Patent Grant
8961588
1. Field of the Invention
The invention relates to drug eluting implantable devices, one example of which is a stent. More particularly, the invention relates to sustained delivery of 40-O-(2-hydroxy)ethyl-rapamycin from a stent.
2. Description of the Background
Percutaneous transluminal coronary angioplasty (PTCA) is a procedure for treating heart disease. A catheter assembly having a balloon portion is introduced percutaneously into the cardiovascular system of a patient via the brachial or femoral artery. The catheter assembly is advanced through the coronary vasculature until the balloon portion is positioned across the occlusive lesion. Once in position across the lesion, the balloon is inflated to a predetermined size to remodel the vessel wall. The balloon is then deflated to a smaller profile to allow the catheter to be withdrawn from the patient's vasculature.
A problem associated with the above procedure includes formation of intimal flaps or torn arterial linings, which can collapse and occlude the conduit after the balloon is deflated. Vasospasms and recoil of the vessel wall also threaten vessel closure. Moreover, thrombosis and restenosis of the artery may develop over several months after the procedure, which may necessitate another angioplasty procedure or a surgical by-pass operation. To reduce the partial or total occlusion of the artery by the collapse of arterial lining and to reduce the chance of the development of thrombosis and restenosis, an expandable, intraluminal prosthesis, also known as a stent, is implanted in the lumen to maintain the vascular patency.
Stents act as scaffoldings, functioning to physically hold open and, if desired, to expand the wall of the passageway. Typically, stents are capable of being compressed so that they can be inserted through small lumens via catheters and then expanded to a larger diameter once they are at the desired location. Mechanical intervention via stents has reduced the rate of restenosis as compared to balloon angioplasty. Yet, restenosis is still a significant clinical problem with rates ranging from 20-40%. When restenosis does occur in the stented segment, its treatment can be challenging, as clinical options are more limited as compared to lesions that were treated solely with a balloon.
Stents are used not only for mechanical intervention but also as vehicles for providing biological therapy. Biological therapy can be achieved by medicating the stents. Medicated stents provide for the local administration of a therapeutic substance at the diseased site. In order to provide an efficacious concentration to the treated site, systemic administration of such medication often produces adverse or even toxic side effects for the patient. Local delivery is a preferred method of treatment in that smaller total levels of medication are administered in comparison to systemic dosages, but are concentrated at a specific site. Local delivery thus produces fewer side effects and achieves more favorable results.
One proposed method of medicating stents involves the use of a polymeric carrier coated onto the surface of the stent. A composition including a solvent, a polymer dissolved in the solvent, and a therapeutic substance dispersed in the blend is applied to the stent by immersing the stent in the composition or by spraying the composition onto the stent. The solvent is allowed to evaporate, leaving on the stent strut surfaces a coating of the polymer and the therapeutic substance impregnated in the polymer.
A potential shortcoming of the foregoing method of medicating stents is that the release rate of the therapeutic substance may be too high to provide an efficacious treatment. This shortcoming may be especially pronounced with certain therapeutic substances. For instance, it has been found that the release rate of 40-O-(2-hydroxy)ethyl-rapamycin from a standard polymeric coating is greater than 50% in about 24 hours. Thus, there is a need for a coating that reduces the release rate of 40-O-(2-hydroxy)ethyl-rapamycin in order to provide a more efficacious release rate profile. The present invention provides a coating to meet this need.
In accordance with one aspect of the invention, a stent is disclosed including a radially expandable body and a coating covering at least a portion of the body, the coating having 40-O-(2-hydroxy)ethyl-rapamycin, or an analog or derivative thereof, wherein the release rate of the 40-O-(2-hydroxy)ethyl-rapamycin, or the analog or derivative thereof, in 24 hours after the implantation of the stent is less than about 50% of the total amount contained in the coating.
In accordance with a further aspect of the present invention, a method of inhibiting or eliminating the development of restenosis following a stent placement procedure is disclosed including implanting a stent which can elude 40-O-(2-hydroxy)ethyl-rapamycin, or an analog or derivative thereof, at a release rate of less than 50% of the total amount of the drug carried by the stent in a 24 hour period following the implantation procedure.
In a further aspect, a method of providing drug delivery capability for a stent is disclosed including coating a stent with a polymer containing 40-O-(2-hydroxy)ethyl-rapamycin, or analog or derivative thereof, wherein the coating has an in vivo release rate of less than 50% of the total amount of the 40-O-(2-hydroxy)ethyl-rapamycin, or analog or derivative thereof, in a 24 hour period.
In yet another aspect of the present invention, a method of treating a polymeric coating on a stent to reduce the rate of release of the drug from the coating is disclosed including exposing the coating to a temperature of a sufficient degree to cause modifications in the structure of the polymer which allows for the reduction of the release rate of the drug through the polymer.
Also disclosed, in another aspect, is a method of treating a coated stent containing a therapeutic substance to reduce the rate of release of the therapeutic substance from the coating including subjecting the coating to a stimuli so as to change the property of at least a region of the coating such that the change of the property of the region of the coating causes the therapeutic substance to be released more slowly from the region that has the changed property.
In another aspect of the present invention, a method of preparing a coated stent containing 40-O-(2-hydroxy)ethyl-rapamycin, or analog or derivative thereof, for an implantation procedure is disclosed including sterilizing the stent while maintaining the peak purity of the 40-O-(2-hydroxy)ethyl-rapamycin, or analog or derivative thereof, at a level greater than 90%.
Herein is disclosed a method of forming a coating for an implantable device including applying a first composition with 40-O-(2-hydroxy)ethyl-rapamycin, or a functional analog or structural derivative thereof, to at least a portion of an implantable device to form a first layer. The release rate of 40-O-(2-hydroxy)ethyl-rapamycin is advantageously controlled by various methods and coatings as described below. In particular, by using the methods and coatings of the present invention, the amount of the 40-O-(2-hydroxy)ethyl-rapamycin, or analog or derivative thereof, is released in less than about 50% in 24 hours.
40-O-(2-hydroxy)ethyl-rapamycin is an immunosuppressant which is under investigation primarily for use with cyclosporine/steroids to prevent acute rejection episodes in renal transplant recipients. 40-O-(2-hydroxy)ethyl-rapamycin is also under investigation for rejection prophylaxis following other types of transplantation (e.g., lung, liver). The chemical structure for 40-O-(2-hydroxy)ethyl-rapamycin is as follows:
Examples of analogs or derivatives of 40-O-(2-hydroxyl)ethyl-rapamycin include but are not limited to 40-O-(3-hydroxy)propyl-rapamycin and 40-O-[2-(2-hydroxy)ethoxy]ethyl-rapamycin.
40-O-(2-hydroxy)ethyl-rapamycin binds to the cytosolic immunophyllin FKBP12 and inhibits growth factor-driven cell proliferation, including that of T-cells and vascular smooth muscle cells. The actions of 40-O-(2-hydroxy)ethyl-rapamycin occur late in the cell cycle (i.e., late G1 stage) compared to other immunosuppressive agents such as tacrolimus or cyclosporine which block transcriptional activation of early T-cell-specific genes. Since 40-O-(2-hydroxy)ethyl-rapamycin can act as a potent anti-proliferative agent, it is believed that 40-O-(2-hydroxy)ethyl-rapamycin can be an effective agent to treat restenosis by being delivered to a local treatment site from a polymeric coated implantable device such as a stent.
The composition including 40-O-(2-hydroxy)ethyl-rapamycin can be applied to the implantable device in various ways. In one embodiment, a first layer can be formed on the implantable device by (1) immersing the implantable device into a solution containing 40-O-(2-hydroxy)ethyl-rapamycin dissolved in a suitable solvent, or (2) spray coating the implantable device with the same solution containing 40-O-(2-hydroxy)ethyl-rapamycin to form a reservoir layer. In this embodiment, the implantable device can include cavities or micro-pores for containing the 40-O-(2-hydroxy)ethyl-rapamycin.
The 40-O-(2-hydroxy)ethyl-rapamycin can also be blended with a polymer and applied to the implantable device to form the reservoir layer. “Polymer,” “poly,” and “polymeric” are defined as compounds that are the product of a polymerization reaction and are inclusive of homopolymers, copolymers, terpolymers etc., including random, alternating, block, and graft variations thereof. The polymers should have a high capacity of adherence to the surface of an implantable device, such as a metallic surface of a stent, and a high capacity of adherence to polymeric surfaces.
In accordance with one embodiment, when the 40-O-(2-hydroxy)ethyl-rapamycin is blended with a polymer for the reservoir layer, the ratio of 40-O-(2-hydroxy)ethyl-rapamycin, or analog or derivative thereof, to polymer by weight in the reservoir layer is about 1:2.8 to about 1:1. It has been found that this particular range of 40-O-(2-hydroxy)ethyl-rapamycin:polymer ratio provides a beneficial release rate of the 40-O-(2-hydroxy)ethyl-rapamycin from the polymer matrix.
In accordance with another embodiment, when the 40-O-(2-hydroxy)ethyl-rapamycin is blended with a polymer for the reservoir layer, the 40-O-(2-hydroxy)ethyl-rapamycin, or analog or derivative thereof, is in the amount of about 50 μg to about 500 μg, more narrowly about 90 μg to about 350 μg, and the polymer is in the amount of about 50 μg to about 1000 μg, more narrowly about 90 μg to about 500 μg. These particular ranges of amounts for 40-O-(2-hydroxy)ethyl-rapamycin and a polymer can provide a beneficial release rate of the 40-O-(2-hydroxy)ethyl-rapamycin from the polymer matrix.
When the polymer solution is being prepared, a predetermined amount of a polymer can be added to a predetermined amount of a compatible solvent. “Solvent” is defined as a liquid substance or composition that is compatible with the components of the composition and is capable of dissolving the component(s) at the concentration desired in the composition. Representative examples of solvents include chloroform, acetone, water (buffered saline), dimethylsulfoxide (DMSO), propylene glycol methyl ether (PM,) iso-propylalcohol (IPA), n-propylalcohol, methanol, ethanol, tetrahydrofuran (THF), dimethylformamide (DMF), dimethylacetamide (DMAC), benzene, toluene, xylene, hexane, cyclohexane, pentane, heptane, octane, nonane, decane, decalin, ethyl acetate, butyl acetate, isobutyl acetate, isopropyl acetate, butanol, diacetone alcohol, benzyl alcohol, 2-butanone, cyclohexanone, dioxane, methylene chloride, carbon tetrachloride, tetrachloroethylene, tetrachloro ethane, chlorobenzene, 1,1,1-trichloroethane, formamide, hexafluoroisopropanol, 1,1,1-trifluoroethanol, and hexamethyl phosphoramide and a combination thereof.
The polymer can be added to the solvent at ambient pressure and under anhydrous atmosphere. If necessary, gentle heating and stirring and/or mixing can be employed to effect dissolution of the polymer into the solvent, for example 12 hours in a water bath at about 60° C.
Sufficient amounts of 40-O-(2-hydroxy)ethyl-rapamycin can then be dispersed in the blended composition of the polymer and the solvent. The polymer can comprise from about 0.1% to about 35%, more narrowly from about 0.5% to about 20% by weight of the total weight of the composition, the solvent can comprise from about 59.9% to about 99.8%, more narrowly from about 79% to about 99% by weight of the total weight of the composition, and the 40-O-(2-hydroxy)ethyl-rapamycin can comprise from about 0.1% to about 40%, more narrowly from about 1% to about 9% by weight of the total weight of the composition. More than 9% by weight of the 40-O-(2-hydroxy)ethyl-rapamycin could adversely affect characteristics that are desirable in the polymeric coating, such as adhesion of the coating to the device. With the use of the optional primer layer, weight ratios of more than 9% for the active ingredient are achievable without compromising the effectiveness of the adhesion. Selection of a specific weight ratio of the polymer and solvent is dependent on factors such as, but not limited to, the material from which the device is made, the geometrical structure of the device, and the type and amount of the active ingredient employed.
Optionally, a second solvent, such as tetrahydrofuran (THF) or dimethylformamide (DMF), can be used to improve the solubility of the 40-O-(2-hydroxy)ethyl-rapamycin in the composition. The second solvent can be added to the composition or the 40-O-(2-hydroxy)ethyl-rapamycin can be added to the second solvent prior to mixture with the blend.
The 40-O-(2-hydroxy)ethyl-rapamycin should be in true solution or saturated in the blended composition. If the 40-O-(2-hydroxy)ethyl-rapamycin is not completely soluble in the composition, operations including mixing, stirring, and/or agitation can be employed to effect homogeneity of the residues. The 40-O-(2-hydroxy)ethyl-rapamycin can also be first added to the second solvent prior to admixing with the composition. The 40-O-(2-hydroxy)ethyl-rapamycin may be added so that the dispersion is in fine particles.
Representative examples of polymers that can be combined with 40-O-(2-hydroxy)ethyl-rapamycin for the reservoir layer include ethylene vinyl alcohol copolymer (commonly known by the generic name EVOH or by the trade name EVAL), poly(hydroxyvalerate); poly(L-lactic acid); polycaprolactone; poly(lactide-co-glycolide); poly(hydroxybutyrate); poly(hydroxybutyrate-co-valerate); polydioxanone; polyorthoester; polyanhydride; poly(glycolic acid); poly(D,L-lactic acid); poly(glycolic acid-co-trimethylene carbonate); polyphosphoester; polyphosphoester urethane; poly(amino acids); cyanoacrylates; poly(trimethylene carbonate); poly(iminocarbonate); copoly(ether-esters) (e.g. PEO/PLA); polyalkylene oxalates; polyphosphazenes; biomolecules, such as fibrin, fibrinogen, cellulose, starch, collagen and hyaluronic acid; polyurethanes; silicones; polyesters; polyolefins; polyisobutylene and ethylene-alphaolefin copolymers; acrylic polymers and copolymers; vinyl halide polymers and copolymers, such as polyvinyl chloride; polyvinyl ethers, such as polyvinyl methyl ether; polyvinylidene halides, such as polyvinylidene fluoride and polyvinylidene chloride; polyacrylonitrile; polyvinyl ketones; polyvinyl aromatics, such as polystyrene; polyvinyl esters, such as polyvinyl acetate; copolymers of vinyl monomers with each other and olefins, such as ethylene-methyl methacrylate copolymers, acrylonitrile-styrene copolymers, ABS resins, and ethylene-vinyl acetate copolymers; polyamides, such as Nylon 66 and polycaprolactam; alkyd resins; polycarbonates; polyoxymethylenes; polyimides; polyethers; epoxy resins; polyurethanes; rayon; rayon-triacetate; cellulose acetate; cellulose butyrate; cellulose acetate butyrate; cellophane; cellulose nitrate; cellulose propionate; cellulose ethers; and carboxymethyl cellulose.
Ethylene vinyl alcohol is functionally a very suitable choice of polymer. Ethylene vinyl alcohol copolymer refers to copolymers comprising residues of both ethylene and vinyl alcohol monomers. One of ordinary skill in the art understands that ethylene vinyl alcohol copolymer may also be a terpolymer so as to include small amounts of additional monomers, for example less than about five (5) mole percentage of styrenes, propylene, or other suitable monomers. Ethylene vinyl alcohol copolymers are available commercially from companies such as Aldrich Chemical Company, Milwaukee, Wis., or EVAL Company of America, Lisle, Ill., or can be prepared by conventional polymerization procedures that are well known to one of ordinary skill in the art.
The copolymer of EVAL allows for good control capabilities of the release rate of the 40-O-(2-hydroxy)ethyl-rapamycin. As a general rule, an increase in the amount of the ethylene comonomer content decreases the rate that the 40-O-(2-hydroxy)ethyl-rapamycin is released from the copolymer matrix. The release rate of the 40-O-(2-hydroxy)ethyl-rapamycin typically decreases as the hydrophilicity of the copolymer decreases. An increase in the amount of the ethylene comonomer content increases the overall hydrophobicity of the copolymer, especially as the content of vinyl alcohol is concomitantly reduced. It is also thought that the release rate and the cumulative amount of the active ingredient that is released is directly proportional to the total initial content of the ingredient in the copolymer matrix. Accordingly, a wide spectrum of release rates can be achieved by modifying the ethylene comonomer content and the initial amount of the 40-O-(2-hydroxy)ethyl-rapamycin.
Besides 40-O-(2-hydroxy)ethyl-rapamycin, another active agent can also be added to the first composition. The additional active agent may be any substance capable of exerting a therapeutic or prophylactic effect in the practice of the present invention. Examples of such active agents include antiproliferative, antineoplastic, antiinflammatory, antiplatelet, anticoagulant, antifibrin, antithrombin, antimitotic, antibiotic, and antioxidant substances as well as combinations thereof. A suitable example of an antiproliferative substance is actinomycin D, or derivatives and analogs thereof (manufactured by Sigma-Aldrich 1001 West Saint Paul Avenue, Milwaukee, Wis. 53233; or COSMEGEN available from Merck). Synonyms of actinomycin D include dactinomycin, actinomycin IV, actinomycin I1 actinomycin X1, and actinomycin C1. Examples of suitable antineoplastics include paclitaxel and docetaxel. Examples of suitable antiplatelets, anticoagulants, antifibrins, and antithrombins include aspirin, sodium heparin, low molecular weight heparin, hirudin, argatroban, forskolin, vapiprost, prostacyclin and prostacyclin analogs, dextran, D-phe-pro-arg-chloromethylketone (synthetic antithrombin), dipyridamole, glycoprotein IIb/IIa platelet membrane receptor antagonist, recombinant hirudin, thrombin inhibitor (available from Biogen), and 7E-3B® (an antiplatelet drug from Centocor). Examples of suitable antimitotic agents include methotrexate, azathioprine, vincristine, vinblastine, fluorouracil, adriamycin, and mutamycin. Examples of suitable cytostatic or antiproliferative agents include angiopeptin (a somatostatin analog from Ibsen), angiotensin converting enzyme inhibitors such as CAPTOPRIL (available from Squibb), CILAZAPRIL (available from Hoffman-LaRoche), or LISINOPRIL (available from Merck & Co., Whitehouse Station, N.J.); calcium channel blockers (such as Nifedipine), colchicine, fibroblast growth factor (FGF) antagonists, histamine antagonist, LOVASTATIN (an inhibitor of HMG-CoA reductase, a cholesterol lowering drug from Merck & Co.), monoclonal antibodies (such as PDGF receptors), nitroprusside, phosphodiesterase inhibitors, prostaglandin inhibitor (available form Glazo), Seramin (a PDGF antagonist), serotonin blockers, thioprotease inhibitors, triazolopyrimidine (a PDGF antagonist), and nitric oxide. Other therapeutic substances or agents that may be appropriate include alpha-interferon; genetically engineered epithelial cells; dexamethasone; rapamycin; estradiol; clobetasol propionate; cisplatin; insulin sensitizers; receptor tyrosine kinase inhibitors; and carboplatin. Exposure of the composition to the active ingredient should not adversely alter the active ingredient's composition or characteristic. Accordingly, the particular active ingredient is selected for compatibility with the blended composition.
