Comparative bioavailability study with two chlorpropamide tablet formulations in healthy volunteers

OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was the assessment of the bioequivalence of two formulations (250 mg tablet) of chlorpropamide (CAS 94-20-2) in 36 healthy volunteers of both sexes. METHODS: The study was conducted using an open, randomized, two-period crossover design with a 3-week washout interval. Plasma samples were obtained over a 72-h period. Plasma chlorpropamide concentrations were analyzed by liquid chromatography coupled to tandem mass spectrometry (LC-MS-MS) with positive ion electrospray ionization using multiple reaction monitoring (MRM). From the chlorpropamide plasma concentration vs time curves, the following pharmacokinetic parameters were obtained: AUC(0-72h), AUC(inf) and C(max). RESULTS: The limit of quantification was 0.1 microg/mL for plasma chlorpropamide analysis. The geometric mean and respective 90 % confidence interval (CI) of Test/ Reference percent ratios were 93.99% (87.11%-101.41%) for C(max), 92.45% (85.96%-99.44%) for AUC(0-72h) and 90.30% (83.35%-97.82%) for AUC(0-inf). CONCLUSION: Since the 90 % CI for AUC(0-72h), AUC(0-inf) and C(max) ratios were within the 80-125%interval proposed by the US FDA, it was concluded that chlorpropamide 250 mg tablet (test formulation) was bioequivalent to the reference 250 mg tablet for of both the rate and extent of absorption.     

Phentolamine bioequivalence study

OBJECTIVE: To assess the bioequivalence of 2 tablet formulations of phentolamine (Regitine phentolamine 40 mg tablet formulation by Novartis, Brazil, as test formulation, and Vasomax, phentolamine 40 mg tablet formulation by Schering Plough S.A., Brazil, as reference formulation). METHODS: A single 40 mg oral dose of each formulation was administered to 36 male healthy volunteers. The study was conducted after screening, using an open, randomized, 2-period crossover design, a 7-day interval between doses, and wash-out period of at least 4 weeks. Plasma samples for determination of phentolamine were obtained predose and at intervals over 720 min postdose. Plasma concentrations were quantified by reversed-phase liquid chromatography coupled to tandem mass spectrometry (LC-MS-MS) with positive ion electrospray ionization using multiple reactions monitoring (MRM) method. Precision of the method was evaluated using calibration curves and plasma quality control samples. The subjects were monitored throughout the study. Systolic and diastolic blood pressure and pulse rate measurement were taken predose and at intervals up to 720 min. Tolerance of both products was good. No serious adverse reactions were reported. The pharmacokinetic parameters calculated for both compounds included: AUC(0-720 min), AUC(0-infinity), C(max), Ca and k(e). RESULTS: The maximum concentrations reached (C(max)) were compared. Regitine 40 mg formulation C(max) geometric mean ratio was 108.29% (90% CI = 98.58-118.96) of Vasomax 40 mg formulation. The areas under the curve (AUC(0-720 min)) were compared. Regitine 40 formulation (AUC(0-720 min)) geometric mean ratio was 102.33% (90% CI = 97.21-107.72) of Vasomax 40 mg formulation. CONCLUSION: Since the 90% CI for both C(max) and AUC ratio where inside the 80 to 125% interval proposed by the Food and Drug Administration, it is concluded that Regitine 40 mg tablet is bioequivalent to Vasomax for the rate and extent of absorption.     

Comparative bioavailability of two ramipril formulations after single-dose administration in healthy volunteers

