Meloxicam for the treatment of respiratory diseases in pigs

Information

  • Patent Grant
  • 10548901
  • Patent Number
    10,548,901
  • Date Filed
    Wednesday, February 28, 2018
    6 years ago
  • Date Issued
    Tuesday, February 4, 2020
    4 years ago
  • Inventors
  • Examiners
    • Maewall; Snigdha
    Agents
    • Jarecki-Black; Judy
Abstract
A method of treating or preventing a respiratory disease in a pig is described that includes administering to the pig in need thereof an effective amount of meloxicam or a pharmaceutically acceptable salt thereof.
Description
BACKGROUND OF THE INVENTION
1. Technical Field

The invention relates to the use of meloxicam or a pharmaceutically acceptable salt thereof for preparing a pharmaceutical composition for the treatment or prevention of respiratory diseases in pigs.


2. Background Information

Respiratory disease in pigs belongs to the most important health problems in swine production. Porcine respiratory disease is primarily caused by infectious agents, but environmental factors have a strong influence. The relevant pathogens include mycoplasmas, bacteria, and viruses (e.g., G. Christensen, V. Sorensen, and J. Mousing, Diseases of the Respiratory System, In: Diseases of Swine, B. E. Straw, S. D'Allaire, W. L. Mengeling, & D. J. Taylor (eds), Iowa State University Press, Ames, Iowa (1999) pp. 913-940).


The most important measures for the control of porcine respiratory disease are to improve herd management and housing conditions and introduce a vaccination program. However, if pigs have developed respiratory disease, they have to be treated.


Current therapy of porcine respiratory disease includes treatment with antibiotics. The successful use of various types of antibiotics is described, including β-lactams, quinolones, and tetracyclines (e.g., I. Lang, M. Rose, E. Thomas, & E. Zschiesche, A Field Study of Cefquinome for the Treatment of Pigs with Respiratory Disease, Revue Med Vet 8-9, (2002) pp. 575-580).


It is known that cyclooxygenase-2 (COX-2) plays a relevant role in the pathophysiology of porcine pleuropneumonia caused by Actinobacillus pleuropneumoniae. Isolated porcine alveolar macrophages increase their COX-2 activity after exposure to Actinobacillus pleuropneumoniae (W. S. Cho & C. Chae, In vitro Effects of Actinobacillus pleuropneumoniae on Inducible Nitric Oxide Synthase and Cyclooxygenase-2 in Porcine Alveolar Macrophages, Am J Vet Res 64, (2003) pp. 1514-1518). Moreover, in situ hybridization (W. S. Cho & C. Chae, Expression of Cyclooxygenase-2 in Swine Naturally Infected with Actinobacillus pleuropneumoniae, Vet Pathol 40, (2003) pp. 25-31) and immunohistochemistry (W. S. Cho & C. Chae, Immunohistochemical Detection of Cyclooxygenase-2 in Lungs of Pigs Naturally Infected with Actinobacillus pleuropneumoniae, J Comp Pathol 127, (2002) pp. 274-279) showed increased COX-2 expression in lungs of pigs naturally infected with Actinobacillus pleuropneumoniae.


Moreover, it is well-known that acetylsalicylic acid (aspirin) can be used for the treatment of pigs with respiratory disease. However, little information on controlled clinical studies is available: for a review, see A. Laval, Utilisation des Anti-inflammatoires chez le Porc, Rec Méd Vét 168 (8/9) (1992) pp. 733-744. Ketoprofen, and, to a lesser extent, flunixin decrease fever induced by experimental infection with Actinobacillus pleuropneumoniae (J. M. Swinkels, A. Pijpers, J. C. Vernooy, A. Van Nes, & J. H. Verheijden, Effects of Ketoprofen and Flunixin in Pigs Experimentally Infected with Actinobacillus pleuropneumoniae, J Vet Pharmacol Ther 17, (1994) pp. 299-303). However, no effects on lung lesions were observed. Ketoprofen was further tested in a controlled, blinded clinical field study (M. F. De Jong, O. Sampimon, J. P. Arnaud, G. Theunissen, G. Groenland, & P. J. Werf, A Clinical Study with a Non Steroid Antiinflammatory Drug, 14, (1996) 659 IPVS). In this study, ketoprofen had no effect on clinical score, relapse, or cure rate.


Indomethacin alleviated experimental endotoxin-induced respiratory failure in pigs (N. C. Olson, T. T. Brown, J. R. Anderson, & D. L. Anderson, Dexamethasone and Indomethacin Modify Endotoxin-Induced Respiratory Failure in Pigs, J Appl Physiol 58, (1985) pp. 274-284).


Meloxicam is a non-steroidal anti-inflammatory compound that belongs to the oxicam class and exerts potent anti-inflammatory, anti-exudative, and anti-pyretic activity. The efficacy of meloxicam as an adjunctive therapy in the treatment of respiratory infections in cattle has been widely proven. Recently meloxicam was approved for the treatment of MMA (A. Hirsch et al., J Vet Pharmacol Therap 26 (2003) pp. 355-360) and locomotor disorders in pigs (G. Friton et al., Berl Münch Tierärztl Wschr 116 (2003) pp. 421-426).


A review article (P. Lees, The Pharmacokinetics of Drugs Used in the Treatment of Respiratory Diseases in Cattle and Pigs, (1991) pp. 67-74, Hatfield, U.K. Proc. Royal Vet. Coll.) focuses on pharmacokinetics used in the treatment of respiratory disease in cattle and pigs; however, non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs data for pigs was almost entirely lacking and only lists data for cattle including meloxicam.


The use of meloxicam in conjunction with antibiotics in bovine respiratory disease is well-established (H. Schmidt, H. Philipp, E. Salomon, & K. Okkinga, Effekte der zusäitzlichen Gabe von Metacam (Meloxicam) auf den Krankheitsverlauf bei Rindern mit Atemwegserkrankungen, Der praktische Tierarzt 81 (2000) pp. 240-244) and registered in the EU. However, to date no information on the use of meloxicam in pigs with respiratory disease is publicly available.


Since the pharmacokinetics in pigs and cattle differ substantially for meloxicam (plasma half-time in cattle is 26 hours whereas it is 2.5 hours in pigs), there is no expectation that the successful use of meloxicam in cattle should also be beneficial for pigs. Moreover, the causative agents for bovine and porcine respiratory disease differ substantially.


The problem underlying the present invention was to provide a medication for the prevention or treatment of respiratory diseases in pigs, one of the most important health problems in swine production.


BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF THE INVENTION

It has been found surprisingly that meloxicam can be used for the treatment or prevention of respiratory diseases in pigs.


Accordingly, the invention relates to the use of meloxicam or a pharmaceutically acceptable salt thereof for preparing a pharmaceutical composition for the treatment or prevention of respiratory diseases in pigs.


Moreover, the invention relates to a method of treating or preventing respiratory diseases in pigs, which method comprises administering an effective amount of meloxicam to the pigs in need thereof.


Furthermore, the invention relates to veterinary preparation containing meloxicam as well as at least one antibiotic selected from the group consisting of β-lactams, quinolones, tetracyclines, sulfonamides, fenicoles, and macrolides.


Another aspect of the invention is a ready-to-use two-component system for the treatment of respiratory diseases in pigs, wherein:

    • (a) one component contains meloxicam and a pharmaceutically acceptable carrier; and
    • (b) the other component contains at least one antibiotic selected from the group consisting of β-lactams, quinolones, tetracyclines, sulfonamides, fenicoles, and macrolides and a pharmaceutically acceptable carrier.


Still another aspect of the invention is an article of manufacture comprising packaging material contained within which is a composition consisting of meloxicam and a pharmaceutically acceptable carrier, and a label which indicates that the composition can be used to treat or prevent respiratory diseases in pigs.





BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF THE DRAWINGS


FIG. 1 shows the incidence of fever (rectal temperature ≥40.56° C.) in percent following the first treatment in a group of pigs treated with oxytetracycline and meloxicam (♦), in a group of pigs treated with oxytetracycline alone (o), and in the untreated control (Δ).



FIG. 2 shows the efficacy of meloxicam in drinking water in reducing lung lesions caused by experimental Swine Influenza Virus (SIV) infection on study days 7 and 14.





DETAILED DESCRIPTION OF THE INVENTION

Preferably the invention relates to the use of meloxicam or a pharmaceutically acceptable salt thereof for preparing a pharmaceutical composition in a form suitable for systemic or oral administration for the treatment or prevention of respiratory diseases in pigs. Meloxicam (4-hydroxy-2-methyl-N-(5-methyl-2-thiazolyl)-2H-1,2-benzothiazine-3-carboxamide-1,1-dioxide) of formula




embedded image



is an active substance which belongs to the group of NSAIDs (non-steroidal-anti-inflammatory drugs). Meloxicam and the sodium and meglumine salt thereof (N-methyl-D-glucamine salt) are described in EP-A-0 002 482 (corresponding to U.S. Pat. No. 4,233,299), each of which is hereby incorporated by reference.


Meloxicam may be used according to the invention in the form of a physiologically acceptable acid addition salt. By physiologically acceptable acid addition salts are meant, according to the invention, the meglumine, sodium, potassium, or ammonium salt, preferably the meloxicam meglumine salt.


In a further preferred embodiment, the pharmaceutical composition is administered corresponding to a daily dose of meloxicam ranging from 0.01 mg/kg to 5.0 mg/kg, preferably from 0.1 mg/kg to 3.5 mg/kg, in particular from 0.2 mg/kg to 2.0 mg/kg.


The pharmaceutical composition is preferably administered in a form suitable for injection, in particular for intramuscular injection, or in form of water soluble granules for administration via drinking water or as top dressing on feed.


A suitable injection formulation is disclosed, for example, in Example 25 of EP-A-0 002 482. Furthermore, such injection solutions may additionally contain excipients selected from among citric acid, lecithin, gluconic acid, tartaric acid, phosphoric acid and EDTA or the salts thereof as disclosed in the Examples 1 to 5 of the International Patent Application WO 01/97813 (corresponding to U.S. Patent App. Pub No. 2002/0035107), each of which is hereby incorporated by reference. Moreover, an injection solution of meloxicam for needleless injections is disclosed in the International Patent Application WO 03/049733 (corresponding to U.S. Patent App. Pub No. 2003/0119825), each of which is hereby incorporated by reference.


Suitable water soluble granules for administration via drinking water or as top dressing on feed are, for example, disclosed in the International Patent Application PCT/EP03/11802 (corresponding to U.S. Patent App. Pub No. 2004/0234596), each of which is hereby incorporated by reference.


In a preferred embodiment of the invention, the meloxicam granules contain a binder which may be selected from among hydroxypropylmethylcellulose, polyvinylpyrrolidone, gelatine, starch, and polyethylene glycol ether, preferably hydroxypropylmethylcellulose, polyvinylpyrrolidone, and polyethylene glycol ether, and most preferably hydroxypropylmethylcellulose and polyvinylpyrrolidone.


In another preferred embodiment of the invention, meloxicam granules contain a sweetener, which may be selected from among sodium saccharine, aspartame, and SUNETT® (acesulfame K), preferably sodium saccharine or aspartame.


Particularly preferred according to the invention are meloxicam granules containing a flavoring agent which may be selected from among vanilla, honey flavoring, apple flavoring, and contramarum, preferably honey flavoring and apple flavoring.


Also particularly preferred are meloxicam granules in which the carrier is selected from among lactose, glucose, mannitol, xylitol, sucrose, and sorbitol, preferably glucose, lactose, or sorbitol, more preferably glucose or lactose, and most preferably glucose.


Most preferred are the following granules of meloxicam recipes:


Example A: 0.6% Meloxicam Granules














g/100 g



















Meloxicam
0.6



Meglumine
0.42



Hydroxypropylmethylcellulose
3.00



Povidone
2.00



Glucose monohydrate
93.98










Example B: 1.2% Meloxicam Granules














g/100 g



















Meloxicam
1.2



Meglumine
0.84



Hydroxypropylmethylcellulose
3.00



Collidone 25
2.0



Glucose Monohydrate
92.96










Example C: 0.6% Meloxicam Granules














g/100 g



















Meloxicam
0.6



Meglumine
0.42



Pharmacoat 606
4.0



Macrogol 6000
1.0



Acesulfame K
0.3



Lactose
93.68










Example D: 0.6% Meloxicam Granules














g/100 g



















Meloxicam
0.6



Meglumine
0.42



Pharmacoat 606
4.75



Macrogol 6000
0.25



Acesulfame K
0.3



Liquid vanilla flavoring
0.05



Lactose
93.63










Particularly preferred are meloxicam granules in which the content of meloxicam is between 0.05% and 4%, preferably between 0.1% and 2%, preferably between 0.3% and 1.8%, more preferably between 0.4% and 1.5%, and most preferably 1.2%. Also particularly preferred are meloxicam granules which contain meglumine and meloxicam in a molar ratio of about 9:8 to 12:8, preferably 10:8.


Meloxicam can be used according to the invention to treat or prevent respiratory diseases in any breed of swines. Preferably pigs selected from the swine breeds American Landrace, American Yorkshire, Angeln Saddleback, Arapawa Island, Ba Xuyen, Bantu, Bazna, Beijing Black, Belarus Black Pied, Belgian Landrace, Bentheim Black Pied, Berkshire, Black Slavonian, British Landrace, British Lop, Bulgarian White, Cantonese, Chester White, Czech Improved White, Danish Landrace, Dermantsi Pied, Duroc, Dutch Landrace, Fengjing, Finnish Landrace, French Landrace, German Landrace, Gloucestershire Old Spots, Guinea Hog, Hampshire, Hereford, Hezuo, Iberian, Italian Landrace, Jinhua, Kele, Krskopolje, Kunekune, Lacombe, Large Black, Large Black-white, Large White, Lithuanian Native, Mangalitsa, Meishan, Middle White, Minzhu, Mong Cai, Mukota, Mora Romagnola, Moura, Mulefoot, Neijiang, Ningxiang, Norwegian Landrace, Ossabaw Island, Oxford Sandy and Black, Philippine Native, Pietrain, Poland China, Red Wattle, Saddleback, Spots, Swabian-Hall, Swedish Landrace, Tamworth, Thuoc Nhieu, Tibetan, Turopolje, Vietnamese Potbelly, Welsh, and Wuzhishan, in particular American Landrace, Belgian Landrace, British Landrace, Danish Landrace, Dutch Landrace Finnish Landrace, French Landrace, German Landrace, Italian Landrace, and Pietrain can be treated with meloxicam according to the present invention.


Furthermore preferred is the administration of meloxicam is in conjunction with an antibiotic, preferably selected from the group consisting of β-lactams, quinolones, tetracyclines, sulfonamides, fenicoles, and macrolides. Most preferred are amoxicillin, oxytetracycline, florfenicol, tylosin, tilmicosin, and sulfamethazine.


The dose of antibiotic is not critical per se and depends strongly on the different efficacies of the antibiotics used. As a rule up to 150.0 mg/kg, preferably from 0.1 mg/kg to 120 mg/kg, in particular from 10 mg/kg to 110 mg/kg of an antibiotic are co-administered together with meloxicam.


The following dose ranges are most preferred:


Amoxicillin: 5 mg/kg to 30 mg/kg, in particular about 10 mg/kg;


Oxytetracycline: 20 mg/kg to 70 mg/kg, in particular about 30 mg/kg;


Florfenicol: 10 mg/kg to 20 mg/kg, in particular about 15 mg/kg;


Tylosin: 10 mg/kg to 25 mg/kg, in particular about 16 mg/kg;


Tilmicosin: 5 mg/kg to 30 mg/kg, in particular 10 mg/kg to 20 mg/kg; and


Sulfamethazine: 80 mg/kg to 150 mg/kg, in particular about 100 mg/kg.


