Although injections are generally regarded as more dependable than the oral form of GS-441524 for treating FIP, a number of cat owners opt for the oral option to avoid any potential discomfort that may come with injections. Certain felines may feel discomfort or develop a dislike for injections following an extended period of treatment, and there are those who may strongly oppose the procedure. In addition, there is a possibility of experiencing injection site sores as a result of the drug’s acidity. In these situations, oral capsules or FIP Tablets can be used as a substitute for injections. There is no need to worry about drug resistance when it comes to oral administration. The effectiveness of GS-441524 in treating both wet and dry FIP is consistent, regardless of the form it is taken in.

In the first tests of GS-441524 for treating FIP in the field, it was injected under the skin. Both intravenous and subcutaneous injections produced high blood levels that stayed at levels that stopped the virus for more than 24 hours. Researchers also found that giving the drug by mouth raised blood levels, but it did so a little later and only at about 40% of the peak levels seen with subcutaneous and intravenous routes (Pedersen NC, private data, 2018). However, dogs with longer intestines that evolved to eat both meat and plants can receive up to 85% of GS441524 through their food [1, 5]. mouth absorption studies have often used dogs as stand-ins for people. This means that mouth absorption in people is also likely to be higher than in cats.

So, the subcutaneous way was picked for tests in the field on cats because it was easy to use and produced high blood levels.

Chinese sellers of GS-441524 copied the published field trial’s diluent, drug concentration, and subcutaneous method of administration. Subsequently, they study the drug and offer it in pill form. Researchers in China discovered that they could get effective blood levels of GS-441524 by just making their oral versions contain more of the drug.

After that, other companies came out with their own versions of GS-441524 that could be taken by mouth. Consumers can buy capsules and tablets right now. The labels name a number of popular, safe chemicals and medical herbs as ingredients, but GS-441524 is not one of them. Customs officers probably don’t look closely at this. GS-441524 is the active agent in all oral goods, no matter what else is in them. The companies that sell sublingual goods don’t say how much GS-441524 is in them, but it is clear that it is a lot more than what would be needed if the drug were given under the skin.

It looks like more and more pet owners and vets are using oral GS-441524 as part of or all of the treatment. Over the last two years, the quality of oral GS-441524 products has gone up while the price has slowly gone down. Because of the problem of injection site reactions and the fact that oral preparations of GS-441524 work better, the mouth treatment has become more popular. More and more cats are being treated with drugs that they take by mouth, either for part of the treatment or all of it.

FIP Tablets vs Capsules: Composition and Dosage

GS-441524 for oral use contain a lot more GS441524 as active ingredient to make up for the loss in absorption. All of the well-known oral products are pills. But FIPMed’s tablets are smaller sized so they’re easier to consume. Some oral medication are FIP capsules which are also filled with liquid or powder, and if cats bite them, they may lose the medicine inside. When cats break open the pills, they have been known to have bad responses.

The directions for taking pills or tablets are the same for all oral types. It is usually best to not eat or drink anything for 30 minutes before and after giving the medicine. Some cats may be willing to take them if you give them a small treat, and many cats will eat them if you put them on a plate with a covering treat (like Churu).

While both oral capsules and pills are equally effective, administering capsules is generally more difficult than pills. Capsules are bigger, making it hard for cats to swallow them effortlessly. It takes more production capabilities to compress the powder form into tablets, while backdoor amateur production uses human labour to put the powder into capsules.

FIPMED oral pills are smaller-sized compared to those in the market, yet contain high absorbable amount of GS441524. They are sold in 30mg and 40mg concentrations not like the 5mg ones in the market, which you need to provide multiple tablets for the same effect. They are compact and can be easily administered in most situations.

Cost of FIP tablets

In the past year, the price of oral GS has gone down a lot. Speaking of prices, oral GS-441524 is 20–40% more expensive than its injectable counterpart, however FIPMed’s tablets are the most affordable in the market and cost almost similar to the injectables.