OBJECTIVE: To assess the bioequivalence of a ramipril 5 mg tablet formulation (ramipril test formulation from Laboratórios Biosintética Ltda (Sao Paulo, Brazil) and Triatec from Aventis Pharma (Sueano, Brazil) standard reference formulation) in 26 healthy volunteers of both sexes. METHODS: The study was conducted using an open, randomized, 2-period crossover design with a 2-week washout interval. Plasma samples were obtained over a 36-hour period. Plasma ramipril and ramiprilat concentrations were analyzed by liquid chromatography coupled to tandem mass spectrometry (LC-MS-MS) with positive ion electrospray ionization using multiple reaction monitoring (MRM). From the ramipril and ramiprilat plasma concentration vs. time curves, the following pharmacokinetic parameters were obtained: AUClast, AUCinf and Cmax. RESULTS: The limit of quantification was 0.2 ng x ml(-1) and 1.0 ng x ml(-1) for ramipril and ramiprilat, respectively. The geometric means and 90% confidence intervals (CI) for Ramipril/Triatec and Ramiprilat/Triatec percent ratios were: 104.69% (90% CI = 93.21-117.59%) for Cmax, 102.49% (90% CI = 92.76-113.24%) for AUClast, 103.60% (90% CI = 93.56 114.73%) for AUCinf, 108.48% (90% CI = 98.86-119.03%) for Cmax, 105.88% (90% CI = 101.55-110.39%) for AUClast, 97.30% (90% CI = 90.17-104.99%) for AUCinf, respectively. CONCLUSION: Since the 90% CI for AUClast, AUCinf and Cmax ratios were within the 80-125% interval proposed by the U.S. FDA, it was concluded that the ramipril formulation produced by Laboratórios Biosintética Ltda is bioequivalent to the Triatec formulation in both rate and extent of absorption.     

Comparative bioavailability study with two amiodarone tablet formulations administered with and without food in healthy subjects

OBJECTIVE: The aim was to assess the comparative bioavailability of two formulations (200 mg tablet) of amiodarone (CAS 19774-82-4) in healthy volunteers of both sexes, with and without food. METHODS: The study was conducted using an open, randomized, two-period crossover design with a 3-week washout interval, in two groups, with and without food. Plasma samples were obtained for up to 240 h post dose. Plasma amiodarone concentrations were analyzed by liquid chromatography coupled to tandem mass spectrometry (LC-MS-MS) with positive ion electrospray ionization using multiple reactions monitoring (MRM). From the amiodarone plasma concentration vs. time curves, the following pharmacokinetic parameters were obtained, with and without food: AUC(last), AUC(inf), AUC(0-240h), AUC(0-72h) and C(max). RESULTS: The limit of quantification was 1 ng/mL for plasma amiodarone analysis. The geometric mean and 90% confidence interval CI of Test/Reference percent ratios were, without and with food, respectively: 107.61 (92.73-124.89) and 100.6 (94.1-107.5) for C(max), 107.05 (95.88-119.51) and 100.2 (96.0-104.7) for AUC(last), 107.27 (95.78-120.15) and 100.8 (97.0-104.8) for AUC(0-72h), 106.76 (95.84-118.94) and 100.2 (96.0-104.7) for AUC(0-240h) and AUC(inf) 105.15 (94.18-117.41) and 100.7 (96.6-105.0). CONCLUSION: Since the 90% CI for AUC(0-72) and C(max) ratios were within the 80-125% interval proposed by the US FDA, it was concluded that the amiodarone 200 mg tablet (test formulation) with and without food was bioequivalent to the reference 200 mg tablet for both the rate and extent of absorption.     

Comparative bioavailability of two cefadroxil formulations in healthy human volunteers after a single-dose administration

OBJECTIVE: To compare the bioavailability of two cefadroxil capsule (500 mg) formulations (Cefadroxila from Eurofarma Laboratórios Ltd, Brazil, as test formulation and Cefamox from Bristol-Myers Squibb, Brazil S.A. as reference formulation) in 24 volunteers of both sexes. MATERIAL AND METHODS: The study was conducted open with randomized two-period crossover design and a 1-week washout period. Plasma samples were obtained over a 12-h interval. Cefadroxil concentrations were analysed by combined reversed-phase liquid chromatography and tandem mass spectrometry (LC-MS-MS) with positive ion electrospray ionization using a selected ion monitoring method. From the cefadroxil plasma concentration versus time curves the following pharmacokinetic parameters were obtained: AUC(last), AUC(0-infinity) and C(max). RESULTS: Geometric mean of Cefadroxila/Cefamox 500 mg individual percent ratio was 103.97% for AUC(last), 104.08% for AUC(0-infinity) and 95.23% for C(max). The 90% confidence intervals (CI) were 98.14-110.16%, 98.37-110.12%, and 85.59-105.96%, respectively. CONCLUSION: Since the 90% CI for C(max), AUC(last) and AUC(0-infinity) were within the 80-125% interval proposed by the Food and Drug Administration, it was concluded that the Cefadroxila 500 mg capsule was bioequivalent to the Cefamox 500 mg capsule, according to both the rate and extent of absorption.     