The phrase “co-administration” (or “administration in conjunction with”), in defining use of meloxicam and an antibiotic, is intended to embrace administration of each agent in a sequential manner in a regimen that will provide beneficial effects, in particular, reduction of the symptoms of the respiratory disease in the affected pig of the drug combination. The phrase also is intended to embrace co-administration of these agents in a substantially simultaneous manner, such as in a single capsule or injection solution having a fixed ratio of these active agents or in multiple, separate capsules for each agent.


Accordingly, meloxicam and the antibiotic may be co-administered in a combined form, or separately or separately and sequentially wherein the sequential administration is preferably close in time.


Preferably the medicament according to this invention is used for the prevention or treatment of Porcine Respiratory Disease Complex in growing or fattening pigs; or for the prevention or treatment of respiratory diseases in pigs caused by mycoplasmas, in particular Mycoplasma hyopneumoniae, Mycoplasma hyorhinis, for the prevention or treatment of respiratory diseases in pigs caused by bacteria in particular Actinobacillus spp., in particular Actinobacillus pleuropneumoniae, Bordetella bronchiseptica, Pasteurella multocida, Arcanobacterium pyogenes, Streptococcus spp., and Staphylococcus spp., or for the prevention or treatment of respiratory diseases in pigs caused by viruses, in particular Swine Influenza Virus, Aujetzky's Virus, Porcine Reproductive and Respiratory Syndrome Virus, Porcine Circovirus, and Transmissible Gastroenteritis and Porcine Respiratory Coronavirus.


Most preferably the medicament according to this invention is used for the prevention or treatment of respiratory diseases in pigs caused by Mycoplasma hyopneumoniae, Actinobacillus pleuropneumoniae, Bordetella bronchiseptica, Pasteurella multocida, Streptococcus suis, Swine Influenza Virus, and Porcine Reproductive and Respiratory Syndrome Virus.


The Examples that follow serve to illustrate the use of meloxicam according to the invention. They are intended solely as possible procedures described by way of example, without restricting the invention to their content.


Example 1: Efficacy of Meloxicam in Pigs with Experimental Actinobacillus Pleuropneumoniae Infection

The study was a controlled, randomized, and blinded exploratory study under experimental conditions with a parallel group design.


Crossbred pigs of about 10 weeks of age were challenged with a single intranasal inoculation of Actinobacillus pleuropneumoniae. The next day, pigs were included in the study and treated if they fulfilled the following inclusion criteria: rectal temperature ≥40° C. and clinical symptoms of acute or subacute infectious respiratory disease.


Twenty-four (12 castrated male and 12 female) pigs were included and randomly allocated to three treatment groups with 8 pigs per group. The treatment groups were:













Group
Treatment







1
untreated


2
oxytetracycline


3
oxytetracycline and meloxicam









Meloxicam was administered as 0.5% solution, at 0.5 mg/kg daily on three consecutive days, oxytetracycline as 20% long-acting solution (OXYTET® 200) at 20 mg/kg as single injection.


Relevant criteria for the evaluation of efficacy were incidence of fever, clinical parameters of respiratory disease, deaths, and lung lesions at necropsy 10 days after first treatment or after spontaneous death. The percentage of affected lung tissue was calculated by lobe and averaged for the total lung.


Challenge with Actinobacillus pleuropneumoniae lead to severe pleuropneumonia within 12 hours.


The incidence of fever (rectal temperature ≥40.56° C.) following the first treatment was lower in group 3 (♦) than in groups 1 (Δ), and 2 (o) (cp. FIG. 1).


The best treatment response in clinical parameters was observed in group 3.


The number of pigs which died during the three days following first treatment is displayed below.
















Group (n = 8 per group)
Deaths









1
7



2
1



3
0










The mean extent of lung lesions was less severe in group 3 than in the other groups (see below).
















Group
Lung lesions (%)









1
60



2
35



3
14










Meloxicam in addition to antibiotic treatment effectively reduced fever, clinical symptoms of respiratory disease, deaths, and the extent of lung lesions in pigs with experimental Actinobacillus pleuropneumoniae-infection.


Example 2: Efficacy of Meloxicam in Drinking Water in Experimental Swine Influenza Virus Infection

The aim of this study was to test the efficacy of meloxicam granules dissolved in drinking water in pigs experimentally infected with Swine Influenza Virus (SIV).


The study was an open, negative controlled randomized laboratory study carried out according to GCP at one site.


Meloxicam granules containing 6 mg meloxicam per gram were offered to the pigs in the treatment groups (A+B) via drinking water in a concentration of 1 g granules per liter drinking water ad libitum for 7 consecutive days. This resulted in an actual meloxicam uptake of 0.8 mg per kg body weight per day. The pigs in the control group (C) received municipal drinking water ad libitum.


30 pigs were infected with SIV on study day 0. 10 pigs were allocated to each of the three groups A, B, and C. Treatment (groups A and B) started after SIV challenge on the same day.


The study animals were clinically examined daily on study days 0 to 7 and 14. They were weighed on study days 7 and 14. All animals of group A and 5 animals of group C were euthanized and necropsied on study day 7; the remaining study animals, group B and 5 study animals of group C, on study day 14.


It is the major finding of this study that meloxicam granules administered continuously in the drinking water at an approximate daily dose of 0.8 mg/kg body weight significantly alleviated the development of lung lesions caused by experimental infection with SIV during the first week after challenge. FIG. 2 shows the quantity of lung lesions by lung lobe on study days 7 and 14.


On study day 7 the percentage of lung tissue affected with SIV-related lesions (median value) was 8.9% in meloxicam group A and 23.8% in the control group (5 study animals of group C).


Moreover, meloxicam-treated pigs reached significantly higher weight gains during the two weeks following infection than untreated controls. Mean daily weight gain in the interval study day 0 to 7 was 557 g in meloxicam group A and 257 g in the control (5 study animals of group C). In the interval study day 0 to 14, mean daily weight gain was 629 g in meloxicam group B and 486 g in the control (5 study animals of group C).


The area under the curve of the clinical index score (CIS), a sum of the relevant clinical parameters, over study days 0 to 7 was significantly smaller in groups A and B than in group C.


Thus oral treatment with meloxicam granules at a dose of 0.8 mg meloxicam per kg body weight per day for 7 consecutive was an efficacious treatment for SIV infection.


Example 3: Field Trial Regarding the Effect of Meloxicam in the Porcine Respiratory Disease Complex (PRDC) in Growing/Fattening Pigs

Materials and Methods


A medium scale farm (560 sows) with a previous history of recurring PRDC episodes was selected. A double-blinded randomized study was carried out with the selection of 162 growing animals with a mean age of 90 days at the onset of PRDC clinical signs. Animals were randomly allocated to 8 pens and divided into two treatment groups, with respect to equal sex ratio, same housing and feeding conditions and genetic background. Group 1 (PC) received 800 ppm chlorotetracycline in the feed over 8 consecutive days plus a single IM injection of a placebo (isotonic saline) at d0 (start of the trial, n=82). Group 2 (M) received 800 ppm chlorotetracycline in the feed over 8 consecutive days plus a single IM injection of 0.4 mg/kg bodyweight meloxicam (METACAM® 2%, Boehringer Ingelheim GmbH) at d0 (n=80). Clinical parameters were assessed as the daily Respiratory Score (RS), using a 3 point score (0=absence of signs to 3=abdominal breathing and disordered general condition) over 8 consecutive days and the total number of additional required injectable medications (AIM). Growth performance data for each group included the Average Daily Gain (ADG) for the following trial periods: d90 to d117, d117 to d170 (slaughtering), and d90 to d170 of age. Mortality was also calculated for these time periods. Slaughterhouse records per group, included the percentage of each lung surface (LS) affected by chronic and acute respiratory lesions.