The dosage or concentration of 40-O-(2-hydroxy)ethyl-rapamycin or other active agent required to produce a therapeutic effect should be less than the level at which the 40-O-(2-hydroxy)ethyl-rapamycin or other active agent produces unwanted toxic effects and greater than the level at which non-therapeutic results are obtained. The dosage or concentration of 40-O-(2-hydroxy)ethyl-rapamycin or other active agent required to inhibit the desired cellular activity of the vascular region, for example, can depend upon factors such as the particular circumstances of the patient; the nature of the trauma; the nature of the therapy desired; the time over which the ingredient administered resides at the vascular site; and if other bioactive substances are employed, the nature and type of the substance or combination of substances. Therapeutically effective dosages can be determined empirically, for example by infusing vessels from suitable animal model systems and using immunohistochemical, fluorescent or electron microscopy methods to detect the agent and its effects, or by conducting suitable in vitro studies. Standard pharmacological test procedures to determine dosages are understood by one of ordinary skill in the art.
In some coatings, the release rate of the 40-O-(2-hydroxy)ethyl-rapamycin may be too high to be clinically useful. For example, in Example 22 below, the percentage of 40-O-(2-hydroxy)ethyl-rapamycin released from a stent coating without a barrier layer in 24 hours was determined to be 58.55 as measured in a porcine serum release rate procedure. The release rate from the coating of Example 22 may be too high for a treatment using 40-O-(2-hydroxy)ethyl-rapamycin as the active agent. The barrier layer of the present invention can reduce the rate of release or delay the time at which the 40-O-(2-hydroxy)ethyl-rapamycin is released from the reservoir layer.
In accordance with one embodiment, the barrier layer can be applied on a selected region of the reservoir layer to form a rate reducing member. The composition for the barrier layer can be substantially free of active agents. Alternatively, for maximum blood compatibility, compounds such as polyethylene glycol, heparin, heparin derivatives having hydrophobic counterions, or polyethylene oxide can be added to the barrier layer.
The choice of polymer for the barrier layer can be the same as the selected polymer for the reservoir. The use of the same polymer, as described for some of the embodiments, significantly reduces or eliminates any interfacial incompatibilities, such as lack of adhesion, which may exist in the employment of two different polymeric layers.
Representative examples of polymers that can be used for a barrier layer can include polytetrafluoroethylene, perfluoro elastomers, ethylene-tetrafluoroethylene copolymer, fluoroethylene-alkyl vinyl ether copolymer, polyhexafluoropropylene, low density linear polyethylenes having high molecular weights, ethylene-olefin copolymers, atactic polypropylene, polyisobutene, polybutylenes, polybutenes, styrene-ethylene-styrene block copolymers, styrene-butylene-styrene block copolymers, styrene-butadiene-styrene block copolymers, and ethylene methacrylic acid copolymers of low methacrylic acid content.
Ethylene vinyl alcohol is functionally a very suitable choice of polymer. The copolymer allows for good control capabilities over the release rate of the 40-O-(2-hydroxy)ethyl-rapamycin. As a general rule, an increase in the amount of the ethylene comonomer content decreases the rate that the 40-O-(2-hydroxy)ethyl-rapamycin is released from the copolymer matrix. The release rate of the 40-O-(2-hydroxy)ethyl-rapamycin decreases as the hydrophilicity of the polymer decreases. An increase in the amount of the ethylene comonomer content increases the overall hydrophobicity of the copolymer, especially as the content of vinyl alcohol is concomitantly reduced.
Fluoropolymers are also a suitable choice for the barrier layer composition. For example, polyvinylidene fluoride (otherwise known as KYNAR, available from ATOFINA Chemicals, Philadelphia, Pa.) can be dissolved in HFE FLUX REMOVER (Techspray, Amarillo, Tex.) and can optionally be combined with EVAL to form the barrier layer composition. Also, solution processing of fluoropolymers is possible, particularly the low crystallinity varieties such as CYTOP available from Asahi Glass and TEFLON AF available from DuPont. Solutions of up to about 15% (wt/wt) are possible in perfluoro solvents, such as FC-75 (available from 3M under the brand name FLUORINERT), which are non-polar, low boiling solvents. Such volatility allows the solvent to be easily and quickly evaporated following the application of the polymer-solvent solution to the implantable device.
In one embodiment, polybutylmethacrylate can be used for the barrier layer. Polybutylmethacrylate, for example, can be dissolved in a solution of xylene, acetone and HFE FLUX REMOVER.
The barrier layer can also be styrene-ethylene/butylene-styrene block copolymer. Styrene-ethylene/butylene-styrene block copolymer, e.g., Kraton G-series, can be dissolved in non-polar solvents such as, but not limited to, toluene, xylene, and decalin.
Other choices of polymers for the rate-limiting membrane include, but are not limited to, ethylene-anhydride copolymers; ethylene vinyl acetate copolymers having, for example, a mol % of vinyl acetate of from about 9% to about 25%; and ethyleneacrylic acid copolymers having, for example, a mol % of acrylic acid of from about 2% to about 25%. The ethylene-anhydride copolymer available from Bynel adheres well to EVAL and thus would function well as a barrier layer over a reservoir layer made from EVAL. The copolymer can be dissolved in organic solvents, such as dimethylsulfoxide and dimethylacetamide. Ethylene vinyl acetate polymers can be dissolved in organic solvents, such as toluene and n-butyl acetate. Ethylene-acrylic acid copolymers can be dissolved in organic solvents, such as methanol, isopropyl alcohol, and dimethylsulfoxide.
Yet another choice of polymer for the rate-limiting membrane is a cross-linked silicone elastomer. Loose silicone and silicone with very low cross-linking are thought to cause an inflammatory biological response. However, it is believed that a thoroughly cross-linked silicone elastomer, having low levels of leachable silicone polymer and oligomer, is an essentially non-inflammatory substance. Silicone elastomers, such as Nusil MED-4750, MED-4755, or MED2-6640, having high tensile strengths, for example between 1200 psi and 1500 psi, will likely have the best durability during crimping, delivery, and expansion of a stent as well as good adhesion to a reservoir layer, e.g., EVAL or the surface of an implantable device.
The embodiments of the composition for a rate-reducing membrane or diffusion barrier layer are prepared by methods wherein all components are combined, then blended. More particularly, a predetermined amount of a polymer can be added to a predetermined amount of a compatible solvent. The selected solvent should be capable of placing the polymer into solution at the concentration desired.
The polymer can be added to the solvent at ambient pressure and under anhydrous atmosphere. If necessary, gentle heating and stirring and/or mixing can be employed to effect dissolution of the polymer into the solvent, for example 12 hours in a water bath at about 60° C. The polymer can comprise from about 0.1% to about 35%, more narrowly from about 1% to about 20% by weight of the total weight of the composition, and the solvent can comprise from about 65% to about 99.9%, more narrowly from about 80% to about 98% by weight of the total weight of the composition. Selection of a specific weight ratio of the polymer and solvent is dependent on factors such as, but not limited to, the type of polymer and solvent employed, the type of underlying reservoir layer, and the method of application.
In an embodiment, the barrier layer contains a polymer in the amount of about 25 μg to about 500 μg, more narrowly about 65 μg to about 350 μg. This particular range for the amount of barrier polymer can provide a beneficial release rate of the 40-O-(2-hydroxy)ethyl-rapamycin from the polymer matrix.
The presence of an active ingredient in a polymeric matrix can interfere with the ability of the matrix to adhere effectively to the surface of the device. Increasing the quantity of the active ingredient reduces the effectiveness of the adhesion. High drug loadings in the coating can hinder the retention of the coating on the surface of the device. A primer layer can serve as a functionally useful intermediary layer between the surface of the device and an active ingredient-containing or reservoir coating. The primer layer provides an adhesive tie between the reservoir coating and the device—which, in effect, would also allow for the quantity of the active ingredient in the reservoir coating to be increased without compromising the ability of the reservoir coating to be effectively contained on the device during delivery and, if applicable, expansion of the device.
The composition for a primer layer is prepared by conventional methods wherein all components are combined, then blended. More particularly, a predetermined amount of a polymer or a prepolymer can be added to a predetermined amount of a solvent or a combination of solvents. The mixture can be prepared at ambient pressure and under anhydrous atmosphere. Heating and stirring and/or mixing can be employed to effect dissolution of the polymer into the solvent.
Representative examples of suitable polymers for the primer layer include, but are not limited to, polyisocyanates, such as triisocyanurate and polyurethanes with polyisocyanate and/or polyisocyanate moieties based on diphenylmethane diisocyanate; acrylates, such as copolymers of ethyl acrylate and methacrylic acid; titanates, such as tetra-iso-propyl titanate and tetra-n-butyl titanate; zirconates, such as n-propyl zirconate and n-butyl zirconate; silane coupling agents, such as 3-aminopropyltriethoxysilane and (3-glydidoxypropyl)methyldiethoxysilane; high amine content polymers, such as polyethyleneamine, polyallylamine, and polylysine; polymers with a high content of hydrogen bonding groups, such as polyethylene-copolyvinyl alcohol, ethylene vinyl acetate, and melamine formaldehydes; and unsaturated polymers and prepolymers, such as polycaprolactone diacrylates, polyacrylates with at least two acrylate groups, and polyacrylated polyurethanes. With the use of unsaturated prepolymers, a free radical or UV initiator can be added to the composition for the thermal or UV curing or cross-linking process, as is understood by one of ordinary skill in the art.
Representative examples of polymers that can be used for the primer material also include those polymers that can be used for the reservoir layer as described above. The use of the same polymer significantly reduces or eliminates any interfacial incompatibilities, such as lack of an adhesive tie or bond, which may exist with the employment of two different polymeric layers.
Ethylene vinyl alcohol is a very suitable choice of polymer for the primer layer. The copolymer possesses good adhesive qualities to the surface of a stent, particularly stainless steel surfaces, and has illustrated the ability to expand with a stent without any significant detachment of the copolymer from the surface of the stent. The copolymer can comprise a mole percent of ethylene of from about 27% to about 48%.
By way of example, and not limitation, the polymer can comprise from about 0.1% to about 35%, more narrowly from about 1% to about 20% by weight of the total weight of the composition, and the solvent can comprise from about 65% to about 99.9%, more narrowly from about 80% to about 98% by weight of the total weight of the primer composition. A specific weight ratio is dependent on factors such as the material from which the implantable device is made, the geometrical structure of the device, the choice of polymer-solvent combination, and the method of application.
In accordance with another embodiment, a fluid can be added to the composition to enhance the wetting of the primer composition for a more uniform coating application. To enhance the wetting of the composition, a suitable fluid typically has a high capillary permeation. Capillary permeation or wetting is the movement of a fluid on a solid substrate driven by interfacial energetics. Capillary permeation is quantitated by a contact angle, defined as an angle at the tangent of a droplet in a fluid phase that has taken an equilibrium shape on a solid surface. A low contact angle indicates a higher wetting liquid. A suitably high capillary permeation corresponds to a contact angle less than about 90°. The wetting fluid, typically, should have a viscosity not greater than about 50 centipoise, narrowly about 0.3 to about 5 centipoise, more narrowly about 0.4 to about 2.5 centipoise. The wetting fluid, accordingly, when added to the composition, reduces the viscosity of composition.
The wetting fluid should be compatible with the polymer and the solvent and should not precipitate the polymer. The wetting fluid can also act as the solvent. Useful examples of the wetting fluid include, but are not limited to, tetrahydrofuran (THF), dimethylformamide (DMF), 1-butanol, n-butyl acetate, dimethyl acetamide (DMAC), and mixtures and combinations thereof.
Depending on the polymer used for the reservoir or barrier layers, it may be advantageous to form a finishing layer that is especially biocompatible on the surface of the coating that is exposed to the biological lumen when inserted into a patient. Representative examples of suitable biocompatible polymers or biocompatible agents for the finishing layer include, but are not limited to ethylene vinyl alcohol copolymer, polyethylene oxide, polyethylene glycol, hyaluronic acid, polyvinyl pyrrolidone, heparin, heparin derivatives such as those having hydrophobic counterions, and phosphylcholine.
Application of the composition can be by any conventional method, such as by spraying the composition onto the prosthesis or by immersing the prosthesis in the composition. Operations such as wiping, centrifugation, blowing, or other web-clearing acts can also be performed to achieve a more uniform coating. Briefly, wiping refers to physical removal of excess coating from the surface of the stent; centrifugation refers to rapid rotation of the stent about an axis of rotation; and blowing refers to application of air at a selected pressure to the deposited coating. Any excess coating can also be vacuumed off the surface of the device. The addition of a wetting fluid leads to a consistent application of the composition which also causes the coating to be uniformly deposited on the surface of the prosthesis.
With the use of the thermoplastic polymers for the primer, such as ethylene vinyl alcohol copolymer, polycaprolactone, poly(lactide-co-glycolide), poly(hydroxybutyrate), etc., the deposited primer composition should be exposed to a heat treatment at a temperature in a range greater than about the glass transition temperature (Tg) and less than about the melting temperature (Tm) of the selected polymer. Unexpected results have been discovered with treatment of the composition under this temperature range, specifically strong adhesion or bonding of the coating to the metallic surface of a stent. The device should be exposed to the heat treatment for any suitable duration of time that would allow for the formation of the primer coating on the surface of the device as well as for the evaporation of the solvent or combination of solvent and wetting fluid. It is understood that essentially all of the solvent and the wetting fluid will be removed from the composition, but traces or residues may remain blended with the polymer.
Table 1 lists the Tg and Tm for some of the polymers used in the embodiments of the present invention. Tg and Tm of polymers are attainable by one of ordinary skill in the art. The cited exemplary temperature and time for exposure are provided by way of illustration and are not meant to be limiting.
With the use of one of the aforementioned thermoset primer polymers, the use of initiators may be required. By way of example, epoxy systems consisting of diglycidyl ether of bisphenol A resins can be cured with amine curatives, thermoset polyurethane prepolymers can cured with polyols, polyamines, or water (moisture), and acrylated urethane can be cured with UV light. If baked, the temperature can be above the Tg of the selected polymer.
With the use of the inorganic primer polymers, such as silanes, titanates, and zirconates, the solvent is allowed to evaporate.
The composition containing the active ingredient can be applied to a designated region of the primer coating or the surface of the device. The solvent(s) or the combination of solvent(s) and the wetting fluid is removed from the composition by allowing the solvent(s) or combination of the solvent(s) and the wetting fluid to evaporate. The evaporation can be induced by heating the device at a predetermined temperature for a predetermined period of time. For example, the device can be heated at a temperature of about 60° C. for about 12 hours to about 24 hours. The heating can be conducted in an anhydrous atmosphere and at ambient pressure and should not exceed the temperature which would adversely affect the active ingredient. The heating can also be conducted under a vacuum condition. It is understood that essentially all of the solvent and the wetting fluid will be removed from the composition, but traces or residues may remain blended with the polymer.
The diffusion barrier layer can be formed on a designated region of the active ingredient-containing coating subsequent to the evaporation of the solvent(s) or solvent(s)/wetting fluid and the drying of the polymer for the active ingredient-containing coating. Alternatively, in embodiments in which a polymeric reservoir coating is not employed, the rate-reducing membrane may be formed directly over active-ingredient containing cavities within the surface of the prosthesis. The diffusion barrier layer can be applied by spraying the composition onto the device or immersing the device in the composition, then drying the polymer. The above-described processes can be similarly repeated for the formation of the diffusion barrier layer.
After the coating has been formed on the implantable device, depending on the polymers used in the coating, the 40-O-(2-hydroxy)ethyl-rapamycin can diffuse from the polymer matrix at a rate that could be too high for certain clinical conditions. Accordingly, the coating can be exposed to a temperature that is effective to decrease the diffusion rate of the 40-O-(2-hydroxy)ethyl-rapamycin from the polymer matrix. In particular, the coating can be exposed to a sufficient temperature effective to decrease the release rate of the 40-O-(2-hydroxy)ethyl-rapamycin, or analog or derivative thereof, by about 50% as compared to a control group, as demonstrated in Example 17 below.
Typically, the temperature will be between the glass transition temperature (Tg) and the melting temperature (Tm) of the polymer. For example, the temperature can be the annealing temperature of the polymer (about equal to Tg+Tm/2). The thermal treatment can be conducted in an anhydrous atmosphere and at ambient pressure. The treatment can also be conducted under a vacuum condition.
The exposure temperature should not adversely affect the characteristics of the 40-O-(2-hydroxy)ethyl-rapamycin or other active agents present in the coating. In order to prevent possible degradation of the active agents or the polymers in the coating, additives can be mixed with the polymer before or during the coating process to shift the thermal profile of the polymer (i.e., decrease the Tg and Tm of the polymer). For example, a plasticizer, which is usually a low molecular weight nonvolatile molecule, can be dissolved with the polymer before the application process. The plasticizer can be an active agent. A representative example of an additive is dioctyl phthalate.
In one embodiment, one of the polymers in the coating exposed to the temperature is a semi-crystalline (e.g., polyvinyl chloride and EVAL) polymer. Without being bound by any particular theory, it is believed that the diffusion rate of the active agent from the polymer is decreased because the thermal radiation increases the percent crystallinity of the polymer. Others types of energy, such as RF energy, can also be used to increase the percent crystallinity. “Percent crystallinity” refers to the percentage of the polymer material that is in a crystalline form. Those of ordinary skill in the art understand that there are several methods for determining the percent crystallinity in polymers. These methods are, for example, described in L. H. Sperline, Introduction to Physical Polymer Science (3rd ed. 2001). The first involves the determination of the heat of fusion of the whole sample by calorimetric methods. The heat of fusion per mole of crystalline material can be estimated independently by melting point depression experiments.
