Nanomedicines: From Bench to Bedside and Beyond

Advancing nanomedicines from concept to clinic requires integration of new science with traditional pharmaceutical development. The medical and commercial success of nanomedicines is greatly facilitated when those charged with developing nanomedicines are cognizant of the unique opportunities and technical challenges that these products present. These individuals must also be knowledgeable about the processes of clinical and product development, including regulatory considerations, to maximize the odds for successful product registration. This article outlines these topics with a goal to accelerate the combination of academic innovation with collaborative industrial scientists who understand pharmaceutical development and regulatory approval requirements—only together can they realize the full potential of nanomedicines for patients.     

Improvement of oral colonic lavage with supplemental simethicone

We have noted that colons of patients prepared for colonoscopy with Golytely, a nonabsorbable electrolyte lavage solution, frequently contain foam which may obscure small mucosal lesions. Therefore, a randomized, blinded controlled trial was performed to determine the prevalence of Golytely-induced foam and the effect of supplemental simethicone in decreasing the prevalence of foam. Foam was present in 32% of colons prepared with Golytely alone but in none of the colons prepared with Golytely supplemented with simethicone. In addition, only 5% of colons prepared with supplemental simethicone had residual stool noted at the time of colonoscopy, a significant improvement over the 39% prevalence of residual stool in colons prepared with Golytely alone. Addition of simethicone to Golytely lavage decreases the prevalence of colonic foam and residual stool.     

Uptake of Adriamycin in tumour and surrounding brain tissue in patients with malignant gliomas

Summary Eight patients with malignant gliomas verified on CT scan, received an intravenous injection of 50 mg of Adriamycin R, 24 hours prior to surgical removal of the tumour. Peroperatively, both tumour and surrounding tissue specimens were obtained for determination of the tissue concentrations of Adriamycin and its reduced metabolite Adriamycinol. It was found that Adriamycin could be detected in tumour tissue from all patients. The concentration varied between 0,9 and 4,6 nmol/g tissue. In contrast, Adriamycin could only be detected in surrounding brain tissue from one patient.In anin vitro study a human malignant glioma cell line (U-251 MG) was exposed to various concentrations of Adriamycin for 24 hours. It was found that an intracellular drug concentration above 30 nmol/g cells caused a concentration dependent inhibition of cell growth. Thus, it is likely that the poor effect of Adriamycin on patients with malignant gliomas is due to an ineffective drug accumulation in the tumour tissue.     

Diagnostic delay after dimenhydrinate use in vomiting children.

OBJECTIVE: To determine whether the use of dimenhydrinate was associated with delay in the diagnosis and management of treatable illnesses or with direct adverse effects in children with vomiting presenting to an emergency department. DESIGN: Questionnaire survey and review of drug reaction and telephone inquiry records. SETTING: The emergency department of a tertiary care children's hospital and a provincial poison information centre. PATIENTS: The parents of 148 children who presented with vomiting completed the questionnaire. The database at the poison information centre included 474 reports of adverse drug reactions over an 8-year period and 105 reports of telephone inquiries over a 4-year period. MAIN RESULTS: Twenty-one (14%) of 148 children had received dimenhydrinate before arrival at the emergency department. The patients who had received dimenhydrinate were more likely than the others to present more than 12 hours after the onset of vomiting (14 [67%] of 21 v. 43 [34%] of 127, p less than 0.01). The discharge diagnoses for those who had received dimenhydrinate included asthma, pelvic inflammatory disease and urinary tract infection. No clinically important direct adverse reactions to dimenhydrinate were documented. CONCLUSIONS: The use of dimenhydrinate in children with vomiting is associated with a risk of delay in the diagnosis of treatable medical conditions.