Student's t-Test and Pearson's Chi-Square Test were used for the consequent comparisons of means and frequencies between trial groups.


Results and Discussion


RS and AIM in the meloxicam group were significantly lower (p<0.05) compared to the control group. Same applies for LS affected by acute lesions (p<0.01), while no differences were observed for LS in chronic cases (Table 1).









TABLE 1







RS, LS: Mean (SD); AIM number (%)










Treatment Group












PC
M
Significance
















RS
 0.70 (0.63)a
0.50 (0.51)b
p = 0.0289



AIM (%)
10/82 (12.2%)a
2/80 (2.5%)b
x2 = 4.226



LS(chronic)
 5.96 (2.28)a
5.91 (2.32)a
p = 0.893



LS (acute)
 3.71 (1.81)a
2.64 (2.03)b
p = 0.0007








a,bValues in a row with different superscripts differ significantly







The analysis of growth performance data revealed significant differences between groups at d90 to d117 (p<0.05, Table 2).









TABLE 2







ADG: Mean (SD)









Trial Period












Group
d90 to d117
d117 to d170
d90 to d170







PC
0.64 (0.09)a
0.89 (0.06)a
0.81 (0.03)a



M
0.67 (0.10)b
0.89 (0.06)a
0.82 (0.03)a








a,bValues in a column with different superscripts differ significantly (p < 0.05)














TABLE 3







Mortality: Number of animals/group (%)









Trial Period












Group
d90 to d117
d117 to d170
d90 to d170







PC
6/82 (7.32%)a
1/76 (1.22%)
7/82 (8.54%)



M
0/80 (0.00%)b
1/80 (1.25%)
1/80 (1.25%)








a,bValues in a column with different superscripts differ significantly (p < 0.05)







Under the conditions of this study, the reduction of the prevalence of respiratory signs as well as the reduced overall number of required injectable antibiotic medications are indicative for the potent anti-inflammatory activity of meloxicam. The latter could become a valuable adjunctive measure, especially when respiratory distress is associated with remarkable reduction of the feed intake. The initial differences in growth performance and in mortality rate could be explained by the fact that meloxicam, when combined with proper antimicrobial medication, contributes to faster recovery from a respiratory inflammation and faster restoring of the distorted growth rate of affected animals. Further research on the evaluation of feed intake and the use of meloxicam in PRDC recurring episodes is required.