A second method involves the determination of the density of the crystalline portion via X-ray analysis of the crystal structure, and determining the theoretical density of a 100% crystalline material. The density of the amorphous material can be determined from an extrapolation of the density from the melt to the temperature of interest. Then the percent crystallinity is given by:
where ρexpt1 represents the experimental density, and ρamorph and ρ100% crust are the densities of the amorphous and crystalline portions, respectively.
A third method stems from the fact that X-ray diffraction depends on the number of electrons involved and is thus proportional to the density. Besides Bragg diffraction lines for the crystalline portion, there is an amorphous halo caused by the amorphous portion of the polymer. The amorphous halo occurs at a slightly smaller angle than the corresponding crystalline peak, because the atomic spacings are larger. The amorphous halo is broader than the corresponding crystalline peak, because of the molecular disorder. This third method can be quantified by the crystallinity index, CI, where
and where Ac and Aa represent the area under the Bragg diffraction line and corresponding amorphous halo, respectively.
The heat emitter used to thermal treat the coating can be any apparatus that emits thermal radiation. For example, the heat emitter can be a cauterizer tip. The heat emitter can also be a blower that includes a heating device so that the blower can direct a warm gas (e.g., air, argon or nitrogen) onto the implantable device. The heating device can be any heating device as known by those of ordinary skill in the art. For example, the heating device can be an electric heater incorporating heating coils.
In one embodiment of the present invention, the thermal radiation from the heat emitter can be directed to only certain portions of the implantable device or only for certain durations so that the diffusion rates of the 40-O-(2-hydroxy)ethyl-rapamycin from the polymer differs in various portions of the coating. In one example, the implantable device can have two or more segments along the longitudinal axis of the implantable device, such as a first segment, a second segment and a third segment. The thermal radiation could be directed substantially only at the first segment and the third segment, for instance, by using a cauterizer tip. Alternatively, the thermal radiation could be set higher for the first and third segments, or the thermal radiation could be directed at the first and third segments for a longer duration than the second segment. As a result, the polymer along the first segment and the third segment would have a greater percent crystallinity than the polymer along the second segment. Therefore, the diffusion rates of the active agent from the polymer matrix along the first segment and the third segment would be less than the diffusion rate along the second segment.
In another embodiment, by limiting the time that the coating is exposed to thermal radiation so that the percent crystallinity is not maximized throughout the entire thickness of the coating, the shallower regions of the coating will have a higher percent crystallinity than the deeper regions. In a particular example, if the coating has four regions with the fourth region as the deepest, by limiting the thermal treatment, the first or shallowest region would have a higher percent crystallinity than the fourth or deepest region. One of ordinary skill in the art will understand that the duration and temperature of the exposure will depend on the desired diffusion rate of the polymer, and the inherent characteristics of the polymers used in the coating.
After the implantable device has been coated according to the various embodiments of the present invention, the implantable device can be sterilized by various methods. According to conventional thought, a coating containing 40-O-(2-hydroxy)ethyl-rapamycin cannot be sterilized with many techniques because the 40-O-(2-hydroxy)ethyl-rapamycin is degraded by the processes. For example, it was thought that a polymer coating containing 40-O-(2-hydroxy)ethyl-rapamycin could not be sterilized with an e-beam procedure because the free radicals produced during the process would degrade the 40-O-(2-hydroxy)ethyl-rapamycin. Similarly, it has been thought that exposing a coating with 40-O-(2-hydroxy)ethyl-rapamycin to ethylene oxide or peroxide gas would also degrade the 40-O-(2-hydroxy)ethyl-rapamycin. However, it has unexpectedly been found that the coatings of the present invention protect the 40-O-(2-hydroxy)ethyl-rapamycin during sterilization procedures (e.g., using an e-beam or ethylene oxide process). In fact, subsequent to sterilization, the peak purity of the 40-O-(2-hydroxy)ethyl-rapamycin has been greater than 90% when included in the coatings of the present invention.
In an embodiment of the present invention, the particular procedure used to sterilize the coating can also be used to expose the coating to a temperature that is effective to decrease the diffusion rate of the 40-O-(2-hydroxy)ethyl-rapamycin from the polymer matrix. In particular, during the sterilization procedure (e.g., the ethylene oxide procedure) the coating can be exposed to a sufficient temperature effective to decrease the release rate of the 40-O-(2-hydroxy)ethyl-rapamycin, or analog or derivative thereof, by about 50% as compared to a control group.
Examples of the Device
The device or prosthesis coated in accordance with embodiments of the present invention may be any suitable medical substrate that can be implanted in a human or veterinary patient. Examples of such implantable devices include self-expandable stents, balloon-expandable stents, stent-grafts, grafts (e.g., aortic grafts), artificial heart valves, cerebrospinal fluid shunts, pacemaker electrodes, and endocardial leads (e.g., FINELINE and ENDOTAK, available from Guidant Corporation, Santa Clara, Calif.). The underlying structure of the device can be of virtually any design. The device can be made of a metallic material or an alloy such as, but not limited to, cobalt chromium alloy (ELGILOY), stainless steel (316L), high nitrogen stainless steel, e.g., BIODUR 108, cobalt chrome alloy L-605, “MP35N,” “MP20N,” ELASTINITE (Nitinol), tantalum, nickel-titanium alloy, platinum-iridium alloy, gold, magnesium, or combinations thereof. “MP35N” and “MP20N” are trade names for alloys of cobalt, nickel, chromium and molybdenum available from Standard Press Steel Co., Jenkintown, Pa. “MP35N” consists of 35% cobalt, 35% nickel, 20% chromium, and 10% molybdenum. “MP20N” consists of 50% cobalt, 20% nickel, 20% chromium, and 10% molybdenum. Devices made from bioabsorbable or biostable polymers could also be used with the embodiments of the present invention.
The embodiments of the present invention may be particularly useful for the coatings of small vessel stents. Small vessels stents can be generally categorized as having inner diameters of less than 2.5 mm in an expanded state. Because of their small size, small vessel stents offer unique challenges for drug delivery. In particular, as compared to conventionally sized stents, small vessel stents have a greater surface:volume ratio. Therefore, when a small vessel stent is inserted into a biological lumen, the vessel tissue surrounding a small vessel stent is exposed to a greater concentration of polymer and active agent.
The various embodiments of the present invention can be used to address some of the challenges offered by the use of small vessel stents. For example, it is thought that it is especially important that small vessel stents have lower amounts of polymer in their coatings, as compared to larger sized stents, in order to reduce the risk of an inflammatory response by the vessel tissue. However, it may also be important to have a barrier layer on the stent coating in order to have a low release rate of the active agents, such as 40-O-(2-hydroxy)ethyl-rapamycin. With the inclusion of the barrier layer, the amount of polymer on the coating may be sufficient to cause an unwanted inflammatory response. In order to address these countervailing concerns, one approach would be to provide a thinner barrier layer on the polymer matrix as compared to larger sized stents, and then heat treat the barrier layer to increase the crystallinity of the barrier layer polymer, thereby decreasing the release rate of the active agent from the reservoir region. In an alternative embodiment, the polymer used for the barrier layer can initially have a very high percent crystallinity. In yet another embodiment, the reservoir layer can be heat treated to reduce the release rate of active agent from the reservoir region without the use of a barrier layer.
In another particular example, it is thought that it is especially important for small vessel stents to have a biocompatible coating. One approach to address this need is to provide a finishing layer on the stent that contains a highly biocompatible polymer such as polyethylene glycol, or biocompatible agents such as heparin. For example, a finishing layer can be applied over a barrier layer so that the coating offers a usefully low release rate of an active agent and also provides a highly biocompatible coating.
Coating
Some of the various embodiments of the present invention are illustrated by
Referring to
Referring to
Barrier layer 28 can have any suitable thickness, as the thickness of barrier layer 28 is dependent on parameters such as, but not limited to, the desired rate of release and the procedure for which the stent will be used. For example, barrier layer 28 can have a thickness of about 0.1 to about 10 microns, more narrowly from about 0.25 to about 5 microns.
By way of example, and not limitation, the impregnated reservoir layer 32 can have a thickness of about 0.5 microns to about 1.5 microns. The particular thickness of reservoir layer 32 is based on the type of procedure for which medical substrate 20 is employed and the amount of the active agent to be delivered. The amount of the active agent to be included on the prosthesis can be further increased by applying a plurality of reservoir layers 32 on top of one another. The optional primer layer 30 can have any suitable thickness, examples of which can be in the range of about 0.1 to about 10 microns, more narrowly about 0.1 to about 2 microns.
Method of Use
In accordance with the above-described method, the active agent can be applied to a device, e.g., a stent, retained on the device during delivery and released at a desired control rate and for a predetermined duration of time at the site of implantation. A stent having the above-described coating layers is useful for a variety of medical procedures, including, by way of example, treatment of obstructions caused by tumors in bile ducts, esophagus, trachea/bronchi and other biological passageways. A stent having the above-described coating layers is particularly useful for treating occluded regions of blood vessels caused by abnormal or inappropriate migration and proliferation of smooth muscle cells, thrombosis, and restenosis. Stents may be placed in a wide array of blood vessels, both arteries and veins. Representative examples of sites include the iliac, renal, and coronary arteries.
Briefly, an angiogram is first performed to determine the appropriate positioning for stent therapy. Angiography is typically accomplished by injecting a radiopaque contrasting agent through a catheter inserted into an artery or vein as an x-ray is taken. A guidewire is then advanced through the lesion or proposed site of treatment. Over the guidewire is passed a delivery catheter, which allows a stent in its collapsed configuration to be inserted into the passageway. The delivery catheter is inserted either percutaneously, or by surgery, into the femoral artery, brachial artery, femoral vein, or brachial vein, and advanced into the appropriate blood vessel by steering the catheter through the vascular system under fluoroscopic guidance. A stent having the above-described coating layers may then be expanded at the desired area of treatment. A post insertion angiogram may also be utilized to confirm appropriate positioning.
The embodiments of the present invention will be illustrated by the following set forth examples.
35 13 mm PENTA stents (available from Guidant Corporation) were coated by spraying a 2% (w/w) solution of poly(ethylene-co-vinyl alcohol) (44 mole % ethylene) (“EVAL”) in 98% (w/w) dimethylacetamide. The solvent was removed by baking at 140° C. for 2 hours. A solution of 1.9% (w/w) EVAL and 0.7% (w/w) 40-O-(2-hydroxy)ethyl-rapamycin in a mixture of 68.2% (w/w) dimethylacetamide and 29.2% (w/w) ethanol was spray coated onto the stents to a thickness with a target of 175 μg of 40-O-(2-hydroxy)ethyl-rapamycin on each stent. The stents were then baked at 50° C. for 2 hours. A barrier layer was formed by spraying the stents with a 4% (w/w) solution of EVAL in a mixture of 76% (w/w) dimethylacetamide and 20% (w/w) pentane. Another 2 hour bake at 50° C. was performed to remove the solvent.
A select number of stents were analyzed to compare the target coating formulation with the final coating formulation. The results are as follows: For the primer layer, there was a target dry weight of 40 μg of polymer, and a measured average dry weight of 43±3 μg of polymer. For the reservoir layer, the target drug:polymer ratio was 1:2.857, the target dry weight for the entire reservoir coating was 675 μg and the average actual dry weight was 683±19 μg. Also for the reservoir layer, the average total drug content of the stent coatings was determined by the process described in Example 2. The average drug content was 133 μg or 152 μg/cm2. For the barrier layer, the target dry weight of polymer was 300 μg and the measured average dry weight was 320±13 μg.
A drug-coated stent was placed in a volumetric flask. An appropriate amount of the extraction solvent acetonitrile with 0.02% BHT as protectant was added (e.g., in a 10 ml volumetric flask, with about 9 ml solvent added). The flask was sonicated for a sufficient time to extract all of the drug from the reservoir region. Then, the solution in the flask was filled to mark with the solvent solution. The drug solution was the analyzed by HPLC. The HPLC system consisted of a Waters 2690 system with an analytical pump, a column compartment (set at 40° C.), an auto-sampler, and a 996 PDA detector. The column was an YMC Pro C18 (150 mm×4.6 I.D., 3 μm particle size), maintained at a temperature of 40° C. The mobile phase consisted of 75% acetonitrile and 25% 20 mMolar ammonium acetate. The flow rate was set on 1 ml/min. The HPLC release rate results were quantified by comparing the results with a reference standard. The total drug content of the stent was then calculated.
34 13 mm PENTA stents were coated by spraying a 2% (w/w) solution of EVAL and 98% (w/w) dimethylacetamide. The solvent was removed by baking at 140° C. for 2 hours. A solution of 1.9% (w/w) EVAL and 1.1% (w/w) 40-O-(2-hydroxy)ethyl-rapamycin in a mixture of 67.9% (w/w) dimethylacetamide and 29.1% (w/w) ethanol was spray coated onto the stents to a thickness with a target of 275 μg of 40-O-(2-hydroxy)ethyl-rapamycin on each stent. The stents were then baked at 50° C. for 2 hours. A barrier layer was formed by spraying the stents with a 4% (w/w) solution of EVAL in a mixture of 76% (w/w) dimethylacetamide and 20% (w/w) pentane. Another 2 hour bake at 50° C. was performed to remove the solvent.
A select number of stents were analyzed to compare the target coating formulation with the final coating formulation. The results are as follows: For the primer layer, there was a target dry weight of 40 μg of polymer, and a measured average dry weight of 43±3 μg of polymer. For the reservoir layer, the target drug:polymer ratio was 1:1.75, the target dry weight for the entire reservoir coating was 757 μg and the average actual dry weight was 752±23 μg. Also for the reservoir layer, the average total drug content of the stent coatings was determined by the process described in Example 2. The average drug content was 205 μg or 235 μg/cm2. For the barrier layer, the target dry weight of polymer was 200 μg and the measured average dry weight was 186±13 μg.
24 13 mm PENTA stents were coated by spraying a 2% (w/w) solution of EVAL and 98% (w/w) dimethylacetamide. The solvent was removed by baking at 140° C. for 2 hours. A solution of 1.9% (w/w) EVAL and 1.2% (w/w) 40-O-(2-hydroxy)ethyl-rapamycin in a mixture of 67.8% (w/w) dimethylacetamide and 29.1% (w/w) ethanol was spray coated onto the stents to a thickness with a target of 325 μg of 40-O-(2-hydroxy)ethyl-rapamycin on each stent. The stents were then baked at 50° C. for 2 hours. A barrier layer was formed by spraying the stents with a 4% (w/w) solution of EVAL in a mixture of 76% (w/w) dimethylacetamide and 20% (w/w) pentane. Another 2 hour bake at 50° C. was performed to remove the solvent.
A select number of stents were analyzed to compare the target coating formulation with the final coating formulation. The results are as follows: For the primer layer, there was a target dry weight of 40 μg of polymer, and a measured average dry weight of 41±2 μg of polymer. For the reservoir layer, the target drug:polymer ratio was 1:1.6, the target dry weight for the entire reservoir coating was 845 μg and the average actual dry weight was 861±16 μg. Also for the reservoir layer, the average total drug content of the stent coatings was determined by the process described in Example 2. The average drug content was 282 μg or 323 μg/cm2. For the barrier layer, the target dry weight of polymer was 125 μg and the measured average dry weight was 131±9 μg.
This Example 5 is referred to as the “Release Rate Profile Procedure.” A drug-coated stent was placed on a stent holder of a Vankel Bio-Dis release rate tester (Vankel, Inc., Cary, N.C.). The stent was dipped into an artificial medium which stabilizes the 40-O-(2-hydroxy)ethyl-rapamycin in the testing solution, including a phosphate buffer saline solution (10 mM, pH 7.4) with 1% TRITON X-100 (Sigma Corporation), for a designated amount of time (e.g., 3 hours). Then the solution was analyzed for the amount of drug released from the stent coating using an HPLC process. The HPLC system consisted of a Waters 2690 system with an analytical pump, a column compartment (set at 40° C.), an auto-sampler, and a 996 PDA detector. The column was an YMC Pro C18 (150 mm×4.6 I.D., 3 μm particle size), maintained at a temperature of 40° C. The mobile phase consisted of 75% acetonitrile and 25% 20 mMolar ammonium acetate. The flow rate was set on 1 ml/min. After the drug solution was analyzed by HPLC the results were quantified by comparing the release rate results with a reference standard.
If the experimental protocol required that the stent coating be subjected to experimental conditions for an additional time, the stent was then dipped in a fresh medium solution for the necessary amount of time (e.g., another 3 hours) and the drug released in the solution was analyzed again according to the HPLC procedure described above. The procedure was repeated according to the number of data points required. The release rate profile could then be generated by plotting cumulative drug released in the medium vs. time.
The release rate of 40-O-(2-hydroxy)ethyl-rapamycin from the stents with coatings produced by the processes under Examples 1, 3 and 4 were tested using the in vitro HPLC process as described in Example 5. The solution for each stent underwent two HPLC runs, and the results were averaged.
The following Table 2 summarizes the results of the release rate procedure for two stents from Example 1:
The following Table 3 summarizes the results of the release rate procedure for two stents from Example 3:
The following Table 4 summarizes the results of the release rate procedure for two stents from Example 4:
A comparison of the release rates for the stents from Examples 1, 3 and 4 is graphically shown in
The following Example 7 is referred to as the “3 day In Vivo Release Rate Procedure” or the “9 day In Vivo Release Rate Procedure,” depending on the number of days the stents are inserted into the experimental animal. The following are the materials used for this Example:
The following was the procedure used for this Example:
A. Animal Preparation.
The stents harvested from the experimental animals were tested using an HPLC procedure to determine how much drug remained on the stents. A drug-coated stent removed from the experimental animal was placed in a volumetric flask. An appropriate amount of the extraction solvent acetonitrile with 0.02% BHT as protectant was added (e.g., in a 10 ml volumetric flask, with about 9 ml solvent added). The flask was sonicated for a sufficient time to extract all of the drug from the reservoir region. Then, the solution in the flask was filled to mark with the solvent solution. The HPLC system consisted of a Waters 2690 system with an analytical pump, a column compartment (set at 40° C.), an auto-sampler, and a 996 PDA detector. The column was an YMC Pro C18 (150 mm×4.6 I.D., 3 μm particle size), maintained at a temperature of 40° C. The mobile phase consisted of 75% acetonitrile and 25% 20 mMolar ammonium acetate. The flow rate was set on 1 ml/min. The HPLC release rate results were quantified by comparing the results with a reference standard. The total drug released in vivo was the difference between the average drug loaded on the stents and the amount of drug remaining on the stents after the stent implantation into the experimental animal.
