Literature DB >> 15126518

A comparison of a novel testosterone bioadhesive buccal system, striant, with a testosterone adhesive patch in hypogonadal males.

Márta Korbonits1, Marc Slawik, Derek Cullen, Richard J Ross, Günter Stalla, Harald Schneider, Martin Reincke, Pierre M Bouloux, Ashley B Grossman.   

Abstract

A novel delivery system has been developed for testosterone replacement. This formulation, COL-1621 (Striant), a testosterone-containing buccal mucoadhesive system, has been shown in preliminary studies to replace testosterone at physiological levels when used twice daily. Therefore, the current study compared the steady-state pharmacokinetics and tolerability of the buccal system with a testosterone-containing skin patch (Andropatch or Androderm) in an international multicenter study of a group of hypogonadal men. Sixty-six patients were randomized into two groups; one applied the buccal system twice daily, whereas the other applied the transdermal patch daily, in each case for 7 d. Serum total testosterone and dihydrotestosterone concentrations were measured at d 1, 3 or 4, and 6, and serially over the last 24 h of the study. Pharmacokinetic parameters for each formulation were calculated, and the two groups were compared. The tolerability of both formulations was also evaluated. Thirty-three patients were treated with the buccal preparation, and 34 were treated with the transdermal patch. The average serum testosterone concentration over 24 h showed a mean of 18.74 nmol/liter (SD =; 5.90) in the buccal system group and 12.15 nmol/liter (SD =; 5.55) in the transdermal patch group (P < 0.01). Of the patients treated with the buccal system, 97% had average steady-state testosterone concentrations within the physiological range (10.41-36.44 nmol/liter), whereas only 56% of the transdermal patch patients achieved physiological total testosterone concentrations (P < 0.001 between groups). Testosterone concentrations were within the physiological range in the buccal system group for a significantly greater portion of the 24-h treatment period than in the transdermal patch group (mean, 84.9% vs. 54.9%; P < 0.001). Testosterone/dihydrotestosterone ratios were physiological and similar in both groups. Few patients experienced major adverse effects from either treatment. No significant local tolerability problems were noted with the buccal system, other than a single patient withdrawal. We conclude that this buccal system is superior to the transdermal patch in achieving testosterone concentrations within the normal range. It may, therefore, be a valuable addition to the range of choices for testosterone replacement therapy.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2004        PMID: 15126518     DOI: 10.1210/jc.2003-030319

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Clin Endocrinol Metab        ISSN: 0021-972X            Impact factor:   5.958


  7 in total

Review 1.  Testosterone and erectile function: from basic research to a new clinical paradigm for managing men with androgen insufficiency and erectile dysfunction.

Authors:  Abdulmaged M Traish; Irwin Goldstein; Noel N Kim
Journal:  Eur Urol       Date:  2007-02-20       Impact factor: 20.096

Review 2.  Occurrence of pulmonary oil microembolism (POME) with intramuscular testosterone undecanoate injection: literature review.

Authors:  Jarren A Adam; Alexander W Pastuszak; Michael B Christensen; Rachel Spencer; Ashlynn Sandberg; James M Hotaling; Larry I Lipshultz
Journal:  Int J Impot Res       Date:  2022-05-24       Impact factor: 2.896

Review 3.  The Roles of Androgens in Humans: Biology, Metabolic Regulation and Health.

Authors:  Marià Alemany
Journal:  Int J Mol Sci       Date:  2022-10-08       Impact factor: 6.208

Review 4.  Pharmacokinetics of testosterone therapies in relation to diurnal variation of serum testosterone levels as men age.

Authors:  Alexander W Pastuszak; Marc Gittelman; James P Tursi; Jonathan S Jaffe; David Schofield; Martin M Miner
Journal:  Andrology       Date:  2021-10-08       Impact factor: 4.456

Review 5.  Androgen replacement therapy: present and future.

Authors:  Louis J G Gooren; Mathijs C M Bunck
Journal:  Drugs       Date:  2004       Impact factor: 9.546

Review 6.  Pharmacology of testosterone replacement therapy preparations.

Authors:  Jennifer J Shoskes; Meghan K Wilson; Michael L Spinner
Journal:  Transl Androl Urol       Date:  2016-12

7.  The benefits and risks of testosterone replacement therapy: a review.

Authors:  Nazem Bassil; Saad Alkaade; John E Morley
Journal:  Ther Clin Risk Manag       Date:  2009-06-22       Impact factor: 2.423

  7 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.