Toward A Reliable Quality Control Test For Microneedle Insertion

Microneedles (MNs) are emerging devices that can be used for the delivery of drugs at specific locations1. Their performance is primarily judged by different features and the penetration through tissue is one of the most important aspects to evaluate. For detailed studies of MN performance different kind of in-vitro, exvivo and in-vivo tests should be performed. The main limitation of some of these tests is that biological tissue is too heterogeneous, unstable and difficult to obtain. In addition the use of biological materials sometimes present legal issues. There are many studies dealing with artificial membranes for drug diffusion2, but studies of artificial membranes for Microneedle mechanical characterization are scarce3. In order to overcome these limitations we have developed tests using synthetic polymeric membranes instead of biological tissue. The selected artificial membrane is homogeneous, stable, and readily available. This material is mainly composed of a roughly equal blend of a hydrocarbon wax and a polyolefin and it is commercially available under the brand name Parafilm®. The insertion of different kind of MN arrays prepared from crosslinked polymers were performed using this membrane and correlated with the insertion of the MN arrays in ex-vivo neonatal porcine skin. The insertion depth of the MNs was evaluated using Optical coherence tomography (OCT). The implementation of MN transdermal patches in the market can be improved by make this product user-friendly and easy to use. Therefore, manual insertion is preferred to other kind of procedures. Consequently, the insertion studies were performed in neonatal porcine skin and the artificial membrane using a manual insertion force applied by human volunteers. The insertion studies using manual forces correlated very well with the same studies performed with a Texture Analyzer equipment. These synthetic membranes seem to mimic closely the mechanical properties of the skin for the insertion of MNs using different methods of insertion. In conclusion, this artificial membrane substrate offers a valid alternative to biological tissue for the testing of MN insertion and can be a good candidate for developing a reliable quality control MN insertion test.

The Use of a Pressure-Indicating Sensor Film to Provide Feedback upon Hydrogel-Forming Microneedle Array Self-Application In Vivo

PURPOSE:
To evaluate the combination of a pressure-indicating sensor film with hydrogel-forming microneedle arrays, as a method of feedback to confirm MN insertion in vivo.
METHODS:
Pilot in vitro insertion studies were conducted using a Texture Analyser to insert MN arrays, coupled with a pressure-indicating sensor film, at varying forces into excised neonatal porcine skin. In vivo studies involved twenty human volunteers, who self-applied two hydrogel-forming MN arrays, one with a pressure-indicating sensor film incorporated and one without. Optical coherence tomography was employed to measure the resulting penetration depth and colorimetric analysis to investigate the associated colour change of the pressure-indicating sensor film.
RESULTS:
Microneedle insertion was achieved in vitro at three different forces, demonstrating the colour change of the pressure-indicating sensor film upon application of increasing pressure. When self-applied in vivo, there was no significant difference in the microneedle penetration depth resulting from each type of array, with a mean depth of 237 μm recorded. When the pressure-indicating sensor film was present, a colour change occurred upon each application, providing evidence of insertion.
CONCLUSIONS:
For the first time, this study shows how the incorporation of a simple, low-cost pressure-indicating sensor film can indicate microneedle insertion in vitro and in vivo, providing visual feedback to assure the user of correct application. Such a strategy may enhance usability of a microneedle device and, hence, assist in the future translation of the technology to widespread clinical use.

Effectiveness of Community versus Hospital Eye Service follow-up for patients with neovascular age-related macular degeneration with quiescent disease (ECHoES): a virtual non-inferiority trial

OBJECTIVES: To compare the ability of ophthalmologists versus optometrists to correctly classify retinal lesions due to neovascular age-related macular degeneration (nAMD).

DESIGN: Randomised balanced incomplete block trial. Optometrists in the community and ophthalmologists in the Hospital Eye Service classified lesions from vignettes comprising clinical information, colour fundus photographs and optical coherence tomographic images. Participants' classifications were validated against experts' classifications (reference standard).

SETTING: Internet-based application.

PARTICIPANTS: Ophthalmologists with experience in the age-related macular degeneration service; fully qualified optometrists not participating in nAMD shared care.

INTERVENTIONS: The trial emulated a conventional trial comparing optometrists' and ophthalmologists' decision-making, but vignettes, not patients, were assessed. Therefore, there were no interventions and the trial was virtual. Participants received training before assessing vignettes.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Primary outcome-correct classification of the activity status of a lesion based on a vignette, compared with a reference standard. Secondary outcomes-potentially sight-threatening errors, judgements about specific lesion components and participants' confidence in their decisions.

RESULTS: In total, 155 participants registered for the trial; 96 (48 in each group) completed all assessments and formed the analysis population. Optometrists and ophthalmologists achieved 1702/2016 (84.4%) and 1722/2016 (85.4%) correct classifications, respectively (OR 0.91, 95% CI 0.66 to 1.25; p=0.543). Optometrists' decision-making was non-inferior to ophthalmologists' with respect to the prespecified limit of 10% absolute difference (0.298 on the odds scale). Optometrists and ophthalmologists made similar numbers of sight-threatening errors (57/994 (5.7%) vs 62/994 (6.2%), OR 0.93, 95% CI 0.55 to 1.57; p=0.789). Ophthalmologists assessed lesion components as present less often than optometrists and were more confident about their classifications than optometrists.

CONCLUSIONS: Optometrists' ability to make nAMD retreatment decisions from vignettes is not inferior to ophthalmologists' ability. Shared care with optometrists monitoring quiescent nAMD lesions has the potential to reduce workload in hospitals.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: ISRCTN07479761; pre-results registration.