Manfred Wargenau

Background: There is a paucity of systematic investigations of the acceptability and preference of alternative oral drug formulations in multiple sclerosis (MS) patients. The use of appropriate oral dosage forms has the potential to circumvent challenges associated with the ingestion of tablets. Objective: This randomized, open, cross-over study aimed to investigate acceptability, swallowability, palatability, and preference of four oral placebo drug formulations of similar sizes/given volumes but different modes of ingestion (film-coated tablet, orodispersible tablet, orodispersible film, and gel) in MS patients. Methods: Acceptability was tested in two patient subgroups (32 participants each) of different MS disability levels (expanded disability status scale [EDSS] < 4 and ≥4). The primary endpoint was acceptability derived as a composite of swallowability (rated by investigator) and palatability (rated by participant). Results: The film-coated tablet showed the highest acceptability rates for EDSS < 4 and EDSS ≥ 4 (100.0%, 93.8%), followed by gel (81.3%, 68.8%). Acceptability rates for all formulations were consistently higher for EDSS < 4 compared to EDSS ≥ 4. Concerning the subjective assessment of palatability, the gel received the highest rate of positive ratings, but also was frequently judged as ‘Unpleasant’. Furthermore, the gel was ranked as the first or second choice as the most-preferred formulation, followed by the film-coated tablet. All formulations were considered safe in the study population. Conclusions: Film-coated tablets are well-suited for use in MS patients and gels may represent an interesting alternative for a certain subgroup of MS patients.

Background/Aims: This preference study aimed to identify the maximum number of mini-tablets of two different sizes that children and adolescents would be willing to take, and parents, nurses, and pediatricians would be willing to administer to children and adolescents. Methods: A total of 336 participants (24 per cohort) were stratified into 14 cohorts: Acutely and chronically sick children/adolescents aged 6–<12 years (y) and 12–<18 y, parents of acutely and chronically sick children/adolescents aged 0–<2 y, 2–<6 y, 6–<12 y, and 12–<18 y, nurses, and pediatricians. After participants were shown seven different numbers of 2 and 3 mm mini-tablets, they were asked to assess the maximum number acceptable for short-, middle-, and long-term treatment using cohort-specific questionnaires. Results: Within all groups and treatment durations, the specified maximum accepted number of 2 mm mini-tablets was higher than the number of 3 mm mini-tablets. The maximum number of mini-tablets acceptable to the participants increased with increasing age of the children and ranged from 40–500 (30–400) for the 2 mm (3 mm) mini-tablets. With increasing duration of treatment, a lower maximum number of mini-tablets was considered tolerable. Chronically sick children were willing to take higher numbers of mini-tablets than acutely sick children. The maximum accepted numbers of mini-tablets specified by pediatric patients, parents, and healthcare professionals were similar for each age group; however, pediatricians consistently specified slightly higher numbers of mini-tablets than parents and nurses. Conclusions: The study demonstrated that even a high number of mini-tablets would be well-accepted by children during middle- or long-term treatment.

Since the acceptability of a medicine can significantly impact therapeutic outcomes, this study aimed to determine and compare the preferences of children, parents, and healthcare professionals for the most commonly used pediatric oral medicine formulations (syrup, mini-tablets, oblong tablets, round tablets) addressing all pediatric age groups, 0–<18 years (y). This survey study employed sex-, age-, and participant group-adapted questionnaires for eight cohorts of participants, i.e., children 6–<12 y, adolescents 12–<18 y, parents of children in four age groups (0–<2 y, 2–<6 y, 6–<12 y, and 12–<18 y), nurses, and pediatricians. Descriptive statistics were used for data analysis. In the age groups 0–<2 y and 2–<6 y, mini-tablets were preferred over syrup by all participants. In the age group 6–12 y, solid dosage forms were also preferred over syrup by all participants. In the age group 12–<18 y, healthcare professionals preferred solid dosage forms over syrup. Parents preferred higher amounts of mini-tablets and syrup compared to round and oblong tablets, while adolescents’ preferences did not differentiate between these formulations. Based on the study results and in contrast to current practice, it is suggested to consider solid dosage forms for future age-appropriate medicinal products already for younger age groups.

