The invention is directed to sublingual spray formulations containing buprenorphine, a pharmaceutically acceptable salt thereof, or a derivative thereof. The invention is further directed to sublingual spray formulations containing buprenorphine and naloxone, pharmaceutically acceptable salts thereof or derivatives thereof. The invention is further directed to a method of treating pain or opioid dependence by administering sublingual spray formulations containing buprenorphine or buprenorphine and naloxone, pharmaceutically acceptable salts thereof, or derivatives thereof to a patient in need thereof.
Buprenorphine is a semi-synthetic opioid and a partial μ-opioid receptor agonist and has the following structure:
Activation of the μ-opioid receptor leads to antinociception and is the pathway by which opioids such as morphine and fentanyl reduce acute and chronic pain. Buprenorphine has advantages over other opioids such as morphine and fentanyl in that it is only a partial instead of a full agonist of the opioid receptor-like receptor 1 (“ORL1”). Activation of ORL1 has been reported to weaken the analgesic effect induced by the activation of the μ-opioid receptor. Additionally, buprenorphine is an antagonist of δ- and κ-opioid receptors, whose activation has anti-analgesic and psychotomimetic effects, respectively. Buprenorphine is also useful in the management of opioid dependence. The slow binding of buprenorphine to the μ-opioid receptor along with its strong affinity allows for pain management at relatively low blood concentrations and the slow disassociation of buprenorphine from the μ-opioid receptor results in a lack of withdrawal symptoms.
Buprenorphine is currently available in transdermal patches, intravenous injection, tablet and film strip formulations. Commercially available buprenorphine formulations include Butrans® (Butrans is a registered trademark of Purdue Pharma L.P.), a 7 day transdermal patch that releases buprenorphine at 5, 10 or 20 mcg/hr, and Temgesic, a 0.2 mg sublingual tablet, are used for the treatment of chronic pain. Buprenex® (Buprenex is a registered trademark of Reckitt Benckiser Healthcare (UK) Limited) is a 0.3 mg/mL injectable solution used for the treatment of acute pain. Subutex® (Subutex is a registered trademark of Reckitt Benckiser Healthcare (UK) Limited) and Suboxone® (Suboxone is a registered trademark of Reckitt Benckiser Healthcare (UK) Limited) are tablets used in the treatment of opioid dependence. Subutex® is available in 2 mg and 8 mg sublingual doses of buprenorphine. Suboxone® contains both buprenorphine and naloxone in a 4:1 ratio. Suboxone® is available in tablet form in 2 mg and 8 mg doses. Suboxone® is also available in a sublingual film strip formulation that dissolves faster and is not lost by accidental swallowing.
Naloxone has the following structure and is synthesized from thebaine:
Naloxone is most commonly used to treat patients suffering from opioid dependence or overdose because it is a competitive μ-opioid antagonist that blocks the effects of opioids.
While there are various formulations currently available, there exists a need in the art for a sublingual spray formulation containing buprenorphine or buprenorphine and naloxone, pharmaceutically acceptable salts thereof, or derivatives thereof. Such a formulation should be safe, be easy to administer, have a high bioavailability, and be storage stable.
In certain embodiments, the present invention is directed to a sublingual spray formulation comprising an effective amount of buprenorphine, a pharmaceutically acceptable salt thereof, or a derivative thereof, water as a solvent, and a mixture of an alcohol and a glycol as a cosolvent.
In certain embodiments, the present invention is directed to a sublingual spray formulation comprising:
In certain embodiments, the present invention is directed to a sublingual spray formulation comprising an effective amount of buprenorphine, a pharmaceutically acceptable salt thereof, or a derivative thereof wherein the formulation has a pH from about 3.5 to about 5.5.
