SI
SI
discoversearch

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor.  We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community.  If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.
Biotech / Medical : ARADIGM CORP. ARDM

 Public ReplyPrvt ReplyMark as Last ReadFilePrevious 10Next 10PreviousNext  
To: rkrw who wrote (133)5/10/2002 12:52:31 AM
From: tuck  Read Replies (1) of 255
 
rkrw,

If nothing else, Aradigm seems to have one heckuva an inhaler:

>> Chest 2002 Mar;121(3):871-6 Related Articles, Books, LinkOut

Accuracy of three electronic monitors for metered-dose inhalers.

Julius SM, Sherman JM, Hendeles L.

Pediatric Pulmonary Division, University of Florida, Gainesville, FL 30342, USA. StevenJulius@aol.com

BACKGROUND: Prior studies indicate that some devices used to monitor metered-dose inhaler (MDI) use are not accurate. OBJECTIVE: To assess the accuracy of the Doser CT (NEW-MED Corporation; Waltham, MA), the MDILog (Medtrac Technologies; Lakewood, CO), and the SmartMist (Aradigm Corporation; Hayward, CA) in a bench-top study. DESIGN: One, two, and four puffs of fluticasone propionate MDI (Flovent; GlaxoWellcome; Research Triangle Park, NC) were actuated twice daily for 30 days with two units of each device. The date and time of each actuation were recorded in a log and then compared with the output of the device. The percentage of doses recorded accurately was compared by analysis of variance. Measurements and results: The SmartMist was 100% accurate, while both the Doser CT and MDILog devices occasionally recorded spurious actuations. The Doser CT also had missed actuations after the counter had prematurely reached zero secondary to the spurious recordings. The accuracy (mean plus minus SD) was 94.3 plus minus 2.9% for the Doser CT and 90.1 plus minus 6.9% for the MDILog (p = 0.21). The dose regimen actuated and duration of use did not significantly affect accuracy. CONCLUSION: All three devices are sufficiently accurate to monitor adherence in most clinical settings.<<

Has ARDM given an indication of how much more their inhaler costs? I gather including a microprocessor adds some cost, and while it may not be worth it for Flovent, maybe it is for other things? Smarter people than I have wondered about applications for delivering small molecules. Now that the fibrosis issues have arisen from inhaling proteins, I can see why. Can you think of any such molecules that would benefit from precision pulmonary delivery (outside of the pain program)? Should they be talking to SEPR?

TIA, and Cheers, Tuck
Report TOU ViolationShare This Post
 Public ReplyPrvt ReplyMark as Last ReadFilePrevious 10Next 10PreviousNext