What makes mouth vs. shot different

Oral GS-441524 is usually not a good idea for cats that are already vomitting or regurgitating and having diarrhea. People often give cats with major digestive problems injections until the problems go away. Subcutaneous administration of GS-441524 is also more reliable than oral administration. This is often a very important factor in the initial care of cats that are very sick and unsteady. When deciding whether to keep giving injectable GS-441524 to a cat, it often depends on how well the owner can do the shots, how ready the cat is to get used to the pain, and how often injection site sores appear. When this happens, oral medicine is often a nice break for both the owner and the cat.

How effective is oral GS-441524 as a FIP treatment

When administered at the appropriate time and dosage, oral FIP treatment can be just as effective as subcutaneous injections in addressing feline infectious peritonitis. On the other hand, FIP treatment experts generally concur that cats treated orally have a greater chance of relapse compared to those treated with injections throughout the entire course of treatment. Oral capsules and pills may not provide optimal treatment for cats with neurological forms of FIP or those experiencing frequent vomiting or diarrhea. Currently, there are no reported side effects linked to either the injection or oral FIP treatment.

Some cats haven’t reacted well to taking GS-441524 by mouth as the first treatment, or they have had relapses when they switched from shots to pills. In other cases, giving cats the same amount of GS-441524 by mouth has cured diseases that weren’t responding well to shots. We do recommend injectable form of GS-441524 which could reach the accurate amounts needed to treat Neuro FIP disease, especially when the virus has become resistant to different drugs.

 

Referenced studies on GI absorption of nucleosides related to GS-441524 and GS-441524

1. Thomas L. A precursor to remdesivir shows therapeutic potential for COVID-19.
https://www.news-medical.net/news/20210209/A-precursor-to-remdesivir-showstherapeuticpotential-for-COVID-19.aspx.

2. Painter GR, Bowen RA, Bluemling GR, et al. The prophylactic and therapeutic activity of a
broadly active ribonucleoside analog in a murine model of intranasal venezuelan equine
encephalitis virus infection. Antiviral Res. 2019;171:104597.
doi:10.1016/j.antiviral.2019.104597

After oral administration EIDD-1931 is quickly absorbed as evidenced by plasma T-max-values
ranging between 0.5 and 1.0 h.Exposures are high (C-ma-xvalues range between 30 and 40μM)
and are dose dependent, but significantly less than dose proportional. The observation of
decreasing bioavailability with increasing dose may indicate capacity limited absorption, a
phenomenon that has been reported for other nucleosides (de Miranda et al., 1981). EIDD-1931,
like most endogenous nucleosides and xenobiotic nucleoside analogs, is a highly polar,
hydrophilic molecule (cLog P =−2.2) and therefore likely to require functional transporters to
cross cell membranes. This dependence would explain the capacity limited uptake seen in the
pharmacokinetic studies done using the CD-1 mice. Earlier reports also indicated that nucleoside
uptake into mouse intestinal epithelial cells is primarily mediated by sodium dependent
concentrative nucleoside transporters (Cass et al., 1999; Vijayalakshmi and Belt, 1988).

3. Cass, C.E., Young, J.D., Baldwin, S.A., Cabrita, M.A., Graham, K.A., Griffiths, M.,Jennings,
L.L., Mackey, J.R., Ng, A.M., Ritzel, M.W., Vickers, M.F., Yao, S.Y., 1999.Nucleoside
transporters of mammalian cells. Pharm. Biotechnol. 12313–12352

4. de Miranda, P., Krasny, H.C., Page, D.A., Elion, G.B., 1981. The disposition of acyclovir
indifferent species. J. Pharmacol. Exp. Ther. 219 (2), 309–315

5. Vijayalakshmi, D., Belt, J.A., 1988. Sodium-dependent nucleoside transport in mouse
intestinal epithelial cells. Two transport systems with differing substrate specificities. Biol.
Chem. 263 (36), 19419–19423.

6. Yan VC, Khadka S, Arthur K, Ackroyd JJ, Georgiou DK, Muller FL. Pharmacokinetics of Orally
Administered GS-441524 in Dogs. bioRxiv, doi: https://doi.org/10.1101/2021.02.04.429674

7. https://ccah.vetmed.ucdavis.edu/