Bioequivalence study of two fluconazole capsule formulations in healthy volunteers

OBJECTIVE: To compare the bioavailability of a fluconazole 150 mg capsule formulation from Laboratório Teuto Brasileiro Ltd., Brazil (test formulation), and Zoltec 150 mg capsule from Laboratórios Pfizer Ltd., Brazil (reference formulation), in 24 volunteers of both sexes. MATERIAL AND METHODS: The study was conducted open with randomized 2-period crossover design and a 2-week washout period. Plasma samples were obtained over a 168-hour interval. Fluconazole concentrations were analyzed by combined reversed-phase liquid chromatography and tandem mass spectrometry (LC/MS/MS) with positive ion electrospray ionization using selected ion monitoring method. From the fluconazole plasma concentration vs. time curves the following pharmacokinetic parameters were obtained: AUC(last), AUC(0-inf) and C(max). RESULTS: Geometric mean of fluconazole/Zoltec 150 mg individual percent ratio was 102.6% for AUC(last), 102.2% for AUC(0-inf) and 109.4% for C(max). The 90% confidence intervals were 97.3-108.2%, 97.0-107.8%, and 103.1-116.0%, respectively. CONCLUSION: Since the 90% CI for both Cmax, AUC(last) and AUC(0-inf) were within the 80-125% interval proposed by the Food and Drug Administration, it was concluded that fluconazole 150 mg capsule was bioequivalent to Zoltec 150 mg, according to both the rate and extent of absorption.     

Cyclosporine bioequivalence study: quantification using fluorescence polarization immunoassay (FPIA) and radioimmunoassay (RIA)

OBJECTIVE: The aim of study was to compare the bioavailability of 2 cyclosporine capsule formulations (100 mg; Sigmasporin Microoral from Novaquímica Divis?o Nature's Plus Farmacêutica Ltd., Brazil, as test formulation and Sandimmune Neoral from Novartis Biociências S.A., Brazil, as reference formulation) in 24 healthy male volunteers. METHODS: The study was open, randomized, with a 2-period crossover, a 1-week washout interval between doses. Blood samples were obtained over a 12-hour interval after each oral administration of cyclosporine (2 capsules of 100 mg of each formulation). Cyclosporine blood concentrations were quantified using a fluorescence polarization immunoassay (FPIA) method provided by Abbott Axsym System and Cyclo-Trac SP. Whole-blood radioimmuoassay (RIA) kit was provided by DiaSorin. These assays provided concentration-time curves for cyclosporine in blood concentration from which the following pharmacokinetic parameters were obtained: AUC(last), AUC(inf), Cmax. RESULTS: Geometric mean and 90% confidence intervals (CI) of Microoral/Neoral as percent ratios were 94.5% (90.8-98.4%) for AUC(last), 93.8% (89.7-98.1%) for AUC(inf), and 98.1% (94.5-101.8%) for Cmax when cyclosporine was determined using FPIA and 96.1% (91.9 to 100.6%) for AUC(last), 95.2% (90.2-100.5%) for AUC(inf), and 99.4% (96.4-102.4%) for Cmax using RIA. CONCLUSION: Since the 90% CI for Cmax, AUC(last) and AUC(inf) ratio were within the 80-125% interval proposed by US-FDA, it is concluded that Sigmasporin Microoral 100 mg capsule formulation is bioequivalent to Sandimmune Neoral 100 mg capsule formulation with regard to both rate and the extent of absorption.     