The release rate of 40-O-(2-hydroxy)ethyl-rapamycin from the stents with coatings produced by the process under Example 1 were tested using a 3 day in vivo process as described in Example 7. In particular, stents from Example 1 were implanted into experimental animals and then the stents were tested by HPLC to determine how much 40-O-(2-hydroxy)ethyl-rapamycin diffused from the stent coating into the blood vessel. According to the HPLC analysis, 21.8 μg of the 40-O-(2-hydroxy)ethyl-rapamycin was released from the coating in 3 days, or 16.4% of the total drug content of the coating.
The release rate of 40-O-(2-hydroxy)ethyl-rapamycin from the stents with coatings produced by the process under Example 3 were tested using a 3 day in vivo process as described in Example 7. In particular, stents from Example 3 were implanted into experimental animals and then the stents were tested by HPLC to determine how much 40-O-(2-hydroxy)ethyl-rapamycin diffused from the stent coating into the blood vessel. According to the HPLC analysis, 7.8 μg of the 40-O-(2-hydroxy)ethyl-rapamycin was released from the coating in 3 days, or 3.8% of the total drug content of the coating.
The release rate of 40-O-(2-hydroxy)ethyl-rapamycin from the stents with coatings produced by the process under Example 4 were tested using a 3 day in vivo process as described in Example 7. In particular, stents from Example 4 were implanted into experimental animals and then the stents were tested by HPLC to determine how much 40-O-(2-hydroxy)ethyl-rapamycin diffused from the stent coating into the blood vessel. According to the HPLC analysis, 50.8 μg of the 40-O-(2-hydroxy)ethyl-rapamycin was released from the coating in 3 days, or 18% of the total drug content of the coating.
The release rate of 40-O-(2-hydroxy)ethyl-rapamycin from the stents with coatings produced by the process under Example 3 were tested using a 9 day in vivo process as described in Example 7. In particular, stents from Example 3 were implanted into experimental animals and then the stents were tested by HPLC to determine how much 40-O-(2-hydroxy)ethyl-rapamycin diffused from the stent coating into the blood vessel. According to the HPLC analysis, 29.7% of the 40-O-(2-hydroxy)ethyl-rapamycin was released from the coating in 9 days.
The release rate of 40-O-(2-hydroxy)ethyl-rapamycin from the stents with coatings produced by the process under Example 4 were tested using a 9 day in vivo process as described in Example 7. In particular, stents from Example 4 were implanted into experimental animals and then the stents were tested by HPLC to determine how much 40-O-(2-hydroxy)ethyl-rapamycin diffused from the stent coating into the blood vessel. According to the HPLC analysis, 39.4% of the 40-O-(2-hydroxy)ethyl-rapamycin was released from the coating in 9 days.
A 13 mm PIXEL stent (available from Guidant Corporation) was coated. The stent had a yellowish-gold coating that included ethylene vinyl alcohol copolymer and actinomycin D. The ends of the stent were heated with a cauterizer tip for fifteen (15) seconds at a current setting of 2.2 Amps, which corresponded to a temperature of about 106° C. at a distance of about 0.006 inches from the stent.
After the stent was exposed to heat from the cauterizer tip, the stent was submerged in a 50% (w/w) methanol:water bath. After twenty-four (24) hours, the stent was observed to have drug present at the stent end rings as indicated by a yellowish hue. The middle section of the stent, however, was clear, indicating that the drug had been released through the polymer. This process was repeated on 40 stents yielding similar results for all the stents.
13 mm PIXEL stents were coated. The stents had yellowish-gold coatings that included ethylene vinyl alcohol copolymer and actinomycin D. The stents were separated into three experimental groups, and the ends of the stents were heated with a cauterizer tip according to the parameters shown in Table 5 for each group. After the stents were exposed to heat from the cauterizer tip, the stent was submerged in a 50% (w/w) methanol:water bath. After twenty-four (24) hours, the stents were observed as summarized in Table 5.
It was observed that the coating in the middle section of the stents, which did not have significant exposure to heat from the cauterizer tip, was clear. This indicates that the drug had been eluted from the stents. On the other hand, the end rings of the stents which had been exposed to heat from the cauterizer tip still appeared gold in color, indicating the presence of drug in the stent coating. The results above indicate that varying the amount of time and heat exposure can modify the elution rate of drug from the stent.
8 mm PIXEL stents were coated by spraying a 2% (w/w) solution of EVAL and 98% (w/w) dimethylacetamide. The solvent was removed by baking at 140° C. for 2 hours. A solution of EVAL and 40-O-(2-hydroxy)ethyl-rapamycin in a mixture of 70% (w/w) dimethylacetamide and 30% (w/w) ethanol was spray coated onto the stents. The stents were then baked at 50° C. for 2 hours. A barrier layer was formed by spraying the stents with a solution of EVAL in a mixture of 80% (w/w) dimethylacetamide and 20% (w/w) pentane. Another 2 hour bake at 50° C. was performed to remove the solvent.
A select number of stents were analyzed to compare the target coating formulation with the final coating formulation. The results are as follows: For the primer layer, there was a target dry weight of 26 μg of polymer, and a measured average dry weight of 28±3 μg of polymer. For the reservoir layer, the target drug:polymer ratio was 1:1.25, and the measured average drug content was 128 μg. For the barrier layer, the measured average dry weight was 84 μg.
8 mm PIXEL stents were coated by spraying a 2% (w/w) solution of EVAL and 98% (w/w) dimethylacetamide. The solvent was removed by baking at 140° C. for 2 hours. A solution of EVAL and 40-O-(2-hydroxy)ethyl-rapamycin in a mixture of 70% (w/w) dimethylacetamide and 30% (w/w) ethanol was spray coated onto the stents. The stents were then baked at 50° C. for 2 hours. A barrier layer was formed by spraying the stents with a solution of EVAL in a mixture of 80% (w/w) dimethylacetamide and 20% (w/w) pentane. Another 2 hour bake at 50° C. was performed to remove the solvent.
A select number of stents were analyzed to compare the target coating formulation with the final coating formulation. The results are as follows: For the primer layer, there was a target dry weight of 26 μg of polymer, and a measured average dry weight of 28±2 μg of polymer. For the reservoir layer, the target drug:polymer ratio was 1:1.5, and the measured average drug content was 130 μg. For the barrier layer, the measured average dry weight was 81 μg.
After the solvent had been substantially removed and the coatings had been formed, a select number of stents were then heat treated by exposing the stents to a heat of 80° C. for 2 hours.
The release rate of 40-O-(2-hydroxy)ethyl-rapamycin from the stents with coatings produced by the processes under Examples 15 and 16 were tested using the process described in Example 5. The following Table 6 summarizes the results of the release rate procedure for three stents from Example 15:
The following Table 7 summarizes the results of the release rate procedure for three stents from Example 16:
A comparison of the release rates for the stents from Examples 15-16 is graphically shown in
This Example 18 is referred to as the “Porcine Serum Release Rate Procedure.” A drug-coated stent was placed on a stent holder of a Vankel Bio-Dis release rate tester. The stent was dipped into porcine serum, with 0.1% sodium azide added, for 24 hrs. The stent was removed from the porcine serum and the drug solution analyzed by an HPLC procedure to determine how much drug was released into the porcine serum. The HPLC system consisted of a Waters 2690 system with an analytical pump, a column compartment (set at 40° C.), an auto-sampler, and a 996 PDA detector. The column was an YMC Pro C18 (150 mm×4.6 I.D., 3 μm particle size), maintained at a temperature of 40° C. The mobile phase consisted of 75% acetonitrile and 25% 20 mMolar ammonium acetate. The flow rate was set on 1 ml/min. The HPLC release rate results were quantified by comparing the results with a reference standard.
13 mm PENTA stents were coated by spraying a 2% (w/w) solution of EVAL and 98% (w/w) dimethylacetamide. The solvent was removed by baking at 140° C. for 2 hours. A solution of EVAL and 40-O-(2-hydroxy)ethyl-rapamycin in a mixture of 70% (w/w) dimethylacetamide and 30% (w/w) ethanol was spray coated onto the stents. The stents were then baked at 50° C. for 2 hours. A barrier layer was formed by spraying the stents with a solution of EVAL in a mixture of 80% (w/w) dimethylacetamide and 20% (w/w) pentane. Another 2 hour bake at 50° C. was performed to remove the solvent.
A select number of stents were analyzed to quantify the coating components. For the primer layer, there was a target dry weight of 40 μg of polymer, and a measured average dry weight of 45±1 μg of polymer. For the reservoir layer, the drug:polymer ratio was 1:1, and the measured average drug content was 151 μg as determined by Example 2. For the barrier layer, the measured average dry weight was 234 μg.
After the coatings were formed on the stents, a select number of stents were tested for the drug release rate from the coatings according to the procedure described in Example 18. It was determined that the average drug released in 24 hours was 32.6 μg, or 21.6% of the total.
13 mm PENTA stents were coated by spraying a 2% (w/w) solution of EVAL and 98% (w/w) dimethylacetamide. The solvent was removed by baking at 140° C. for 2 hours. A solution of EVAL and 40-O-(2-hydroxy)ethyl-rapamycin in a mixture of 70% (w/w) dimethylacetamide and 30% (w/w) ethanol was spray coated onto the stents. The stents were then baked at 50° C. for 2 hours. A barrier layer was formed by spraying the stents with a solution of EVAL in a mixture of 80% (w/w) dimethylacetamide and 20% (w/w) pentane. Another 2 hour bake at 50° C. was performed to remove the solvent.
A select number of stents were analyzed to quantify the coating components. For the primer layer, there was a target dry weight of 40 μg of polymer, and a measured average dry weight of 44±3 μg of polymer. For the reservoir layer, the drug:polymer ratio was 1:1.8, and the measured average drug content was 97 μg as determined by Example 2. For the barrier layer, the measured average dry weight was 184 μg.
After the coatings were formed on the stents, a select number of stents were tested for the drug release rate from the coatings according to the procedure described in Example 18. It was determined that the average drug released in 24 hours was 24.1 μg, or 24.8% of the total.
13 mm PENTA stents were coated by spraying a 2% (w/w) solution of EVAL and 98% (w/w) dimethylacetamide. The solvent was removed by baking at 140° C. for 2 hours. A solution of EVAL and 40-O-(2-hydroxy)ethyl-rapamycin in a mixture of 70% (w/w) dimethylacetamide and 30% (w/w) ethanol was spray coated onto the stents. The stents were then baked at 50° C. for 2 hours. A barrier layer was formed by spraying the stents with a solution of EVAL in a mixture of 80% (w/w) dimethylacetamide and 20% (w/w) pentane. Another 2 hour bake at 50° C. was performed to remove the solvent.
A select number of stents were analyzed to quantify the coating components. For the primer layer, there was a target dry weight of 40 μg of polymer, and a measured average dry weight of 41±1 μg of polymer. For the reservoir layer, the drug:polymer ratio was 1:1.8, and the measured average drug content was 227 μg as determined by Example 2. For the barrier layer, the measured average dry weight was 181 μg.
After the coatings were formed on the stents, a select number of stents were tested for the drug release rate from the coatings according to the procedure described in Example 18. It was determined that the average drug released in 24 hours was 27.5 μg, or 12.1% of the total.
13 mm PENTA stents were coated by spraying a 2% (w/w) solution of EVAL and 98% (w/w) dimethylacetamide. The solvent was removed by baking at 140° C. for 2 hours. A solution of EVAL and 40-O-(2-hydroxy)ethyl-rapamycin in a mixture of 70% (w/w) dimethylacetamide and 30% (w/w) ethanol was spray coated onto the stents. The stents were then baked at 50° C. for 2 hours. No barrier layer was applied for this Example.
A select number of stents were analyzed to quantify the coating components. For the primer layer, there was a target dry weight of 40 μg of polymer, and a measured average dry weight of 44±2 μg of polymer. For the reservoir layer, the drug:polymer ratio was 1:1.8, and the measured average drug content was 221 μg as determined by Example 2.
After the coatings were formed on the stents, a select number of stents were tested for the drug release rate from the coatings according to the procedure described in Example 18. It was determined that the average drug released in 24 hours was 129.4 μg, or 58.55% of the total.
13 mm PENTA stents were coated by spraying a 2% (w/w) solution of EVAL and 98% (w/w) dimethylacetamide. The solvent was removed by baking at 140° C. for 2 hours. A solution of EVAL and 40-O-(2-hydroxy)ethyl-rapamycin in a mixture of 70% (w/w) dimethylacetamide and 30% (w/w) ethanol was spray coated onto the stents. The stents were then baked at 50° C. for 2 hours. A barrier layer was formed by spraying the stents with a solution of EVAL in a mixture of 80% (w/w) dimethylacetamide and 20% (w/w) pentane. Another 2 hour bake at 50° C. was performed to remove the solvent.
A select number of stents were analyzed to quantify the coating components. For the primer layer, there was a target dry weight of 40 μg of polymer, and a measured average dry weight of 42 μg of polymer. For the reservoir layer, the drug:polymer ratio was 1:1.5, and the measured average drug content was 184 μg as determined by Example 2. For the barrier layer, the measured average dry weight was 81 μg.
After the coatings were formed on the stents, a select number of stents were tested for the drug release rate from the coatings according to the procedure described in Example 18. It was determined that the average drug released in 24 hours was 70.1 μg, or 38.1% of the total.
8 mm PIXEL stents were coated by spraying a 2% (w/w) solution of EVAL and 98% (w/w) dimethylacetamide. The solvent was removed by baking at 140° C. for 2 hours. A solution of EVAL and 40-O-(2-hydroxy)ethyl-rapamycin in a mixture of 70% (w/w) dimethylacetamide and 30% (w/w) ethanol was spray coated onto the stents. The stents were then baked at 50° C. for 2 hours. A barrier layer was formed by spraying the stents with a solution of EVAL in a mixture of 80% (w/w) dimethylacetamide and 20% (w/w) pentane. Another 2 hour bake at 50° C. was performed to remove the solvent.
A select number of stents were analyzed to quantify the coating components. For the primer layer, there was a target dry weight of 40 μg of polymer, and a measured average dry weight of 45±1 μg of polymer. For the reservoir layer, the drug:polymer ratio was 1:1.75, and the measured average drug content was 200 μg as determined by Example 2. For the barrier layer, the measured average dry weight was 180 μg.
After the coatings were formed on the stents, a select number of stents were tested for the drug release rate from the coatings according to the procedure described in Example 18. It was determined that the average drug released in 24 hours was 39.0 μg, or 19.5% of the total.
8 mm PIXEL stents were coated by spraying a 2% (w/w) solution of EVAL and 98% (w/w) dimethylacetamide. The solvent was removed by baking at 140° C. for 2 hours. A solution of EVAL and 40-O-(2-hydroxy)ethyl-rapamycin in a mixture of 70% (w/w) dimethylacetamide and 30% (w/w) ethanol was spray coated onto the stents. The stents were then baked at 50° C. for 2 hours. A barrier layer was formed by spraying the stents with a solution of EVAL in a mixture of 80% (w/w) dimethylacetamide and 20% (w/w) pentane. Another 2 hour bake at 50° C. was performed to remove the solvent.
A select number of stents were analyzed to quantify the coating components. For the primer layer, there was a target dry weight of 40 μg of polymer, and a measured average dry weight of 41±4 μg of polymer. For the reservoir layer, the drug:polymer ratio was 1:1, and the measured average drug content was 167 μg as determined by Example 2. For the barrier layer, the measured average dry weight was 184 μg.
After the coatings were formed on the stents, a select number of stents were tested for the drug release rate from the coatings according to the procedure described in Example 18. It was determined that the average drug released in 24 hours was 6.0 μg, or 3.6% of the total.
8 mm PIXEL stents were coated by spraying a 2% (w/w) solution of EVAL and 98% (w/w) dimethylacetamide. The solvent was removed by baking at 140° C. for 2 hours. A solution of EVAL and 40-O-(2-hydroxy)ethyl-rapamycin in a mixture of 70% (w/w) dimethylacetamide and 30% (w/w) ethanol was spray coated onto the stents. The stents were then baked at 50° C. for 2 hours. A barrier layer was formed by spraying the stents with a solution of EVAL in a mixture of 80% (w/w) dimethylacetamide and 20% (w/w) pentane. Another 2 hour bake at 50° C. was performed to remove the solvent.
A select number of stents were analyzed to quantify the coating components. For the primer layer, there was a target dry weight of 26 μg of polymer, and a measured average dry weight of 24±2 μg of polymer. For the reservoir layer, the drug:polymer ratio was 1:1.25, and the measured average drug content was 120 μg as determined by Example 2. For the barrier layer, the measured average dry weight was 138 μg.
After the coatings were formed on the stents, a select number of stents were tested for the drug release rate from the coatings according to the procedure described in Example 18. It was determined that the average drug released in 24 hours was 11.0 μg, or 9.2% of the total.
13 mm PENTA stents were coated by spraying a 2% (w/w) solution of EVAL and 98% (w/w) dimethylacetamide. The solvent was removed by baking at 140° C. for 2 hours. A solution of EVAL and 40-O-(2-hydroxy)ethyl-rapamycin in a mixture of 70% (w/w) dimethylacetamide and 30% (w/w) ethanol was spray coated onto the stents. The stents were then baked at 50° C. for 2 hours. A barrier layer was formed by spraying the stents with a solution of 1% (w/w) polybutylmethacrylate, 5.7% (w/w) acetone, 50% (w/w) xylene and 43.3% (w/w) HFE FLUX REMOVER (Techspray, Amarillo, Tex.). Another 2 hour bake at 50° C. was performed to remove the solvent.
A select number of stents were analyzed to quantify the coating components. For the primer layer, there was a target dry weight of 40 μg of polymer, and a measured average dry weight of 44±4 μg of polymer. For the reservoir layer, the drug:polymer ratio was 1:1, and the measured average drug content was 183 μg as determined by Example 2. For the barrier layer, the measured average dry weight was 168 μg.
After the coatings were formed on the stents, a select number of stents were tested for the drug release rate from the coatings according to the procedure described in Example 18. It was determined that the average drug released in 24 hours was 21.6 μg, or 11.8% of the total.