In certain embodiments, the present invention is directed to a sublingual spray formulation comprising:
In certain embodiments, the present invention is directed to a sublingual spray formulation comprising:
In certain embodiments, the present invention is directed to a sublingual spray formulation comprising:
In certain embodiments, the present invention is directed to a sublingual spray formulation comprising:
In certain embodiments, the present invention is directed to a sublingual spray formulation comprising:
In certain embodiments, the present invention is directed to a sublingual spray formulation comprising:
In certain embodiments, the present invention is directed to a sublingual spray formulation comprising:
In certain embodiments, the present invention is directed to a sublingual spray formulation comprising:
In certain embodiments, the present invention is directed to a sublingual spray formulation comprising:
In certain embodiments, the present invention is directed to a sublingual spray formulation comprising:
In preferred embodiments, the present invention is directed to a sublingual spray formulation comprising:
In a more preferred embodiment, the present invention is directed to a sublingual spray formulation comprising:
In preferred embodiments, the present invention is directed to a sublingual spray formulation comprising:
In preferred embodiments, the present invention is directed to a sublingual spray formulation comprising:
In certain preferred embodiments the present invention is directed to a sublingual spray formulation comprising:
In certain preferred embodiments the present invention is directed to a sublingual spray formulation comprising:
In certain preferred embodiments the present invention is directed to a sublingual spray formulation comprising:
In certain preferred embodiments the present invention is directed to a sublingual spray formulation comprising:
In certain embodiments, the sublingual spray formulations of the present invention contain naloxone in an amount that discourages improper administration of the formulations. When the naloxone containing formulations are properly administered, the naloxone is delivered at a rate that is below that which would be therapeutic. In this context, “therapeutic” refers to an amount of naloxone that would block the effects of the buprenorphine that is concurrently administered in the sublingual spray formulation. If the formulations are improperly used, however, the naloxone in the formulation could be sufficient to block the effects of buprenorphine.
In certain embodiments, the present invention is directed to methods for treating pain comprising administering a sublingual spray formulation of the present invention to a patient.
In certain embodiments, the present invention is directed to methods for treating opioid dependence comprising administering a sublingual spray formulation of the present invention to a patient.
In an embodiment, the present invention is directed to sublingual spray formulations wherein the Cmax (ng/mL) of buprenorphine is from about 0.6 to about 0.8. In a preferred embodiment, the Cmax (ng/mL) of buprenorphine is 0.76 following sublingual administration.
In yet another embodiment, the present invention is directed to sublingual spray formulations wherein the Tmax of buprenorphine is from about 1.5 to about 1.9 hours. In a preferred embodiment, the Tmax of buprenorphine is about 1.75 hours following sublingual administration.
In yet another embodiment, the present invention is directed to sublingual spray formulations wherein the Cmax (ng/mL) of buprenorphine is from about 1.2 to about 1.5. In a preferred embodiment, the Cmax (ng/mL) of buprenorphine is about 1.38 following sublingual administration.
In a further embodiment, the present invention is directed to sublingual spray formulations wherein the Tmax of buprenorphine is from about 1.2 to about 1.7 hours. In a preferred embodiment, the Tmax of buprenorphine is about 1.5 hours following sublingual administration.
In another embodiment, the present invention is directed to sublingual spray formulations wherein greater than 98% of the formulation particles are greater than 10 microns in diameter during administration.
In another embodiment, the present invention is directed to sublingual spray formulations wherein the mean Dv(10) is from about 10 to about 30 microns during administration.
In another embodiment, the present invention is directed to sublingual spray formulations wherein the mean Dv(50) is from about 30 to about 80 microns during administration.
In another embodiment, the present invention is directed to sublingual spray formulations wherein the mean Dv(90) is from about 80 to about 200 microns during administration.
In a further embodiment, the present invention is directed to sublingual spray formulations that when administered provide a spray plume ovality ratio of from about 1.1 to 2.4.
In yet another embodiment, the invention is directed to sublingual formulations that when administered provide a plume width of from about 25 to about 45 millimeters.
In a further embodiment, the invention is directed to sublingual formulations that when administered provide a plume angle of from about 30 to about 55 degrees.
In yet another embodiment, the invention is directed to sublingual formulations that when administered provide a D(4,3) of 55 to 95 microns.
In an additional embodiment, the invention is directed to sublingual formulations that when administered provide a spray span ((Dv90-Dv10)/Dv50) of from about 1.2 to about 3.3.
The present invention is directed to a sublingual spray formulation comprising an effective amount of buprenorphine or buprenorphine and naloxone, pharmaceutically acceptable salts thereof, or derivatives thereof. The present invention further relates to a method of treating pain or opioid dependence by administering an effective amount of a sublingual spray formulation of the present invention to a patient in need thereof.
The present invention is further directed to a sublingual spray formulation comprising an effective amount of buprenorphine or buprenorphine and naloxone, pharmaceutically acceptable salts thereof, or derivatives thereof, a solvent, a cosolvent and an antioxidant.
Applicants developed new sublingual buprenorphine and buprenorphine/naloxone formulations that unexpectedly are storage stable, safe and effective. Specifically, Applicants were surprised that the formulations were stable at high temperatures (40 degrees Celsius) for an extended period of time (see Examples 1 and 2 below). Further, Applicants unexpectedly found that the formulations provided a quick onset of action and bioavailability (as demonstrated by pharmacokinetic studies, see Example 3 below). The formulations upon administration exhibit excellent droplet size distribution, as well.
