FORMULATION BASED ON POLYHEXAMETHYLENE BIGUANIDE FOR USE IN THE TREATMENT OF ACANTHAMOEBA KERATITIS AND/OR FUNGAL INFECTIONS

Abstract

The present invention relates to a stable formulation based on polyhexamethylene biguanide (PHMB) suitable for administration at an ophthalmic level, a process for its preparation and relative dosage regimen effective for the treatment of Acanthamoeba keratitis, and in particular for the eradication of cysts.

Claims

1. A liquid formulation comprising polyhexamethylene biguanide at a concentration within the range of 0.04%-0.08% (w/v), a buffer system for keeping the pH within the range of 5-6.5, and an isotonizing agent for keeping the osmolarity within the range of 270-330 mOsm/Kg, wherein the molecular weight of the polyhexamethylene biguanide is within the range of 2,300-6,000 amu and has a polydispersion index of the polymer within the range of 1.5-1.9, suitable for ophthalmic administration for use in the treatment of Acanthamoeba keratitis and/or fungal infections.

2. A method of treating co-infections by Acanthamoeba and Pseudomonas aeruginos or Staphylococcus epidermis comprising administering the liquid formulation of claim 1.

3. The liquid formulation according to claim 1, wherein the buffer system is selected from the group comprising phosphate, citrate, bicarbonate, borate, Tris, glycerol, mannitol, sorbitol, trometamol, histidine, glycine, HEPES buffer, and combinations thereof.

4. The liquid formulation according to claim 3, wherein the buffer system is selected from the group consisting of disodium phosphate dodecahydrate/monobasic sodium phosphate, disodium phosphate dodecahydrate/citric acid, Tris/HCl or boric acid/borate.

5. The liquid formulation according to claim 1, wherein the isotonizing agent is sodium chloride or potassium chloride.

6. The liquid formulation according to claim 1, wherein the polydispersity index of the polymer is within the range of 1.7-1.8.

7. The liquid formulation according to claim 1, having a pH of 5.8.

8. The liquid formulation according to claim 1, in the form of a collyrium, eye drops, ophthalmic gel or viscose solutions.

9. The liquid formulation according to claim 8, in the form of an ophthalmic gel or a viscose solution, further comprising a viscosifying agent selected from the group consisting of Xanthan gum, gellan gum, polyvinyl alcohol, hyaluronic acid, sodium hyaluronate, carboxymethylcellulose and hydroxypropylcellulose.

10. The liquid formulation according to claim 1, further comprising a penetration enhancer selected from Tween 80 and benzalkonium chloride.

11. The liquid formulation according to claim 1, further comprising 0.02% chlorhexidine, 0.1% propamidine or 0.1% desomidine.

12. The method according to claim 2, wherein administering the liquid compositon comprises ophthalmic administration of a graduated dosage of 16 drops/day for 5 days, 8 drops/day for 7 days, 6 drops/day for 7 days and 4 drops/day until clinical resolution.

13. A process for the preparation of a liquid formulation according to claim 1, comprising: (i) adding the buffer system at a concentration ranging from 0.01% to 4.5% (w/v) and of the isotonizing agent at a concentration ranging from 0.01% and 5.5% (w/v) in purified water under gentle and continuous stirring; with the optional addition of a viscosifying agent selected from sodium hyaluronate, xanthan gum, polyvinyl alcohol, carboxymethylcellulose and hydroxypropylcellulose; (ii) adding the polyhexamethylene biguanide having a molecular weight within the range of 2,300-6,000 amu and a polydispersion index within the range of 1.5 1.9, at a concentration within the range of 0.04%-0.08% (w/v) under gentle stirring; (iii) bringing to volume by the addition of purified water; (iv) sterilization by filtration or heat.

14. The process according to claim 13, wherein the buffer system comprises a phosphate, citrate, bicarbonate, borate, Tris, glycerol, mannitol, sorbitol, trometamol, his-tidine, glycine, HEPES buffer, and combinations thereof.

15. The process according to claim 14, wherein the buffer system is selected from the group consisting of disodium phosphate dodecahydrate/monobasic sodium phosphate, disodium phosphate dodecahydrate/citric acid, Tris/HCl and boric acid/borate.

