Volume 99, Issue 7 pp. 3226-3233

Examination of the ability of the nasal administration route to confer a brain exposure advantage for three chemical inhibitors of P-glycoprotein

Jeannie M. Padowski

Corresponding Author

Jeannie M. Padowski

Curriculum in Toxicology, School of Medicine, University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill, North Carolina

Curriculum in Toxicology, School of Medicine, University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill, North Carolina. Telephone: 919-843-0734; Fax: 919-962-0644.Search for more papers by this author
Gary M. Pollack

Gary M. Pollack

Curriculum in Toxicology, School of Medicine, University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill, North Carolina

School of Pharmacy, University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill, North Carolina

Search for more papers by this author
First published: 01 February 2010

Abstract

The central nervous system (CNS), efficiently isolated from the systemic circulation by the blood–brain barrier (BBB), represents a challenging therapeutic target. For CNS-targeted agents, augmenting brain exposure by increasing blood drug concentrations often is prohibited by systemic toxicity. Therefore, a means for selectively increasing brain exposure, while minimizing systemic exposure, would be desirable. Limited evidence has indicated that nasally-administered compounds can penetrate into brain, although the selectivity of this approach is unclear. This study demonstrated a distinct, but compound-specific, advantage of the nasal administration route in conferring selective CNS delivery (defined as a brain exposure advantage; BEA). Brain and systemic concentrations of three P-glycoprotein-inhibiting agents were evaluated following single nasal or systemic doses to mice, and the influence of administration route on brain exposure (absolute BEA) and on brain-to-blood partitioning (relative BEA) was calculated. Relative and absolute BEA differed markedly among rifampin, quinidine, and GF120918, with relative BEA ranging between 1.53- and 809-fold and absolute BEA between 0.114- and 9.19-fold. Although substantial increases in brain exposure and partitioning in conjunction with nasal administration were demonstrated, the utility of this approach may be limited by inability to deliver a therapeutically relevant mass of drug to the brain. © 2010 Wiley-Liss, Inc. and the American Pharmacists Association J Pharm Sci 99:3226–3233, 2010

The full text of this article hosted at iucr.org is unavailable due to technical difficulties.