Topical antihistamines, such as olopatadine hydrochloride, an H1 receptor antagonist, are commonly prescribed for treating allergic conjunctivitis. Drug delivery via eye drops has many deficiencies including a short residence time due to tear drainage via the nasolacrimal duct, which results in a low bioavailability and potential for side effects. These deficiencies could be mitigated by a drug-eluting contact lens such as the recently approved ACUVUE® THERAVISION™ WITH KETOTIFEN which is a daily disposable etafilcon, a drug-eluting contact lens with ketotifen (19 μg per lens). Here, we investigate the feasibility of designing a drug-eluting lens with sustained release of olopatadine for treating allergies using an extended wear lens.
Methods:
Nanobarrier depots composed of vitamin-E (VE) are formed through direct entrapment by ethanol-driven swelling. The drug-loaded lenses are characterized for transparency and water content. In vitro release is measured under sink conditions and fitted to a diffusion control release model to determine diffusivity and partition coefficient.
Results:
In vitro studies indicate that ACUVUE OASYS® and ACUVUE TruEye™ lenses loaded with ∼0.3 g of VE/g of hydrogel effectively prolong olopatadine dynamics by 7-fold and 375-fold, respectively. Incorporation of VE into the lenses retains visible light transmission and other properties.
Conclusion:
The VE incorporation in commercial lenses significantly increases the release duration offering the possibility of antiallergy extended wear lenses.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
AbelsonMB, ChambersWA, SmithLM. Conjunctival allergen challenge: A clinical approach to studying allergic conjunctivitis. Arch Ophthalmol, 1990; 108(1):84–88.
2.
AbelsonMB, SchaeferK.Conjunctivitis of allergic origin: Immunologic mechanisms and current approaches to therapy. Surv Ophthalmol, 1993;38 Suppl:115–132.
BelfortR, MarbeckP, HsuCC, et al.Epidemiological study of 134 subjects with allergic conjunctivitis. Acta Ophthalmol Scand, 2000; 78:38–40.
15.
GreinerAN, HellingsPW, RotirotiG, et al.Allergic rhinitis. Lancet, 2011; 378(9809):2112–2122.
16.
ScoperSV, BerdyGJ, LichtensteinSJ, et al.Perception and quality of life associated with the use of olopatadine 0.2% (Pataday™) in patients with active allergic conjunctivitis. Adv Ther, 2007; 24(6):1221–1232.
17.
BieloryL, LienKW, BigelsenS. Efficacy and tolerability of newer antihistamines in the treatment of allergic conjunctivitis. Drugs, 2005; 65(2):215–228.
18.
Ousler IIIGW, WorkmanDA, TorkildsenGL. An open-label, investigator-masked, crossover study of the ocular drying effects of two antihistamines, topical epinastine and systemic loratadine, in adult volunteers with seasonal allergic conjunctivitis. Clin Ther, 2007; 29(4):611–616.
19.
PipkornU, BendeM, HednerJ, et al.A double-blind evaluation of topical levocabastine, a new specific H1 antagonist in patients with allergic conjunctivitis. Allergy, 1985; 40(7):491–496.
20.
SimonsFER, SimonsKJ. Histamine and H1-antihistamines: Celebrating a century of progress. J Allergy Clin Immunol, 2011;128(6):1139–1150. e4.
21.
DockhornRJ, DuckettTG. Comparison of Naphcon-A and its components (naphazoline and pheniramine) in a provocative model of allergic conjunctivitis. Curr Eye Res, 1994; 13(5):319–324.
22.
GreinerJV, UdellIJ. A comparison of the clinical efficacy of pheniramine maleate/naphazoline hydrochloride ophthalmic solution and olopatadine hydrochloride ophthalmic solution in the conjunctival allergen challenge model. Clin Ther, 2005; 27(5):568–577.
23.
AhluwaliaP, AndersonDF, WilsonSJ, et al.Nedocromil sodium and levocabastine reduce the symptoms of conjunctival allergen challenge by different mechanisms. J Allergy Clin Immunol, 2001; 108(3):449–454.
24.
LeonJ, CharapA, DuzmanE, et al.Efficacy of cimetidine/pyrilamine eyedrops: A dose response study with histamine challenge. Ophthalmology, 1986; 93(1):120–123.
25.
BlumenthalM, CasaleT, DockhornR, et al.Efficacy and safety of nedocromil sodium ophthalmic solution in the treatment of seasonal allergic conjunctivitis. Am J Ophthalmol, 1992; 113(1):56–63.
26.
