This study was performed in a continued effort to understand the inputs that drive therapy enhancement using an implantable IT drug delivery solution. The objective of this NHP work is to be able to augment current clinical research on catheter placement in IT baclofen therapy by providing additional understanding of the efficacy observations in clinical practice [17–19] as well as provide a means to increase the cranial distribution of IT delivered therapeutics. Previous studies in rhesus NHPs showed brain distribution of gadolinium-labeled diethylenetriamine pentaacetate (DTPA, MW 600 Da) as a surrogate for small molecules and gadolinium-labeled albumin (MW 74,000 Da) as a surrogate for peptides and mid-size biologics with both IT and ICV continuous infusion via a catheter and infusion pump. In these studies, global brain and spinal cord distribution was visualized by MRI imaging, but any further quantification of the data was challenging. This previous study also demonstrated that a minimal IT infusion rate of 0.4 mL/day was needed to achieve brain distribution whereas a lower infusion rate of 0.1 mL/day resulted in very limited brain distribution of the gadolinium-labeled compounds with MRI imaging [36].
The inherent capabilities of an implanted programmable drug infusion pump such as flow rates, and thus infusate volume, can be exploited to drive rostral delivery. Indeed, in a previous experiment in our laboratories, both benchtop and in silico modeling demonstrated that CSF oscillations are a larger driving force to rostral CSF distribution than infusion rate alone, even at the maximum rate of an infusion pump. It was also noted that increasing the total volume of a bolus, as in therapy trialing, can impact the degree of mixing observed more than possible rate adjustments with an infusion pump [37]. However, this current study shows that the placement of the catheter tip at the time of implant may have the most profound effect. Although the ability to manage spasticity is excellent with current clinical practices, it is important to understand the implications of changing this surgical implant parameter. In addition to spasticity, there are a variety of indications where enhanced distribution to key regions of the brain would be of value and potentially offer an alternative and less invasive solution to ICV catheterization. As clinicians consider the best treatment options for their patients, it is critical to understand both the opportunities and limitations of various drug delivery solutions. Conversely, it may be beneficial to maintain a lower, thoracic placement of the catheter tip for indications where a more local, less rostral spread of the therapeutic is desired.
In this experiment, with respect to brain concentrations, we observed the greatest difference in distribution (absolute exposure as well as pharmacokinetic patterns) between catheter tip positions in the posterior regions of the NHP brain, including the cerebellum and cerebellar white matter, brain stem, amygdala, insula, posterior putamen, and anterior and limbic cingulate cortex, with a maximum average C1:T10 AUC ratio of 39.6 for the anterior cingulate cortex. On average, the C1:T10 AUC ratio was found to be 14.8. The highest overall exposures were achieved for the cerebellum, brain stem, amygdala, occipital cortex, and the superior temporal cortex. Therefore, indications where these regions are the focus of pharmacological therapy could potentially stand to benefit the most from a higher catheter tip position instead of a typical thoracic implant. Likewise, cervical catheter placement could potentially result in more consistent therapy outcomes between subjects if the intended target was located in the brain. However, the individual pharmacokinetics of each therapeutic would need to be assessed to fully understand the drug distribution to a target region, and thus potential for therapy efficacy.
Similarly, cervical and upper thoracic AUCs were much higher for C1 positioning relative to T10 tip locations. In indications such as spasticity, in particular spasticity of a cerebral origin, increased rostral distribution with C1 positioning may improve therapy outcomes from intrathecal baclofen therapy. Grabb, et al observed a mild improvement in upper limb spasticity in pediatric patients by utilizing a midthoracic catheter tip positioning (T6-7) compared to T12 positioning, highlighting the potential of alternative tip locations [4]. A retrospective review of adult spasticity patients by McCall and MacDonald showed similar improvements in mean spasticity scores with cervical tip placement over thoracic [6]. Furthermore, Adesinasi examined the effect of catheter tip location on upper and lower extremity hypertonia using the Modified Ashworth Scale and found that patients with spasticity of a cerebral origin exhibited greater improvements with tip placement at higher spinal levels than patients with spasticity of a spinal origin [9]. In addition, if it was clinically desirable to target the upper spine, it could potentially be feasible to use a lower dose to achieve the desired clinical endpoint by exploiting the improved rostral distribution to the cervical and upper thoracic regions.
