Systemic absorption of amitriptyline and buspirone after oral and transdermal administration to healthy cats

A double-blind, placebo-controlled, randomized study to evaluate the weight gain drug, mirtazapine transdermal ointment, in cats with unintended weight loss

Mirtazapine is classified as a weight gain drug in cats, and the purpose of this study was to evaluate its efficacy in cats experiencing unintended weight loss. This was a multi-center, double-blind, placebo-controlled, randomized clinical study in client-owned cats ≥1 year of age, weighing ≥2 kg, with a documented loss (≥5%) in body weight. Cats were treated once daily with either 2 mg/cat mirtazapine transdermal ointment (n = 83) or placebo (n = 94) (Per Protocol population) applied to the inner surface of the pinna for 14 ± 3 days. Physical examination, body weight, complete blood count, serum chemistry, and urinalysis were performed prior to treatment and on Day 14. Changes in body weight between the mirtazapine and placebo groups were evaluated from Day 1 to Day 14 and compared using a two-sample t test. The mean percent change in body weight was +3.9% (standard deviation ±5.4%) in the mirtazapine group and +0.4% (±3.3%) in the placebo group (p < 0.0001). The most common adverse event was mild erythema at the application site in 17.4% of placebo and 10.4% of mirtazapine-treated cats. Application of mirtazapine transdermal ointment was well tolerated both topically and systemically and resulted in significant weight gain in cats experiencing unintended weight loss associated with various underlying diseases.

Veterinary Compounding: Regulation, Challenges, and Resources

The spectrum of therapeutic need in veterinary medicine is large, and the availability of approved drug products for all veterinary species and indications is relatively small. For this reason, extemporaneous preparation, or compounding, of drugs is commonly employed to provide veterinary medical therapies. The scope of veterinary compounding is broad and focused primarily on meeting the therapeutic needs of companion animals and not food-producing animals in order to avoid human exposure to drug residues. As beneficial as compounded medical therapies may be to animal patients, these therapies are not without risks, and serious adverse events may occur from poor quality compounds or excipients that are uniquely toxic when administered to a given species. Other challenges in extemporaneous compounding for animals include significant regulatory variation across the global veterinary community, a relative lack of validated compounding formulas for use in animals, and poor adherence by compounders to established compounding standards. The information presented in this article is intended to provide an overview of the current landscape of compounding for animals; a discussion on associated benefits, risks, and challenges; and resources to aid compounders in preparing animal compounds of the highest possible quality.

Drug compounding for veterinary patients

Drugs have been compounded for veterinary practice for many years because it has been necessary in the course of routine practice. However, regulations and compliance policy guidelines (CPGs) should be recognized. A new CPG issued in July 2003 listed the current Food and Drug Administration (FDA) limitations on compounding for veterinary medicine. To summarize the guideline: drugs must not be compounded from bulk substances, and the compounding must not constitute manufacture of a new animal drug. Drug compounding on a case-by-case basis is allowed under the CPG. However, veterinarians and pharmacists must be aware of potential incompatibilities and practices that may interfere with the drug's stability, purity, and/or potency.

Organogels in drug delivery

In the last decade, interest in physical organogels has grown rapidly with the discovery and synthesis of a very large number of diverse molecules, which can gel organic solvents at low concentrations. The gelator molecules immobilise large volumes of liquid following their self-assembly into a variety of aggregates such as rods, tubules, fibres and platelets. The many interesting properties of these gels, such as their thermoreversibility, have led to much excitement over their industrial applications. However, only a few organogels are currently being studied as drug/vaccine delivery vehicles as most of the existing organogels are composed of pharmaceutically unacceptable organic liquids and/or unacceptable/untested gelators. In this paper a brief overview of organogels is presented, followed by a more in-depth review of the gels that have been investigated for drug and/or vaccine delivery. These include microemulsion-based gels and lecithin gels (studied for transdermal delivery), sorbitan monostearate organogels and amphiphilogels (studied as vaccine adjuvants and for oral and transdermal drug delivery, respectively), gels composed of alanine derivatives (investigated as in situ forming gels) and Eudragit organogels (studied as a matrix for suppositories). Finally, pluronic lecithin organogels, descendents of lecithin gels but which are not really organogels, are briefly discussed for their interesting history, their root and the wide interest in these systems.

Evaluation of transdermal application of glipizide in a pluronic lecithin gel to healthy cats

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate plasma glipizide concentration and its relationship to plasma glucose and serum insulin concentrations in healthy cats administered glipizide orally or transdermally. ANIMALS-15 healthy adult laboratory-raised cats.

PROCEDURE

Cats were randomly assigned to 2 treatment groups (5 mg of glipizide, PO or transdermally) and a control group. Blood samples were collected 0, 10, 20, 30, 45, 60, 90, and 120 minutes and 4, 6, 10, 14, 18, and 24 hours after administration to determine concentrations of insulin, glucose, and glipizide.

RESULTS

Glipizide was detected in all treated cats. Mean +/- SD transdermal absorption was 20 +/- 14% of oral absorption. Mean maximum glipizide concentration was reached 5.0 +/- 3.5 hours after oral and 16.0 +/- 4.5 hours after transdermal administration. Elimination half-life was variable (16.8 +/- 12 hours orally and 15.5 +/- 15.3 hours transdermally). Plasma glucose concentrations decreased in all treated cats, compared with concentrations in control cats. Plasma glucose concentrations were significantly lower 2 to 6 hours after oral administration, compared with after transdermal application; concentrations were similar between treatment groups and significantly lower than for control cats 10 to 24 hours after treatment.

CONCLUSIONS AND CLINICAL RELEVANCE

Transdermal absorption of glipizide was low and inconsistent, but analysis of our results indicated that it did affect plasma glucose concentrations. Transdermal administration of glipizide is not equivalent to oral administration. Formulation, absorption, and stability studies are required before clinical analysis can be performed. Transdermal administration of glipizide cannot be recommended for clinical use at this time.