As used herein the term “patient” refers but is not limited to a person that is being treated for pain, opioid dependence or another affliction or disease that can be treated with buprenorphine.
As used herein the term “pharmaceutically acceptable” refers to ingredients that are not biologically or otherwise undesirable in a sublingual dosage form.
As used herein the term “effective amount” refers to the amount necessary to treat a patient in need thereof.
Pharmaceutically acceptable salts that can be used in accordance with the current invention include but are not limited to hydrochloride, hydrobromide, hydroiodide, nitrate, sulfate, bisulfate, phosphate, acid phosphate, isonicotinate, acetate, lactate, salicylate, citrate, tartrate, pantothenate, bitartrate, ascorbate, succinate, maleate, gentisinate, fumarate, gluconate, glucaronate, saccharate, formate, benzoate, glutamate, methanesulfonate, ethanesulfonate, benzensulfonate, p-toluenesulfonate and pamoate (i.e., 1,1′-methylene-bis-(2-hydroxy-3-naphthoate)) salts.
In preferred embodiments the pharmaceutically acceptable salt is hydrochloride.
Derivatives of buprenorphine that can be used in accordance with the current invention include but are not limited norbuprenorphine, thenorphine, demethoxybuprenorphine and esters and diastereomers of buprenorphine.
The solvent used with the present invention is United States Pharmacopeia (“USP”) purified water.
Cosolvents that can be used in accordance with the current invention are alcohols, and glycols or a mixture thereof.
Alcohols that can be used in accordance with the current invention include but are not limited to methanol, ethanol, propyl alcohol, and butyl alcohol.
Glycols that can be used in accordance with the current invention include but are not limited to propylene glycol, butylene glycol and polyethylene glycols such as PEG 200 and PEG 400 and the like.
In preferred embodiments the cosolvent is ethanol or propylene glycol or a mixture thereof.
In more preferred embodiments the amount of cosolvent included in the formulation is from about 5% to about 90% w/w.
In other more preferred embodiments the amount of cosolvent included in the formulation is from about 2 to about 10% propylene glycol. In a most preferred embodiment the amount of cosolvent is about 5% w/w propylene glycol.
In other more preferred embodiments the amount of cosolvent included in the formulation is about 40% w/w to about 60% w/w ethanol. In a most preferred embodiment the amount of cosolvent is about 55% w/w ethanol.
In other more preferred embodiments the cosolvent is a mixture of propylene glycol at about 5% w/w and ethanol at about 55% w/w.
Solubilizers that can be used in accordance with the current invention are hydroxpropyl beta-cyclodextrin (“HPβCD”) and sulfobutylether cyclodextrin or a mixture thereof.
In preferred embodiments the solubilizer is HPβCD.
In more preferred embodiments the amount of HPβCD is from about 10% w/w to 40% w/w. In a most preferred embodiment the amount of HPβCD is about 30% w/w.
Antioxidants that can be used in accordance with the current invention include but are not limited to butylated hydroxyanisole (“BHA”), butylated hydroxytoluene (“BHT”), methionine, sodium ascorbate, sodium thiosulfate and thioglycerol, cysteine Hydrochloride monohydrate or a mixture thereof.
In preferred embodiments the amount of antioxidant included in the formulation is from about 0.001% to about 0.05% w/w.
In more preferred embodiments the amount of antioxidant is about 0.01% w/w of BHA.
In other more preferred embodiments the antioxidant is a mixture of about 0.01% w/w of BHA and about 0.005% w/w of BHT.
In other more preferred embodiments the antioxidant is about 0.01% w/w of sodium thiosulfate.
In other more preferred embodiments the antioxidant is about 0.02% w/w of sodium ascorbate.
Permeation enhancers that can be used in accordance with the current invention include but are not limited to menthol, Tween® 80 (Tween is a registered trademark of Uniqema Americas, LLC), sodium lauryl sulfate, glyceryl oleate, oleic acid, cetylpyridium chloride, and sodium desoxy cholate.
In preferred embodiments the amount of permeation enhancer is from about 0.001% to about 0.1% w/w.
In more preferred embodiments the amount of permeation enhancer is about 0.05% w/w of menthol.
Chelating agents that can be used in accordance with the present invention include but are not limited to ethylenediaminetetraacetic acid disodium (“disodium edetate” or edetate disodium dihyrdate”).