Amlodipine bioequivalence study: quantification by liquid chromatography coupled to tandem mass spectrometry

OBJECTIVE: To assess the bioequivalence of two amlodipine tablet formulations (Amlodipine 5 mg tablet from Merck S.A. Indústrias Químicas, Brazil as test formulation and Norvasc 5 mg tablet from Laboratórios Pfizer Ltd., Brazil as reference formulation) in 24 healthy volunteers of both sexes. METHODS: The study was conducted using an open, randomized two-period crossover design with a 4-week washout interval. Plasma samples were obtained over a 144 h period. Plasma amlodipine concentrations were analyzed by combined liquid chromatography coupled to tandem mass spectrometry (LC-MS-MS) with positive ion electrospray ionization using multiple reaction monitoring (MRM). From the amlodipine plasma concentration vs time curves, the following pharmacokinetic parameters were obtained: AUC(last), AUC(0-inf) and C(max). The statistical interval proposed was 80-125% according to the US Food and Drug Administration Agency. RESULTS: The limit of quantification was 0.1 ng/ml for plasma amlodipine analysis. The geometric mean and the 90% confidence interval (CI) test/reference ratios were 101.2 (92.9-110.2%) for AUC(last), 99.6 (91.5-108.4%) for AUC(0-inf) and 98.5 (89.0-109.1%) for C(max). CONCLUSION: Since the 90% CI for AUC(last), AUC(0-inf) and C(max) ratios were within in the 80-125% interval proposed by the US FDA, it was concluded that Amlodipine 5 mg tablet (test formulation) was bioequivalent to Norvasc 5 mg tablet, in terms of both rate and extent of absorption.     

Comparative bioavailability of clarithromycin formulations in healthy brazilian volunteers

OBJECTIVE: To compare the bioavailability of clarithromycin 500 mg tablets (Merck S.A Industrias Quimicas, Sao Paulo, SP, Brazil, used as test formulation) and Klaricid (Abbott Laboratórios do Brasil Ltda, Sao Paulo, SP, Brazil, used as reference formulation) in 24 healthy volunteers. MATERIAL AND METHODS: The study was conducted using an open, randomized, two-period crossover design with one-week interval between doses. Blood samples were collected at pre-dose, 0.33, 0.66, 1, 1.33, 1.66, 2, 2.5, 3, 4, 6, 8, 10, 12, 16, 20 and 24 hours after the administration. AUC was calculated by the trapezoidal rule extrapolation method. Cmax and tmax were compiled from the plasmatic concentration-time data. Analysis of variance was carried out using logarithmically transformed AUC(0-inf), AUC(0-24 h), Cmax and untransformed tmax. RESULTS: Intraindividual coefficient of variation (CV%) values were 14.25% and 12.62%, respectively for Cmax and AUC(0-24 h). The geometric mean values (+/- SD) for AUC(0-24 h) (microg x h/ml), AUC(0-inf) (microg x h/ml), and Cmax (microg/ml) for test medication were 18.56 (+/- 6.87), 18.8 (+/- 5.70) and 2.45 (+/- 0.88); the obtained values for reference medication were 18.29 (+/- 5.39), 19.10 (+/- 7.21) and 2.5 (+/- 0.69). 90% Cl for clarithromycin geometric mean of AUC(0-24 h), AUC(0-inf) and Cmax ratios (test/reference) were: 93.6-105.9%, 93.8-106.2% and 89- 103.2%. CCONCLUSION The test medication was considered bioequivalent to the reference medication based on the rate and extent of absorption.     

