Evaluation of the bioequivalence of two tablet formulations of enalapril/hydrochlorothiazide after single oral administration to healthy volunteers

The pharmacokinetic parameters of two oral formulations of 20/12.5 mg tablets of enalapril/hydrochlorothiazide (CAS 75847-73-3 and CAS 58-93-5, respectively; Penopril as test and another commercially available preparation as reference) were compared in an open-label randomized single oral dose two-period cross-over design to 24 healthy volunteers under fasting conditions. Plasma concentrations of enalaprilat (CAS 76420-72-9), the pharmacologically active metabolite of enalapril, and hydrochlorothiazide were determined by a validated GC/MS and HPLC assay, respectively. Serial blood samples were collected prior to each administration and at 19 timepoints within 36 h after dosing. The parametric 90% confidence intervals of the geometric mean values of the test/reference ratios for enalaprilat were 99.3% to 118.9% (point estimate: 108.7%) for AUC(0-infinity), 97.3% to 116.9% (point estimate: 106.7%) for AUC(0-t), and 92.5% to 113.0% (point estimate: 102.3%) for Cmax, and for hydrochlorothiazide 92.3% to 105.1% (point estimate: 98.5%) for AUC(0-infinity), 92.7% to 105.4% (point estimate: 98.9%) for AUC(0-t), and 97.6% to 115.3% (point estimate: 106.0%) for Cmax, within the acceptance criteria for bioequivalence (80%-125%). Tmax values were analyzed by the nonparametric Wilcoxon test and the difference was not statistically significant. Therefore, it is concluded that the test and reference enalapril/hydrochlorothiazide formulations are bioequivalent for both the extent and the rate of absorption.     

Evaluation of the bioequivalence and pharmacokinetics of two formulations of secnidazole after single oral administration in healthy volunteers

The pharmacokinetic parameters of two oral formulations of a 1 g dose of secnidazole (CAS 3366-95-8, secnidazole tablet as reference and another capsule preparation as test) were compared in an open-label, randomized, single oral dose, two-period cross-over design in 18 healthy volunteers under fasting conditions. Plasma concentrations of secnidazole were measured by a validated HPLC chromatographic assay. The parametric 90% confidence intervals of the geometric mean values of the test/reference ratios were 91.9% to 105.9% (point estimate: 99.39%) for AUC(0-infinity), 92.7% to 104.4% (point estimate: 98.61%) for AUC(0-t), 97.6% to 107.1% (point estimate: 102.31%) for C(max), being within the acceptance criteria for bioequivalence (80%-125%). T(max) values were analyzed by the nonparametric Wilcoxon test and the difference was not statistically significant. Therefore, it is concluded that the test and reference secnidazole formulations are bioequivalent for both the extent and the rate of absorption.     

Bioequivalence evaluation of two brands of fluoxetine 20 mg capsules (Flutin and Prozac) in healthy human volunteers

A bioequivalence study of two oral formulations of 20 mg fluoxetine was carried out in 24 healthy volunteers following a single dose, two-sequence, crossover randomized design at International Pharmaceutical Research Centre (IPRC), Amman, Jordan. The two formulations were Flutin capsules (Julphar, UAE) as test and Prozac capsules (Eli Lilly, UK) as reference product. Test and reference capsules were administered to each subject after an overnight fasting on two treatment days separated by a 28 day washout period. After dosing, serial blood samples were collected for a period of 360 h. Plasma harvested from blood was analysed for fluoxetine by a sensitive, reproducible and accurate LC-MS method. Various pharmacokinetic parameters including AUC(0-t), AUC(0-infinity), C(max), T(max), T(1/2), and lambda(Z) were determined from plasma concentrations for both formulations and found to be in good agreement with reported values. AUC(0-t), AUC(0-infinity) and C(max) were tested for bioequivalence after log-transformation of data. No significant difference was found based on ANOVA; 90% confidence interval (94.60%-106.41% for AUC(0-t), 94.6%-108.14% for AUC(0-infinity); 91.88%-103.65% for C(max)) for test/reference ratio of these parameters were found within FDA acceptance range of 80%-125%. Based on these statistical inferences, it was concluded that Flutin is bioequivalent to Prozac and can be used interchangeably in medical practice.     