In preferred embodiments the amount of disodium edetate is about 0.005% to about 0.01% w/w.
Formulations of the present invention may have a pH range from about 3.0 to about 7.0, preferably from about 3.5 to about 5.5 and more preferably from about 3.8 to about 5.1. pH adjustors that can be used in accordance with the present invention include but are not limited to citric acid, sodium hydroxide and a mixture thereof. In preferred embodiments the amount of citric acid is from about 2% to about 20% w/w. In more preferred embodiments the amount of citric acid is about 15%. In other more preferred embodiments the amount of citric acid is about 10%.
As used herein, all numerical values relating to amounts, weights, and the like, that are defined as “about” each particular value is plus or minus 10%. For example, the phrase “about 10% w/w” is to be understood as “9% to 11% w/w.” Therefore, amounts within 10% of the claimed value are encompassed by the scope of the claims.
As used herein “% w/w” refers to the percent weight of the total formulation.
In a more preferred embodiment the sublingual spray formulation comprises:
In another more preferred embodiment the sublingual spray formulation comprises:
In another more preferred embodiment the sublingual spray formulation comprises:
In a most preferred embodiment the sublingual spray formulation comprises:
In a more preferred embodiment the sublingual spray formulation comprises:
In a more preferred embodiment the sublingual spray formulation comprises:
In a more preferred embodiment the sublingual spray formulation comprises:
In a more preferred embodiment the sublingual spray formulation comprises:
In a more preferred embodiment the sublingual spray formulation comprises:
In a more preferred embodiment the sublingual spray formulation comprises:
In a more preferred embodiment the sublingual spray formulation comprises:
In a more preferred embodiment the sublingual spray formulation comprises:
In another more preferred embodiment the sublingual spray formulation comprises:
The following examples are intended to illustrate the present invention and to teach one of ordinary skill in the art how to make and use the invention. They are not intended to be limiting in any way.
Method of Making the Formulations
Sublingual spray formulations were created by first degassing ethanol and USP purified water, separately. Next, the ethanol and purified water were each purged with nitrogen. Soluble excipients were then dissolved in either the ethanol or the purified water based on their solubility. Next, the solutions were combined. Active pharmaceutical ingredient/s was/were added to the final solution and mixed until dissolved.
Formulations
Stability Data
The formulations listed in Table 1 were subject to stability test at 40° C.±2° C. under 75%±5% relative humidity for six months. Stability data was collected at zero, and six months. Assay and impurities were detected using high performance liquid chromatography with an ultraviolet detector. The assay was performed at 288 nm and indicated as a % of initial concentration. For all impurities, analysis was performed at 240 nm and expressed as a % area. Amounts of particular impurities are listed in Table 2 as a percentage of the area of each formulation along with amount of total impurities.
Sublingual buprenorphine spray formulations contained less than one percent total impurities after six months at 40° C. Control and formulations 1, 3, 4, 5, 6, 8 and 9 showed significant increase in levels of individual impurities (impurity B, impurity G, bisalkyl or unspecified impurity) at the 6 month time point whereas formulations containing BHA and BHT (#2) or sodium thiosulfate (#7) showed good stability. pH also played a role in the stability of the product. These results represent sublingual buprenorphine spray formulations that would remain stable for two years at room temperature.
Method of Making the Formulations
Sublingual spray formulations were created by first degassing ethanol and USP purified water, separately. Next, the ethanol and purified water were each purged with nitrogen. Soluble excipients were then dissolved in either the ethanol or the purified water based on their solubility. Next, the solutions were combined. Buprenorphine and naloxone were added to the final solution and mixed until dissolved.
Formulations
Stability Data
The formulations listed in Table 3 were subject to stability test at 40° C.±2° C. under 75%±5% relative humidity three months and at ±25° C. under 60%±5% relative humidity for three months. Stability data was collected at zero, one, two and three months at 40° C. and at zero, one and three months at 25° C. Assay and impurities were detected using high performance liquid chromatography with an ultraviolet detector. Buprenorphine assay was performed at 288 nm and indicated as a % of initial concentration. For all buprenorphine impurities, analysis was performed at 240 nm and expressed as a % area. Naloxone assay was performed at 280 nm and indicated as a % of initial concentration and for all naloxone impurities, analysis was performed at 230 nm. Amounts of particular impurities are listed in Tables 4 and 5 for 40° C. and in Table 6 for 25° C. as a percentage of the area of each formulation along with amount of total impurities. Relative retention time (“RRT”) is given for each impurity.
