1
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: not found
      • Article: not found

      Ocular Drug Delivery: Present Innovations and Future Challenges

      Read this article at

      ScienceOpenPublisher
      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Related collections

          Most cited references 169

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: not found

          Pegaptanib for neovascular age-related macular degeneration.

           ,  A Adamis,  Brian Cunningham (2004)
          Pegaptanib, an anti-vascular endothelial growth factor therapy, was evaluated in the treatment of neovascular age-related macular degeneration. We conducted two concurrent, prospective, randomized, double-blind, multicenter, dose-ranging, controlled clinical trials using broad entry criteria. Intravitreous injection into one eye per patient of pegaptanib (at a dose of 0.3 mg, 1.0 mg, or 3.0 mg) or sham injections were administered every 6 weeks over a period of 48 weeks. The primary end point was the proportion of patients who had lost fewer than 15 letters of visual acuity at 54 weeks. In the combined analysis of the primary end point (for a total of 1186 patients), efficacy was demonstrated, without a dose-response relationship, for all three doses of pegaptanib (P<0.001 for the comparison of 0.3 mg with sham injection; P<0.001 for the comparison of 1.0 mg with sham injection; and P=0.03 for the comparison of 3.0 mg with sham injection). In the group given pegaptanib at 0.3 mg, 70 percent of patients lost fewer than 15 letters of visual acuity, as compared with 55 percent among the controls (P<0.001). The risk of severe loss of visual acuity (loss of 30 letters or more) was reduced from 22 percent in the sham-injection group to 10 percent in the group receiving 0.3 mg of pegaptanib (P<0.001). More patients receiving pegaptanib (0.3 mg), as compared with sham injection, maintained their visual acuity or gained acuity (33 percent vs. 23 percent; P=0.003). As early as six weeks after beginning therapy with the study drug, and at all subsequent points, the mean visual acuity among patients receiving 0.3 mg of pegaptanib was better than in those receiving sham injections (P<0.002). Among the adverse events that occurred, endophthalmitis (in 1.3 percent of patients), traumatic injury to the lens (in 0.7 percent), and retinal detachment (in 0.6 percent) were the most serious and required vigilance. These events were associated with a severe loss of visual acuity in 0.1 percent of patients. Pegaptanib appears to be an effective therapy for neovascular age-related macular degeneration. Its long-term safety is not known. Copyright 2004 Massachusetts Medical Society.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

            Dexamethasone intravitreal implant in patients with macular edema related to branch or central retinal vein occlusion twelve-month study results.

            To evaluate the safety and efficacy of 1 or 2 treatments with dexamethasone intravitreal implant (DEX implant) over 12 months in eyes with macular edema owing to branch or central retinal vein occlusion (BRVO or CRVO). Two identical, multicenter, prospective studies included a randomized, 6-month, double-masked, sham-controlled phase followed by a 6-month open-label extension. We included 1256 patients with vision loss owing to macular edema associated with BRVO or CRVO. At baseline, patients received DEX implant 0.7 mg (n = 421), DEX implant 0.35 mg (n = 412), or sham (n = 423) in the study eye. At day 180, patients could receive DEX implant 0.7 mg if best-corrected visual acuity (BCVA) was 250 μm. The primary outcome for the open-label extension was safety; BCVA was also evaluated. At day 180, 997 patients received open-label DEX implant. Except for cataract, the incidence of ocular adverse events was similar in patients who received their first or second DEX implant. Over 12 months, cataract progression occurred in 90 of 302 phakic eyes (29.8%) that received 2 DEX implant 0.7 mg injections versus 5 of 88 sham-treated phakic eyes (5.7%); cataract surgery was performed in 4 of 302 (1.3%) and 1 of 88 (1.1%) eyes, respectively. In the group receiving two 0.7-mg DEX implants (n = 341), a ≥ 10-mmHg intraocular pressure (IOP) increase from baseline was observed in (12.6% after the first treatment, and 15.4% after the second). The IOP increases were usually transient and controlled with medication or observation; an additional 10.3% of patients initiated IOP-lowering medications after the second treatment. A ≥ 15-letter improvement in BCVA from baseline was achieved by 30% and 32% of patients 60 days after the first and second DEX implant, respectively. Among patients with macular edema owing to BRVO or CRVO, single and repeated treatment with DEX implant had a favorable safety profile over 12 months. In patients who qualified for and received 2 DEX implant injections, the efficacy and safety of the 2 implants were similar with the exception of cataract progression. Proprietary or commercial disclosure may be found after the references. Copyright © 2011 American Academy of Ophthalmology. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              Ocular drug delivery.

              Ocular drug delivery has been a major challenge to pharmacologists and drug delivery scientists due to its unique anatomy and physiology. Static barriers (different layers of cornea, sclera, and retina including blood aqueous and blood-retinal barriers), dynamic barriers (choroidal and conjunctival blood flow, lymphatic clearance, and tear dilution), and efflux pumps in conjunction pose a significant challenge for delivery of a drug alone or in a dosage form, especially to the posterior segment. Identification of influx transporters on various ocular tissues and designing a transporter-targeted delivery of a parent drug has gathered momentum in recent years. Parallelly, colloidal dosage forms such as nanoparticles, nanomicelles, liposomes, and microemulsions have been widely explored to overcome various static and dynamic barriers. Novel drug delivery strategies such as bioadhesive gels and fibrin sealant-based approaches were developed to sustain drug levels at the target site. Designing noninvasive sustained drug delivery systems and exploring the feasibility of topical application to deliver drugs to the posterior segment may drastically improve drug delivery in the years to come. Current developments in the field of ophthalmic drug delivery promise a significant improvement in overcoming the challenges posed by various anterior and posterior segment diseases.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Journal
                Journal of Pharmacology and Experimental Therapeutics
                J Pharmacol Exp Ther
                American Society for Pharmacology & Experimental Therapeutics (ASPET)
                0022-3565
                1521-0103
                August 23 2019
                September 2019
                September 2019
                May 09 2019
                : 370
                : 3
                : 602-624
                Article
                10.1124/jpet.119.256933
                © 2019

                Comments

                Comment on this article