13 mm PENTA stents were coated by spraying a 2% (w/w) solution of EVAL and 98% (w/w) dimethylacetamide. The solvent was removed by baking at 140° C. for 2 hours. A solution of EVAL and 40-O-(2-hydroxy)ethyl-rapamycin in a mixture of 70% (w/w) dimethylacetamide and 30% (w/w) ethanol was spray coated onto the stents. The stents were then baked at 50° C. for 2 hours. A barrier layer was formed by spraying the stents with a solution of 1% (w/w) polybutylmethacrylate, 5.7% (w/w) acetone, 50% (w/w) xylene and 43.3% (w/w) HFE FLUX REMOVER. Another 2 hour bake at 50° C. was performed to remove the solvent.
A select number of stents were analyzed to quantify the coating components. For the primer layer, there was a target dry weight of 40 μg of polymer, and a measured average dry weight of 41±2 μg of polymer. For the reservoir layer, the drug:polymer ratio was 1:1.8, and the measured average drug content was 102 μg as determined by Example 2. For the barrier layer, the measured average dry weight was 97 μg.
After the coatings were formed on the stents, a select number of stents were tested for the drug release rate from the coatings according to the procedure described in Example 18. It was determined that the average drug released in 24 hours was 9.1 μg, or 8.9% of the total.
8 mm PIXEL stents were coated by spraying a 2% (w/w) solution of EVAL and 98% (w/w) dimethylacetamide. The solvent was removed by baking at 140° C. for 2 hours. A solution of EVAL and 40-O-(2-hydroxy)ethyl-rapamycin in a mixture of 70% (w/w) dimethylacetamide and 30% (w/w) ethanol was spray coated onto the stents. The stents were then baked at 50° C. for 2 hours. A barrier layer was formed by spraying the stents with a solution of 1% (w/w) polybutylmethacrylate, 5.7% (w/w) acetone, 50% (w/w) xylene and 43.3% (w/w) HFE FLUX REMOVER (Techspray, Amarillo, Tex.). Another 2 hour bake at 50° C. was performed to remove the solvent.
A select number of stents were analyzed to quantify the coating components. For the primer layer, there was a target dry weight of 26 μg of polymer, and a measured average dry weight of 27±2 μg of polymer. For the reservoir layer, the drug:polymer ratio was 1:1.25, and the measured average drug content was 120 μg as determined by Example 2. For the barrier layer, the measured average dry weight was 68 μg.
After the coatings were formed on the stents, a select number of stents were tested for the drug release rate from the coatings according to the procedure described in Example 18. It was determined that the average drug released in 24 hours was 22.0 μg, or 18.3% of the total.
A select number of stents from Example 3 were tested for the drug release rate from the coatings according to the procedure described in Example 18. It was determined that the average drug released in 24 hours was 22.8 μg, or 11.1% of the total.
A select number of stents from Example 4 were tested for the drug release rate from the coatings according to the procedure described in Example 18. It was determined that the average drug released in 24 hours was 57.0 μg, or 20.2% of the total.
Two stents were coated by spraying a 2% (w/w) solution of EVAL and 98% (w/w) dimethylacetamide to form a primer layer. For the primer layer, there was a target dry weight of 100 μg of polymer, and the measured dry weights were 93 μg and 119 μg, respectively. The two stents were then coated with an EVAL-40-O-(2-hydroxy)ethyl-rapamycin blend at a drug:polymer ratio of 2:1 to produce a reservoir layer. After application, it was determined that the reservoir layers had weights of 610 μg and 590 μg, respectively. From the total weight of the reservoir layers and the drug:polymer ratio, it was estimated that the coatings contained about 407 μg and 393 μg of 40-O-(2-hydroxy)ethyl-rapamycin, respectively. Polymeric barrier layers were also applied to the stents and it was determined that the weights of the barrier layers were 279 μg and 377 μg, respectfully.
The stents from this Example were then sterilized using an ethylene oxide sterilization process. In particular, the stents were placed in a chamber and exposed to ethylene oxide gas for 6 hours at 130-140° F., with a relative humity of 45-80%. The stents were then aerated for about 72 hours at 110-130° F.
After sterilization, the coatings were then analyzed using an HPLC to determine the peak purity of the drug in the stent coatings. It was determined that the 40-O-(2-hydroxy)ethyl-rapamycin in the coatings had peak purities of about greater than 95%.
Two stents were coated by spraying a 2% (w/w) solution of EVAL and 98% (w/w) dimethylacetamide to form a primer layer. For the primer layer, there was a target dry weight of 100 μg of polymer, and the measured dry weights were 99 μg and 94 μg, respectively. The two stents were then coated with an EVAL-40-O-(2-hydroxy)ethyl-rapamycin blend at a drug:polymer ratio of 2:1 to produce a reservoir layer. After application, it was determined that the reservoir layers had weights of 586 μg and 588 μg, respectively. From the total weight of the reservoir layers and the drug:polymer ratio, it was estimated that the coatings contained about 391 μg and 392 μg of 40-O-(2-hydroxy)ethyl-rapamycin, respectively. Polymeric barrier layers were also applied to the stents and it was determined that the weights of the barrier layers were 380 μg and 369 μg, respectfully.
The stents from this Example were then sterilized using an e-beam sterilization process. In particular, the stents were placed in a stent container which was run through an e-beam chamber. While moving through the e-beam chamber via a conveyor belt, the stent container was exposed to an e-beam with a constant energy level so that the stent container received between 33.11 and 46.24 KGy. The stent therefore at any point along the length of the stent received at a minimum 25 KGy.
After sterilization, the coating was then analyzed using an HPLC to determine the peak purity of the drug in the stent coating. It was determined that the 40-O-(2-hydroxy)ethyl-rapamycin in the coating had a peak purity of about greater than 95%.
13 mm PENTA stents were coated by spraying a 2% (w/w) solution of EVAL and 98% (w/w) dimethylacetamide. The solvent was removed by baking at 140° C. for 2 hours. A solution of EVAL and 40-O-(2-hydroxy)ethyl-rapamycin in a mixture of 70% (w/w) dimethylacetamide and 30% (w/w) ethanol was spray coated onto the stents. The stents were then baked at 50° C. for 2 hours. A barrier layer was formed by spraying the stents with a solution of EVAL in a mixture of 80% (w/w) dimethylacetamide and 20% (w/w) pentane. Another 2 hour bake at 50° C. was performed to remove the solvent.
A select number of stents were analyzed to quantify the coating components. For the primer layer, there was a target dry weight of 40 μg of polymer, and a measured average dry weight of 44±3 μg of polymer. For the reservoir layer, the drug:polymer ratio was 1:2, and the measured average drug content was 245 μg as determined by Example 2. For the barrier layer, the measured average dry weight was 104 μg.
After the coatings were formed on the stents, a select number of stents were tested for the drug release rate from the coatings according to the procedure described in Example 18. It was determined that the average drug released in 24 hours was 23.5 μg, or 9.6% of the total.
13 mm PENTA stents were coated by spraying a 2% (w/w) solution of EVAL and 98% (w/w) dimethylacetamide. The solvent was removed by baking at 140° C. for 2 hours. A solution of EVAL and 40-O-(2-hydroxy)ethyl-rapamycin in a mixture of 70% (w/w) dimethylacetamide and 30% (w/w) ethanol was spray coated onto the stents. The stents were then baked at 50° C. for 2 hours. A barrier layer was formed by spraying the stents with a solution of EVAL in a mixture of 80% (w/w) dimethylacetamide and 20% (w/w) pentane. Another 2 hour bake at 50° C. was performed to remove the solvent.
A select number of stents were analyzed to quantify the coating components. For the primer layer, there was a target dry weight of 40 μg of polymer, and a measured average dry weight of 45±3 μg of polymer. For the reservoir layer, the drug:polymer ratio was 1:1.5, and the measured average drug content was 337 μg as determined by Example 2. For the barrier layer, the measured average dry weight was 169 μg.
After the coatings were formed on the stents, a select number of stents were tested for the drug release rate from the coatings according to the procedure described in Example 18. It was determined that the average drug released in 24 hours was 37.1 μg, or 11.0% of the total.
Stents from Example 34 and stents from Example 35 were sterilized according to the process described in Example 32. The released rates of the drug in the stent coatings of sterilized stents and non-sterilized were then tested according to the process described in Example 5. The results of the release rate test are graphically shown in
A 13 mm PENTA stent can be coated by spraying a solution of EVAL, 40-O-(2-hydroxy)ethyl-rapamycin and ethanol onto the stent. The stent is then baked at 50° C. for 2 hours to yield a reservoir coating with 300 μg of EVAL and 300 μg of 40-O-(2-hydroxy)ethyl-rapamycin. A barrier layer can be formed by spraying the stent with a solution of EVAL and pentane. A second 2 hour bake at 50° C. can be performed to remove the solvent to yield a barrier coating with 320 μg of EVAL.
A 13 mm PENTA stent can be coated by spraying a solution of EVAL and DMAC onto the stent. The solvent is removed by baking at 140° C. for 2 hours to yield a primer coating with 100 μg of EVAL. A reservoir layer can be applied by spraying a solution of EVAL, 40-O-(2-hydroxy)ethyl-rapamycin and ethanol onto the stent. The stent is then baked at 50° C. for 2 hours to yield a reservoir coating with 200 μg of EVAL and 400 μg of 40-O-(2-hydroxy)ethyl-rapamycin. A barrier layer can be formed by spraying the stent with a solution of EVAL and pentane. A second 2 hour bake at 50° C. is performed to remove the solvent to yield a barrier coating with 350 μg of EVAL.
A 13 mm PENTA stent can be coated by spraying a solution of EVAL, 40-O-(2-hydroxy)ethyl-rapamycin and ethanol onto the stent. The stent is then baked at 50° C. for 2 hours to yield a reservoir coating with 500 μg of EVAL and 250 μg of 40-O-(2-hydroxy)ethyl-rapamycin. A barrier layer can be formed by spraying the stent with a solution of EVAL and pentane. A second 2 hour bake at 50° C. is performed to remove the solvent to yield a barrier coating with 300 μg of EVAL.
A 13 mm PENTA stent can be coated by spraying a solution of EVAL, 40-O-(2-hydroxy)ethyl-rapamycin and ethanol onto the stent. The stent is then baked at 50° C. for 2 hours to yield a reservoir coating with 475 μg of EVAL and 175 μg of 40-O-(2-hydroxy)ethyl-rapamycin. A barrier layer can be formed by spraying the stent with a solution of EVAL and pentane. A second 2 hour bake at 50° C. is performed to remove the solvent to yield a barrier coating with 300 μg of EVAL.
An 8 mm PIXEL stent can be coated by spraying a solution of EVAL and 40-O-(2-hydroxy)ethyl-rapamycin in a mixture of dimethylacetamide and ethanol onto the stent. The stent is then baked at 50° C. for 2 hours to yield a reservoir coating with 400 μg of EVAL and 200 μg of 40-O-(2-hydroxy)ethyl-rapamycin. A barrier layer can be formed by spraying the stent with a solution of EVAL and a mixture of dimethylacetamide and pentane. A second 2 hour bake at 50° C. is performed to remove the solvent to yield a barrier coating with 300 μg of EVAL.
An 8 mm Pixel stent can be coated by spraying a solution of EVAL and 40-O-(2-hydroxy)ethyl-rapamycin in a mixture of dimethylacetamide and ethanol onto the stent. The stent is then baked at 50° C. for 2 hours to yield a reservoir coating with 400 μg of EVAL and 200 μg of 40-O-(2-hydroxy)ethyl-rapamycin. A barrier layer can be formed by spraying the stent with a solution of polybutylmethacrylate (“PBMA”) and HFE FLUX REMOVER. A second 2 hour bake at 50° C. is performed to remove the solvent to yield a barrier coating with 150 μg of PBMA.
An 8 mm PIXEL stent can be coated by spraying a solution of EVAL and 40-O-(2-hydroxy)ethyl-rapamycin in a mixture of dimethylacetamide and ethanol onto the stent. The stent is then baked at 50° C. for 2 hours to yield a reservoir coating with 200 μg of EVAL and 200 μg of 40-O-(2-hydroxy)ethyl-rapamycin. A barrier layer can be formed by spraying the stent with a solution of EVAL and a mixture of dimethylacetamide and pentane. A second 2 hour bake at 50° C. is performed to remove the solvent to yield a barrier coating with 200 μg of EVAL.
An 8 mm PIXEL stent can be coated by spraying a solution of EVAL and 40-O-(2-hydroxy)ethyl-rapamycin in a mixture of dimethylacetamide and ethanol onto the stent. The stent is then baked at 50° C. for 2 hours to yield a reservoir coating with 200 μg of EVAL and 200 μg of 40-O-(2-hydroxy)ethyl-rapamycin. A barrier layer can formed by spraying the stent with a solution of PBMA and HFE FLUX REMOVER. A second 2 hour bake at 50° C. is performed to remove the solvent to yield a barrier coating with 150 μg of PBMA.
An 8 mm PIXEL stent can be coated by spraying a solution of EVAL and 40-O-(2-hydroxy)ethyl-rapamycin in a mixture of dimethylacetamide and ethanol onto the stent. The stent is then baked at 50° C. for 2 hours to yield a reservoir coating with 200 μg of EVAL and 200 μg of 40-O-(2-hydroxy)ethyl-rapamycin. A barrier layer can be formed by spraying the stent with a solution of EVAL and a mixture of dimethylacetamide and pentane. A second 2 hour bake at 50° C. is performed to remove the solvent to yield a barrier coating with 200 μg of EVAL.
An 8 mm PIXEL stent can be coated by spraying a solution of EVAL and 40-O-(2-hydroxy)ethyl-rapamycin in a mixture of dimethylacetamide and ethanol onto the stent. The stent is then baked at 50° C. for 2 hours to yield a reservoir coating with 200 μg of EVAL and 200 μg of 40-O-(2-hydroxy)ethyl-rapamycin. A barrier layer can be formed by spraying the stent with a solution of PBMA and HFE FLUX REMOVER. A second 2 hour bake at 50° C. is performed to remove the solvent to yield a barrier coating with 100 μg of PBMA.
An 8 mm PIXEL stent can be coated by spraying a solution of EVAL and 40-O-(2-hydroxy)ethyl-rapamycin in a mixture of dimethylacetamide and ethanol onto the stent. The stent is then baked at 50° C. for 2 hours to yield a reservoir coating with 270 μg of EVAL and 150 μg of 40-O-(2-hydroxy)ethyl-rapamycin. A barrier layer can be formed by spraying the stent with a solution of EVAL and a mixture of dimethylacetamide and pentane. A second 2 hour bake at 50° C. is performed to remove the solvent to yield a barrier coating with 150 μg of EVAL.
An 8 mm PIXEL stent can be coated by spraying a solution of EVAL and 40-O-(2-hydroxy)ethyl-rapamycin in a mixture of dimethylacetamide and ethanol onto the stent. The stent is then baked at 50° C. for 2 hours to yield a reservoir coating with 170 μg of EVAL and 150 μg of 40-O-(2-hydroxy)ethyl-rapamycin. A barrier layer can be formed by spraying the stent with a solution of PBMA and HFE FLUX REMOVER. A second 2 hour bake at 50° C. is performed to remove the solvent to yield a barrier coating with 75 μg of PBMA.
An 8 mm PIXEL stent can be coated by spraying a solution of EVAL and 40-O-(2-hydroxy)ethyl-rapamycin in a mixture of dimethylacetamide and ethanol onto the stent. The stent is then baked at 50° C. for 2 hours to yield a reservoir coating with 150 μg of EVAL and 150 μg of 40-O-(2-hydroxy)ethyl-rapamycin. A barrier layer can be formed by spraying the stent with a solution of EVAL and a mixture of dimethylacetamide and pentane. A second 2 hour bake at 50° C. is performed to remove the solvent to yield a barrier coating with 200 μg of EVAL. A finishing layer can then applied by spraying the stent with a solution of EVAL, polyethyleneoxide (molecular weight of 17.5 K) (“PEO”) and dimethylacetamide. The stent is baked at 50° C. for 2 hours to remove the solvent to yield a finishing coating with 83 μg of EVAL and 17 μg of PEO.
An 8 mm PIXEL stent can be coated by spraying a solution of EVAL and 40-O-(2-hydroxy)ethyl-rapamycin in a mixture of dimethylacetamide and ethanol onto the stent. The stent is then baked at 50° C. for 2 hours to yield a reservoir coating with 270 μg of EVAL and 150 μg of 40-O-(2-hydroxy)ethyl-rapamycin. A barrier layer can formed by spraying the stent with a solution of EVAL and a mixture of dimethylacetamide and pentane. A second 2 hour bake at 50° C. is performed to remove the solvent to yield a barrier coating with 150 μg of EVAL. A finishing layer can then applied by spraying the stent with a solution of EVAL, PEO and dimethylacetamide. The stent is baked at 50° C. for 2 hours to remove the solvent to yield a finishing coating with 83 μg of EVAL and 17 μg of PEO.
An 8 mm PIXEL stent can be coated by spraying a solution of EVAL and 40-O-(2-hydroxy)ethyl-rapamycin in a mixture of dimethylacetamide and ethanol onto the stent. The stent is then baked at 50° C. for 2 hours to yield a reservoir coating with 200 μg of EVAL and 200 μg of 40-O-(2-hydroxy)ethyl-rapamycin. A barrier layer can be formed by spraying the stent with a solution of EVAL and a mixture of dimethylacetamide and pentane. A second 2 hour bake at 50° C. is performed to remove the solvent to yield a barrier coating with 100 μg of EVAL.
An 8 mm PIXEL stent can be coated by spraying a solution of EVAL and 40-O-(2-hydroxy)ethyl-rapamycin in a mixture of dimethylacetamide and ethanol onto the stent. The stent is then baked at 50° C. for 2 hours to yield a reservoir coating with 200 μg of EVAL and 200 μg of 40-O-(2-hydroxy)ethyl-rapamycin. A barrier layer can be formed by spraying the stent with a solution of EVAL, KYNAR and HFE FLUX REMOVER. A second 2 hour bake at 50° C. is performed to remove the solvent to yield a barrier coating with 50 μg of EVAL and 50 μg of KYNAR.
An 8 mm PIXEL stent can be coated by spraying a solution of EVAL and 40-O-(2-hydroxy)ethyl-rapamycin in a mixture of dimethylacetamide and ethanol onto the stent. The stent is then baked at 50° C. for 2 hours to yield a reservoir coating with 350 μg of EVAL and 200 μg of 40-O-(2-hydroxy)ethyl-rapamycin. A barrier layer is formed by spraying the stent with a solution of EVAL and a mixture of dimethylacetamide and pentane. A second 2 hour bake at 50° C. is performed to remove the solvent to yield a barrier coating with 200 μg of EVAL.