The control formulation for the buprenorphine/naloxone sublingual spray formulation contained greater than 1% impurities of both buprenorphine and naloxone within one month at 40° C. and between about 4% and about 5% at three months.
All formulations had less than 1% total impurities at three months. Similar to the buprenorphine only formulations in Example 1, formulations containing sodium thiosulfate (#10 and #11) were exceptionally stable with no impurities after three months. Formulation #12 contains BHA and BHT as the antioxidant and had significant impurities of naloxone (0.26% total impurities). Formulation #13 contains sodium ascorbate and had no impurities of buprenorphine and 0.09% total impurities of naloxone. These results represent sublingual spray formulations that would remain stable for one year at room temperature.
The control formulation had greater than 1% impurities at three months. All formulations containing antioxidants had less than 1% total impurities at three months. Similar to the buprenorphine only formulations in Example 1, formulations containing sodium thiosulfate (#10 and #11) or a mixture of BHA and BHT (#12) were exceptionally stable with no impurities after three months. Formulation #13 which contains sodium ascorbate had no impurities of buprenorphine and 0.11% total impurities of naloxone after storage at 25° C.±2° C./75%±5% relative humidity.
A study was designed and executed to determine the pharmacokinetics of buprenorphine sublingual spray formulations of the present invention after administration in healthy volunteers under fasting conditions.
The study was a single center, single dose, open-label, 1-sequence, 2-period, ascending dose study design in twelve healthy male and female subjects. The following dose levels of the investigational product were administered under fasting conditions: Dose 1: A single 0.5 mg dose (1 spray of 100 microliters) of Buprenorphine 5 mg/mL Sublingual Spray; and Dose 2: A single 1.0 mg dose (2 sprays of 100 microliters) of Buprenorphine 5 mg/mL Sublingual Spray.
The subjects arrived at the clinical site more than 10 hours before the buprenorphine administration. The subjected were supervised overnight (while fasting) and a single 50 mg dose of naltrexone (1×50 mg tablet) was orally administered with 240 mL of water approximately 1 hour prior to the buprenorphine administration to provide blockade of the pharmacological effects of buprenorphine. Then, a single dose (0.5 mg in period 1 and 1.0 mg in period 2) of the buprenorphine formulation was sublingually administered in the morning. Subjects were allowed to leave the clinical site after the 24-hour post-dose blood draw and returned to the clinical site before the remaining blood sample. The second dose level was administered following favorable safety review. The buprenorphine administrations were separated by a wash-out of 14 calendar days. The parameters are summarized below in Table 7.
As seen in Table 7, the Cmax obtained for buprenorphine were 0.761 ng/mL and 1.38 ng/mL. The Tmax observed for buprenorphine was 1.75 and 1.50 hours following the ascending doses.
A study was designed and executed in order to compare the rate and extent of absorption and bioavailability of 1 mg buprenorphine sublingual spray formulations of the present invention with 0.3 mg (1 mL) Buprenex® (buprenorphine HCl) intramuscular injection and 0.3 mg (1 mL) Buprenex® (buprenorphine HCl) intravenous bolus injection.
This was an open-label, 3-treatment, 3-period, 6-sequence, single-dose, randomized crossover study. Eighteen healthy male and female volunteers were randomly assigned to 1 of 6 treatment sequences. Dosing occurred after an overnight fast and there was a minimum 14-day washout between the dosing in two periods. Blood samples for the measurement of the plasma concentrations of buprenorphine were collected before (pre-dose) and at 5, 10, 20, 30, and 40 minutes and at 1, 1.25, 1.5, 2, 4, 6, 8, 10, 12, 16, 24, 36, 48, 72, 96, 120, and 144 hours after dosing. The results of this study are summarized below in Table 8.
The absolute bioavailability of buprenorphine, based on AUC(0-t) and AUC(inf), after sublingual administration was 41.03% and 42.57%, respectively.
A challenge of creating a buprenorphine sublingual spray formulation is that it must be capable of producing spray droplets that are over 10 microns in diameter. Spray droplets 10 microns or smaller could be inhaled into the lungs. The optimal particle size for sublingual spray droplets is from 20 to about 200 microns in diameter. It is desirable for the formulation to have droplet sizes near 20 because this increases the surface area and increased surface area exposure is one factor that contributes to a high bioavailability. Sublingual formulations should be able to maintain a consistent droplet size throughout its shelf life. Applicants found during testing that formulations of the present invention yielded desirable droplet sizes for sublingual administration. The testing also revealed that the formulation dose remains consistent when administered with a spray pump.
