Cited by 44Lysosomal Storage Disorders ResearchNanoparticle-Based Drug DeliveryBiomedical Research and Pathophysiology

2-Hydroxypropyl-β-cyclodextrins and the Blood-Brain Barrier: Considerations for Niemann-Pick Disease Type C1

Open access
Calias, Pericles·2018·Current Pharmaceutical Design

Abstract

The rare, chronic, autosomal-recessive lysosomal storage disease Niemann-Pick disease type C1 (NPC1) is characterized by progressively debilitating and ultimately fatal neurological manifestations. There is an urgent need for disease-modifying therapies that address NPC1 neurological pathophysiology, and passage through the blood-brain barrier represents an important consideration for novel NPC1 drugs. Animal investigations of 2-hydroxypropyl-β-cyclodextrins (HPβCD) in NPC1 in mice demonstrated that HPβCD does not cross the blood-brain barrier in significant amounts but suggested a potential for these complex oligosaccharides to moderately impact CNS manifestations when administered subcutaneously or intraperitoneally at very high doses; however, safety concerns regarding pulmonary toxicity were raised. Subsequent NPC1 investigations in cats demonstrated far greater HPβCD efficacy at much lower doses when the drug was administered directly to the CNS. Based on this, a phase 1/2a clinical trial was initiated with intrathecal administration of a specific, wellcharacterized mixture of HPβCD, with a tightly controlled molar substitution specification and a defined molecular "fingerprint" of the different species. The findings were very encouraging and a phase 2b/3 clinical trial has completed enrollment and is underway. In addition, phase 1 clinical studies utilizing high-dose intravenous administration of a different HPβCD are currently recruiting. Independent studies are needed for each product to satisfactorily address questions of safety, efficacy, dosing, and route of administration. The outcomes cannot be assumed to be translatable between HPβCD products and/or routes of administration.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.2174/1381612823666171019164220

Cites

35 of 35 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Cyclodextrins can be used for the preparation of formulations able to cross the blood-brain barrier, administered through nasal or oral/parenteral routes.

    “For instance, it is known that cyclodextrins can be used for the preparation of formulations able to cross the BBB, administered through nasal or oral/parenteral routes [16,23,80,81].”

    From Nanoemulsions for “Nose-to-Brain” Drug Delivery (2019) · cites this paper as [80]

    The Introduction (page unavailable) says cyclodextrins are used as excipients in drug formulations, supporting that part of the claim. It does not say those formulations cross the BBB by nasal, oral, or parenteral administration. Considerations and Future Perspectives (page unavailable) instead says the HPβCD studied does not readily cross the BBB in therapeutically relevant amounts. (LLM, conf=0.85)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

1 of the 36 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Calias, P.
Affiliations
Co-Founder and Pharmaceutical Development Consultant, Educational Trainers and Consultants, 39 Swains Pond Ave, Melrose, MA 02176, United States
Corresponding author
Calias, Pericles
Venue
Current Pharmaceutical Design
Published
2018-02-15
Volume
23
Issue
40
Pages
6231-6238
ISSN
1381-6128 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2765725508
Cited by
44
References
36
Citations by year
2026: 4 · 2025: 6 · 2024: 5 · 2023: 1 · 2022: 2 · 2021: 7 · 2020: 10 · 2019: 5 · 2018: 4
FWCI
0.85
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Current Pharmaceutical Design (publishedVersion)
  • Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Physiology › Lysosomal Storage Disorders Research
  • Physical Sciences › Materials Science › Biomaterials › Nanoparticle-Based Drug Delivery
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Pathology and Forensic Medicine › Biomedical Research and Pathophysiology
Keywords
Niemann-Pick disease type C1, hydroxypropyl-β-cyclodextrin, blood-brain barrier, lysosomal storage disease, intrathecal administration, brain drug delivery, pulmonary toxicity, drug safety, route of administration, clinical trials
MeSH terms
2-Hydroxypropyl-beta-cyclodextrin, Animals, Blood-Brain Barrier, Disease Models, Animal, Humans, Niemann-Pick Disease, Type C

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review