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.     

Bioequivalence evaluation of two brands of furosemide 40 mg tablets (Salurin and Lasix) in healthy human volunteers

A randomized, two-way, crossover, bioequivalence study was conducted in 24 fasting, healthy, male volunteers to compare two brands of furosemide 40 mg tablets, Salurin (Julphar, UAE) as test and Lasix (Hoechst AG, Germany) as reference product. The study was performed at the International Pharmaceutical Research Centre (IPRC), in a joint venture with Al-Mowasah Hospital, Amman, Jordan. One tablet of either formulation was administered with 240 ml of water after a 10 h overnight fast. After dosing, serial blood samples were collected for a period of 12 h. Plasma harvested from blood was analysed for furosemide by a validated HPLC method. Various pharmacokinetic parameters including AUC(0-t), AUC(0-infinity), C(max), T(max), T(1/2), and elimination rate constant were determined from plasma concentrations of both formulations. Statistical modules (ANOVA and 90% confidence intervals) were applied to AUC(0-t), AUC(0-infinity), and C(max) to assess the bioequivalence of the two brands which revealed no significant difference between them, and 90% CI fell within the US FDA accepted bioequivalence range of 80%-125%. Based on these statistical inferences, Salurin was found to be bioequivalent to Lasix.     

Evaluation of the bioequivalence and pharmacokinetics of two formulations of rizatriptan after single oral administration in healthy volunteers

The pharmacokinetic parameters of two oral formulations of rizatriptan (CAS 144034-80-0, a capsule preparation as test and rizatriptan tablet as reference), given at a single dose of 10 mg each, were compared in an open-label, randomized, single oral dose, two-period cross-over design in 20 healthy volunteers under fasting conditions. Plasma concentrations of rizatriptan were measured by a validated HPLC assay. The parametric 90% confidence intervals of the geometric mean values of the test/reference ratios were 91.9% to 101.9% (point estimate: 97.3%) for AUC(0-infinity), 93.0% to 102.2% (point estimate: 96.5%) for AUC(0-t), 90.1% to 100.0% (point estimate: 95.4%) for Cmax, being within the acceptance criteria for bioequivalence (80%-125%). Tmax values were analyzed by the nonparametric Wilcoxon test and the difference was not statistically significant. Therefore, it is concluded that the test and reference rizatriptan formulations are bioequivalent with regard to both the extent and the rate of absorption.     

Bioequivalence evaluation of norfloxacin 400 mg tablets (Uroxin and Noroxin) in healthy human volunteers

A bioequivalence study of two oral formulations of 400 mg norfloxacin was carried out in 18 healthy volunteers according to a single dose, two-sequence, cross-over randomized design at College of Pharmacy, King Saud University, Riyadh, Saudi Arabia, jointly with King Khalid University Hospital. The two formulations were: Uroxin (Julphar, United Arab Emirates) as test and Noroxin (Merck Sharpe & Dohme, BV, Netherlands). Both test and reference formulations were administered to each subject after an overnight fasting on 2 treatment days separated by 1 week wash-out period. After dosing, serial blood samples were collected for a period of 24 h. Plasma harvested from blood, was analysed for norfloxacin by a sensitive, reproducible and accurate HPLC method. Various pharmacokinetic parameters including AUC(0-t), AUC(0-infinity), C(max), T(max), T(1/2), and K(el) were determined from plasma concentrations for both the formulations and found to be in good agreement with reported values. AUC(0-t), AUC(0-infinity), and C(max) were tested for bioequivalence after log-transformation of data. No significant difference was found based on ANOVA; 90% confidence interval for test/reference ratio of these parameters were found within a bioequivalence acceptance range of 80-125%. Based on these statistical inferences, it was concluded that Uroxin is bioequivalent to Noroxin.     