Claims
  • 1. A method of treating or preventing a respiratory disease caused by a virus in a pig, the method comprising administering to a pig suffering from a respiratory disease an effective amount of meloxicam or a pharmaceutically acceptable salt thereof, wherein the disease is caused by Swine Influenza Virus, Aujetzky's Virus, Porcine Reproductive and Respiratory Syndrome Virus, Porcine Circovirus, or Transmissible Gastroenteritis and Porcine Respiratory Coronavirus wherein meloxicam or a pharmaceutically acceptable salt thereof is administered in the form of granules and wherein the granules further comprise: meglumine;a carrier selected from the group consisting of lactose, glucose, mannitol, xylitol, sucrose, and sorbitol; and a binder selected from the group consisting of hydroxypropylmethylcellulose, polyvinylpyrrolidone, gelatine, starch, and polyethylene glycol ether.
  • 2. The method of claim 1, wherein the disease is Porcine Respiratory Disease Complex and the pig is a growing or fattening pig.
  • 3. The method of claim 1, wherein the meloxicam or a pharmaceutically acceptable salt thereof is administered systemically or orally.
  • 4. A method of treating or preventing a respiratory disease caused by a virus in a pig, the method comprising administering to a pig suffering from a respiratory disease an effective amount of meloxicam or a pharmaceutically acceptable salt thereof, wherein the disease is caused by Swine Influenza Virus, Aujetzky's Virus, Porcine Reproductive and Respiratory Syndrome Virus, Porcine Circovirus, or Transmissible Gastroenteritis and Porcine Respiratory Coronavirus, and the meloxicam or a pharmaceutically acceptable salt thereof is administered by injection wherein meloxicam or a pharmaceutically acceptable salt thereof is administered in the form of granules and wherein the granules further comprise: meglumine;a carrier selected from the group consisting of lactose, glucose, mannitol, xylitol, sucrose, and sorbitol; and a binder selected from the group consisting of hydroxypropylmethylcellulose, polyvinylpyrrolidone, gelatine, starch, and polyethylene glycol ether.
  • 5. The method of claim 1, wherein the meloxicam or a pharmaceutically acceptable salt thereof is administered in a daily dose ranging from 0.01 mg/kg to 5.0 mg/kg.
  • 6. The method of claim 1, wherein the meloxicam or a pharmaceutically acceptable salt thereof is administered via drinking water or as top dressing on feed in soluble granules.
  • 7. The method of claim 1, further comprising: administering an antibiotic to the pig, wherein the antibiotic is selected from the group consisting of β-lactams, quinolones, tetracyclines, sulfonamides, fenicoles, macrolides, and any one or more combinations thereof.
  • 8. The method of claim 7, wherein the antibiotic is oxytetracycline or chlorotetracycline.
  • 9. The method of claim 7, wherein the antibiotic is administered in conjunction with the meloxicam or a pharmaceutically acceptable salt thereof.
Priority Claims (1)
Number Date Country Kind
04004054 Feb 2004 EP regional
US Referenced Citations (142)
Number Name Date Kind
2795529 Alburn et al. Jun 1957 A
3089818 Stone et al. May 1963 A
3288675 Newmark et al. Nov 1966 A
3849549 Dempski et al. Nov 1974 A
3931212 Satzinger et al. Jan 1976 A
3947576 Kuczkowski et al. Mar 1976 A
4233299 Trummlitz et al. Nov 1980 A
4446144 von Daehne May 1984 A
4447443 Goldenberg May 1984 A
4482554 Gebhardt et al. Nov 1984 A
4543200 Sherman Sep 1985 A
4628053 Fries Dec 1986 A
4687662 Schobel Aug 1987 A
4702919 Kitamori et al. Oct 1987 A
4748174 Veronesi May 1988 A
4794117 Corbiere Dec 1988 A
4802926 Kussendrager et al. Feb 1989 A
4835187 Reuter et al. May 1989 A
4942167 Chiesi et al. Jul 1990 A
5026560 Makino et al. Jun 1991 A
5085868 Mattsson et al. Feb 1992 A
5169847 Nagy et al. Dec 1992 A
5178878 Wehling et al. Jan 1993 A
5283065 Doyon et al. Feb 1994 A
5304561 Sarfarazi Apr 1994 A
5360611 Robertson et al. Nov 1994 A
5380934 Inoue et al. Jan 1995 A
5414011 Fu et al. May 1995 A
5460828 Santus et al. Oct 1995 A
5464632 Cousin et al. Nov 1995 A
5489439 Bola Feb 1996 A
5552160 Liversidge et al. Sep 1996 A
5556639 Fielden Sep 1996 A
5599535 Polansky et al. Feb 1997 A
5654003 Fuisz et al. Aug 1997 A
5674888 Polansky et al. Oct 1997 A
5700816 Isakson Dec 1997 A
5792838 Smith et al. Aug 1998 A
5811446 Thomas Sep 1998 A
5824658 Falk et al. Oct 1998 A
5886030 Maniar Mar 1999 A
5891129 Daubert et al. Apr 1999 A
5962012 Lin et al. Oct 1999 A
6046191 Hamley et al. Apr 2000 A
6048557 Van Den Burg et al. Apr 2000 A
6053890 Moreau Defarges et al. Apr 2000 A
6063783 Pineiro et al. May 2000 A
6071539 Robinson et al. Jun 2000 A
6077864 Burgess et al. Jun 2000 A
6090800 Unger et al. Jul 2000 A
6106862 Chen et al. Aug 2000 A
6136804 Nichtberger Oct 2000 A
6156349 Steinbach et al. Dec 2000 A
6166012 Muller et al. Dec 2000 A
6180136 Larson Jan 2001 B1
6183779 Ouali et al. Feb 2001 B1
6184220 Turck et al. Feb 2001 B1
6187800 Suri et al. Feb 2001 B1
6221377 Meyer Apr 2001 B1
6284269 Struengmann et al. Sep 2001 B1
6319519 Woolfe et al. Nov 2001 B2
6495603 Miyake et al. Dec 2002 B1
6550955 D'Silva Apr 2003 B2
6599529 Skinhøj et al. Jul 2003 B1
6605295 Bellmann et al. Aug 2003 B1
6630056 Thibierge et al. Oct 2003 B1
6669957 Laruelle et al. Dec 2003 B1
6682747 Turck et al. Jan 2004 B1
6869948 Bock et al. Mar 2005 B1
6986346 Hochrainer et al. Jan 2006 B2
7105512 Morizono et al. Sep 2006 B2
7969206 Ito Jun 2011 B2
8337892 Couaraze et al. Dec 2012 B1
8920820 Folger et al. Dec 2014 B2
20010055569 Davis et al. Dec 2001 A1
20020006440 Cherukuri Jan 2002 A1
20020016342 Scolnick et al. Feb 2002 A1
20020035107 Henke et al. Mar 2002 A1
20020058908 Zierenberg et al. May 2002 A1
20020068088 Gruber Jun 2002 A1
20020077328 Hassan et al. Jun 2002 A1
20020099049 Burch et al. Jul 2002 A1
20020106345 Uhrich et al. Aug 2002 A1
20020131998 Martani Sep 2002 A1
20020169212 Stroble et al. Nov 2002 A1
20020187187 Ohki et al. Dec 2002 A1
20030050305 Tejada Mar 2003 A1
20030055051 Morizono et al. Mar 2003 A1
20030109701 Coppi et al. Jun 2003 A1
20030119825 Folger et al. Jun 2003 A1
20030199482 Seibert et al. Oct 2003 A1
20030220306 Simmons et al. Nov 2003 A1
20030235589 Demopulos et al. Dec 2003 A1
20040001883 Matsui et al. Jan 2004 A1
20040015126 Zierenberg et al. Jan 2004 A1
20040024041 Selzer Feb 2004 A1
20040024042 Breyer Feb 2004 A1
20040037869 Cleverly et al. Feb 2004 A1
20040043992 Tolba et al. Mar 2004 A1
20040110747 Altman Jun 2004 A1
20040170687 Hurd et al. Sep 2004 A1
20040171611 Trummlitz et al. Sep 2004 A1
20040180092 Henke et al. Sep 2004 A1
20040198826 Baiker et al. Oct 2004 A1
20040204413 Faour et al. Oct 2004 A1
20040204472 Briggs et al. Oct 2004 A1
20040214753 Britten et al. Oct 2004 A1
20040229038 Cooper et al. Nov 2004 A1
20040234596 Ohki et al. Nov 2004 A1
20040253312 Sowden et al. Dec 2004 A1
20050038018 Kanbe et al. Feb 2005 A1
20050147664 Liversidge et al. Jul 2005 A1
20050187212 Ohki et al. Aug 2005 A1
20050187213 Lang et al. Aug 2005 A1
20050197332 Altman Sep 2005 A1
20050244491 Ohki et al. Nov 2005 A1
20050245510 Friton et al. Nov 2005 A1
20050277634 Janott et al. Dec 2005 A1
20050288280 Friton et al. Dec 2005 A1
20060079516 Henke et al. Apr 2006 A1
20060160793 Altman Jul 2006 A1
20060217431 Daemmgen et al. Sep 2006 A1
