Bioavailability and disposition of azelastine and fluticasone propionate when delivered by MP29‐02, a novel aqueous nasal spray
Authors: Derendorf Hartmut , Munzel Ullrich , Petzold Ursula , Maus Joachim , Mascher Hermann , Hermann Robert , Bousquet Jean 
Published: February 2012

WHAT IS ALREADY KNOWN ABOUT THIS SUBJECT• The topical second generation anti‐histamine azelastine hydrochloride (AZE) and the potent corticosteroid fluticasone propionate (FP) are well established first‐line treatments in allergic rhinitis (AR).• MP29‐02, a novel intranasal AZE and FP formulation, has been shown to control AR symptoms faster and better than standard intranasal AZE or FP.• The systemic bioavailabilities of marketed AZE and FP nasal spray products have been established at about 40% and 1% only, respectively.• For new combination medicinal products such as MP29‐02, the determination of possible pharmacokinetic (PK) drug–drug interactions between both active components and formulation‐based bioavailability alterations is essential.WHAT THIS STUDY ADDS• This paper provides for the first time information on potential drug–drug interactions, AZE and FP bioavailability and disposition characteristics of each component administered by the novel nasal spray formulation MP29‐02.• The studies employed highly sensitive FP and AZE LC‐MS/MS assays and could therefore be conducted with recommended therapeutic doses, thereby circumventing previously recognized draw‐backs that required nasal bioavailability studies to be conducted using supra‐therapeutic doses.• No significant PK drug–drug interaction between the active components AZE and FP was noted for MP29‐02.• AZE bioavailabilty was equivalent when MP29‐02 data were compared with MP29‐02‐AZE‐mono and Astelin®.• Increased FP exposure was observed with MP29‐02‐based products compared with FP‐BI. FP serum concentrations were generally very low with all investigational products suggesting no clinically meaningful pharmacodynamic differences in terms of systemic safety.AIM(S) To determine azelastine hydrochloride (AZE) and fluticasone propionate (FP) bioavailabilities of the novel nasal spray combination product MP 29‐02, compared with MP29‐02‐based products containing only AZE (MP29‐02‐AZE‐mono), FP (MP29‐02‐FP‐mono), marketed AZE and FP single entity products (Astelin® and FP Boehringer‐Ingelheim; FP‐BI).METHODS Two randomized, three period, six sequence, three treatment crossover studies were conducted in healthy subjects. Study 1 administered 200 µg FP as MP29‐02, MP29‐02‐FP‐mono or FP‐BI. Study 2 administered 548 µg AZE as MP29‐02, MP29‐02‐AZE‐mono or Astelin®. Each dose consisted of two sprays/nostril. Serum FP and plasma AZE were followed over 24 (FP) and 120 h (AZE) and quantified by LC‐MS/MS. Peak (Cmax) and total exposures AUC(0,tlast) were compared between the treatments by anova.RESULTS Study 1: Average FP Cmax was very low with all products (≤10 pg ml−1). FP AUC(0,tlast) point estimates (90% CIs) for MP29‐02 : MP29‐02‐FP‐mono and MP29‐02 : FP‐BI ratios (%) were 93.6 (83.6, 104.7) and 161.1 (137.1, 189.3). Corresponding ratios for Cmax were 91.0 (82.5, 100.4) and 157.4 (132.5, 187.1). Study 2: AZE AUC(0,tlast) point estimates (90% CIs) for MP29‐02 : MP29‐02‐AZE‐mono and MP29‐02 : Astelin® ratios (%) were 98.8 (91.0, 107.4) and 105.5 (95.6, 116.4). Corresponding outcomes for Cmax were 102.7 (92.1, 114.4) and 107.3 (92.6, 124.3).CONCLUSIONS No interactions of AZE and FP were found with the MP29‐02 formulation. Azelastine bioavailability was similar for MP29‐02 and Astelin®. Maximum and total FP exposure was higher for MP29‐02‐based products compared with FP‐BI. FP concentrations were generally very low with all investigational products and did not suggest clinically meaningful differences concerning systemic safety.