Bioequivalence study of two formulations containing 400 mg dexibuprofen in healthy Indian subjects

OBJECTIVE: This study presents the results of two-period, two-treatment crossover investigations on 24 healthy Indian male subjects to assess the bioequivalence of two oral formulations containing 400 mg of dexibuprofen (CAS 51146-56-6). An attempt was also made to study the pharmacokinetics of dexibuprofen in the local population of Indian origin. METHOD: Both of the formulations were administered orally as a single dose separated by a one-week washout period. The concentration of dexibuprofen in plasma was determined by a validated HPLC method with UV detection using carbamazepine as internal standard. The formulations were compared using the parameters area under the plasma concentration-time curve (AUC(0-t)), area under the plasma concentration-time curve from zero to infinity (AUC(0-infinity)), peak plasma concentration (C(max)), and time to reach peak plasma concentration (t(max)). RESULTS: The results of this investigation indicated that there were no statistically significant differences between the logarithmically transformed AUC(0-infinity), and C(max) values of the two preparations. The 90% confidence interval for the ratio of the logarithmically transformed AUC(0-t), AUC(0-infinity) and C(max) were within the bioequivalence limit of 0.8-1.25 and the relative bioavailability of the test formulation was 99.04% of that of reference formulation. CONCLUSION: Thus, these findings clearly indicate that the two formulations are bioequivalent in terms of rate and extent of drug absorption. Both preparations were well tolerated with no adverse reactions observed throughout the study.     

Comparative bioavailability of two immediate-release tablets of lisinopril/hydrochlorothiazide in healthy volunteers

AIM: Two formulations of lisinopril/hydrochlorothiazide (20 mg/12.5 mg) were evaluated for bioequivalence after single dosing in healthy volunteers. METHODS: The study was conducted according to an open, randomized, 2-period crossover design with a 2-week washout interval between doses. Twenty-four volunteers participated and all completed the study successfully. Lisinopril and hydrochlorothiazide were determined in plasma by HPLC. The pharmacokinetic parameters AUC(0-t), AUC(0-infinity), Cmax and Cmax/AUC(0-infinity) were tested for bioequivalence after logarithmic transformation of data and ratios of tmax were evaluated non-parametrically. RESULTS: For lisinopril, the parametric analysis revealed the following test/reference ratios and their confidence intervals (90% CI): 1.01 (0.84-1.22) for AUC(0-t), 0.98 (0.81-1.19) for AUC(0-infinity), 1.02 (0.83-1.25) for Cmax and 1.03 (0.99-1.08) for Cmax/AUC(0-infinity). The 90% CI for tmax was 0.94-1.07. All parameters showed bioequivalence between both formulations. As for hydrochlorothiazide, test/reference ratios and their confidence intervals (90% CI) were: 1.05 (0.95-1.17), 1.02 (0.93-1.12) for AUC(0-infinity), 0.99 (0.89-1.07) for Cmax and 0.97 (0.90-1.04) for Cmax/AUC(0-infinity). The 90% CI for tmax was 1.00-1.41. All parameters showed bioequivalence between both formulations except for tmax. A discrete fall in both systolic (SBP) and diastolic (DBP) blood pressure was observed after drug administration. The time course of both parameters was similar for the 2 formulations. Heart rates also followed a similar time profile. CONCLUSIONS: The bioequivalence of the 2 formulations of lisinopril/hydrochlorothiazide was demonstrated.     