BoniniS, SchiavoneM, BoniniS, et al.Efficacy of lodoxamide eye drops on mast cells and eosinophils after allergen challenge in allergic conjunctivitis. Ophthalmology, 1997; 104(5):849–853.
FahyG, EastyDL, CollumLM, et al.Randomised double-masked trial of lodoxamide and sodium cromoglycate in allergic eye disease: A multicentre study. Eur J Ophthalmol, 1992; 2(3):144–149.
KrayKT, Squire JrEN, TiptonWR, et al.Cromolyn sodium in seasonal allergic conjunctivitis. J Allergy Clin Immunol, 1985; 76(4):623–627.
31.
LeonardiA, BorghesanF, AvarelloA, et al.Effect of lodoxamide and disodium cromoglycate on tear eosinophil cationic protein in vernal keratoconjunctivitis. Br J Ophthalmol, 1997; 81(1):23–26.
32.
Miyake-KashimaM, TakanoY, TanakaM, et al.Comparison of 0.1% bromfenac sodium and 0.1% pemirolast potassium for the treatment of allergic conjunctivitis. Jpn J Ophthalmol, 2004; 48(6):587–590.
33.
OdelramH, BjörksténB, af KlerckerT, et al.Topical levocabastine versus sodium cromoglycate in allergic conjunctivitis. Allergy, 1989; 44(6):432–436.
34.
BallasZ, BlumenthalM, TinkelmanDG, et al.Clinical evaluation of ketorolac tromethamine 0.5% ophthalmic solution for the treatment of seasonal allergic conjunctivitis. Surv Ophthalmol, 1993; 38:141–148.
35.
TinkelmanDG, RuppG, KaufmanH, et al.Double-masked, paired-comparison clinical study of ketorolac tromethamine 0.5% ophthalmic solution compared with placebo eyedrops in the treatment of seasonal allergic conjunctivitis. Surv Ophthalmol, 1993; 38:133–140.
36.
EbiharaN, OhashiY, UchioE, et al.A large prospective observational study of novel cyclosporine 0.1% aqueous ophthalmic solution in the treatment of severe allergic conjunctivitis. J Ocul Pharmacol Ther, 2009; 25(4):365–372.
37.
OzcanAA, ErsozTR, DulgerE. Management of severe allergic conjunctivitis with topical cyclosporin A 0.05% eyedrops. Cornea, 2007; 26(9):1035–1038.
38.
ZhuH, ChauhanA. A mathematical model for tear drainage through the canaliculi. Curr Eye Res, 2005; 30(8):621–630.
39.
LuxA, MaierS, DinslageS, et al.A comparative bioavailability study of three conventional eye drops versus a single lyophilisate. Br J Ophthalmol, 2003; 87(4):436–440.
40.
AhmedS, AminMM, SayedS. Ocular drug delivery: A comprehensive review. AAPS PharmSciTech, 2023; 24(2):66.
41.
GauseS, HsuK-H, ShaforC, et al.Mechanistic modeling of ophthalmic drug delivery to the anterior chamber by eye drops and contact lenses. Adv Colloid Interface Sci, 2016; 233:139–154.
42.
BaudouinC, de LunardoC. Short term comparative study of topical 2% carteolol with and without benzalkonium chloride in healthy volunteers. Br J Ophthalmol, 1998; 82(1):39–42.
43.
HsuKH, GuptaK, NayakaH, et al.Multidose preservative free eyedrops by selective removal of benzalkonium chloride from ocular formulations. Pharm Res, 2017; 34(12):2862–2872.
44.
IshibashiT, YokoiN, KinoshitaS. Comparison of the short-term effects on the human corneal surface of topical timolol maleate with and without benzalkonium chloride. J Glaucoma, 2003; 12(6):486–490.
45.
GuptaC, ChauhanA. Drug transport in HEMA conjunctival inserts containing precipitated drug particles. J Colloid Interface Sci, 2010; 347(1):31–42.
46.
TaiMC, CosarCB, CohenEJ, et al.The clinical efficacy of silicone punctal plug therapy. Cornea, 2002; 21(2):135–139.
47.
Alvarez-LorenzoC, YañezF, Barreiro-IglesiasR, et al.Imprinted soft contact lenses as norfloxacin delivery systems. J Control Release, 2006; 113(3):236–244.
48.
CiolinoJB, RossAE, TulsanR, et al.Latanoprost-eluting contact lenses in glaucomatous monkeys. Ophthalmology, 2016; 123(10):2085–2092.
49.
CiolinoJB, StefanescuCF, RossAE, et al.In vivo performance of a drug-eluting contact lens to treat glaucoma for a month. Biomaterials, 2014; 35(1):432–439.
50.