16. The process according to claim 13, wherein the isotonizing agent is sodium chloride or potassium chloride.

17. A method of treating Acanthamoeba keratitis, co-infections by Acanthamoeba and Pseudomonas aeruginosa or fungal infections comprising administering the liquid formulation of claim 1 by controlled release of the active ingredient.

18. The process according to claim 13, wherein the polyhexamethylene biguanide has a polydispersion index within the range of 1.7-1.8.

Description

[0051] The present invention will now be described for illustrative but non-limiting purposes, according to a preferred embodiment with particular reference to the attached figures, in which:

[0052] FIG. 1 shows the structure of the repeating unit of hexamethylene biguanide in PHMB;

[0053] FIG. 2 shows a flow chart of the preparation process of the PHMB-based formulations;

[0054] FIG. 3 illustrates the chromatogram obtained by gel-permeation chromatography of the PHMB in API.

[0055] FIG. 4 illustrates the chromatogram obtained by gel-permeation chromatography of the PHMB in the finished product; from a comparison with the chromatogram of FIG. 2 referring to the raw material, it is evident how the production process is capable of keeping the molecular-weight distribution of the raw material unchanged, up to the finished product.

[0056] FIG. 5 shows the comparison between the stability data of the 0.08% PHMB-based formulation at pH 7.4 and pH 5.8.

[0057] FIG. 6 shows a comparison between the PHMB-DNA bond in relation to the molecular weight. From the trend of the graph it can be appreciated that using PHMB with a high molecular weight the polymer-DNA bond is more effective as one or more nucleic acid molecules are involved. The high-molecular-weight polymer is capable of forming cross-bridge links between different nucleic acid molecules forming a network of bonds (line with circles). Vice versa, the line with squares reflects the establishment of a linear type bond between PHMB and DNA, in which the polymer characterized by a lower molecular weight cannot show an aptitude for forming cross-bridge bonds but establishes a bond in which only one nucleic acid molecule is involved.

[0058] FIG. 7 (A) shows the results of the stability study of 0.08% PHMB formulations using PHMB batches with different molecular weights (MW) and polydispersion indexes (PDI), expressed as % recovery (w/v) of PHMB at T0 and after 12 months (T12).

[0059] FIG. 7 (B) shows the results of the stability study of a 0.08% PHMB formulation, using a PHMB batch characterized by a MW=2,641 amu and a PDI=1.6. The study was carried out under three different temperature conditions: long term stability 25° C., RH 40%; intermediate stability 30° C., RH 65%; accelerated stability 40° C. RH 25%. Stability results expressed as % recovery (w/v) of PHMB at T0 and after 3 months (T3) are indicated.

[0060] The following non-limiting examples are now provided for a better illustration of the invention, wherein various PHMB-based formulations were tested and compared, evaluating the impact on the stability of some formulation parameters such as pH, osmolarity, molecular weight and polydispersion index of the active ingredient PHMB.

Example 1: Preparation Process of PHMB-Based Formulations

[0061] The process for preparing the formulation according to the invention is illustrated in the diagram of FIG. 2.

[0062] Disodium phosphate dodecahydrate (Na.sub.2HPO.sub.4.12H.sub.2O), monobasic sodium phosphate (NaH.sub.2PO.sub.4.H.sub.2O) and sodium chloride are added in succession and dissolved in a volume of purified water under continuous gentle stirring.

[0063] The stirring step is critical for maintaining the initial molecular weight and the polydispersion index of PHMB and must be effected avoiding the formation of foam or vortexes in the solution. A stir bar or wheel to be immersed in the solution for stirring is preferably used. Finally, PHMB (0.08%) is added.

[0064] The solution is brought to volume (100 ml) by adding a sufficient quantity of purified water and under continuous stirring. The pH and appearance of the solution are then controlled.

[0065] Sterilization is effected by filtration through a 0.2 μM filter. The nature of the filter membrane and the dynamics (pressure, flow) are selected so as to prevent the product from being forced through the membrane to avoid depolymerization or breakage of the polymer chain.

[0066] After filtration, the integrity of the 0.2 μm filter is controlled by means of an electronic control system.

[0067] Finally, the sterile solution is used for filling single-dose containers using the Blow/Fill/Seal (B/F/S) technology under aseptic conditions.

[0068] This automated technology allows a vial to be filled and sealed, under aseptic conditions with solution volumes ranging from 0.1 to 1,000 cm.sup.3.

[0069] The PHMB solution appears as a clear colourless or pale yellow liquid.