Bioequivalence assay between orally disintegrating and conventional tablet formulations in healthy volunteers

The purpose of this study was to evaluate bioequivalence of two commercial 8 mg tablet formulations of ondansetrona available in the Brazilian market. In this study, a simple, rapid, sensitive and selective liquid chromatography-tandem mass spectrometry method is described for the determination of ondansetron in human plasma samples. The method was validated over a concentration range of 2.5-60 ng/ml and used in a bioequivalence trial between orally disintegrating and conventional tablet ondansetron formulations, to assess its usefulness in this kind of study. Vonau flash (Biolab Sanus Farmacêutica, Brazil, as test formulations) and Zofran (GlaxoSmithKline, Brazil, as reference formulation) were evaluated following a single 8 mg dose to 23 healthy volunteers of both genders. The dose was administered after an overnight fast according to a two-way crossover design. Bioequivalence between the products was determinated by calculating 90% confidence interval (90% CI) for the ratio of C(max), AUC(0-t) and AUC(0-infinity) values for the test and reference products, using logarithmically transformed data. The 90% confidence interval for the ratio of C(max) (87.5-103.8%), AUC(0-t) (89.3-107.2%) and AUC(0-infinity) (89.7-106.0%) values for the test and reference products is within the 80-125% interval, proposed by FDA, EMEA and ANVISA. It was concluded that two ondansetron formulations are bioequivalent in their rate and extent of absorption.     

A bioequivalence study of citalopram based on quantification by high-performance liquid chromatography coupled to electrospray tandem mass spectrometry

OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to compare the bioavailability of two citalopram formulations (citalopram from Eurofarma Laboratórios Ltda., as the test formulation, and cipramil from Schering-Plough, Brazil, as the reference formulation) in healthy volunteers. METHODS: The study had an open, randomized, two-period crossover design with a two-week washout interval between doses. The samples were obtained over a 168-hour interval after each oral administration of citalopram (one 20 mg tablet of each formulation). The analyte and the internal standard were extracted from plasma using diethylether: dichloromethane (70 : 30, v/v) and the extracts were analyzed by high-performance liquid chromatography coupled to electrospray tandem mass spectrometry. Chromatography was done isocratically using a Genesis C8 analytical column (4 microm, 2.1 mm i.d. x 100 mm). The method had a chromatographic run time of three minutes and a linear calibration curve over the range of 0.5 - 200 ng x ml(-1) (r2 > 0.999887). The limit of quantification was 0.5 ng x ml(-1). RESULTS: The geometric mean and 90% confidence intervals (CI) for the citalopram/cipramil ratio were 98.28% (94.24 - 102.49%) for AUClast, 96.44% (90.20 - 103.11%) for AUCinf, and 98.54% (94.70 - 102.54%) for Cmax. CONCLUSION: Since the 90% CI for Cmax, AUClast and AUC(0-infinity) ratios were all within the 80 - 125% interval proposed by the US Food and Drug Administration, we concluded that the citalopram formulation elaborated by Eurofarma Laboratórios Ltda. was bioequivalent to the cipramil formulation in its rate and extent of absorption.     

Comparative bioavailability study with two gemfibrozil tablet formulations in healthy volunteers

OBJECTIVE: To assess the bioequivalence of gemfibrozil (CAS 25812-30-0) 900 mg tablet formulation from EMS Farmaceutica as test formulation versus a 900 mg tablet formulation as reference in 36 healthy volunteers of both sexes. METHODS: The study was conducted using an open, randomized, two-period crossover design with a 1-week washout interval. Plasma samples were obtained over a 24-h period. Plasma gemfibrozil concentrations were analyzed by liquid chromatography coupled to tandem mass spectrometry (LC-MS-MS) with negative ion electrospray ionization using multiple reaction monitoring (MRM). From the gemfibrozil plasma concentration vs time curves, the following pharmacokinetic parameters were obtained: AUClast, AUC(0-inf) and Cmax. RESULTS: The limit of quantification was 0.05 microg/mL for plasma gemfibrozil analysis. The geometric mean and respective 90% confidence interval (CI) of Test/Reference percent ratios were 90.29 (81.39-100.17) for Cmax, 96.26 (90.33-102.59) for AUClast, 96.04 (90.21-102.23) for AUC(0-24 h) and 96.62 (90.82-102.78) for AUC(0-infinity). CONCLUSION: Since the 90% CI for AUClast, AUC(0-inf) and Cmax, ratios were within the 80-125% interval proposed by the U.S. FDA, it was concluded that gemfibrozil 900 mg tablet (test formulation) was bioequivalent to the 900 mg tablet reference formulation for both rate and extent of absorption.     