Mini-tablets are advantageous over liquid formulations in overcoming challenges related to stability, taste, and dosage. This open-label, single-dose, cross-over study investigated the acceptability and safety of drug-free, film-coated mini-tablets in children aged 1 month–6 years (stratified: 4–6 years, 2–<4 years, 1–<2 years, 6–<12 months, and 1–<6 months), and their preference for swallowing either a high quantity of 2.0 mm or a low quantity of 2.5 mm diameter mini-tablets. The primary endpoint was acceptability derived from swallowability. The secondary endpoints were investigator-observed palatability, acceptability as a composite endpoint derived from both swallowability and palatability, and safety. Of 320 children randomized, 319 completed the study. Across all tablet sizes, quantities and age groups, acceptability rates based on swallowability were high (at least 87%). Palatability was rated as “pleasant/neutral” in 96.6% of children. The acceptability rates as per the composite endpoint were at least 77% and 86% for the 2.0 mm and 2.5 mm film-coated mini-tablets, respectively. No adverse events or deaths were reported. Recruitment in the 1–<6-months group was stopped early due to coughing—evaluated as “choked on” in three children. Both 2.0 mm and 2.5 mm film-coated mini-tablets are suitable formulations for young children.

Introduction: A medicine’s acceptability is likely to have significant impact on pediatric adherence. The importance is underlined in EMA and FDA guidance on this topic where investigation of acceptability is stated as a regulatory expectation. Demonstrating acceptability can be challenging given there is no globally recognized definition and no standardized testing methodology or assessment criteria. Palatability and swallowability are generally recognized as important elements of acceptability, and this work proposes a definition of acceptability using these elements to give a composite endpoint for acceptability for pediatric subjects across all age ranges. Methods: This composite acceptability endpoint is based on validated assessment methods for swallowability and palatability in children of different age groups using different galenic placebo formulations, in line with criteria proposed by EMA for assessing acceptability in children from newborn to 18 years of age. Data from two studies investigating mini-tablets, oblong tablets, orodispersible films, and syrup were analyzed to establish the validity, expediency, and applicability of the suggested composite acceptability assessment tool. Results: The new composite endpoint is an efficient and suitable way to distinguish preferences of oral formulations: Mini-tablets and oblong tablets had significantly better acceptability than syrups and orodispersible films. Conclusion: Since the suggested acceptability criteria takes both swallowability and palatability into account as composite endpoint, it is highly sensitive to detect acceptability differences between oral formulations. It is a well-defined valid approach, which meets regulatory requirements in an appropriate and comprehensive manner and may in future serve as a pragmatic, standardized method to assess and compare acceptability of pediatric formulations with active substances.

Summary Background The presence of pulmonary hypertension (PH) severely aggravates the clinical course of heart failure with preserved ejection fraction (HFPEF) resulting in substantial morbidity and mortality. So far, neither established heart failure therapies nor pulmonary vasodilators have proven to be effective for this condition. Riociguat (Adempas®, BAY 63-2521), a stimulator of soluble guanylate cyclase, is a novel pulmonary and systemic vasodilator that has been approved for the treatment of precapillary forms of PH. With regard to postcapillary PH, the DILATE-1 study was a multicenter, double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled single-dose study in subjects with PH associated with HFPEF. Although there was no significant change in the primary outcome measure, peak decrease in mean pulmonary artery pressure with riociguat versus placebo, riociguat significantly increased stroke volume without changing heart rate, pulmonary artery wedge pressure, transpulmonary pressure gradient or pulmonary vascular resistance. The present study is designed to test the efficacy of long-term treatment with riociguat in patients with PH associated with HFPEF. Methods/study design The DYNAMIC study is a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, parallel-group, multicenter clinical phase IIb trial evaluating the efficacy, safety and kinetics of riociguat in PH-HFPEF patients. The drug will be given over 26 weeks to evaluate the effects of riociguat versus placebo. The primary efficacy variable will be the change from baseline in cardiac output at rest, measured by right heart catheter after 26 weeks of study drug treatment. Additional efficacy variables will be changes from baseline in further hemodynamic parameters, changes in left and right atrial area, right ventricular volume, as well as right ventricular ejection fraction measured by cardiac magnetic resonance imaging, and changes from baseline in World Health Organization (WHO) class and N‑terminal prohormone B‑type natriuretic peptide (NT-proBNP). The trial was registered on 25 August 2014 (EudraCT Number: 2014-003055-60; www.clinicaltrialsregister.eu).