20070077296 Folger et al. Apr 2007 A1
20070099907 Altman May 2007 A1
20070193894 Macken et al. Aug 2007 A1
20070249727 Martin et al. Oct 2007 A1
20080064759 Stamm et al. Mar 2008 A1
20080132493 Folger et al. Jun 2008 A1
20080234380 Shapiro Sep 2008 A1
20080280840 Lang et al. Nov 2008 A1
20100015184 Tuel Jan 2010 A1
20100233399 Pradella et al. Sep 2010 A1
20110083985 Folger et al. Apr 2011 A1
20110275618 Folger et al. Nov 2011 A1
20120077764 Freehauf Mar 2012 A1
20130178467 Henke et al. Jul 2013 A1
20140066440 Folger et al. Mar 2014 A1
20140113893 Folger et al. Apr 2014 A1
20140179639 Lang et al. Jun 2014 A1
20140332438 Henke et al. Nov 2014 A1
20150051198 Folger et al. Feb 2015 A1
20170035885 Henke et al. Feb 2017 A1
Foreign Referenced Citations (132)
Number Date Country
673675 Nov 1996 AU
762464 Jun 2003 AU
1102802 Jun 1981 CA
2164100 Jan 1995 CA
2166204 Jan 1995 CA
2264626 Mar 1998 CA
2326048 Oct 1999 CA
2326517 Oct 1999 CA
2404360 Sep 2001 CA
2414063 Dec 2001 CA
2469588 Jun 2003 CA
2503396 May 2004 CA
1187356 Jul 1998 CN
1546033 Nov 2004 CN
3434707 Apr 1985 DE
3700172 Jul 1987 DE
4217971 Oct 1993 DE
19729879 Jan 1999 DE
10010123 Sep 2001 DE
10024752 Nov 2001 DE
10032132 Jan 2002 DE
10300323 Oct 2004 DE
0002482 Jun 1979 EP
0034432 Aug 1981 EP
0093999 Nov 1983 EP
0127400 Dec 1984 EP
0177870 Apr 1986 EP
0179430 Apr 1986 EP
0298192 Jan 1989 EP
0306984 Mar 1989 EP
0360246 Mar 1990 EP
0390071 Oct 1990 EP
0422681 Apr 1991 EP
0465235 Jan 1992 EP
0560329 Sep 1993 EP
0629392 Dec 1994 EP
0945134 Sep 1999 EP
1082966 Mar 2001 EP
1190714 Mar 2002 EP
1568369 Aug 2005 EP
2065846 Feb 1995 ES
2159564 Oct 2001 ES
2437838 Apr 1980 FR
2087236 May 1982 GB
2455875 Jun 2009 GB
1251650 May 1995 IT
47007352 Mar 1972 JP
S52102416 Aug 1977 JP
S6191118 May 1986 JP
1299230 Dec 1989 JP
H06157312 Jun 1994 JP
H0912426 Jan 1997 JP
11139971 May 1999 JP
2001170083 Jun 2001 JP
2001172183 Jun 2001 JP
2003535902 Dec 2003 JP
3550782 Aug 2004 JP
2007197357 Aug 2007 JP
4018022 Dec 2007 JP
04321624 Aug 2009 JP
199301814 Feb 1993 WO
1994000420 Jan 1994 WO
1995009639 Apr 1995 WO
1995017178 Jun 1995 WO
1995018604 Jul 1995 WO
1996003387 Feb 1996 WO
1996003388 Feb 1996 WO
1996010999 Apr 1996 WO
1996011192 Apr 1996 WO
1996040102 Dec 1996 WO
1996040103 Dec 1996 WO
1996041625 Dec 1996 WO
1997003655 Feb 1997 WO
1997003667 Feb 1997 WO
1997017978 May 1997 WO
1997017989 May 1997 WO
1997029776 Aug 1997 WO
1997031631 Sep 1997 WO
1998009654 Mar 1998 WO
1998017250 Apr 1998 WO
1998031361 Jul 1998 WO
1998042318 Oct 1998 WO
199850045 Nov 1998 WO
1999009988 Mar 1999 WO
1999012524 Mar 1999 WO
1999027906 Jun 1999 WO
1999039730 Aug 1999 WO
1999049845 Oct 1999 WO
1999049867 Oct 1999 WO
1999055320 Nov 1999 WO
1999059634 Nov 1999 WO
1999062516 Dec 1999 WO
2000015195 Mar 2000 WO
2001006982 Feb 2001 WO
2001008689 Feb 2001 WO
2001037838 May 2001 WO
2001052897 Jul 2001 WO
2001064268 Sep 2001 WO
2001087343 Nov 2001 WO
2001097813 Dec 2001 WO
2002041899 May 2002 WO
2002085331 Oct 2002 WO
2002096216 Dec 2002 WO
2003049733 Jun 2003 WO
2003082297 Oct 2003 WO
2003097066 Nov 2003 WO
2004004776 Jan 2004 WO
2004026116 Apr 2004 WO
2004026313 Apr 2004 WO
2004037264 May 2004 WO
2004089379 Oct 2004 WO
2004103283 Dec 2004 WO
2005002542 Jan 2005 WO
2005004915 Jan 2005 WO
2005079806 Sep 2005 WO
2005097040 Oct 2005 WO
2005105101 Nov 2005 WO
2005115386 Dec 2005 WO
2006000306 Jan 2006 WO
2006015942 Feb 2006 WO
2006061351 Jun 2006 WO
2006100213 Sep 2006 WO
2007039417 Apr 2007 WO
2007087214 Aug 2007 WO
2007135505 Nov 2007 WO
2008113149 Sep 2008 WO
2008152122 Dec 2008 WO
2009049304 Apr 2009 WO
2011046853 Apr 2011 WO
2011107150 Sep 2011 WO
2011107498 Sep 2011 WO
2011138197 Nov 2011 WO
Non-Patent Literature Citations (112)
Entry
Straus et al., “New Evidence for Stroke Prevention: Clinical Applications”. The Journal of the American Medical Association, vol. 288, No. 11, Sep. 2002, pp. 1396-1398.
Straus et al., “New Evidence for Stroke Prevention: Scientific Review”. The Journal of the American Medical Association, vol. 288, No. 11, Sep. 2002, pp. 1388-1395.
Sunose et al., “The Effect of Cyclooxygenase 2 Inhibitor, FK3311, on Ischemia-Reperfusion Injury in Canine Lung Transplantation”. Journal of Heart and Lung Transplantation, vol. 19, No. 1, Jan. 2000, p. 40.
Swamy et al., “Orodispersible tablets of meloxicam using disintegrant blends for improved efficacy”., Indian Journal of Pharmaceutical Science, vol. 69, No. 6, 2007, pp. 836-840. [Accessed at http://ijpsonline.com/article.asp?issn=0250-474X;year=2007;volume=69;issue=6;spa . . . on Jun. 16, 2013].
Tuerck et al., “Clinical Pharmacokinetics of Meloxicam”. Arzneimittel-Forschung, vol. 47, No. 3, 1997, pp. 253-258.
Tunuguntla et al., “Management of Prostatitis”. Prostate Cancer and Prostatic Diseases, vol. 5, No. 3, 2002, pp. 172-179.
Vippagunta et al., “Crystalline solids”. Advanced Drug Delivery Reviews, vol. 48, 2001, pp. 3-26.
Wagenlehner et al., “Therapy of Prostatitis Syndrome”. Der Urologe [A], vol. 40, No. 1, 2001, pp. 24-28. [English Abstract at p. 25].
Wan et al., “Incorporation and distribution of a low dose drug in granules”. International Journal of Pharmaceutics, vol. 88, 1992, pp. 159-163.
Winfield, “Ophthalmic Products—Chelating agents”. Pharmaceutical Practice, Churchill Livingstone, 2004, p. 268.
Yamashita et al., “Effects of Carprofen and Meloxicam with or without Butorphanol on the Minimum Alveolar concentration of Sevoflurane in Dogs”. The Journal of Veterinary Medical Science, Jan. 2008, pp. 29-35. [Accessed at https://www.jstage.jst.go.jp/article/jvms/70/1/70_1_20/_pdf on Mar. 5, 2014].
Zaghawa et al., “Clinical and Etiological study on respiratory affections of sheep”. Faculty of veterinary medicine—Sadat City—Menoufia University, Medicine and Infectious Diseases Department, Abstract, 10 pages. [Date Unknown].
Fitzpatrick et al., “Recognising and Controlling Pain and Inflammation in Mastitis”. Proceedings of the British Mastitis Conference, Axient/Institute for Animal Health, Milk Development Council/Novartis Animal Health, 1998, pp. 36-44.
Gerritsen et al., “Prostaglandin Synthesis and Release from Cultured Human Trabecular-meshwork Cells and Scleral Fibroblasts”. Experimental Eye Research, vol. 43, No. 6, 1986, pp. 1089-1102.
Giuliani et al., “Role of Antithrombotic Therapy in Cardiac Disease”. Mayo Clinic Practice of Cardiology, Third Edition, Mosby, St. Louis, MO, 1996, pp. 1116-1121.
Gollackner et al., “Increased apoptosis of hepatocyctes in vascular occulusion after orthotopic liver transplantation”. Transplant International, vol. 13, No. 1, 2000, pp. 49-53.
Gowan, R., “Retrospective Analysis of Long-Term Use of Meloxicam in Aged Cats with Musculoskeletal Disorders and the Effect of Renal Function”. Journal of Veterinary Internal Medicine, vol. 23, Abstract No. 87, 2009, p. 1347.
Gruet et al., “Bovine mastitis and intramammary drug delivery: review and perspectives”. Advanced Drug Delivery Reviews, vol. 50, 2001, pp. 245-259.
Gunew et al., “Long-term safety, efficacy and palatability of oral meloxicam at 0.01-0.03 mg/kg for treatment of osteoarthritic pain in cats”. Journal of Feline Medicine and Surgery, vol. 10, 2008, pp. 235-241.
Guth et al., “Pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics of terbogrel, a combined thromboxane A2 receptor and synthase inhibitor, in healthy subjects”. British Journal of Clinical Pharmacology, vol. 58, No. 1, Jul. 2004, pp. 40-51.