[0070] At the end of the production process, the characterization of the finished product in its main components is effected, including any impurities with suitable chromatographic methods.

[0071] The comparison between the PHMB chromatogram in the API (FIG. 3) and the PHMB chromatogram following the preparation process of the formulation (FIG. 4), shows that the molecular-weight distribution of the PHMB is unaltered.

Example 2: Comparison Studies on the Stability of PHMB-Based Formulations

[0072] The PHMB-based formulations produced are sterile solutions whose relevant physicochemical parameters are pH and osmolarity.

[0073] As detailed, the choice of a slightly acidic pH is governed by the necessity of obtaining a stable formulation that cannot be obtained at a pH around neutrality.

[0074] For this purpose, various formulations based on PHMB 0.08% at different pH values (5.8, 6.2, 7.4) were developed, subsequently verifying their stability at 25° C., 40° C. and 60° C.

[0075] For the preparation of the formulation based on PHMB 0.08%, pH 5.8 the following ingredients were weighed:

TABLE-US-00001 TABLE 1 Ingredient Function % (w/v) NaH.sub.2PO.sub.4•H.sub.2O buffer 0.827 g Na.sub.2HPO.sub.4•12 H.sub.2O buffer 0.240 g NaCl isotonizing agent 0.520 g PHMB active ingredient  0.08 g Sterile water solvent complement to 100 ml

[0076] Table 2 hereunder indicates the physico-chemical characteristics of the final formulation at pH 5.8 and during the phases of the preparation process of the same.

TABLE-US-00002 TABLE 2 Osmolarity Active Recovery (mOsm/ UV (UV pH Kg) spectrum quantitative) Buffer solution — 289 — — (Before adding PHMB) Buffer with PHMB 5.8 290 corresponds — (before sterilization) Formulation sterilized 5.8 297 corresponds 100.4 by filtration

[0077] For the preparation of the formulation based on PHMB 0.08%, pH 6.2 the following ingredients were weighed following the same process described above:

TABLE-US-00003 TABLE 3 Ingredient Function % (w/v) NaH.sub.2PO.sub.4•H.sub.2O buffer 0.735 g Na.sub.2HPO.sub.4•12 H.sub.2O buffer 0.480 g NaCl isotonizing agent 0.510 g PHMB active ingredient  0.08 g Sterile water solvent complement to 100 ml

[0078] Table 4 hereunder indicates the physico-chemical characteristics of the final formulation at pH 6.2 and during the phases of the preparation process of the same.

TABLE-US-00004 TABLE 4 Active Recovery Osmolarity UV (UV pH (mOsm/Kg) spectrum quantitative) Buffer solution 6.05 291 — — (Before adding PHMB) Buffer with PHMB 6.07 295 corresponds — (before sterilization) Sterilized formulation 6.20 287 corresponds 100.9 by filtration

[0079] For the preparation of the formulation based on 0.08% PHMB, pH 7.4, the following ingredients were weighed:

TABLE-US-00005 TABLE 5 Ingredient Function % (w/v) NaH.sub.2PO.sub.4•H.sub.2O buffer 1.91 g Na.sub.2HPO.sub.4•12 H.sub.2O buffer 0.19 g NaCl isotonizing agent 0.44 g PHMB active ingredient 0.08 g Sterile water solvent complement to 100 ml

[0080] Table 6 hereunder indicates the physico-chemical characteristics of the final formulation at pH 7.4 and during the phases of the preparation process of the same.

TABLE-US-00006 TABLE 6 Osmolarity Active UV pH (mOsm/Kg) spectrum Buffer solution — — — (Before adding PHMB) Buffer with PHMB 7.45 286 corresponds (before sterilization) Formulation sterilized 7.45 286 corresponds by filtration Formulation sterilized 7.33 295 corresponds in an auto-clave Filtered formulation, 7.36 293 corresponds after 2 weeks at 25° C.

[0081] Comparisons were then made on the stability of 0.08% PHMB-based formulations in a single dose container at a pH of 5.8 and 7.4 at 25° C. (long term), 40° C. (accelerated) and 60° C. (stress conditions).