Five milligram per mL buprenorphine spray formulations of the present invention were subjected to two different storage conditions (25 and 40 degrees C.) and samples were taken at two different times (5M and 6M) for spray droplet size distribution analysis. Droplet analysis was conducted using standard laser analysis procedures known by those of skill in the art.
Droplet size distribution (Dv20, Dv50, Dv90, percent droplets less than 10 micrometers in diameter, D(4,3) and Span tested at two distances, 3 cm and 6 cm for upright and horizontal samples stored at 25 and 40 degrees C.) and spray pattern (Dmin, Dmax and ovality ratio tested at two distances, 3 cm and 6 cm for upright and horizontal samples stored at 25 and 40 degrees C.) were determined. D(4,3) refers to the volume moment mean of the particles; Dv10 refers to droplet size for which 10% of the total volume is obtained; Dv50 refers to droplet size for which 50% of the total volume is obtained; Dv90 refers to droplet size for which 90% of the total volume is obtained; Span refers to distribution span (Dv90-Dv10)/Dv50; DSD refers to droplet size distribution; the temperature listed is the storage temperature; U refers to an upright position of the spray pump; and H refers to horizontal position of the spray pump. The results of these studies can be seen below in Tables 9 to 40.
In addition, the formulations were tested for plume geometry including width and angle using standard procedures known by those of skill in the art. This testing showed that the spray pattern and plume were acceptable for formulations of the present invention. The results of these studies can be seen below in Tables 41 and 42.
Buprenorphine formulations of Table 43 were all stable upon preparation.
Buprenorphine/naloxone formulations of Table 44 were all stable upon preparation.
Number | Name | Date | Kind |
---|---|---|---|
6365596 | Valenti | Apr 2002 | B1 |
6413496 | Goodman et al. | Jul 2002 | B1 |
7501113 | Blondino et al. | Mar 2009 | B2 |
7666876 | Birch et al. | Feb 2010 | B2 |
8211946 | Whittle | Jul 2012 | B2 |
8475832 | Myers et al. | Jul 2013 | B2 |
20030003113 | Lewandowski | Jan 2003 | A1 |
20030166624 | Gale et al. | Sep 2003 | A1 |
20030190290 | Ross | Oct 2003 | A1 |
20040192714 | Boer et al. | Sep 2004 | A1 |
20070148097 | Finn et al. | Jun 2007 | A1 |
20090117054 | Crooks et al. | May 2009 | A1 |
20090176834 | Kottayil et al. | Jul 2009 | A1 |
20090270438 | Booles et al. | Oct 2009 | A1 |
20100015183 | Finn et al. | Jan 2010 | A1 |
20100087470 | Oksche et al. | Apr 2010 | A1 |
20100120812 | Chapleo et al. | May 2010 | A1 |
20100233257 | Herry et al. | Sep 2010 | A1 |
20110189259 | Vasisht et al. | Aug 2011 | A1 |
20110245288 | Stinchcomb et al. | Oct 2011 | A1 |
20110280916 | Blondino et al. | Nov 2011 | A1 |
20130109747 | Whittle | May 2013 | A1 |
Number | Date | Country |
---|---|---|
2461681 | Jan 2010 | GB |
WO 9843673 | Mar 1998 | WO |
2007087431 | Aug 2007 | WO |
2009120889 | Oct 2009 | WO |
Entry |
---|
Dumitriu (Polymeric Biomaterials, Revised and Expanded 2001, CRC Press; p. 8). |
Kuhlman et al. (J. Anal. Toxicol 1996; 20:369-378). |
Lado et al. (Z. Naturforsch. 2004;59c:354-358). |
International Search Report and the Written Opinion for corresponding application PCT/US14/52699 dated Nov. 26, 2014. |
Panchagnula R. et al., Transdermal delivery of naloxone: effect of water, propylene glycol, ethanol and their binary combinations on permeation through rat skin, Int J Pharm, May 21, 2001, 219(1-2), 95-105. |
Prausnitz M.R., et al., Transdermal drug delivery, Nat Biotechnol, Nov. 2008, 26(11), 1261-1268. |
Number | Date | Country | |
---|---|---|---|
20160045430 A1 | Feb 2016 | US |
Number | Date | Country | |
---|---|---|---|
61875837 | Sep 2013 | US |
Number | Date | Country | |
---|---|---|---|
Parent | 14469063 | Aug 2014 | US |
Child | 14923630 | US |