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.

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.

暂无摘要。

UNASSIGNED: 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.
UNASSIGNED: 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.
UNASSIGNED: 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.
UNASSIGNED: 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.

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).

Allergic rhinitis is among the most common chronic diseases in the world. Obesity can lead to a chronic systemic inflammatory process. In this study, we evaluated the effects of body weight on the response to treatment of allergic rhinitis with nasal corticosteroids. Two groups of patients diagnosed with allergic rhinitis were compared: one composed of obese patients and one composed of normal weight patients. Nasal endoscopy, peak nasal inspiratory flow, quality of life, the VAS, SNOT22, and NOSE-5 questionnaires, and the concentration of nasal cytokines (INF-γ, TNF-ᾳ, IL-4, IL-5, IL-6, and IL-10) through nasal brushing were evaluated before and after treatment with 400 mcg/day nasal beclomethasone. No differences were identified between the groups in nasal endoscopy, peak nasal inspiratory flow, the VAS, SNOT22, and NOSE-5 questionnaires, or in the cytokines INF-γ, TNF-ᾳ, IL-4, IL-5, IL-6, and IL-10 prior to nasal corticosteroid treatment. Both groups showed improvement in the VAS, SNOT-22, and NOSE-5 questionnaires and an increase in peak nasal inspiratory volumes after treatment. In the eutrophic group, there was an increase in INF-γ and IL-5 after treatment. When comparing the variation in cytokines before and after treatment between groups, IL-10 was the cytokine that showed altered behavior dependent on weight. Obesity did not seem to impact nasal symptoms and physiology and presented a similar clinical response to treatment with nasal corticosteroids to normal weight patients. However, obese patients had an impaired anti-inflammatory response during treatment with nasal corticosteroids.

暂无摘要。

Patients with epilepsy may experience seizure clusters, which are described by the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) as intermittent, stereotypic episodes of frequent seizure activity that are distinct from a patient\'s usual seizure pattern. Untreated seizure clusters may increase the risk for status epilepticus, as well as decrease quality of life and increase burden on patients and care partners. Benzodiazepine therapies are the mainstay for acute treatment of seizure clusters and are often administered by nonmedical care partners outside a healthcare facility. Three rescue therapies are currently FDA-approved for this indication, with diazepam rectal gel being the first in 1997, for patients aged ≥  2 years. Limitations of rectal administration (e.g., positioning and disrobing the patient, which may affect ease of use and social acceptability; interpatient variation in bioavailability) led to the investigation of the potential for nasal administration as an alternative. Midazolam nasal spray (MDS) was approved by the FDA in 2019 for patients aged ≥  12 years and diazepam nasal spray (DNS) in 2020 for patients aged ≥  6 years; these two intranasal therapies have differences in their formulations [e.g., organic solvents (MDS) vs. Intravail and vitamin E for absorption and solubility (DNS)], effectiveness (e.g., proportion of seizure clusters requiring only one dose), and safety profiles. In clinical studies, the proportion of seizure clusters for which only one dose of medication was used varied between the three approved rescue therapies with the highest single-dose rate for any time period for DNS; however, although studies for all three preparations enrolled patients with highly intractable epilepsy, inclusion and exclusion criteria varied, so the three cannot be directly compared. Treatments that have been used off-label for seizure clusters in the USA include midazolam for injection as an intranasal spray (indicated for sedation/anxiolysis/amnesia and anesthesia) and tablet forms of clonazepam (indicated for treatment for seizure disorders) and lorazepam (indicated for anxiety). In the European Union, buccal and intranasal midazolam are used for treating the indication of prolonged, acute convulsive seizures and rectal diazepam solution for the indication of epileptic and febrile convulsions; duration of effectiveness for these medications for the treatment of seizure clusters has not been established. This paper examines the literature context for understanding seizure clusters and their treatment and provides effectiveness, safety, and administration details for the three FDA-approved rescue therapies. Additionally, other medications that are used for rescue therapy in the USA and globally are discussed. Finally, the potential benefits of seizure action plans and candidates for their use are addressed. This paper is intended to provide details about the unique characteristics of rescue therapies for seizure clusters to help clarify appropriate treatment for individual patients.

Sex differences in drug pharmacokinetics include variations in the expression of the cytochrome P450 enzymes, which are involved in the metabolism of benzodiazepines. It is unclear whether sex influences outcomes associated with intranasally administered drugs. A post hoc analysis of sex differences was conducted to evaluate the effectiveness and safety of diazepam nasal spray, which included examining changes in the number of days between seizure clusters over time (SEIzure interVAL [SEIVAL]). Diazepam nasal spray is approved for acute treatment of seizure clusters in patients with epilepsy aged ≥6 years. Data from a phase 3 safety study were used to determine the proportion of second doses used within 24 h (ie, a proxy for effectiveness) and SEIVAL. Adverse events were recorded. Of 163 treated patients, 89 were female, and 74 were male. Approximately 16% of both sexes self-administered the study drug. A slightly higher proportion of seizure clusters was treated with a second dose in female (14.7%) than male (9.4%) patients. SEIVAL increased significantly and substantially over a year for all patients. The safety profile was generally similar between the sexes. These results suggest that potential sex differences in benzodiazepine pharmacokinetics do not meaningfully influence outcomes associated with diazepam nasal spray. PLAIN LANGUAGE SUMMARY: Some drugs may have differences in absorption and metabolism between genders that could translate into differences in safety and effectiveness. This safety study looked at diazepam nasal spray for treating seizure clusters in patients at least 6 years old. It found that safety was about the same for females and males. For both groups, most clusters stopped after only 1 dose of the drug, and the time between treated clusters got longer over a year.

The Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic and the subsequent increase in respiratory viral infections highlight the need for broad-spectrum antivirals to enable a quick and efficient reaction to current and emerging viral outbreaks. We previously demonstrated that the antihistamine azelastine hydrochloride (azelastine-HCl) exhibited in vitro antiviral activity against SARS-CoV-2. Furthermore, in a phase 2 clinical study, a commercial azelastine-containing nasal spray significantly reduced the viral load in SARS-CoV-2-infected individuals. Here, we evaluate the efficacy of azelastine-HCl against additional human coronaviruses, including the SARS-CoV-2 omicron variant and a seasonal human coronavirus, 229E, through in vitro infection assays, with azelastine showing a comparable potency against both. Furthermore, we determined that azelastine-HCl also inhibits the replication of Respiratory syncytial virus A (RSV A) in both prophylactic and therapeutic settings. In a human 3D nasal tissue model (MucilAirTM-Pool, Epithelix), azelastine-HCl protected tissue integrity and function from the effects of infection with influenza A H1N1 and resulted in a reduced viral load soon after infection. Our results suggest that azelastine-HCl has a broad antiviral effect and can be considered a safe option against the most common respiratory viruses to prevent or treat such infections locally in the form of a nasal spray that is commonly available globally.