[0082] The results of the stability analyses are indicated hereunder: [0083] Stability data: [0084] 0.08% PHMB formulation, pH 5.8 at 25° C.±2° C. and relative humidity 40%±5 (long term)

TABLE-US-00007 TABLE 7 Limits Weeks Analyses Meas. Unit Min Max 0 13 26 39 52 65 104 Appearance Transparent, free of corr.* corr. corr. corr. corr. corr. corr. foreign particles Colour Colourless corr. corr. corr. corr. corr. corr. corr. pH 5.3 6.3 5.7 5.6 5.8 5.8 5.8 5.8 5.8 Osmolarity mOsm/Kg 270 330 290 274 281 276 293 277 276 Biguanide Corresponds corr. corr. corr. corr. corr. corr. corr. (HPLC) to standard Biguanide % L.S. 90 110 97.6 97.8 99.7 96.2 98.8 92.5 94.6 test (UV) Impurity A % a.s. 5.0 0.8 1.0 1.0 1.8 0.8 1.0 0.9 Impurities % a.s. 5.0 0.9 0.9 1.2 2.4 1.1 1.4 1.1 B + C Water loss % 5.0 0.0 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.2 Sterility According to European sterile sterile pharmacopoeia *corr.: corresponding 0.08% PHMB formulation, pH 5.8 at 40° C. ± 2° C. and relative humidity 25% (accelerated)

TABLE-US-00008 TABLE 8 Limits Weeks Analysis Meas. Unit Min. Max. 0 13 26 Appearance Transparent, free of corr. corr. corr. foreign particles Colour Colourless corr. corr. corr. pH 5.3 6.3 5.7 5.6 5.8 Osmolarity mOsm/Kg 270 330 290 274 276 Biguanide Corresponding to the standard corr. corr. (HPLC) Biguanide test % L.S. 90 110 97.6 96.7 99.2 (UV) Impurity A % a.s. 5.0 0.8 1.0 0.9 Impur. B + C % a.s. 5.0 0.9 1.0 1.3 Water loss % 5.0 0.1 0.2 Sterility According to European sterile Pharmacopoeia *corr.: corresponding 0.08% PHMB formulation, pH 7.4 at 60° C. ± 2° C. and relative humidity 20% (stress conditions)

TABLE-US-00009 TABLE 9 Limits Weeks Analysis Meas. units Min. Max. 0 1 2 Appearance Transparent, free of corr. corr. corr. foreign particles Colour Colourless corr. corr. corr. pH 7.0 7.8 7.3 7.2 7.3 Osmolarity mOsm/Kg 270 330 276 294 299 Biguanide (ABS 1.5 1.4 1.3 ratio 235/220 nm) Sterility According to European sterile sterile Pharmacopoeia *corr.: corresponding PHMB 0.08% formulation, pH 5.8 at 60° C. ± 2° C. and relative humidity 20% (stress conditions)

TABLE-US-00010 TABLE 10 Limits Weeks Analysis Meas. units Min. Max. 0 1 2 Appearance Transparent, free of corr. corr. corr. foreign particles Colour Colourless corr. corr. corr. pH 5.3 6.3 5.8 5.6 5.7 Osmolarity mOsm/Kg 270 330 289 296 302 Biguanide (ABS 1.4 1.5 1.5 ratio 235/220 nm) Sterility According to European sterile sterile Pharmacopoeia *corr.: corresponding

[0085] The results shown in FIG. 5 show that the stability of the PHMB-based formulation obtained by maintaining a pH within the range of 5-6.5 is not achieved with a pH around neutral (pH 7.4).

Example 3: Study of the PHMB-DNA Bond

[0086] A study on the PHMB-DNA bond was carried out in order to evaluate the equivalence between low-molecular-weight PHMB and high-molecular-weight PHMB.

[0087] The binding capacity of PHMB to DNA can be considered as being independent of the specific type of DNA studied as indicated in literature [8], whereas the binding capacity and effectiveness to DNA depend on the molecular weight and polydispersion index of the PHMB polymer. When the polymer has a molecular weight ranging from 2,300 to 6,000 amu and a polydispersion index within the range of 1.5-1.9, the binding with DNA is more effective, probably because the length of the polymer is more suitable for the formation of cross-bridge bonds involving multiple nucleic acid molecules according to the mechanism proposed by Allen et al. [8]. Vice versa, when the polymer is characterized by a low molecular weight the bond will be linear and will involve a single nucleic acid molecule.

