A pharmacokinetic crossover study to compare the absorption characteristics of three transdermal nicotine patches
Introduction
Several forms of nicotine replacement therapy produce overall similar beneficial results of approximately twofold increases in cessation rate compared to persons receiving placebo [9]. Nonetheless, it is plausible that differences in the amount and pattern of nicotine delivery from patches may confer clinical advantages and disadvantages to individual patch users as cigarette users also vary in the amount and pattern of nicotine obtained from smoking. For example, heavily dependent smokers reliably smoke immediately upon awakening in the morning and attain higher overall nicotine blood levels during the day [5]. Furthermore, the effects of nicotine vary as a function of the speed and amount of nicotine administered. For example, at the extreme condition of the cigarette, small amounts of nicotine are very rapidly absorbed, producing a cascade of electrophysiologic, cardiovascular, and neurohormonal effects [8], [14]. Similarly, across three brands of oral snuff with similar nicotine content, but varying pH, the peak plasma nicotine concentrations, and several behavioral effects were directly related to the pH, and, hence, speed of nicotine absorption [6]
Several reviews have reported on the pharmacokinetics of the four patch systems [1], [4], [7], [8], [10]. These reviews report differences between the systems in terms of both amount of nicotine delivered, as well as rate of delivery; however, the data reported were taken from studies of individual systems. Because these studies used different subject groups and protocols, inferences about the differences between the systems is limited. The current study compared the pharmacokinetic profiles of currently marketed patch systems, using a double-blind, incomplete block study design. The three patch systems studied are manufactured by Pharmacia-Upjohn, Novartis, and Alza. Although other patch systems have been marketed, we selected these three on the basis that they appeared to be the three primary patch types of global utilization and appeared to represent diverse patch types.
Section snippets
Subjects
An Institutional Review Board approved the study, and all subjects provided written informed consent. Of the 25 subjects (nine females) who completed the study, two were Asians, two were blacks, 20 were whites, and one was Hispanic. The mean age of the subjects was 25.8 years (S.D.=7.3) and the mean weight was 73.3 kg (S.D.=12.5)
Inclusion criteria consisted of the following: smokers who smoked at least 10 cigarettes per day and had a plasma cotinine level of at least 100 ng/ml at baseline;
Results
Fig. 1 shows the plasma nicotine concentrations measured during the first 24 h of patch exposure and the steady-state modeled nicotine plasma concentrations over the subsequent 2 days of exposure. Table 1 shows the actual measured pharmacokinetic parameters calculated for the first day of patch administration (0–24 h). Table 2 shows the pharmacokinetic parameters calculated from modeled data during the second and third days of patch administration (48–72 h).
As shown in Table 1, Table 2, the
Discussion
The results of this study demonstrated significant differences in nicotine delivery among transdermal patches at the highest marketed dose and approved duration of use (i.e., 16 or 24 h). This is consistent with reviews [1], [4], [7], [8], [10] that have been reported on the pharmacokinetics of the four patch systems from studies of individual systems. The data showed that the 21-mg, 24-h patches delivered a higher relative dose of nicotine over the course of the day than the 15-mg, 16-h patch,
Acknowledgements
This research was funded by SmithKline Beecham Consumer Healthcare.
References (14)
Clinical pharmacology of transdermal nicotine
Eur J Pharmacol Biopharmacol
(1995)- et al.
High-dose nicotine patch therapy. Percentage of replacement and smoking cessation
JAMA, J Am Med Assoc
(1995) - et al.
Effect of transdermal nicotine delivery as an adjunct to low-intervention smoking cessation therapy. A randomized, placebo-controlled, double-blind study
Arch Intern Med
(1991) - et al.
Therapeutic uses of nicotine patches: efficacy and safety
J Smok-Relat Dis
(1992) - et al.
Measuring nicotine dependence: a review of the Fagerstrom tolerance questionnaire
J Behav Med
(1989) - et al.
Pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics of moist snuff in humans
Tob Control
(1999) Nicotine pharmacokinetics of four nicotine transdermal systems
Health Values
(1993)
Cited by (76)
Challenges involved in the creation of scientific evidence for tobacco control
2024, Studies in Natural Products ChemistryThe effects of acute nicotine administration on cognitive and early sensory processes in schizophrenia: a systematic review
2020, Neuroscience and Biobehavioral ReviewsCitation Excerpt :This suggests a differential effect of tobacco and nicotine alone on these cognitive processes (AhnAllen et al., 2015; Hahn et al., 2013b). A potential explanation is that cigarette-derived nicotine is characterized by rapidly metabolized nicotine (Williams et al., 2010), whereas protracted release from a patch is more likely to ensure a more sustained nicotine concentration throughout the entire period of cognitive testing (Fant et al., 2000). Given the preclinical evidence that the absorption of non-nicotine components through smoking may have specific central effects (Arnold et al., 2014; Danielson et al., 2014; Hall et al., 2014; Levin et al., 2014; Ryu et al., 2018), further studies are warranted to investigate the effects of pure nicotine vs. non-nicotine components of tobacco on cognitive and early sensory outcomes in schizophrenia.
Percutaneous penetration of drugs applied in transdermal delivery systems: an in vivo based approach for evaluating computer generated penetration models
2019, Regulatory Toxicology and PharmacologyNicotine pharmacokinetics of electronic cigarettes: A review of the literature
2018, Regulatory Toxicology and PharmacologyCitation Excerpt :In the face of these contrasting views, though, both nicotine yields and behavioural similarity to cigarette smoking are thought to have contributed to the popularity of e-cigarettes among smokers who want to quit, as well as to the acceptability of e-cigarettes compared to NRT (RCP, 2016). In general, the uptake of nicotine from NRT products through, for example, the buccal or skin routes, is relatively slow and the pharmacokinetic profile does not fully resemble that of cigarettes (e.g. Fant et al., 2000; Lunell and Curvall, 2011). Generally speaking, the time to maximum plasma nicotine concentration (Tmax) tends to be longer with NRTs while the maximum nicotine level (Cmax) is lower and not characterised by a sharp peak, but by a lower and flatter peak, compared to that of a combustible cigarette.
Time controlled pulsatile transdermal delivery of nicotine: A phase i feasibility trial in male smokers
2016, Journal of Controlled ReleaseCitation Excerpt :This is attributed to a buildup of drug in the skin and its subsequent slow release as reported before [38] and was also observed with commercial patches (Nicotinell® product documentation, Novartis consumer health, Switzerland). With respect to clinical efficacy of nicotine replacement therapy, there is broad consensus that this is dependent on the achieved pharmacokinetic profile of nicotine [7,17,23,28,29,50–52]. Commercial transdermal patches provide constant drug delivery over 16 h, for example, in order to mimic the trough level plasma concentration pattern of nicotine of a regular smoker throughout the day; alternatively, delivery over 24 h is provided to assure elevated drug plasma levels in the early morning hours.