Fluconazole bioequivalence study: quantification by tandem mass spectrometry

To develop a new method for quantifying fluoconazole in human plasma and to compare the bioavailability of two fluconazole capsule formulations, an open, randomized, two-period crossover study with a one-week washout interval was conducted in 24 healthy volunteers. Plasma samples were obtained up to 168 hours after drug administration and the serum fluconazole concentrations were analyzed using electrospray tandem mass spectrometry coupled to liquid chromatography using multiple reaction monitoring mode. The pharmacokinetic parameters obtained for fluconazole after the administration of each formulation included the Area under the curve (AUC)(0-168h), AUC(0-infinity), Cmax, Cmax/AUC(0-168h), Tmax, elimination rate constant (Ke), and half-life (T1/2). Within- and between-run imprecision was less than 2.3% and 8.2%, respectively. Inaccuracy within and between runs was -1.5% and -9.7%, respectively. The pharmacokinetic parameters for bioequivalence showed a normal distribution, and the variance of AUC(0-168h), AUC(0-infinity), and Cmax were homoscedastic. The geometric mean for the Fluconal/Zoltec (Fluconal; Libbs Farmacêutica Ltda, S?o Paulo, Brazil; Zoltec; Laboratórios Pfizer Ltda., S?o Paulo, Brazil) individual percent ratio was 94.9% for AUC(0-168h), 94.7% for AUC(0-infinity), 80.1% for Cmax, 102.6% for Ke, 97.5% for T1/2, and 0.93 for Tmax (arithmetic mean of individual differences). We have developed a method in which liquid chromatography is coupled with electrospray tandem mass spectrometry to improve the pharmacokinetic analysis of fluconazole. Because the 90% CI AUC is within the interval proposed for the Food and Drug Administration, we concluded that Fluconal is bioequivalent to Zoltec in terms of absorption. The CV was 27.5% for the Cmax parameter, indicating that fluconazole's absorption rate is highly variable. The European Union Regulatory Agency accepts an interval of 70-143%, and because the 90% CI for Cmax is within the interval proposed for the European Union agency, we conclude that Fluconal is bioequivalent to Zoltec for the rate of absorption.     

Bioequivalence study of two oral tablet formulations containing saquinavir mesylate boosted with ritonavir in healthy male subjects

Saquinavir (SAQ) mesylate (CAS 149845-06-7) is a potent inhibitor of the HIV-1 protease indicated in combination with other antiretrovirals for the management of HIV-1 infection. The objective of this study was to compare rate and extent of absorption and to assess the bioequivalence between a new pharmaceutical equivalent tablet formulation containing 500 mg of SAQ mesylate and the innovator film coated tablet formulation. A randomized, single-center, open-label, two-treatment, two-sequence, three-period, replicated crossover bioequivalence study in 40 healthy male subjects was conducted. All subjects received 100 mg ritonavir (CAS 155213-67-5) twice daily for a run-in period of 3 days before treatment. Dosing was separated by a wash-out period of 14 days. Blood samples were collected over 72 h and plasma levels of SAQ were determined by a validated HPLC/UV assay. The 90% confidence interval (CI) of the ratio of the geometric means for log-transformed C(max), AUC(last) and AUC(inf) values were used to assess bioequivalence using the equivalence interval of 80-125%. Point estimate and 90% CI of the ratios of C(max), AUC(last) and AUC(inf) values were 94.9 (80.9-111.3), 97.4 (82.4-115.4) and 97.4 (82.5-115.0), respectively. Both treatments exhibited similar tolerability and safety. It was concluded that the new pharmaceutical product was bioequivalent to the innovator.     