[0088] A comparative study was then conducted with different PHMB polymer samples in order to evaluate the binding capacity to nucleic acid molecules. The PHMB (sample A) was degraded by acid and high-temperature treatment for 5 hours to obtain low-molecular-weight PHMB polymers. The PHMB (sample B) did not receive any type of treatment and is characterized by a molecular weight that falls within the range claimed.

[0089] The capacity of both samples of binding nucleic acid molecules was then evaluated. The experimental method proposed herein is based on the interaction between an aqueous solution of PHMB and an aqueous solution of DNA. The quantity of the PHMB-DNA complex was measured as the difference between the initial quantity of both species in solution and the residual quantity after the end of the reaction. The quantity of both species in solution is monitored by spectrophotometric measurements at 2 different wavelengths, 260 nm for DNA and 235 nm for PHMB, respectively.

[0090] In conclusion, the data show an increased capacity of high-molecular-weight PHMB in interacting with DNA through the formation of cross-bridge bonds with multiple nucleic acid molecules and therefore a consequent greater efficacy in the treatment of infectious Acanthamoeba keratitis or of co-infections from Pseudomonas aeruginosa. The type of bond between the PHMB polymer and DNA that is created is much more effective, as shown in the graph in FIG. 6.

Example 4: Stability Study in Relation to the Molecular Weight and the Polydispersion Index of PHMB

[0091] A comparative study was carried out on three different PHMB-based starting batches characterized by different molecular weights and polydispersion indexes (PDI): [0092] batch L-17GR185627, MW=2517 amu, PDI=1.73, [0093] batch F-693/LU/101, MW=1170 amu, PDI=1.93; [0094] batch F-693/LU/118, MW=440 amu, PDI=2.14.

[0095] For each lot a 0.08% PHMB formulation was prepared characterized by pH=5.8, osmolarity 0.280 osmol/Kg.

[0096] The stability of the PHMB formulation was then evaluated at T0 and after 12 months (T=12) at a temperature of 25° C.±2° C., RH 40±5%. The parameters considered are the following: [0097] Appearance [0098] Recovery% (w/v) of the active ingredient

[0099] The results are indicated in the following Table 11 and in the graph of FIG. 7A.

TABLE-US-00011 TABLE 11 MW Months Batch (Da) PDI Test T = 0 T = 12 L-17GR185627 2517 1.73 Appearance Acceptable Acceptable Recovery %   101.5 97.1 PHMB (UV) F-693/LU/101 1170 1.93 Appearance Acceptable Not acceptable Recovery % 100 35.8 PHMB (UV) F-693/LU/118 440 2.14 Appearance Acceptable Non acceptable Recovery % 100 12.2 PHMB (UV)

[0100] The stability study confirms that the most stable 0.08% PHMB formulation is that characterized by the PHMB with the highest molecular weight, i.e. batch L-17GR185627, MW=2517 amu, pH=5.8 and with a PDI value of 1.73. No significant degradation products (BP) were observed throughout the duration of the stability study.

[0101] 0.08% PHMB solutions characterized by a low molecular weight (batch F-693/LU/101, MW=1170 amu—batch F-693/LU/118, MW=440 amu) indicate a reduced recovery % of PHMB after 12 months and therefore instability of the formulation and reduced effectiveness.

[0102] It is therefore evident that the parameters of the molecular weight and polydispersion index of PHMB together with the pH of the solution contribute synergistically to providing a stable and effective formulation.

[0103] Furthermore, a stability study was carried out on 0.08% PHMB solutions, at pH 5.8 and osmolality 0.290 osmol/Kg, characterized by a MW=2641 amu and a PDI=1.6. The study was carried out under three different temperatures conditions: Long term stability 25° C., RH 40%; Intermediate stability 30° C., RH 65%; Accelerated stability 40° C. RH 25%. The stability results are indicated hereunder, and in FIG. 7 (B):

TABLE-US-00012 TABLE 12 Months Conditions Test T = 0 T = 3 25° C., RH 40% Appearance Acceptable Acceptable Recovery % PHMB 103.7 103.1 (UV) 30° C., RH 65%; Appearance Acceptable Acceptable Recovery % PHMB 103.7 101.7 (UV) 40° C. RH 25% Appearance Acceptable Acceptable Recovery % PHMB 103.7 105.3 (UV)

[0104] The results of the stability tests show that the product is stable under all the temperature conditions investigated, as the recovery % of PHMB falls within the predetermined specifications limit, 90-110% (w/v). The other chemical-physical parameters investigated (data not shown), such as pH, osmolality and recovery assay of the impurities, remain stable and within the specified specification limits, under all of the three climatic conditions tested.