The delivery of therapeutics by the IT route is an active area of research. A question that is currently not well answered is an explanation of the high degree of variability in uptake within different regions of the brain (33). The mean coefficient of variance for the brain regions for the C1 and T10 catheter tip positions was 76% and 84%, respectively, despite marked differences in the total exposure of each region to the 18F-Baclofen. The higher variability in brain distribution with the T10 catheter tip position suggests that because the 18F-Baclofen has to traverse a longer length of the spinal IT space there is increased turbulence in the flow resulting from spinal nerve roots which perturbs the overall cranial flow of the 18 F-Baclofen.
The exposure to 18F-Baclofen in the cervical spinal cord was greater with a C1 catheter tip position compared to the T10 catheter tip position by a factor of 15 in the cervical spinal cord and 2.5 in the upper thoracic spinal cord but was close to unity in the lower thoracic and lumbar spinal cord. There was also greater variability in exposure in the cervical and upper thoracic spinal cord with the T10 catheter tip placement compared to the C1 (Coefficient of Variance 31% and 55% for the cervical and upper thoracic cord for C1 catheter tip and 145% and 140% for T10 catheter tip). It is known that the driving force for CSF circulation is primarily pulsations of the arterial supply to the brain within the IT space. The pulse wave magnitude decreases as it flows down the spinal IT space, and it increases as it returns cranially [38]. The spinal cord is eccentrically placed in the spinal IT space with its position changing along the length of the spinal cord, resulting in a spiral flow of CSF in both caudal and cranial directions [39]. The data presented here indicate that the highest exposure to the cervical and upper thoracic spinal cord occurs when the tip of the catheter is located at C1, resulting in a primarily caudal flow of 18F-baclofen, in contrast to the catheter tip being placed at T10 where the flow of 18F-baclofen is in a rostral direction. This has implications for the therapeutic delivery of baclofen using IT catheters.
The assumption that rostral distribution as a function of catheter tip placement is consistent from NHP to human has yet to be tested beyond spinal CSF sampling [17, 19]. It may also be crucial in determining differences in intrathecal dynamics in different disease states, for instance where integrity to the blood brain barrier is diminished, including chronic neuroinflammatory disorders of the CNS such as multiple sclerosis [40]. Additionally, a better understanding of the CSF and interstitial fluid exchange along the brain-wide network of perivascular spaces, which has been termed the ‘glymphatic system,’ will be crucial as dysfunction of this network is a feature of the aging and injured brain and has potential implications on how therapeutics reach their desired brain targets [41]. The choice of flow rate and drug volume administered for IT delivery to the brain is complex, and many different permutations have been published. The dynamics of CSF flow in the spinal CSF space are complex [42]. Largely, there are two approaches. The first is a bolus injection which, in theory, overwhelms the normal physiology resulting in the injectate volume being driven towards the brain. The second approach is a slow infusion which utilizes the normal physiology to transport the injectate to the brain, and simultaneously minimizes any perturbations of the normal flow. Logically, the delivery rate should be equal to, or lower than the normal flow rate. Published data indicate that the flow rate varies with both the site of measurement and the measurement technique. Khani et. al. demonstrated a peak CSF flow rate of 0.3-0.6mL/s in the mid cervical region in cynomolgus monkeys [43], whereas McCully et. al., determined the rate of CSF flow in rhesus monkeys using inulin administered in the lateral ventricles and sampled at the lumbar spine to be 0.018 mL/min [44]. This implies that our rate of administration of 0.055 mL/h, with good delivery to the brain, is likely to be less than the actual physiological flow rate and therefore unlikely to perturb the normal flow dynamics. Similarly, the rate could easily be translated from non-human primates to human subjects.