Pharmacokinetics/pharmacodynamics of desloratadine and fluoxetine in healthy volunteers

The authors assessed the potential for a pharmacokinetic/pharmacodynamic interaction between desloratadine and fluoxetine. This randomized, placebo-controlled, open-label study was conducted in 54 healthy volunteers. Subjects received 1 of 3 treatments: desloratadine 5 mg plus fluoxetine 20 mg, desloratadine 5 mg plus placebo, or fluoxetine 20 mg plus placebo. Serial electrocardiograms (ECGs) were performed at baseline and day 35. Treatment effects on C(max) and AUC were assessed. During coadministration of desloratadine with fluoxetine, the ratio of the mean log-transformed C(max) and AUC values for desloratadine following concomitant fluoxetine therapy revealed a small increase in C(max) values of 15% (90% confidence interval [CI], 95%-139%) but no increase for AUC values (90% CI, 82%-123%). Corresponding values for 3-OH desloratadine demonstrated small increases in mean log-transformed C(max) and AUC ratios: 17% (90% CI, 100%-136%) and 13% (90% CI, 96%-132%), respectively. Statistical evaluation of the ratio of the mean C(max) and AUC values for fluoxetine following concomitant desloratadine therapy revealed small decreases of 9% (90% CI, 72%-115%) and 11% (90% CI, 69%-113%), respectively. Corresponding values for norfluoxetine demonstrated modest increases in mean log-transformed C(max) and AUC ratios: 22% (90% CI, 100%-139%) and 18% (90% CI, 101%-136%), respectively. Coadministration of desloratadine with a potent inhibitor of CYP2D6 did not result in clinically relevant changes in its pharmacokinetic parameters. Desloratadine administration was not associated with clinically important changes in the pharmacokinetics of fluoxetine, a drug metabolized by CYP2D6. The most common adverse event in all groups was headache (65%). Desloratadine plus fluoxetine caused no significant changes in ECGs or ventricular rate.     

Comparative bioavailability study with two pantoprazole delayed-released tablet formulations administered with and without food in healthy subjects

OBJECTIVE: To assess the comparative bioavailability of two formulations (40 mg delayed-released [DR] tablet; test and reference) of pantoprazole (CAS 102625-70-7) in healthy volunteers of both sexes, with and without food. METHODS: The study was conducted using an open, randomized, two-period crossover design with a 1-week washout interval, in two groups, with and without food. Plasma samples were obtained for up to 24 h post dose. Plasma pantoprazole concentrations were analyzed by liquid chromatography coupled to tandem mass spectrometry (LC-MS-MS) with positive ion electrospray ionization using multiple reactions monitoring (MRM). From the pantoprazole plasma concentration vs. time curves, the pharmacokinetic parameters AUC(last) and C(max) were obtained, with and without food. RESULTS: The limit of quantification was 5 ng/mL for plasma pantoprazole analysis. The geometric mean and 90% confidence interval CI of test/reference percent ratios were, without and with food, respectively: 104.6540% (90.8616%-120.5401%) and 99.9708% (90.9987%-109.8275%) for C(max), 95.6634% (85.2675%-107.3267%) and 89.3500% (83.6630%-95.4237%) for AUC(last). CONCLUSION: Since the 90% CI for AUC(last) and C(max) ratios were within the 80-125% interval proposed by the US FDA, it was concluded that pantoprazole 40 mg DR tablet (test formulation) with and without food was bioequivalent to the reference 40 mg DR tablet for both the rate and extent of absorption.     