Example 5: Clinical Study

[0105] A randomized, multicentre, double-blind, parallel-group Phase 3 study is described in detail hereunder, for evaluating the efficacy, safety and tolerability of the 0.08% PHMB formulation of the invention compared to a conventional combination therapy 0.02% PHMB+0.1% propamidine in male and female adult subjects suffering from Acanthamoeba keratitis.

[0106] The study is conceived as a superiority study in accordance with EMA requirements (CPMP/EWP/482/99). The study comprises a screening visit for inclusion, a treatment period that includes short outpatient visits and follow-up visits.

[0107] A total of 130 subjects with Acanthamoeba keratitis were assigned to the following two treatment groups in a 1:1 ratio.

[0108] Group 1: 0.08% PHMB+placebo

[0109] Group 2: 0.02% PHMB+0.1% combination therapy.

[0110] Patients:

[0111] The study was conducted in male and female subjects suffering from Acanthamoeba keratitis, ≥12 years of age, inclusive.

[0112] Objective:

[0113] The primary objective of the study is the comparison of the Clinical Resolution Rate (CRR) 12 months after randomization (CRR_12) between the 0.08% PHMB+placebo formulation and the combination therapy 0.02% PHMB+0.1% propamidine, evaluating the difference between CRR_12 in relation to the degree of uncertainty, and testing the therapeutic superiority or non-inferiority of monotherapy with 0.08% PHMB

[0114] A further objective of the study is to obtain information on the safety of the ophthalmic formulation based on 0.08% PHMB according to the invention.

[0115] Hypothesis:

[0116] The primary hypothesis to be tested is that the CRR12 of the subjects treated with monotherapy with the 0.08% PHMB formulation is higher or not inferior, lower by a still acceptable margin (Δ), with respect to the CRR12 of the combination therapy 0.02% PHMB+0.1% propamidine, administered according to the treatment protocol indicated hereunder.

[0117] The secondary hypotheses are: [0118] the undesirable effects relating to toxicity are lower with the 0.08% PHMB monotherapy compared to the combination therapy; [0119] time to cure is lower in subjects receiving the 0.08% PHMB monotherapy compared to the combination therapy.

[0120] The clinical resolution obtained within 12 months of starting treatment is 67%, as indicated in the sponsor's retrospective study (Study 038/SI).

[0121] Concurrent and Previous Treatments

[0122] The subjects are authorized to take or have taken the following drugs:

[0123] Antibiotics: Topical moxifloxacin is allowed for the treatment of concomitant bacterial infections. It is not permitted however as a prophylactic antibiotic for the treatment of patients with corneal ulcers; PHMB is already a broad-spectrum antibacterial and an additional anti-bacterial is not needed. Topical moxifloxacin is not permitted for use as a prophylactic antibiotic in patients with corneal ulcers; PHMB is a good broad-spectrum anti-bacterial and an additional antibacterial is not needed for this.

[0124] Antiviral and antifungal drugs: The use of these drugs is not allowed during the study. Any intake of these drugs at the onset of the study must be discontinued.

[0125] Anti-inflammatory drugs: For subjects under steroid treatment at the onset of the study (who are already taking local steroids, e.g. for a misdiagnosis of HSV keratitis or as an adjuvant treatment for bacterial keratitis) the following options exist: [0126] a. Interruption, maintenance or reduction of steroid doses. Dexamethasone (0.1% or 0.15%) is the only local steroid allowed in this trial. Patients using other topical steroids at the time of the start of the study must change the frequency of administration. Diclofenac is the only oral NSAID allowed in the trial and is added in the appropriate doses (75 mg-150 mg per day, divided into 2-3 doses). [0127] b. Subjects using NSAIDS or cyclosporine at the time of the start of the clinical study must stop treatment after randomization. [0128] c. Subjects who are not using local steroids at the time of entry into the study can start them together with oral NSAIDs (recommended diclofenac; 75 mg-150 mg per day, divided into 2-3 doses) during the study as specified in the protocol.

[0129] Other topical therapeutic treatments permitted: lubricants, mydriatics (cyclopentolate, homatropine or atropine) and anti-glaucoma drugs.