An 8 mm PIXEL stent can be coated by spraying a solution of EVAL and 40-O-(2-hydroxy)ethyl-rapamycin in a mixture of dimethylacetamide and ethanol onto the stent. The stent is then baked at 50° C. for 2 hours to yield a reservoir coating with 350 μg of EVAL and 200 μg of 40-O-(2-hydroxy)ethyl-rapamycin. A barrier layer can be formed by spraying the stent with a solution of PBMA and HFE FLUX REMOVER. A second 2 hour bake at 50° C. is performed to remove the solvent to yield a barrier coating with 100 μg of PBMA.
An 8 mm PIXEL stent can be coated by spraying a solution of EVAL and 40-O-(2-hydroxy)ethyl-rapamycin in a mixture of dimethylacetamide and ethanol onto the stent. The stent is then baked at 50° C. for 2 hours to yield a reservoir coating with 350 μg of EVAL and 200 μg of 40-O-(2-hydroxy)ethyl-rapamycin. A barrier layer can be formed by spraying the stent with a solution of EVAL and a mixture of dimethylacetamide and pentane. A second 2 hour bake at 50° C. is performed to remove the solvent to yield a barrier coating with 200 μg of EVAL.
An 8 mm PIXEL stent is coated by spraying a solution of EVAL and 40-O-(2-hydroxy)ethyl-rapamycin in a mixture of dimethylacetamide and ethanol onto the stent. The stent is then baked at 50° C. for 2 hours to yield a reservoir coating with 350 μg of EVAL and 200 μg of 40-O-(2-hydroxy)ethyl-rapamycin. A barrier layer can be formed by spraying the stent with a solution of EVAL and a mixture of dimethylacetamide and pentane. A second 2 hour bake at 50° C. is performed to remove the solvent to yield a barrier coating with 100 μg of EVAL. A finishing layer can then be applied by spraying the stent with a solution of EVAL, PEO and dimethylacetamide. The stent is baked at 50° C. for 2 hours to remove the solvent to yield a finishing coating with 83 μg of EVAL and 17 μg of PEO.
An 8 mm PIXEL stent can be coated by spraying a solution of EVAL and 40-O-(2-hydroxy)ethyl-rapamycin in a mixture of dimethylacetamide and ethanol onto the stent. The stent is then baked at 50° C. for 2 hours to yield a reservoir coating with 350 μg of EVAL and 200 μg of 40-O-(2-hydroxy)ethyl-rapamycin. A barrier layer can be formed by spraying the stent with a solution of PBMA and HFE FLUX REMOVER. A second 2 hour bake at 50° C. is performed to remove the solvent to yield a barrier coating with 75 μg of PBMA. A finishing layer can then be applied by spraying the stent with a solution of PBMA, PEO and dimethylacetamide. The stent is baked at 50° C. for 2 hours to remove the solvent to yield a finishing coating with 62.5 μg of PBMA and 12.5 μg of PEO.
While particular embodiments of the present invention have been shown and described, it will be obvious to those skilled in the art that changes and modifications can be made without departing from this invention in its broader aspects.
The present application is a divisional application of U.S. patent Ser. No. 10/108,004, filed on Mar. 27, 2002, the teachings of which are incorporated herein in their entirety.
| Number | Name | Date | Kind |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2072303 | Herrmann et al. | Mar 1937 | A |
| 2386454 | Frosch et al. | Oct 1945 | A |
| 3773737 | Goodman et al. | Nov 1973 | A |
| 3849514 | Gray, Jr. et al. | Nov 1974 | A |
| 3929992 | Sehgal et al. | Dec 1975 | A |
| 4151413 | Arnold | Apr 1979 | A |
| 4226243 | Shalaby et al. | Oct 1980 | A |
| 4316885 | Rakhit | Feb 1982 | A |
| 4325903 | Wissbrun et al. | Apr 1982 | A |
| 4329383 | Joh | May 1982 | A |
| 4343931 | Barrows | Aug 1982 | A |
| 4395538 | Taira et al. | Jul 1983 | A |
| 4459252 | MacGregor | Jul 1984 | A |
| 4529792 | Barrows | Jul 1985 | A |
| 4611051 | Hayes et al. | Sep 1986 | A |
| 4650803 | Stella et al. | Mar 1987 | A |
| 4656242 | Swan et al. | Apr 1987 | A |
| 4733665 | Palmaz | Mar 1988 | A |
| 4800882 | Gianturco | Jan 1989 | A |
| 4865846 | Kaufman | Sep 1989 | A |
| 4882168 | Casey et al. | Nov 1989 | A |
| 4886062 | Wiktor | Dec 1989 | A |
| 4931287 | Bae et al. | Jun 1990 | A |
| 4941870 | Okada et al. | Jul 1990 | A |
| 4977901 | Ofstead | Dec 1990 | A |
| 5019096 | Fox, Jr. et al. | May 1991 | A |
| 5059211 | Stack et al. | Oct 1991 | A |
| 5100883 | Schiehser | Mar 1992 | A |
| 5100992 | Cohn et al. | Mar 1992 | A |
| 5102876 | Caufield | Apr 1992 | A |
| 5112457 | Marchant | May 1992 | A |
| 5114718 | Damani | May 1992 | A |
| 5118677 | Caufield | Jun 1992 | A |
| 5118678 | Kao et al. | Jun 1992 | A |
| 5120725 | Kao et al. | Jun 1992 | A |
| 5120727 | Kao et al. | Jun 1992 | A |
| 5120842 | Failli et al. | Jun 1992 | A |
| 5133742 | Pinchuk | Jul 1992 | A |
| 5138051 | Hughes et al. | Aug 1992 | A |
| 5151413 | Caufield et al. | Sep 1992 | A |
| 5162333 | Failli et al. | Nov 1992 | A |
| 5163952 | Froix | Nov 1992 | A |
| 5165919 | Sasaki et al. | Nov 1992 | A |
| 5169851 | Hughes et al. | Dec 1992 | A |
| 5219980 | Swidler | Jun 1993 | A |
| 5221740 | Hughes | Jun 1993 | A |
| 5258020 | Froix | Nov 1993 | A |
| 5258389 | Goulet et al. | Nov 1993 | A |
| 5272012 | Opolski | Dec 1993 | A |
| 5273760 | Oshlack et al. | Dec 1993 | A |
| 5292516 | Viegas et al. | Mar 1994 | A |
| 5298260 | Viegas et al. | Mar 1994 | A |
| 5300295 | Viegas et al. | Apr 1994 | A |
| 5306286 | Stack et al. | Apr 1994 | A |
| 5306501 | Viegas et al. | Apr 1994 | A |
| 5306786 | Moens et al. | Apr 1994 | A |
| 5328471 | Slepian | Jul 1994 | A |
| 5330768 | Park et al. | Jul 1994 | A |
| 5344833 | Hughes | Sep 1994 | A |
| 5380299 | Fearnot et al. | Jan 1995 | A |
| 5383928 | Scott et al. | Jan 1995 | A |
| 5417981 | Endo et al. | May 1995 | A |
| 5447724 | Helmus et al. | Sep 1995 | A |
| 5455040 | Marchant | Oct 1995 | A |
| 5462990 | Hubbell et al. | Oct 1995 | A |
| 5464650 | Berg et al. | Nov 1995 | A |
| 5468253 | Bezwada et al. | Nov 1995 | A |
| 5480599 | Leven et al. | Jan 1996 | A |
| 5485496 | Lee et al. | Jan 1996 | A |
| 5516881 | Lee et al. | May 1996 | A |
| 5527337 | Stack et al. | Jun 1996 | A |
| 5527907 | Or et al. | Jun 1996 | A |
| 5569463 | Helmus et al. | Oct 1996 | A |
| 5575818 | Pinchuk | Nov 1996 | A |
| 5578073 | Haimovich et al. | Nov 1996 | A |
| 5583139 | Or et al. | Dec 1996 | A |
| 5584877 | Miyake et al. | Dec 1996 | A |
| 5601889 | Chundury et al. | Feb 1997 | A |
| 5605696 | Eury et al. | Feb 1997 | A |
| 5607467 | Froix | Mar 1997 | A |
| 5609629 | Fearnot et al. | Mar 1997 | A |
| 5610241 | Lee et al. | Mar 1997 | A |
| 5616338 | Fox, Jr. et al. | Apr 1997 | A |
| 5624411 | Tuch | Apr 1997 | A |
| 5628730 | Shapland et al. | May 1997 | A |
| 5644020 | Timmermann et al. | Jul 1997 | A |
| 5649977 | Campbell | Jul 1997 | A |
| 5651174 | Schwartz et al. | Jul 1997 | A |
| 5658995 | Kohn et al. | Aug 1997 | A |
| 5665772 | Cottens et al. | Sep 1997 | A |
| 5667767 | Greff et al. | Sep 1997 | A |
| 5670558 | Onishi et al. | Sep 1997 | A |
| 5672605 | Or et al. | Sep 1997 | A |
| 5674242 | Phan et al. | Oct 1997 | A |
| 5679400 | Tuch | Oct 1997 | A |
| 5700286 | Tartaglia et al. | Dec 1997 | A |
| 5702754 | Zhong | Dec 1997 | A |
| 5707867 | Glenn | Jan 1998 | A |
| 5711958 | Cohn et al. | Jan 1998 | A |
| 5713949 | Jayaraman | Feb 1998 | A |
| 5716981 | Hunter et al. | Feb 1998 | A |
| 5721131 | Rudolph et al. | Feb 1998 | A |
| 5723219 | Kolluri et al. | Mar 1998 | A |
| 5735897 | Buirge | Apr 1998 | A |
| 5746998 | Torchilin et al. | May 1998 | A |
| 5759205 | Valentini | Jun 1998 | A |
| 5766710 | Turnlund et al. | Jun 1998 | A |
| 5769883 | Buscemi et al. | Jun 1998 | A |
| 5776184 | Tuch | Jul 1998 | A |
| 5783657 | Pavlin et al. | Jul 1998 | A |
| 5788979 | Alt et al. | Aug 1998 | A |
| 5795318 | Wang et al. | Aug 1998 | A |
| 5798355 | Steiner et al. | Aug 1998 | A |
| 5800392 | Racchini | Sep 1998 | A |
| 5820917 | Tuch | Oct 1998 | A |
| 5824048 | Tuch | Oct 1998 | A |
| 5824049 | Ragheb et al. | Oct 1998 | A |
| 5830178 | Jones et al. | Nov 1998 | A |
| 5837008 | Berg et al. | Nov 1998 | A |
| 5837313 | Ding et al. | Nov 1998 | A |
| 5843172 | Yan | Dec 1998 | A |
| 5843960 | Steiner et al. | Dec 1998 | A |
| 5846981 | Steiner et al. | Dec 1998 | A |
| 5849859 | Acemoglu | Dec 1998 | A |
| 5851508 | Greff et al. | Dec 1998 | A |
| 5858746 | Hubbell et al. | Jan 1999 | A |
| 5865814 | Tuch | Feb 1999 | A |
| 5869127 | Zhong | Feb 1999 | A |
| 5873904 | Ragheb et al. | Feb 1999 | A |
| 5876433 | Lunn | Mar 1999 | A |
| 5877224 | Brocchini et al. | Mar 1999 | A |
| 5879713 | Roth et al. | Mar 1999 | A |
| 5897911 | Loeffler | Apr 1999 | A |
| 5898029 | Lyons et al. | Apr 1999 | A |
| 5902875 | Roby et al. | May 1999 | A |
| 5905168 | Dos Santos et al. | May 1999 | A |
| 5910564 | Gruning et al. | Jun 1999 | A |
| 5912253 | Cottens et al. | Jun 1999 | A |
| 5914387 | Roby et al. | Jun 1999 | A |
| 5919893 | Roby et al. | Jul 1999 | A |
| 5925720 | Kataoka et al. | Jul 1999 | A |
| 5932243 | Fricker et al. | Aug 1999 | A |
| 5932299 | Katoot | Aug 1999 | A |
| 5955509 | Webber et al. | Sep 1999 | A |
| 5958385 | Tondeur et al. | Sep 1999 | A |
| 5962007 | Cooper et al. | Oct 1999 | A |
| 5962138 | Kolluri et al. | Oct 1999 | A |
| 5968091 | Pinchuk | Oct 1999 | A |
| 5971954 | Conway et al. | Oct 1999 | A |
| 5980564 | Stinson | Nov 1999 | A |
| 5980928 | Terry | Nov 1999 | A |
| 5980972 | Ding | Nov 1999 | A |
| 5985890 | Cottens et al. | Nov 1999 | A |
| 5997517 | Whitbourne | Dec 1999 | A |
| 6001117 | Huxel et al. | Dec 1999 | A |
| 6010530 | Goicoechea | Jan 2000 | A |
| 6011125 | Lohmeijer et al. | Jan 2000 | A |
| 6013621 | Nishi et al. | Jan 2000 | A |
| 6015541 | Greff et al. | Jan 2000 | A |
| 6015815 | Mollison | Jan 2000 | A |
| 6033582 | Lee et al. | Mar 2000 | A |
| 6034204 | Mohr et al. | Mar 2000 | A |
| 6042875 | Ding et al. | Mar 2000 | A |
| 6051576 | Ashton et al. | Apr 2000 | A |
| 6051648 | Rhee et al. | Apr 2000 | A |
| 6054553 | Groth et al. | Apr 2000 | A |
| 6056906 | Werneth et al. | May 2000 | A |
| 6056993 | Leidner et al. | May 2000 | A |
| 6060451 | DiMaio et al. | May 2000 | A |
| 6060518 | Kabanov et al. | May 2000 | A |
| 6066156 | Yan | May 2000 | A |
| 6080488 | Hostettler et al. | Jun 2000 | A |
| 6083534 | Wallach et al. | Jul 2000 | A |
| 6096070 | Ragheb et al. | Aug 2000 | A |
| 6099562 | Ding et al. | Aug 2000 | A |
| 6100346 | Jamiolkowski et al. | Aug 2000 | A |
| 6110188 | Narciso, Jr. | Aug 2000 | A |
| 6110483 | Whitbourne et al. | Aug 2000 | A |
| 6113629 | Ken | Sep 2000 | A |
| 6120491 | Kohn et al. | Sep 2000 | A |
| 6120536 | Ding et al. | Sep 2000 | A |
| 6120788 | Barrows | Sep 2000 | A |
| 6120847 | Yang et al. | Sep 2000 | A |
| 6120904 | Hostettler et al. | Sep 2000 | A |
| 6121027 | Clapper et al. | Sep 2000 | A |
| 6129761 | Hubbell | Oct 2000 | A |
| 6136333 | Cohn et al. | Oct 2000 | A |
| 6139573 | Sogard et al. | Oct 2000 | A |
| 6143037 | Goldstein et al. | Nov 2000 | A |
| 6143354 | Koulik et al. | Nov 2000 | A |
| 6153252 | Hossainy et al. | Nov 2000 | A |
| 6159978 | Myers et al. | Dec 2000 | A |
| 6165212 | Dereume et al. | Dec 2000 | A |
| 6172167 | Stapert et al. | Jan 2001 | B1 |
| 6177523 | Reich et al. | Jan 2001 | B1 |
| 6180632 | Myers et al. | Jan 2001 | B1 |
| 6200985 | Cottens et al. | Mar 2001 | B1 |
| 6203551 | Wu | Mar 2001 | B1 |
| 6206915 | Fagan et al. | Mar 2001 | B1 |
| 6211249 | Cohn et al. | Apr 2001 | B1 |
| 6214901 | Chudzik et al. | Apr 2001 | B1 |
| 6221102 | Baker et al. | Apr 2001 | B1 |
| 6228934 | Horowitz et al. | May 2001 | B1 |
| 6231600 | Zhong | May 2001 | B1 |
| 6240616 | Yan | Jun 2001 | B1 |
| 6245753 | Byun et al. | Jun 2001 | B1 |
| 6245760 | He et al. | Jun 2001 | B1 |
| 6248129 | Froix | Jun 2001 | B1 |
| 6251136 | Guruwaiya et al. | Jun 2001 | B1 |
| 6254632 | Wu et al. | Jul 2001 | B1 |
| 6258121 | Yang et al. | Jul 2001 | B1 |
| 6258371 | Koulik et al. | Jul 2001 | B1 |
| 6262034 | Mathiowitz et al. | Jul 2001 | B1 |
| 6270788 | Koulik et al. | Aug 2001 | B1 |
| 6273913 | Wright et al. | Aug 2001 | B1 |
| 6277449 | Kolluri et al. | Aug 2001 | B1 |
| 6281225 | Hearst et al. | Aug 2001 | B1 |
| 6283947 | Mirzaee | Sep 2001 | B1 |
| 6283949 | Roorda | Sep 2001 | B1 |
| 6284305 | Ding et al. | Sep 2001 | B1 |
| 6284788 | Mittendorf et al. | Sep 2001 | B1 |
| 6287628 | Hossainy et al. | Sep 2001 | B1 |
| 6293959 | Miller et al. | Sep 2001 | B1 |
| 6299604 | Ragheb et al. | Oct 2001 | B1 |
| 6306176 | Whitbourne | Oct 2001 | B1 |
| 6309402 | Jendersee et al. | Oct 2001 | B1 |
| 6331313 | Wong et al. | Dec 2001 | B1 |
| 6335029 | Kamath et al. | Jan 2002 | B1 |
| 6344035 | Chudzik et al. | Feb 2002 | B1 |
| 6346110 | Wu | Feb 2002 | B2 |
| 6358556 | Ding et al. | Mar 2002 | B1 |
| 6379381 | Hossainy et al. | Apr 2002 | B1 |
| 6384046 | Schuler et al. | May 2002 | B1 |
| 6387124 | Buscemi et al. | May 2002 | B1 |
| 6387379 | Goldberg et al. | May 2002 | B1 |
| 6395326 | Castro et al. | May 2002 | B1 |
| 6406739 | LeBoeuf et al. | Jun 2002 | B1 |
| 6419692 | Yang et al. | Jul 2002 | B1 |
| 6451373 | Hossainy et al. | Sep 2002 | B1 |
| 6475235 | Jayaraman | Nov 2002 | B1 |
| 6482834 | Spada et al. | Nov 2002 | B2 |
| 6494862 | Ray et al. | Dec 2002 | B1 |
| 6503538 | Chu et al. | Jan 2003 | B1 |
| 6503556 | Harish et al. | Jan 2003 | B2 |
| 6503954 | Bhat et al. | Jan 2003 | B1 |
| 6506437 | Harish et al. | Jan 2003 | B1 |
| 6527801 | Dutta | Mar 2003 | B1 |
| 6527863 | Pacetti et al. | Mar 2003 | B1 |
| 6528526 | Myers et al. | Mar 2003 | B1 |
| 6530950 | Alvarado et al. | Mar 2003 | B1 |
| 6530951 | Bates et al. | Mar 2003 | B1 |
| 6540776 | Sanders Millare et al. | Apr 2003 | B2 |