GulsenD, ChauhanA. Ophthalmic drug delivery through contact lenses. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci, 2004; 45(7):2342–2347.
51.
HsuKH, CarbiaBE, PlummerC, et al.Dual drug delivery from vitamin E loaded contact lenses for glaucoma therapy. Eur J Pharm Biopharm, 2015; 94:312–321.
52.
KimJ, ConwayA, ChauhanA. Extended delivery of ophthalmic drugs by silicone hydrogel contact lenses. Biomaterials, 2008; 29(14):2259–2269.
53.
KimJ, PengCC, ChauhanA. Extended release of dexamethasone from silicone-hydrogel contact lenses containing vitamin E. J Control Release, 2010; 148(1):110–116.
54.
LiC, ChauhanA. Ocular transport model for ophthalmic delivery of timolol through p-HEMA contact lenses. J Drug Deliv Sci Technol, 2007; 17(1):69–79.
55.
LiCC, ChauhanA. Modeling ophthalmic drug delivery by soaked contact lenses. Ind Eng Chem Res, 2006; 45(10):3718–3734.
56.
HillmanJ, MarstersJ, BroadA. Pilocarpine delivery by hydrophilic lens in the management of acute glaucoma. Trans Ophthalmol Soc U K, 1975; 95(1):79–84.
57.
HillmanJS.Management of acute glaucoma with pilocarpine-soaked hydrophilic lens. Br J Ophthalmol, 1974; 58(7):674.
58.
GulsenD, LiC-C, ChauhanA. Dispersion of DMPC liposomes in contact lenses for ophthalmic drug delivery. Curr Eye Res, 2005; 30(12):1071–1080.
59.
HirataniH, FujiwaraA, TamiyaY, et al.Ocular release of timolol from molecularly imprinted soft contact lenses. Biomaterials, 2005; 26(11):1293–1298.
60.
JungHJ, Abou-JaoudeM, CarbiaBE, et al.Glaucoma therapy by extended release of timolol from nanoparticle loaded silicone-hydrogel contact lenses. J Control Release, 2013; 165(1):82–89.
61.
PengC-C, KimJ, ChauhanA. Extended delivery of hydrophilic drugs from silicone-hydrogel contact lenses containing vitamin E diffusion barriers. Biomaterials, 2010; 31(14):4032–4047.
62.
KapoorY, DixonP, SekarP, et al.Incorporation of drug particles for extended release of cyclosporine a from poly-hydroxyethyl methacrylate hydrogels. Eur J Pharm Biopharm, 2017; 120:73–79.
63.
PengC-C, Ben-ShlomoA, MackayEO, et al.Drug delivery by contact lens in spontaneously glaucomatous dogs. Curr Eye Res, 2012; 37(3):204–211.
64.
PengC-C, BurkeMT, ChauhanA. Transport of topical anesthetics in vitamin E loaded silicone hydrogel contact lenses. Langmuir, 2011; 28(2):1478–1487.
65.
SekarP, ChauhanA.Effect of vitamin-E integration on delivery of prostaglandin analogs from therapeutic lenses. J Colloid Interface Sci, 2019; 539:457–467.
66.
HsuKH, de la JaraPL, AriyavidanaA, et al.Release of betaine and dexpanthenol from vitamin E modified silicone-hydrogel contact lenses. Curr Eye Res, 2015; 40(3):267–273.
67.
LiuZ, OvertonM, ChauhanA. Transport of vitamin E from ethanol/water solution into contact lenses and impact on drug transport. J Ocul Pharmacol Ther, 2022; 38(6):396–403.
68.
DixonP, GhoshT, MondalK, Konar, et al. Controlled delivery of pirfenidone through vitamin E-loaded contact lens ameliorates corneal inflammation. Drug Deliv Transl Res, 2018; 8(5):1114–1126.
69.
ZhangX, ZhaoY, JingY, et al.Modification of silicone hydrogel contact lenses with vitamin E for the delivery of ofloxacin. J Nanomater, 2023:1500048.
70.
MaulviFA, SinghaniaSS, DesaiAR, et al.Contact lenses with dual drug delivery for the treatment of bacterial conjunctivitis. Int J Pharm, 2018; 548(1):139–150.
71.
PengC-C, ChauhanA.Ion transport in silicone hydrogel contact lenses. J Membrane Sci, 2012; 399:95–105.
SharifNA, XuSX, YanniJM. Olopatadine (AL-4943A): Ligand binding and functional studies on a novel, long-acting H1-selective histamine antagonist and anti-allergic agent for use in allergic conjunctivitis. J Ocul Pharmacol Ther, 1996; 12(4):401–407.