[0130] Dosage

[0131] The dosage applied in the clinical efficacy study is as follows: [0132] administration of a graduated dosage of 16 drops per day for 5 days, 8 drops per day for 7 days, 6 drops per day for 7 days and 4 drops per day until clinical resolution.

[0133] Treatment Assignment:

[0134] Protocol for bilateral pathology: if both eyes are affected only one of the two (the right unless there is a difference in severity such as to require treatment of the more compromised eye) will be treated according to the dosage of the treatment and considered for the study. The other eye will be treated according to standard clinical practice.

[0135] Table 13 below summarizes the demographics and distribution of patients participating in the study.

TABLE-US-00013 TABLE 13 PHMB PHMB 0.02% + 0.08% + 0.1% Pro- placebo pamidine Total Screened 69 66 135 Screening failures 0 0 0 Randomized 69 66 135 Did not receive the 0 1 (1.5%)  1 (0.7%) study drug.sup.1 Safety analysis set.sup.1 69 (100%)  65 (98.5%) 134 (99.3%) Study completion .sup.2 58 (84.1%) 57 (87.7%) 115 (85.8%) Premature withdrawals 11 (15.9%)  7 (10.8%)  18 (13.4%) from the study .sup.2 did not receive the 0   1 (100.0%)    1 (100.0%) study drug Full analysis set.sup.1 66 (95.7%) 61 (92.4%) 127 (94.1%) Study completion .sup.2 56 (84.8%) 53 (86.9%) 109 (85.8%) Premature withdrawals 10 (15.2%)  7 (11.5%)  17 (13.4%) from the study .sup.2 DX not confirmed  3 (100%) 4 (80%)    7 (87.5%) Absence of primary 0 1 (20%)    1 (12.5%) efficacy evaluation Protocol analysis set.sup.1 62 (89.9%) 57 (86.4%) 119 (88.1%) Study completion.sup.2 54 (87.1%) 50 (87.7%) 104 (87.4%) Premature withdrawals  8 (12.9%)  6 (10.5%)  14 (11.8%) from the study .sup.2 Maximum PD  4 (57.1%)  4 (44.4%)  8 (50%) Not FAS  3 (42.9%)  5 (55.6%)  8 (50%) .sup.1Percentages based on the number of randomized patients within each treatment group .sup.2 Percentages based on the number of subjects included in the analysis set

[0136] Table 14 shows the 12-month clinical resolution rate. Patients are divided into patients with and without prior steroid treatment.

TABLE-US-00014 TABLE 14 PHMB PHMB + 0.08% 0.02% + PHMB 0.1% Pro- Total Clinical resolution placebo pamidine (N = rate 12 months (N = 66) (N = 61) 127) Prior steroid- Unresolved  7 (22.6%) 2 (10%)   9 (17.6%) treated Resolution 24 (77.4%) 18 (90%)   42 (82.4%) patients* Patients Unresolved 3 (8.6%)  5 (12.2%)  8 (10.5%) without Resolution 32 (91.4%) 36 (87.8%) 68 (89.5%) prior steroid treatment *Any use of any of these drugs prior to therapy: Corticosteroids and anti-infective drugs in combination, corticosteroids The percentages are based on the number of subjects within each subgroup and treatment

[0137] Results:

[0138] Primary Efficacy: 12-month Clinical Resolution Rate

[0139] The results of the clinical study reveal the non-inferiority of 0.08% PHMB monotherapy compared to the combination therapy 0.02% PHMB+Propamidine 0.1% in terms of clinical resolution rate at 12 months (CRR_12)

[0140] * CRR_12 for 0.08% PHMB monotherapy is equal to 87.1%

[0141] * CRR_12 for 0.02% PHMB+Propamidine 0.1% is equal to 89.5%

[0142] Monotherapy is always preferred to combination therapy and the results do not show any statistically significant differences.

[0143] The percentage of subjects previously treated with corticosteroid-based therapies are indicated hereunder: [0144] 22.6% for 0.08% PHMB monotherapy [0145] 10% for 0.02% PHMB+Propamidine 0.1% combination therapy

[0146] The CRR12 clinical resolution rate for patients with and without prior steroid treatment are indicated hereunder:

[0147] * CRR_12 for monotherapy 0.08% PHMB is equal to 91.4%

[0148] * CRR_12 for 0.02% PHMB+Propamidine 0.1% is equal to 87.8%

[0149] The CRR_12 obtained with monotherapy is in both cases unexpected, as the combination therapy followed in normal clinical practice provides a CRR_12 of approximately 63-67%.