Hansson et al., “Effect of local anaesthesia and/or analgesia on pain responses induced by piglet castration”. Acta Veterinaria Scandinavica, vol. 53, No. 1, May 2011, pp. 1-9.
Hawkey et al., “Gastrointestinal Tolerability of Meloxicam Compared to Diclofenac in Osteoarthritis Patients”. British Journal of Rheumatology, vol. 37, No. 9, 1998, pp. 937-945.
Herbort et al., “Anti-inflammatory Effect of Topical Diclofenac After Argon Laser Trabeculoplasty: Preliminary Results of a Placebo Controlled Study”. Klin. Monatsbl. Augenheik, vol. 200, No. 5, May 1992, pp. 358-361.
Hirsch et al, “Investigation on the efficacy of meloxicam in sows with mastitis-metritis-agalactia syndrome”. Journal of Veterinary Pharmacology and Therapeutics, vol. 26, 2003, pp. 355-360.
hittp://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=ambient, 2012.
Hydrated Silica Webpage; http://science.kosmix.com/topic/hydrated_silica; Kosmix Corporation, Apr. 21, 2011, pp. 1-14.
International Search Report and Written Opinion for PCT/EP2005/001549 dated Jun. 14, 2005.
Jain et al., “Antiplatelet therapy in acute coronary syndromes without persistent ST-segment elevation”. Cardiovascular Drugs and Therapy, vol. 15, No. 5, Sep. 2001, pp. 423-436. [Abstract Only].
Kimura et al., “Effect of cilostazol on platelet agrregation and experimental thrombosis”. Arzneimittel-Forschung, vol. 35, No. 7A, 1985, pp. 1144-1149. [Abstract Only].
Kumar et al., “Comparative Studies on Effect of Some Hydrophilic Polymers on the Dissolution Rate of a Poorly Water Soluble Drug, Meloxicam”. Indian Drugs, vol. 39, No. 6, Apr. 2002, pp. 323-329.
Lane, David M., “Confidence Interval on the Mean”. [Accessed at http://onlinestatbook.com/2/estimation/mean.html on Jun. 12, 2014], pp. 1-4.
Lascelles et al., “Nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs in cats: a review”. Veterinary Annesthesia and Analgesia, 2007, pp. 1-23.
Li et al., “Degradation mechanism and kinetic studies of a novel anticancer agent, AG2034”. International Journal of Pharmaceutics, vol. 167, 1998, pp. 49-56.
Lieberman et al., “Tablet Formulation and Design” in Pharmaceutical Dosage Forms: Tablets, vol. 1, Second Edition, Marcel Dekker, Inc., New York, New York, 1989, pp. 105-108.
Little et al., “Importance of water for the health and productivity of the dairy cow”. Research in Veterinary Science, vol. 37, No. 3, 1984, pp. 283-289, 1 page, Abstract Only. [Accessed at htt://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/6522821 on Feb. 8, 2016].
Luger et al., “Structure and physicochemical properties of meloxicam, a new NSAID”. European Journal of Pharmaceutical Sciences, vol. 5, 1996, pp. 175-187.
Macdonald Campus of McGill University, “Mastitis in Dairy Cows”, published online, Jul. 2003, pp. 1-12.
Masferrer et al., “Cyclooxygenase-2 Inhibitors: A New Approach to the Therapy of Ocular Inflammation”. Survey of Ophthalmology, vol. 41, Supp. 2, Feb. 1997, pp. S35-S40.
McDonald et al., “Calpain inhibitor I reduces the activation of nuclear factor-KappaB and Organ Injury/Dysfunction in Hemorrhagic Shock”. The FASEB Journal, vol. 15, Jan. 2001, pp. 171-186.
Medina, Joe, “Section XXIV—Principles of Compounding”. Tech Lectures for the Pharmacy Technician, 2008, 12 pages.
Merriam Webster definition of Treatment accessed at [http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/treatment on Dec. 19, 2013], 2 pages.
Mesh to Micron Conversion Chart, 2 pages. [Accessed at http://www.showmegold.org/news/mesh.htm on Aug. 22, 2013].
Nash et al., “A Relationship Between Screen Opening and Mesh Size for Standard Sieves”., Pharmaceutical Development and Technology, vol. 2, No. 2, 1997, pp. 185-186.
Nell et al., “Comparison of vedaprofen and meloxicam in dogs with muskuloskeletal pain and inflammation”. Journal of Small Animal Practice, vol. 43, No. 5, May 2002, pp. 208-212 [Accessed at http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/12038853 on Sep. 27, 2013]. Abstract Only, 1 page.
Noble et al., “Meloxicam”. Drugs, vol. 51, No. 3, Mar. 1996, pp. 424-430.
Parikh et al., Binders and Solvents, Chapter 4, Handbook of Pharmaceutical Granulation Technology, First Edition, Marcel Dekker,1997, pp. 59-67.
Pharma Projects, Dialog File 928, Accession Nr. 0021312, Diclofenac, InSite Vision, 1996, 5 pages.
Pharmaceutical Excipent Encyclopedia, Yakuji Nippo Ltd., Tokyo, 1994, pp. 2-5.
Physicians' Desk Reference, 55th Edition, Medical Economics Company, Inc., 2001, pp. 981-984 and pp. 1404-1406.
Rantanen et al., “Process Analysis of Fluidized Bed Granulation”. AAPS PharmsciTech, vol. 2, No. 4, Article 21, 2001, 8 pages.
Remington: The Science and Practice of Pharmacy, 19th Edition, vol. II, Mack Publishing Company, Easton, Pennsylvania, 1995, p. 1646.
RIRDC Equine Research News, “Equine Recurrent Uveitis (Moon Blindness) Research—Cause of Common Eye Problem Identified—”. Jan. 2000, pp. 1-2. [Accessed at http://www.equusite.com/articles/health/healthUveitis.shtml on Feb. 8, 2016].
Robson et al., “Intrinsic acute renal failure (ARF) associated with non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drug (NSAld) use in juvenile cats undergoing routine desexing—16 cases 1998-2005”. May 2006, Journal of Veterinary Internal Medicine, vol. 20, No. 3, Abst. 109, p. 740.
Rolfe et al., “The Physiological Significance of Mitochondrial Proton Leak in Animal Cells and Tissues.” Bioscience Reports, vol. 17, No. 1, 1997, pp. 9-16.
Rudnic et al., “Oral Solid Dosage Forms”.,Gennaro, Editior, Remington's Pharmaceutical Sciences, 18th Edition, Mack Publishing Company, Easton, PA, 1990, pp. 1633-1645 and pp. 1654-1655.
Saha et al., “Effect of solubilizing excipients on permeation of poorly water-soluble compounds across Caco-2 cell monolayers”. European Journal of Pharmaceutics and Biopharmaceutics, vol. 50, No. 3, 2000, pp. 403-411, Abstract accessed at http://cat.inist.fr/?aModele=afficheN&cpsidt=798854, accessed on Aug. 13, 2010, 3 pages.
Schneeweis et al., “In Vivo and In Vitro Diclofenac Sodium Evaluation After Rectal Application of Soft Gelatine Capsules Enabling Application Induced Transformation (AIT) into a Seminsolid System of Liquid Crystals (SSLC) for Controlled Release”. Pharmaceutical Research, vol. 14, No. 12, Dec. 1997, pp. 1726-1729.
Sciencelab.com, “Lactose, Monohydrate, Spray-Dried Powder, NF”. Accessed at http://www.epoxy-paint.net/page/.S/PVAR/10419/SLL1453, Feb. 29, 2008, 2 pages.
Sharma et al., “Adsorption of Meloxican on Porous Calcium Silicate: Characterization and Tablet Formulation”. AAPS PharmSciTech, vol. 6, No. 4, Article 76, 2005, pp. E618-E625.
Snyder et al., “Corticosteroid Treatment and Trabecular Meshwork Proteases in Cell and Organ Culture Supernatants”. Experimental Eye Research, vol. 57, No. 4, 1993, pp. 461-468.
Sorbera et al., “Lumiracoxib Antiarthritic, COX-2 Inhibitor”. Drugs of the Future, vol. 27, No. 8, Aug. 2002, pp. 740-747.
Stei et al., “Local Tissue Tolerability of Meloxicam, a New NSAID: Indications for Parental, Dermal and Mucosal Administration”. British Journal of Rheumatology, vol. 35, Supp. 1, 1996, pp. 44-50.
