODSThe applicable potential of a nasal spray cocktail containing 2 NAbs was characterized by testing its neutralizing potency, synergetic neutralizing mechanism, emergency protective and therapeutic efficacy in a hamster model, and pharmacokinetics/pharmacodynamic (PK/PD) in human nasal cavity.RESULTSThe 2 NAbs displayed broad neutralizing efficacy against Omicron, and they could structurally compensate each other in blocking the Spike-ACE2 interaction. When administrated through the intranasal mucosal route, this cocktail demonstrated profound efficacy in the emergency prevention in hamsters challenged with authentic Omicron BA.1. The investigator-initiated trial in healthy volunteers confirmed the safety and the PK/PD of the NAb cocktail delivered via nasal spray. Nasal samples from the participants receiving 4 administrations over a course of 16 hours demonstrated potent neutralization against Omicron BA.5 in an ex vivo pseudovirus neutralization assay.CONCLUSIONThese results demonstrate that the NAb cocktail nasal spray provides a good basis for clinical prophylactic efficacy against Omicron infections.TRIAL REGISTRATIONwww.chictr.org.cn, ChiCTR2200066525.FUNDINGThe National Science and Technology Major Project (2017ZX10202203), the National Key Research and Development Program of China (2018YFA0507100), Guangzhou National Laboratory (SRPG22-015), Lingang Laboratory (LG202101-01-07), Science and Technology Commission of Shanghai Municipality (YDZX20213100001556), and the Emergency Project from the Science & Technology Commission of Chongqing (cstc2021jscx-fyzxX0001).

Effects of Mucosal Decongestion on Nasal Aerodynamics: A Pilot Study.

OBJECTIVE: Mucosal decongestion with nasal sprays is a common treatment for nasal airway obstruction. However, the impact of mucosal decongestion on nasal aerodynamics and the physiological mechanism of nasal airflow sensation are incompletely understood. The objective of this study is to compare nasal airflow patterns in nasal airway obstruction (NAO) patients with and without mucosal decongestion and nondecongested healthy subjects. STUDY DESIGN: Cross-sectional study of a convenience sample. SETTING: Academic tertiary medical center. METHODS: Forty-five subjects were studied (15 nondecongested healthy subjects, 15 nondecongested NAO patients, and 15 decongested NAO patients). Three-dimensional models of the nasal anatomy were created from computed tomography scans. Steady-state simulations of airflow and heat transfer were conducted at 15 L/min inhalation rate using computational fluid dynamics. RESULTS: In the narrow side of the nose, unilateral nasal resistance was similar in decongested NAO patients and nondecongested healthy subjects, but substantially higher in nondecongested NAO patients. The vertical airflow distribution within the nasal cavity (inferior vs middle vs superior) was also similar in decongested NAO patients and nondecongested healthy subjects, but nondecongested NAO patients had substantially less middle airflow. Mucosal cooling, quantified by the surface area where heat flux exceeds 50 W/m2, was significantly higher in decongested NAO patients than in nondecongested NAO patients. CONCLUSION: This pilot study suggests that mucosal decongestion improves objective measures of nasal airflow, which is consistent with improved subjective sensation of nasal patency after decongestion.