[0150] The clinical study therefore not only demonstrates that monotherapy under the formulation conditions described (MW, PDI and PHMB polymer concentration 0.04%-0.008%, pH and osmolality) is equivalent to the combination therapy, but in both cases the results obtained are better than those previously described in clinical practice (retrospective study 083/SI).

[0151] Secondary Efficacy: Cure Time

[0152] The cure times associated with the treatment are:

[0153] * 0.08% PHMB group: 138.3 days* (range 32-365 days)

[0154] * 0.02% PHMB group+Propamidine 0.1%: 117.1* days

[0155] (range 54-214 days)

[0156] *average value

[0157] 0.08% PHMB shows a cure time within a wider range. A longer cure time is generally associated with a monotherapy treatment with respect to a combination therapy, but unexpectedly the lower limit of the cure time range for monotherapy shows a resolution at 32 days. The results do not show any statistical difference.

[0158] Table 15 shows the results for the time-to-care of patients who have been treated

TABLE-US-00015 TABLE 15 PHMB PHMB 0.02% + 0.08% + 0.1% placebo Propamidine Treatment time (days) (N = 56) (N = 54) Visit at the end of the study n/nmiss 56/0 54/0 Average (DS) 138.3 (67.3) 117.1 (47) Mean 125 112 Q1, Q3 93.152 85.151 Min, Max 32.365 54.214 p-value for the difference 0.0934 between treatment groups.sup.1 n/nmiss = number of subjects with evaluated/missing data Q1 = first quartile, Q3 = third quartile, SD = standard deviation .sup.1Mann Whitney U test.

Bibliography

[0159] [1] Kilvington S, Larkin DF. Acanthamoeba adherence to contact lenses and removal by cleaning agents. Eye 1990;4:589-593.

[0160] [2] Sharma R., et al. Coinfection with Acanthamoeba and Pseudomonas in contact lens-associated keratitis. Optom Vis Sci. 2013; 90(2): e53-5

[0161] [3] Singh A., et al. Acanthamoeba Keratitis Versus Mixed Acanthamoeba and Bacterial Keratitis: Comparison of Clinical and Microbiological Profiles. Cornea. 2020; 39:1112-1116.

[0162] [4] Nakagawa H., et al. Number of Bacteria and Time of Coincubation With Bacteria Required for the Development of Acanthamoeba Keratitis. Cornea. 2017; 36:353-357.

[0163] [5] Larkin D. F., et al., Treatment of Acanthamoeba keratitis with polyhexamethylene biguanide, Ophthalmology, 99 (1992) 185.

[0164] [6] Dave S. B., Changes in ocular flora in eyes exposed to ophthalmic antibiotics. Ophthalmology. 2013;120:937-41.

[0165] [7] Ian J. et al., Effects of Polyhexamethylene Biguanide and Polyquaternium-1on Phospholipid Bilayer Structure and Dynamics, J. Phys. Chem. B 2015,119,10531-10542.

[0166] [8] M. J. Allen, et al. White Cooperativity in the binding of the cationic biocide polyhexamethylene biguanide to nucleic acids. Biochemical and Biophysical Research Communications 318 (2004) 397-404.

[0167] [9] K. Chindera, et al. The antimicrobial polymer PHMB enters cells and selectively condenses bacterial chromosomes. Scientific Reports 6:23121.

[0168] [10] Papa V. et al. Ocular safety and tolerability of high dose PHMB (Polyhexanide) in healthy volunteers. ARVO, 2017.

[0169] [11] Sowlati-Hashjin S., et al. Insights into the Polyhexamethylene Biguanide (PHMB) Mechanism of Action on Bacterial Membrane and DNA: A Molecular Dynamics Study. J Phys Chem B. 2020;124:4487-4497.

[0170] [12] Domanda di brevetto US2007/0140897 A1.

[0171] [13] Y. Bouattour et al. Stability of an ophtalmic formulation of polyhexamethylene biguanide in gamma-sterilized and ethylene oxide sterilized low density polypropylene multidose eyedroppers. PEERJ, vol. 6 pag. e4549 (2018).