“Committee for Veterinary Medicinal Products Meloxicam (Extension to bovine milk) Summary Report (4)”. The European Agency for the Evaluation of Medicinal Products, Veterinary Medicines Evaluation Unit, Jul. 1999, pp. 1-2. [Accessed at http://www.ema.europa.eu/docs/en_GB/document_library/Maximum_Residue_limits_-_Report/2009/11/WC500014953.pdf].
“Committee for Veterinary Medicinal Products Meloxicam Summary Report (1)”. The European Agency for the Evaluation of Medicinal Products, Jun. 1997, pp. 1-7.
“Committee for Veterinary Medicinal Products—Meloxicam (Extension to PIGS)—Summary Report (5)”. The European Agency for the Evaluation of Medicinal Products, Veterinary Medicines and Information Technology, Dec. 2000, pp. 1-3.
“Determining Factors for Particle Size of a Table Formulation”. Techceuticals Blog, Mar. 9, 2009, 2 pages. Accessed at [http://techceuticals.com/blog/?tag=particle-size on Oct. 1, 2015.].
“Edetic Acid and Edetates”, Handbook of Pharmaceutical Excipients, American Pharmaceutical Association and the Pharmaceutical Society of Great Britain, 1986, pp. 108-110, 7 pages.
“Meloxicam Veterinary—Systemic”., The United States Pharmacopeial Convention, 2004, pp. 1-9. [Accessed at http://vetmed.tamu.edu/common/docs/public/aavpt/meloxicam.pdf on Aug. 16, 2013].
“Metacam (R) 0.5 mg/ml oral suspension for cats.” Boehringer Ingelheim Datasheet, Web site: http://www.vetgb.com/vetgb_pdfs/rnetacamc_7a5c_vetgb.pdf> Accessed on Jun. 8, 2010.
“Metacam Professional Insert: Metacam® (meloxicam) 1.5 mg/mL Oral Suspension (equivalent to 0.05 mg per drop) Non-Steroidal anti-inflammatory drug for oral use in dogs only”. Boehringer Ingelheim, Jan. 2005, 2 pages.
“Metacam(R)” FDA Animal & Veterinary Drug Labels, Web site: http://www.fda.gov/downloads/AnimalVeterinary/Products/ApprovedAnimalDrugProducts/DrugLabels/UCM050397.pdf> Accessed Jun. 8, 2010.
“METACAM—Community register of veterinary medicinal products” accessed online at http://pharmacos.eudra.org/F2/register/v004.htm, 2005.
“Staging System for Chronic Kidney Disease”., IRIS: International Renal Interest Society, 2006, pp. 1-4.
“Types of Solutions”. University of Wisconsin, Stevens Point, Feb. 1, 2001, accessed at http://www.uwsp.edu/chemistry/tzamis/chem106pdfs/solutionexamples.pdf, Google date sheet included, 2 pages.
Abstract in English for IT1251650, 1995.
Abstract in English for JPH06157312, 1994.
Abstract in English of DE10024752, 2001.
Abstract in English of DE3434707, 1985.
Abstract in English of ES2065846, 1995.
Abstract in English of FR2437838, 1980.
Abstract in English of JP02906528, 1999.
Abstract in English of JP11139971, 1999.
Abstract in English of JP2001170083, 2001.
Abstract in English of JP2007197357, 2007.
Abstract in English of JP3550782, 2004.
Abstract in English of JP4018022, 2007.
Abstract in English of JP47007352, 1972.
Abstract in English of WO1999039730, 1999.
Altman et al., “Efficacy Assessment of Meloxicam, a Preferential Cyclooxygenase-2 Inhibitor, in Acute Coronary Syndromes Without ST-Segment Elevation: The Nonsteroidal Anti-Inflammatory Drugs in Unstable Angina Treatment-2 (NUT-2) Pilot Study”. Circulation, vol. 106, 2002, pp. 191-195.
Ansel et al., “Dosage Form Design: Pharmaceutic and Formulation Considerations”. Pharmaceutical Dosage Forms and Drug Delivery Systems, Seventh Edition, Lippincott Williams & Wilkins, Philadelphia, PA, 1999, pp. 66 and pp. 89.
Ansel et al., “Pharmaceutical Dosage Forms and Drug Delivery Systems”. Seventh Edition, Lippincott Williams & Wilkins, Philadelphia, PA, 1999, pp. 77-87.
Bednarek et al., “Effect of steroidal and non-steroidal anti-imflammatory drugs in combination with long-acting oxytetracycline on non-specific immunity of calves suffering from enzootic bronchopneumonia”. Veterinary Microbiology, vol. 96, 2003, pp. 53-67.
Bednarek et al., “The effect of steroidal and non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs on the cellular immunity of calves with experimentally-induced local lung inflammation”. Veterinary Immunology and Immunopathology, vol. 71, 1999, pp. 1-15.
Bi et al., “Evaluation of Rapidly Disintegrating Tablets Prepared by a Direct Compression Method”. Drug Development and Industrial Pharmacy, vol. 25, No. 5, 1999, pp. 571-581.
Boehringer Ingelheim; Metacam (Meloxicam) Now Approved for Pigs and Mastitis in Dairy Cows; May 2003 Press Release; pp. 1-2.
Budsberg et al., “Evaluation of intravenous administration of meloxicam for perioperative pain management rollowing stifle joint surgery in dogs”. American Journal of Veterinary Research, vol. 63, No. 11, Nov. 2002, pp. 1557-1563.
Bunji, Kouho, “Tissue Damage Due to Infections” Drug Injection Handbook, Fundamentals of Blending Variation for Injection Drugs, Nanzando Co. Ltd., Tokyo, 1976, p. 5.
Chemical Abstracts, vol. 118, No. 18, Abstract No. 175803, Columbus, OHion, US May 1993 & JP-A-04 321 624 (Hisamitsu Pharm.Co.Inc., JP), Nov. 11, 1992, 1 page.
Cho et al., “In vitro effects of Actinobacillus pleuropneumoniae on inducible nitric oxide synthase and cyclooxygenase-2 in porcine alveolar macrophages”. American Journal of Veterinary Research, vol. 64, No. 12, Dec. 2003, pp. 1514-1518.
Clarke et al., “Feline osteoarthritis: a prospective study of 28 cases”. Journal of Small Animal Practice, vol. 47, 2006, pp. 439-445.
D'Yakov et al., “Long term use of Tamsulosin (omnic®) in Patients with Chronic Prostatitis”. Urologiia, vol. 5, 2002, pp. 10-12.
Del Tacca et al., “Efficacy and Tolerability of Meloxicam, a COX-2 Preferential Nonsteroidal Anti-Inflammatory Drug”. Clinical Drug Investigation, vol. 22, No. 12, 2002, pp. 799-818.
Dellabella et al., “Conservative Managment of Juxtavesical Calculi with Tamsulosin”. European Urology Supplements, vol. 2, No. 1, 2003, p. 81.
Dow Chemicals Brochure, entitled “Using METHOCEL cellulose ethers for controlled release of drugs in hyrophilic matrix systems.” Publication Jul. 2000, Form No. 198-02075-700 AMS, pp. 1-36.
Dunn et al., “Tamsulosin: A Review of its Pharmacology and Therapeutic Efficacy in the Management of Lower Urinary Tract Symptoms”. Drugs & Aging, vol. 19, No. 2, 2002, pp. 132-161.
Engelhardt et al., “Meloxicam: Influence on Arachidonic Acid Metabolism”. Biochemical Pharmacology, vol. 51, 1996, pp. 21-28.
Ettmayer et al., “Lessons Learned from Marketed and Investigational Prodrugs”. Journal of Medicinal Chemistry, vol. 47, No. 10, May 2004, pp. 2393-2404.
European Search Report for EP10155400 dated Jun. 9, 2010.
European Search Report for EP10162015 dated Aug. 30, 2010.
Farkouh et al., “Comparison of lumiracoxib with naproxen and ibuprofen in the Therapeutic Arthritis Research and Gastrointestinal Event Trial (TARGET), cardiovascular outcomes: randomised controlled trial”. Lancet, vol. 364, Aug. 2004, pp. 675-684.
Fiedorczyk, D.M., “Renial Failure in Cats”. Misericordia University, Internet Archive Date: Sep. 7, 2006, http://www.misericordia.edu/honorus/dfpaper.cfm [Retrieved on Dec. 12, 2012].
Fitzgerald et al., “COX-2 inhibitors and the cardiovascular system”. Clinical and Experimental Rheumatology, vol. 19, No. 6, Supp. 25, Nov. 2001, pp. S31-S36.
Related Publications (1)
Number Date Country
20180185380 A1 Jul 2018 US
Divisions (1)
Number Date Country
Parent 12114509 May 2008 US
Child 14183744 US
Continuations (2)
Number Date Country
Parent 14183744 Feb 2014 US
Child 15908470 US
Parent 11047920 Feb 2005 US
Child 12114509 US