Bioequivalence of a novel oral metronidazole formulation

The plasma pharmacokinetics of metronidazole (CAS 443-48-1) and its active OH-metabolite (CAS 4812-40-2) were investigated in 16 healthy volunteers after the oral administration of single oral doses of 500 mg metronidazole by means of a novel (test, T) and reference formulation (reference, R). The trial was conducted according to a randomised, controlled, open, within-subject cross-over design with two periods one week apart for wash-out. A single oral dose of 500 mg metronidazole by means of the test formulation T (Vagimid Dragees) resulted in a geometric mean C(max) of 10649 ng/ mL (CV: 0.21) for metronidazole after a median t(max) of 70 min (range: 40 to 120); the geometric mean of the AUC(0-t(z)) and AUC(0-infinity) were 107406 (CV: 0.25) and 109056 ng x h/mL (CV: 0.26); the arithmetic mean of the half-life (t1/2) and the mean residence time (MRT) were 7.28 h (CV: 0.12) and 11.62 h (CV: 0.10). For the OH-metabolite, the geometric mean C(max) was 1941 ng/mL (CV: 0.22) after a median t(max) of 480 min (range: 360 to 600) with a geometric mean AUC(0-tz) and AUC(0-infinity) of 48653 (CV: 0.21) and 52417 ng x h/mL (CV: 0.22), respectively; the arithmetic mean t1/2 and MRT were 10.60 h (CV: 0.21) and 21.14 h (CV: 0.13), respectively. The test formulation was bioequivalent with the reference formulation for both metronidazole (90% CI of the treatment ratio of 1.02 to 1.15 and 1.02 to 1.12 for C(max) and AUC) and its metabolite (90% CI of 0.92 to 1.05 and 0.98 to 1.06, respectively). The treatments were very well tolerated and there were no limiting safety-relevant findings.     

Bioequivalence of two lithium formulations in healthy volunteers

OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to compare the maximum exposure and extent of bioavailability of two lithium carbonate (CAS 554-13-2) containing 300 mg tablet formulations (test and reference) for oral administration. METHOD: This bioequivalence study was conducted in a 2-period crossover design with a washout phase of 7 days. Plasma samples were obtained by blood sampling over 72 h in each period. Twenty-four healthy volunteers of both genders participated in the trial. Samples were analyzed by a flame atomic absorption spectrometer. Resulting Li+ concentrations were used for determination of the pharmacokinetic parameters AUC(last), AUC(inf) and C(max). RESULTS: 90 % confidence intervals for AUC(last), AUC(inf) and C(max) were 96.81-107.44%, 98.44-109.54% and 98.60-111.33%, respectively. CONCLUSION: All 90% and 95% confidence intervals were inside the limits defined by the FDA Guidance for Industry (80%-125%) and thus stated that test and reference formulation may be accepted as bioequivalent, with regard to both, maximum exposure and extent of bioavailability.     

Comparative bioavailability of two losartan formulations in healthy human volunteers after a single dose administration

OBJECTIVE: To compare the bioavailability of two potassic losartan immediate release tablet (50 mg) formulations (Losartan from Laboratórios Cristália Ltd., Brazil, as a test formulation and Cozaar from Merck Sharp & Dohme Farmacêutica Ltd., Brazil, as a reference formulation) in 25 volunteers of both sexes. MATERIAL AND METHODS: The study was conducted in an open, randomized, 2-period crossover design and a 1-week washout period. Plasma samples were obtained over a 24-hour interval. The concentrations of losartan and its active metabolite losartan acid were analyzed by combined reversed phase liquid chromatography and tandem mass spectrometry (LC-MS-MS) with negative ion electrospray ionization using a selected ion monitoring method. From the losartan and losartan acid plasma concentrations vs. time curves the following pharmacokinetic parameters were obtained: AUClast, AUC0-inf and Cmax. RESULTS: The geometric mean and respective 90% confidence interval (CI) of Losartan/Cozaar losartan percent ratios were 92.9% (82.2-105.0%) for Cmax, 99.0% (92.5-105.9%) for AUClast, and 99.1% (92.7-105.8%) for AUC0-inf. Furthermore, the geometric mean and respective 90% CI of Losartan/Cozaar losartan acid percent ratios were 98.5% (91.5-106.0%) for Cmax, 97.9% (93.3 102.7%) for AUClast, and 98.1% (93.6-102.9%) for AUC0-inf. CONCLUSION: Since the 90% CI for Cmax, AUClast and AUC0-inf were within the 80-125% interval proposed by the US Food and Drug Administration, it was concluded that the potassic losartan immediate release 50 mg tablet was bioequivalent to the Cozaar immediate release 50 mg tablet, according to both the rate and extent of absorption. While there were no significant differences in the bioequivalence assessed by either losartan or losartan acid, future bioequivalence studies on losartan may be performed by quantifying losartan alone as the parent compounds are more discriminative.