| 6544223 | Kokish | Apr 2003 | B1 |
| 6544543 | Mandrusov et al. | Apr 2003 | B1 |
| 6544582 | Yoe | Apr 2003 | B1 |
| 6547819 | Strecker | Apr 2003 | B2 |
| 6555157 | Hossainy | Apr 2003 | B1 |
| 6558733 | Hossainy et al. | May 2003 | B1 |
| 6565659 | Pacetti et al. | May 2003 | B1 |
| 6572644 | Moein | Jun 2003 | B1 |
| 6574497 | Pacetti | Jun 2003 | B1 |
| 6585755 | Jackson et al. | Jul 2003 | B2 |
| 6585765 | Hossainy et al. | Jul 2003 | B1 |
| 6585926 | Mirzaee | Jul 2003 | B1 |
| 6605154 | Villareal | Aug 2003 | B1 |
| 6616765 | Castro et al. | Sep 2003 | B1 |
| 6623448 | Slater | Sep 2003 | B2 |
| 6623764 | Sokoll et al. | Sep 2003 | B1 |
| 6625486 | Lundkvist et al. | Sep 2003 | B2 |
| 6645135 | Bhat | Nov 2003 | B1 |
| 6645195 | Bhat et al. | Nov 2003 | B1 |
| 6652581 | Ding | Nov 2003 | B1 |
| 6656216 | Hossainy et al. | Dec 2003 | B1 |
| 6656506 | Wu et al. | Dec 2003 | B1 |
| 6660034 | Mandrusov et al. | Dec 2003 | B1 |
| 6663662 | Pacetti et al. | Dec 2003 | B2 |
| 6663880 | Roorda et al. | Dec 2003 | B1 |
| 6666880 | Chiu et al. | Dec 2003 | B1 |
| 6673154 | Pacetti et al. | Jan 2004 | B1 |
| 6673385 | Ding et al. | Jan 2004 | B1 |
| 6689099 | Mirzaee | Feb 2004 | B2 |
| 6695920 | Pacetti et al. | Feb 2004 | B1 |
| 6706013 | Bhat et al. | Mar 2004 | B1 |
| 6709514 | Hossainy | Mar 2004 | B1 |
| 6712845 | Hossainy | Mar 2004 | B2 |
| 6713119 | Hossainy et al. | Mar 2004 | B2 |
| 6716444 | Castro et al. | Apr 2004 | B1 |
| 6723120 | Yan | Apr 2004 | B2 |
| 6733768 | Hossainy et al. | May 2004 | B2 |
| 6739033 | Hijlkema et al. | May 2004 | B2 |
| 6740040 | Mandrusov et al. | May 2004 | B1 |
| 6743462 | Pacetti | Jun 2004 | B1 |
| 6749626 | Bhat et al. | Jun 2004 | B1 |
| 6753071 | Pacetti et al. | Jun 2004 | B1 |
| 6758859 | Dang et al. | Jul 2004 | B1 |
| 6759054 | Chen et al. | Jul 2004 | B2 |
| 6764505 | Hossainy et al. | Jul 2004 | B1 |
| 6787179 | Timm et al. | Sep 2004 | B2 |
| 6823576 | Austin | Nov 2004 | B2 |
| 6861088 | Weber et al. | Mar 2005 | B2 |
| 6865810 | Stinson | Mar 2005 | B2 |
| 6869443 | Buscemi et al. | Mar 2005 | B2 |
| 6878160 | Gilligan et al. | Apr 2005 | B2 |
| 6887270 | Miller et al. | May 2005 | B2 |
| 6887485 | Fitzhugh et al. | May 2005 | B2 |
| 6890546 | Mollison et al. | May 2005 | B2 |
| 6899731 | Li et al. | May 2005 | B2 |
| 6948223 | Shortt | Sep 2005 | B2 |
| 7077859 | Sirhan et al. | Jul 2006 | B2 |
| 7291165 | Rosenthal et al. | Nov 2007 | B2 |
| 20010007083 | Roorda | Jul 2001 | A1 |
| 20010014717 | Hossainy et al. | Aug 2001 | A1 |
| 20010018469 | Chen et al. | Aug 2001 | A1 |
| 20010020011 | Mathiowitz et al. | Sep 2001 | A1 |
| 20010027340 | Wright et al. | Oct 2001 | A1 |
| 20010029351 | Falotico et al. | Oct 2001 | A1 |
| 20010031769 | Jackman et al. | Oct 2001 | A1 |
| 20010034344 | Mittendorf et al. | Oct 2001 | A1 |
| 20010037145 | Guruwaiya et al. | Nov 2001 | A1 |
| 20010046518 | Sawhney | Nov 2001 | A1 |
| 20010051608 | Mathiowitz et al. | Dec 2001 | A1 |
| 20020005206 | Falotico et al. | Jan 2002 | A1 |
| 20020007213 | Falotico et al. | Jan 2002 | A1 |
| 20020007214 | Falotico | Jan 2002 | A1 |
| 20020007215 | Falotico et al. | Jan 2002 | A1 |
| 20020009604 | Zamora et al. | Jan 2002 | A1 |
| 20020016625 | Falotico et al. | Feb 2002 | A1 |
| 20020032414 | Ragheb et al. | Mar 2002 | A1 |
| 20020032434 | Chudzik et al. | Mar 2002 | A1 |
| 20020051730 | Bodnar et al. | May 2002 | A1 |
| 20020071822 | Uhrich | Jun 2002 | A1 |
| 20020077693 | Barclay et al. | Jun 2002 | A1 |
| 20020082679 | Sirhan et al. | Jun 2002 | A1 |
| 20020082685 | Sirhan et al. | Jun 2002 | A1 |
| 20020087123 | Hossainy et al. | Jul 2002 | A1 |
| 20020091433 | Ding et al. | Jul 2002 | A1 |
| 20020094440 | Llanos et al. | Jul 2002 | A1 |
| 20020111590 | Davila et al. | Aug 2002 | A1 |
| 20020120326 | Michal | Aug 2002 | A1 |
| 20020123801 | Pacetti et al. | Sep 2002 | A1 |
| 20020127263 | Carlyle et al. | Sep 2002 | A1 |
| 20020142039 | Claude | Oct 2002 | A1 |
| 20020155212 | Hossainy | Oct 2002 | A1 |
| 20020165608 | Llanos et al. | Nov 2002 | A1 |
| 20020176849 | Slepian | Nov 2002 | A1 |
| 20020183581 | Yoe et al. | Dec 2002 | A1 |
| 20020188037 | Chudzik et al. | Dec 2002 | A1 |
| 20020188277 | Roorda et al. | Dec 2002 | A1 |
| 20030004141 | Brown | Jan 2003 | A1 |
| 20030028243 | Bates et al. | Feb 2003 | A1 |
| 20030028244 | Bates et al. | Feb 2003 | A1 |
| 20030031780 | Chudzik et al. | Feb 2003 | A1 |
| 20030032767 | Tada et al. | Feb 2003 | A1 |
| 20030036794 | Ragheb et al. | Feb 2003 | A1 |
| 20030039689 | Chen et al. | Feb 2003 | A1 |
| 20030039696 | Porter | Feb 2003 | A1 |
| 20030040712 | Ray et al. | Feb 2003 | A1 |
| 20030040790 | Furst | Feb 2003 | A1 |
| 20030059520 | Chen et al. | Mar 2003 | A1 |
| 20030060877 | Falotico et al. | Mar 2003 | A1 |
| 20030065377 | Davila et al. | Apr 2003 | A1 |
| 20030072868 | Harish et al. | Apr 2003 | A1 |
| 20030073961 | Happ | Apr 2003 | A1 |
| 20030083646 | Sirhan et al. | May 2003 | A1 |
| 20030083739 | Cafferata | May 2003 | A1 |
| 20030097088 | Pacetti | May 2003 | A1 |
| 20030097173 | Dutta | May 2003 | A1 |
| 20030099712 | Jayaraman | May 2003 | A1 |
| 20030105518 | Dutta | Jun 2003 | A1 |
| 20030113439 | Pacetti et al. | Jun 2003 | A1 |
| 20030144727 | Rosenthal et al. | Jul 2003 | A1 |
| 20030150380 | Yoe | Aug 2003 | A1 |
| 20030157241 | Hossainy et al. | Aug 2003 | A1 |
| 20030158517 | Kokish | Aug 2003 | A1 |
| 20030190406 | Hossainy et al. | Oct 2003 | A1 |
| 20030207020 | Villareal | Nov 2003 | A1 |
| 20030211230 | Pacetti et al. | Nov 2003 | A1 |
| 20040018296 | Castro et al. | Jan 2004 | A1 |
| 20040029952 | Chen et al. | Feb 2004 | A1 |
| 20040047978 | Hossainy et al. | Mar 2004 | A1 |
| 20040047980 | Pacetti et al. | Mar 2004 | A1 |
| 20040052858 | Wu et al. | Mar 2004 | A1 |
| 20040052859 | Wu et al. | Mar 2004 | A1 |
| 20040054104 | Pacetti | Mar 2004 | A1 |
| 20040060508 | Pacetti et al. | Apr 2004 | A1 |
| 20040062853 | Pacetti et al. | Apr 2004 | A1 |
| 20040063805 | Pacetti et al. | Apr 2004 | A1 |
| 20040071861 | Mandrusov et al. | Apr 2004 | A1 |
| 20040072922 | Hossainy et al. | Apr 2004 | A1 |
| 20040073298 | Hossainy | Apr 2004 | A1 |
| 20040086542 | Hossainy et al. | May 2004 | A1 |
| 20040086550 | Roorda et al. | May 2004 | A1 |
| 20040096504 | Michal | May 2004 | A1 |
| 20040098117 | Hossainy et al. | May 2004 | A1 |
| 20040220665 | Hossainy et al. | Nov 2004 | A1 |
| 20050037052 | Udipi et al. | Feb 2005 | A1 |
| 20050038134 | Loomis et al. | Feb 2005 | A1 |
| 20050038497 | Neuendorf et al. | Feb 2005 | A1 |
| 20050043786 | Chu et al. | Feb 2005 | A1 |
| 20050049693 | Walker | Mar 2005 | A1 |
| 20050049694 | Neary | Mar 2005 | A1 |
| 20050054774 | Kangas | Mar 2005 | A1 |
| 20050055044 | Kangas | Mar 2005 | A1 |
| 20050055078 | Campbell | Mar 2005 | A1 |
| 20050060020 | Jenson | Mar 2005 | A1 |
| 20050064088 | Fredrickson | Mar 2005 | A1 |
| 20050065501 | Wallace | Mar 2005 | A1 |
| 20050065545 | Wallace | Mar 2005 | A1 |
| 20050065593 | Chu et al. | Mar 2005 | A1 |
| 20050074406 | Couvillon, Jr. et al. | Apr 2005 | A1 |
| 20050074545 | Thomas | Apr 2005 | A1 |
| 20050075714 | Cheng et al. | Apr 2005 | A1 |
| 20050079274 | Palasis et al. | Apr 2005 | A1 |
| 20050084515 | Udipi et al. | Apr 2005 | A1 |
| 20050106210 | Ding et al. | May 2005 | A1 |
| 20050113903 | Rosenthal et al. | May 2005 | A1 |
| 20050118344 | Pacetti | Jun 2005 | A1 |
| 20050119720 | Gale et al. | Jun 2005 | A1 |
| 20050233062 | Hossainy et al. | Oct 2005 | A1 |
| 20060198870 | Mollison et al. | Sep 2006 | A1 |
| Number | Date | Country |
|---|---|---|
| 42 24 401 | Jan 1994 | DE |
| 0 310 856 | Apr 1989 | EP |
| 0 323 042 | Jul 1989 | EP |
| 0 376 656 | Jul 1990 | EP |
| 0 396 429 | Nov 1990 | EP |
| 0 401 747 | Dec 1990 | EP |
| 0 414 632 | Feb 1991 | EP |
| 0 475 230 | Mar 1992 | EP |
| 0 514 406 | Nov 1992 | EP |
| 0 604 022 | Jun 1994 | EP |
| 0 623 354 | Nov 1994 | EP |
| 0 665 023 | Aug 1995 | EP |
| 0 701 802 | Mar 1996 | EP |
| 0 716 836 | Jun 1996 | EP |
| 0 809 999 | Dec 1997 | EP |
| 0 832 655 | Apr 1998 | EP |
| 0 875 218 | Apr 1998 | EP |
| 0 850 651 | Jul 1998 | EP |
| 0 879 595 | Nov 1998 | EP |
| 0 910 584 | Apr 1999 | EP |
| 0 923 953 | Jun 1999 | EP |
| 0 953 320 | Nov 1999 | EP |
| 0 970 711 | Jan 2000 | EP |
| 0 978 288 | Feb 2000 | EP |
| 0 982 041 | Mar 2000 | EP |
| 1 023 879 | Aug 2000 | EP |
| 1 036 562 | Sep 2000 | EP |
| 1 064 942 | Jan 2001 | EP |
| 1 192 957 | Apr 2002 | EP |
| 1 273 314 | Jan 2003 | EP |
| 11-299901 | Nov 1999 | JP |
| 2000-051367 | Feb 2000 | JP |
| 2001-190687 | Jul 2001 | JP |
| 2004-523275 | Aug 2004 | JP |
| 2005-512959 | May 2005 | JP |
| 872531 | Oct 1981 | SU |
| 876663 | Oct 1981 | SU |
| 905228 | Feb 1982 | SU |
| 790725 | Feb 1983 | SU |
| 1016314 | May 1983 | SU |
| 811750 | Sep 1983 | SU |
| 1293518 | Feb 1987 | SU |
| WO 9001969 | Mar 1990 | WO |
| WO 9111176 | Aug 1991 | WO |
| WO 9112846 | Sep 1991 | WO |
| WO 9409760 | May 1994 | WO |
| WO 9510989 | Apr 1995 | WO |
| WO 9524929 | Sep 1995 | WO |
| WO 9531104 | Nov 1995 | WO |
| WO 9613273 | May 1996 | WO |
| WO 9640140 | Dec 1996 | WO |
| WO 9640174 | Dec 1996 | WO |
| WO 9703654 | Feb 1997 | WO |
| WO 9710011 | Mar 1997 | WO |
| WO 9731020 | Aug 1997 | WO |
| WO 9735575 | Oct 1997 | WO |
| WO 9745105 | Dec 1997 | WO |
| WO 9746590 | Dec 1997 | WO |
| WO 9802441 | Jan 1998 | WO |
| WO 9804256 | Feb 1998 | WO |
| WO 9808463 | Mar 1998 | WO |
| WO 9809523 | Mar 1998 | WO |
| WO 9810747 | Mar 1998 | WO |
| WO 9817331 | Apr 1998 | WO |
| WO 9823228 | Jun 1998 | WO |
| WO 9832398 | Jul 1998 | WO |
| WO 9836784 | Aug 1998 | WO |
| WO 9844921 | Oct 1998 | WO |
| WO 9844922 | Oct 1998 | WO |
| WO 9901118 | Jan 1999 | WO |
| WO 9916386 | Apr 1999 | WO |
| WO 9919471 | Apr 1999 | WO |
| WO 9919473 | Apr 1999 | WO |
| WO 9924036 | May 1999 | WO |
| WO 9938546 | Aug 1999 | WO |
| WO 9939720 | Aug 1999 | WO |
| WO 9942104 | Aug 1999 | WO |
| WO 9944584 | Sep 1999 | WO |
| WO 9944597 | Sep 1999 | WO |
| WO 9960997 | Dec 1999 | WO |
| WO 9961040 | Dec 1999 | WO |
| WO 9963981 | Dec 1999 | WO |
| WO 0002599 | Jan 2000 | WO |
| WO 0009085 | Feb 2000 | WO |
| WO 0012147 | Mar 2000 | WO |
| WO 0015208 | Mar 2000 | WO |
| WO 0018446 | Apr 2000 | WO |
| WO 0024390 | May 2000 | WO |
| WO 0032234 | Jun 2000 | WO |
| WO 0032238 | Jun 2000 | WO |
| WO 0033878 | Jun 2000 | WO |
| WO 0038590 | Jul 2000 | WO |
| WO 0038703 | Jul 2000 | WO |
| WO 0038754 | Jul 2000 | WO |
| WO 0042949 | Jul 2000 | WO |
| WO 0056247 | Sep 2000 | WO |
| WO 0057818 | Oct 2000 | WO |
| WO 0064506 | Nov 2000 | WO |
| WO 0066122 | Nov 2000 | WO |
| WO 0071052 | Nov 2000 | WO |
| WO 0074665 | Dec 2000 | WO |
| WO 0101890 | Jan 2001 | WO |
| WO 0101957 | Jan 2001 | WO |
| WO 0114387 | Mar 2001 | WO |
| WO 0115751 | Mar 2001 | WO |
| WO 0117577 | Mar 2001 | WO |
| WO 0123395 | Apr 2001 | WO |
| WO 0145763 | Jun 2001 | WO |
| WO 0149338 | Jul 2001 | WO |
| WO 0151027 | Jul 2001 | WO |
| WO 0174414 | Oct 2001 | WO |
| WO 0187373 | Nov 2001 | WO |
| WO 0203890 | Jan 2002 | WO |
| WO 0226162 | Apr 2002 | WO |
| WO 0234311 | May 2002 | WO |
| WO 02056790 | Jul 2002 | WO |
| WO 02058753 | Aug 2002 | WO |
| WO 02102283 | Dec 2002 | WO |
| WO 03000308 | Jan 2003 | WO |
| WO 03022323 | Mar 2003 | WO |
| WO03022324 | Mar 2003 | WO |
| WO 03028780 | Apr 2003 | WO |
| WO 03035131 | May 2003 | WO |
| WO 03037223 | May 2003 | WO |
| WO 03039612 | May 2003 | WO |
| WO 03080147 | Oct 2003 | WO |
| WO 03082368 | Oct 2003 | WO |
| WO 04000383 | Dec 2003 | WO |
| WO 2004009145 | Jan 2004 | WO |
| WO 2005004945 | Jan 2005 | WO |
| Entry |
|---|
| Notification of Reasons for Refusal issued by JPO on Nov. 17, 2009, in connection with Appl. No. 2003-579899, 4 pgs. |
| Translation of a Notification of Reasons for Refusal issued by JPO on Nov. 17, 2009, in connection with Appl. No. 2003-579899, 3 pgs. |
| Neuhaus et al., “mTOR Inhibitors: An Overview”, Liver Transpl. vol. 7. No. 6, pp. 473-484. |
| Anonymous, Rolling Therapeutic Agent Loading Device for Therapeutic Agent Delivery or Coated Stent (Abstract 434009), Res. Disclos. p. 975 Jun. 2000. |
| Barath et al., Low Dose of Antitumor Agents Prevents Smooth Muscle Cell Proliferation After Endothelial Injury; JACC 13(2):252A (Abstract) (Feb. 1989). |
| Dichek et al., Seeding of Intravascular Stents with Genetically Engineered Endothelial Cells, Circ. 80(5):1347-1353 (1989). |
| Everolimus, http://www.micromedex.com/products/drugdex/updates/evero.htm, printed Mar. 6, 2002 (12 pags). |
| Guidant Licenses Everolimus From Novartis for Drug Eluting Stents (Press Release, Mar. 27, 2002), http://biz.yahoo.com/bw/020327/272460—1.html, printed Mar. 29, 2002 (3 pages). |
| Herdeg et al., Antiproliferative Stent Coatings: Taxol and Related Compounds, Semin. Intervent. Cardiol. 3:197-199 (1998). |
| International Nonproprietary Names for Pharmaceutical Substances (INN), WHO Drug Information 14(3):183, 184, 194 (2000) (3 pages). |
| KYNAR® and KYANR®FLEX PVCF, The Base Resins for Demanding Industrial Applications, http://www.atofinachemicals.com/kynarglobal/index.cfm, printed Mar. 7, 2002 (1 page). |
| Matsumaru et al., Embolic Materials for Endovascular Treatment of Cerebral Lesions; J. Biomater. Sci. Polymer Edn, 8(7):555-569 (1997). |
| Miyazaki et al., “Antitumor Effect of Implanted Ethylene-Vinyl Alcohol Copolymer Matrices Containing Anticancer Agents on Ehrlich Ascites Carcinoma and P388 Leukemia in Mice,” Chem. Pharm. Bull., 33(6):2490-2498 (1985). |
