Prosonix develops multi-component drug particles combining two respiratory drugs

To ensure optimal co-localisation in the lung

Prosonix, a UK developer of respiratory medicines based in Oxford, has revealed new research demonstrating that a combination of two inhaled respiratory drug molecules in a pre-determined ratio within Multi-component Particles (MCP) can significantly improve co-localisation of the active drug components in the lung.

The presentation was made by Prosonix’ Dipesh Parikh at the Drug Delivery to the Lungs 2011 (DDL2011) conference in Edinburgh, UK.

Prosonix says its UMAX technology has enabled the development of an MCP, which combines budesonide (BDS) and formoterol fumarate dihydrate (FFD) in a single particle, in a pre-determined ratio with ‘exquisite’ control and consistency. The combination of BDS and FFD forms the basis of AstraZeneca’s respiratory drug product Symbicort.

Prosonix showed that combining multiple active drug components into a single particle with UMAX technology, using Raman chemical imaging, results in optimal co-association and co-localisation of the drug molecules at the correct sites in the lung and respiratory tract.

Previous analysis by Prosonix of currently marketed suspension-based MDI and DPI combination product formulations, which consist of individual drug components in a simple mixture, has shown limited co-localisation1, 2.

Compared with these combination products, the improved co-localisation of MCPs to targeted parts of the lung is expected to achieve more pronounced synergy and additive efficacy on the key target cells directly from the solid state, improving outcomes and leading in turn to lower doses and improved safety and compliance.

1. Co-deposition of Salmeterol and Fluticasone Propionate by a Combination Inhaler.Theophilus, A., et al (2006) Int. J. Pharmaceutics, 313; 14–22
2. Enhanced Synergy between Fluticasone Propionate and Salmeterol Inhaled from a Single Inhaler versus Separate Inhalers. Nelson, H.S., et al (2003) J. Allergy Clin. Immunol. 112(1); 29–36