| Miyazawa, et al.; Effects of Pemirolast and Tranilast on Intimal Thickening After Arterial Injury in the Rat; J. Cardiovasc. Pharmacol., pp. 157-162 (1997). |
| Ohsawa, et al.; Preventive Effects of an Antiallergic Drug, Pemirolast Potassium, on Restenosis After Percutaneous Transluminal Coronary Angioplasty; American Heart Journal; pp. 1081-1087 (Dec. 1998). |
| Shigeno, Prevention of Cerebrovascular Spasm by Bosentan, Novel Endothelin Receptor; Chemical Abstract 125:212307 (1996). |
| TechSpray Product Information, HFE Flux Remover, http://www.techspray.com/1686info.htm, printed Mar. 14, 2002 (2 pages). |
| Transplant 2001: Certican (Everolimus) Effective in Preventing Acute Rejection in Renal Transplantation, http://www.docguide.com/dg.nsf/PrintPrint/A9A24F321A71712485256A4E00689824, printed Mar. 6, 2002 (2 pages). |
| Anonymous, A Simple Approach for Glass Transition Temperature Prediction, http://www.geocities.com/ResearchTriangle/Thinktank/4146/6400glass-temperature.html, printed May 5, 2005 (2 pages). |
| Anonymous, Appendix I—Glass Transition Temperature (Tg) www.Dymax.com/pdf/SPIE-Paper-Apendix.pdf, printed May 9, 2005 (2 pages). |
| Anonymous, Cardiologists Draw—Up The Dream Stent, Clinica 710:15 (Jun. 17, 1996), http://www.dialogweb.com/cgi/document?req=1061848202959, printed Aug. 25, 2003 (2 pages). |
| Anonymous, Differential Scanning Calorimetry, http://www.pslc.ws/macrog/dsc.htm, printed May 9, 2005 (8 pages). |
| Anonymous, Glass Transition Temperature, http://islnotes.cps.msu.edu/trp/back/mol—glas.html, printed May 5, 2005 (1 page). |
| Anonymous, Glass transition temperature, http://palimpsest.stanford.edu/don/dt/dt1549.html, printed May 5, 2005 (1 page). |
| Anonymous, Heparin-coated stents cut complications by 30%, Clinica 732:17 (Nov. 18, 1996), http://www.dialogweb.com/cgi/document?req=1061847871753, printed Aug. 25, 2003 2 pages). |
| Anonymous, How Big are Polymers? www.chemeng.ucla.edu/che112/Notes, printed May 9, 2005 (13 pages). |
| Anonymous, Measuring and Understanding Tg (Glass Transition Temperature), Arlon, Application Notes (4 pages). |
| Anonymous, Stenting continues to dominate cardiology, Clinica 720:22 (Sep. 2, 1996), http://www.dialogweb.com/cgi/document?req=1061848017752. printed Aug. 25, 2003 (2 pages). |
| Anonymous, The Glass Transition, http://www.pslc.ws/macrog/tg.htm, printed May 18, 2005 (11 pages). |
| Anonymous, Thermoplastics—An Introduction, http://www.azom.com/details.asp?ArticleID+83&head=Thermoplastics%2B-%2BAn%2BIntroduction, printed May 18, 2005 (5 pages). |
| Aoyagi et al., Preparation of cross-linked aliphatic polyester and application to thermo-responsive material, Journal of Controlled Release 32:87-96 (1994). |
| Arvanitoyannis et al., Novel star-shaped polylactide with glycerol using stannous octoate or tetraphenyl tin as catalyst: 1 Synthesis, characterization and study of their biodegradability, Polymer vol. 36, No. 15, pp. 2947-2956 (1995). |
| Baird et al, Dielectric behaviour and morphology of polyvinylidene fluoride, Journal of Material Science 10:1248-1251 (1975). |
| Barbucci et al., Coating of commercially available materials with a new heparinizable material, J. Biomed. Mater. Res. 25:1259-1274 (Oct. 1991). |
| Birmingham Polymers, Inc., Biodegradation Information, http://www.birminghampolymers.com/htdocs/biodegradation.htm, printed Apr. 26, 2004 (2 pages). |
| Birmingham Polymers, Inc., Chemical Properties of Selected Polymers, http://www.birminghampolymers.com/htdocs/Chemical—Properties.htm, printed May 19, 2005 (2 pages). |
| Birmingham Polymers, Inc., DLPLA IV vs. Mw, http://www.birminghampolymers.com/htdocs/dlpla.htm, printed Apr. 26, 2004 (1 page). |
| Birmingham Polymers, Inc., Physical Properties of Selected Polymers, http://www.birminghampolymers.com/htdocs/physical—properties.htm, printed Apr. 26, 2004 (2 pages). |
| Birmingham Polymers, Inc., Standard Products, http://www.birminghampolymers.com/htdocs/Standard—Products.htm, printed Apr. 26, 2004 (2 pages). |
| Black et al., Glass Transitions of Some Block Copolymers, Journal of Applied Polymer Science 18:2307-2310 (1974). |
| Bliznyuk et al., Surface Glass Transition Temperature of Amorphous Polystyrene Measured by SFM, pp. 1-5. |
| Bloembergen et al., Studies of Composition and Crystallinity of Bacterial Poly(β-hydroxybutyrate-co-β-hydroxyvalerate), Macromolecules 19, pp. 2865-2871 (1986). |
| Buchholz et al., Cooling rate dependence of the glass transition temperature of polymer melts: Molecular dynamics study, Journal of Chemical Physics 117(15):7364-7372 (Oct. 15, 2002). |
| Chung et al., Inner core segment design for drug delivery control of thermo-responsive polymeric micelles, Journal of Controlled Release 65:93-103 (2000). |
| Notification of Refusal issued by JPO on Aug. 3, 2010, in connection with Appl. No. 2003-579899, 1 pg. |
| Complete Translation of the Notification of Reasons for Refusal issued by JPO on Nov. 17, 2009, in connection with Appl. No. 2003-579899, 8 pgs. |
| Examination Report by EPO on Oct. 5, 2007, in connection with Appl. No. EP 03 745 538.3, 6 pgs. |
| Dev et al., Kinetics of Drug Delivery to the Arterial Wall Via Polyurethane-Coated Removable Nitinol Stent: Comparative Study of Two Drugs, Catheterization and Cardiovascular Diagnosis 34:272-278 (1995). |
| Ding et al., Novel Synthesis of Poly(p-phenylene sulfide) from Cyclic Disulfide Oligomers, Macromolecules 29:4811-4812 (1996). |
| Eigler et al., Local Arterial Wall Drug Delivery from a Polymer Coated Removable Metallic Stent: Kinetics, Distribution, and Bioactivity of Forskolin, JACC, 4A (701-1), Abstract (Feb. 1994). |
| Eling et al., Biodegradable materials of poly(L-lactic acid): 1. melt-spun and solution-spun fibres, Polymer, vol. 23, pp. 1587-1593 (1982). |
| EPO Examination Report for application 04 812 597.5-2307, mailed Feb. 26, 2007, 2 pgs. |
| EPO Examination Report for application 04 812 597.5-2307, mailed Sep. 6, 2007, 3 pgs. |
| EPO Examination Report for application 04 812 597.5-2307, mailed Jul. 4, 2008, 3 pgs. |
| European Search Report for 05780079.9-2107, mailed Jan. 17, 2008, 6 pages. |
| Fernandez-Martin et al., Glass Transition Temperature and Heat Capacity of Heterotacticlike PMMA, Journal of Polymer Science: Polymer Physics Edition 19:1353-1363 (1981). |
| Forrest et al., Effect of Free Surfaces on the Glass Transition Temperature of Thin Polymer Films, Physical Review Letters 77(10):2002-2005 (Sep. 2, 1996). |
| Fryer et al., Dependence of the Glass Transition Temperature of Polymer Films on Interfacial Energy and Thickness, Macromolecules 34(16):5627-5634 (2001). |
| Fujii et al., Investigation of the Stereoregularity of Poly(vinyl Alcohol), Journal of Polymer Science: Part A 2:2327-2347 (1964). |
| Gabriele Perego, Tiziano Vercellio, Copolymers of L and D, L Lactide with 6-caprolactone: synthesis and characterization, Malromol. Chem. 194, 2463-2469 (1993). |
| Gee et al., The effect of ionizing radiation on the thermal properties of linear high polymers: Part 2. Nylon-6, pp. 192-197 (1970). |
| Grohens et al., Tacticity and surface chemistry effects on the glass transition temperature of thin supported PMMA films, Mat. Res. Soc. Symp. 629:FF1.7.1-FF1.7.7 (2000). |
| Guidant Licenses Everolimus From Novartis for Drug Eluting Stents (Press Release, Mar. 27, 2002 , http://biz.yahoo.com/bw/020327/272460—1.html, printed Mar. 27, 2002 (2 pages). |
| Helmus, Overview of Biomedical Materials, MRS Bulletin, pp. 33-38 (1991). |
| Inoue et al., An AB block copolymer of oligo(methyl methacrylate) and poly(acrylic acid) for micellar delivery of hydrophobic drugs, Journal of Controlled Release 51:221-229 (1998). |
| International Search Report and Written Opinion for PCT/US2004/017060, filed May 28, 2004, mailed Dec. 30, 2004, 10 pgs. |
| International Search Report and Written Opinion for PCT/US2004/040121, filed Nov. 30, 2004, mailed Apr. 12, 2005, 12 pgs. |
| International Search Report for PCT/US2005/018579 filed May 26, 2005, mailed May 24, 2006, 16 pages. |
| Jacobsen et al., Filling of Poly(Lactic Acid) With Native Starch, Polymer Engineering and Science, vol. 36, No. 22, pp. 2799-2804 (1996). |
| Kataoka et al., Block copolymer micelles as vehicles for drug delivery, Journal of Controlled Release 24:119-132 (1993). |
| Katsarava et al., Amino Acid-Based Bioanalogous Polymers. Synthesis and Study of Regular Poly(ester amide)s Based on Bis(α-amino acid)α,ω-Alkylene Diesters, and Aliphatic Dicarbolic Acids, Journal of Polymer Science, Part A: Polymer Chemistry, 37(4), 391-407 (1999). |
| KYNAR® and KYNAR®FLEX PVDF, The Base Resins for Demanding Industrial Applications, http://www.products.arkemagroup.com/print.cfm, printed May 18, 2005 (3 pages). |
| Lam et al., Biodegradation of porous versus non-porous poly(L-lactic acid) films, J. of Materials Science: Materials Medicine 5, pp. 181-189 (1994). |
| Levy et al., Strategies for Treating Arterial Restenosis Using Polymeric Controlled Release Implants, Biotechnol. Bioact. Polym. [Proc. Am. Chem. Soc. Symp.], pp. 259-268 (1994). |
| Liu et al., Drug release characteristics of unimolecular polymeric micelles, Journal of Controlled Release 68:167-174 (2000). |
| Löfgren et al., Synthesis and Characterization of Biodegradable Homopolymers and Block Copolymers Based on 1,5-Dioxepan-2-one, Macromolecules 27:5556-5562 (1994). |
| Lotz, Phase Transitions and Structure of Crystalline Polymers, pp. 1-27. |
| Marconi et al., Covalent bonding of heparin to a vinyl copolymer for biomedical applications, Biomaterials 18(12):885-890 (1997). |
| Micoulaut et al., Glass Transition temperature variation, cross-linking and structure in network glasses: A stochastic approach, Europhysics Letters 47(5):568-574 (1999). |
| Migliaresi et al., Dynamic Mechanical and Calorimetric Analysis of Compression-Molded PLLA of Different Molecular Weights: Effect of Thermal Treatments, J. of Applied Polymer Science, vol. 43, pp. 83-95 (1991). |
| Miyazaki et al., Antitumor Effect of Implanted Ethylene-Vinyl Alcohol Copolymer Matrices Containing Anticancer Agents on Ehrlich Ascites Carcinoma and P388 Leukemia in Mice, Chem. Pharm. Bull. 33(6) 2490-2498 (1985). |
| Miyazawa et al., Effects of Pemirolast and Tranilast on Intimal Thickening After Arterial Injury in the Rat, J. Cardiovasc. Pharmacol., pp. 157-162 (1997). |
| Nijenhuis et al., Highly crystalline as-polymerized poly(L-lactide), Polymer bulletin 26, pp. 71-77 (1991). |
| Nordrehaug et al.. A novel biocompatible coating applied to coronary stents, European Heart Journal 14, p. 321 (P1694), Abstr. Suppl. (1993). |
| Ozaki et al., New Stent Technologies, Progress in Cardiovascular Diseases, vol. XXXIX(2):129-140 (Sep./Oct. 1996). |
| Parravicini et al., Crystallization of Poly(Ethylene Terephthalate) (PET) from the Oriented Mesomorphic Form, pp. 875-885 (1994). |
| Pechar et al., Poly(ethylene glycol) Multiblock Copolymer as a Carrier of Anti-Cancer Drug Doxorubicin, Bioconjucate Chemistry 11(2):131-139 (Mar./Apr. 2000). |
| Peng et al., Role of polymers in improving the results of stenting in coronary arteries, Biomaterials 17:685-694 (1996). |
| Reeve et al., Polylactide Stereochemistry:Effect on Enzymatic Degradability, Macromolecules 27, pp. 825-831 (1994). |
| Rogers et al., Glass Formation in Polymers. I. The Glass Transitions of the Poly-(n-Alkyl Methacrylates), 61:985-990 (Jul. 1957). |
| Saotome, et al., Novel Enzymatically Degradable Polymers Comprising α-Amino Acid, 1,2-Ethanediol, and Adipic Acid, Chemistry Letters, pp. 21-24, (1991). |
| Sarasua et al., Crystallization and Melting Behavior of Polylactides, Macromolecules 31, pp. 3895-3905 (1998). |
| Scott et al., Ehtylene-Vinyl Acetate Semi-Batch Emulsion Copolymerization: Use of Factorial Experiments for Process Optimization, pp. 539-555 (1993). |
| Sichina, Characterization of Polymers by TMA, Perkin Elmer Polymers technical note (9 pages). |
| Sun et al., Novel Copolyesters Containing Naphthalene Structure. I. From Bis(hydroxyalkyl)Naphthalate and Bis[4-(2-hydroxyethoxy)aryl] Compounds, Journal of Polymer Science: Part A: Polymer Chemistry 34:1783-1792 (1996). |
| Taylor et al., An Applied Approach to Film Formation; The glass transition temperature evolution of plasticized latex films, downloaded May 5, 2005 (13 pages). |
| Translation of Notification of Refusal issued by JPO on Aug. 3, 2010, in connection with Appl. No. 2003-579899, 1 pg. |
| Tsige et al., Simulation study of the glass transition temperature in poly(methyl methacrylate), Physical Review E vol. 65: (2002) (8 pages). |
| van Beusekom et al., Coronary stent coatings, Coronary Artery Disease 5(7): 590-596 (Jul. 1994). |
| Van de Velde et al. Biopolymers; overview of several properties and consequences on their applications. Polymer Testing vol. 21 (2002) pp. 433-442. |
| Wilensky et al., Methods and Devices for Local Drug Delivery in Coronary and Peripheral Arteries, Trends Cardiovasc. Med. 3(5):163-170 (1993). |
| Yokoyama et al., Characterization of physical entrapment and chemical conjugation of adriamycin in polymeric micelles and their design for in vivo delivery to a solid tumor, Journal of Controlled Release 50:79-92 (1998). |
| International Search Report and Written Opinion for PCT/US2004/017060, filed May 28, 2004, mailed Dec. 30, 2004. 10 pgs. |
| Number | Date | Country | |
|---|---|---|---|
| 20070020382 A1 | Jan 2007 | US |
| Number | Date | Country | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Parent | 10108004 | Mar 2002 | US |
| Child | 11527971 | US |