A randomized, crossover study to determine bioequivalence of two brands of dexibuprofen 400 mg tablets in healthy Asian adult male subjects of Indian origin

AIM: To estimate the bioavailability and evaluate bioequivalence of a single dose of a dexibuprofen tablet (test formulation, containing dexibuprofen 400 mg, manufactured by Emcure Pharmaceuticals Ltd., Pune, India) and to compare it with that of a single dose of a Seractil tablet (reference formulation, containing dexibuprofen 400 mg, manufactured by Genus Pharmaceuticals, Bershire, UK) under fasting conditions. SUBJECTS AND METHODS: Using a two-treatment, two-period, two-sequence, randomized crossover design, test and reference formulations were administered as individual single doses to 24 healthy adult Asian male subjects of Indian origin under non-fed conditions, with 4 days washout period between dosing. 17 blood samples were drawn from each subject over a 12-hour period. Pharmacokinetic parameters, Cmax, AUC0-t, AUC0-infinity and Cmax/AUC0-infinity were calculated from the plasma concentration-time data of each individual and during each period by applying non-compartmental analysis. Analysis of variance was carried out using logarithmically transformed and non-transformed values of the stated pharmacokinetic parameters. Data for test and reference formulations were analyzed statistically to test for bioequivalence of the two formulations. RESULTS: All 24 subjects who received the two formulations on two occasions with a washout period of 4 days, completed the study and provided an adequate amount of blood at each sampling point. After oral administration the values of Cmax (microg/ml), tmax (h), AUC0-t (microg/ml x h), AUC0-infinity (microg/ml x h) for reference and test formulations were 23.501 and 22.948, 1.156 and 1.281, 69.795 and 68.455, and 72.454 and 70.208, respectively. ANOVA and CI test showed no significant (p > 0.05) variation in these pharmacokinetic parameters of test and reference formulations. When the AUC0-t values for both formulations for non-transformed and log-transformed data were compared, the test formulation showed a bioavailability of 98.08% and 99.56%, respectively, as compared to reference formulation. These values are within the acceptance limit of 80 - 120%. No adverse events were observed in any of the subjects during the two runs of the study. Both clinical and laboratory parameters of all subjects showed no clinically significant changes. CONCLUSION: The test formulation containing dexibuprofen 400 mg (manufactured by Emcure Pharmaceuticals Ltd., Pune, India) was bioequivalent to reference formulation (Seractil, manufactured by Genus Pharmaceuticals, Berkshire, UK). Both formulations were well tolerated. The test formulation can be considered a pharmaceutically and therapeutically equivalent alternative to Seractil.     

Comparative bioavailability study of doxycycline hyclate (equivalent to 100 mg doxycycline) capsules (doxycin vs vibramycin) for bioequivalence evaluation in healthy adult volunteers

This investigation was carried out to evaluate the bioavailability of a new capsule formulation of doxycycline (100 mg), doxycin, relative to the reference product, vibramycin (100 mg) capsules. The bioavailability was carried out in 24 healthy male volunteers who received a single dose (100 mg) of the test (A) and the reference (B) products after an overnight fast of at least 10 hours on 2 treatment days. The treatment periods were separated by a 2-week washout period. A randomized, balanced 2-way cross-over design was used. After dosing, serial blood samples were collected for a period of 48 hours. Plasma concentrations of doxycycline were analyzed by a sensitive and validated high-performance liquid chromatography assay. The pharmacokinetic parameters for doxycycline were determined using standard noncompartmental methods. The parameters AUC(0-t), AUC(0-infinity), Cmax, K(el), t(1/2) and Cmax/AUC(0-infinity) were analyzed statistically using log-transformed data. The time to maximum concentration (tmax) was analyzed using raw data. The parametric 90% confidence intervals of the mean values of the pharmacokinetic parameters: AUC(0-t), AUC(0-infinity), Cmax and Cmax/AUC(0-infinity) were within the range 80-125% which is acceptable for bioequivalence (using log-transformed data). The calculated 90% confidence intervals based on the ANOVA analysis of the mean test/reference ratios of AUC(0-t), AUC(0-infinity), Cmax and Cmax/AUC(0-infinity) were 95.98-109.56%, 92.21 to 107.66%, 93.90-112.56%, and 96.0 to 106.91% respectively. The test formulation was found bioequivalent to the reference formulation with regard to AUC(0-t), AUC(0-infinity), Cmax and Cmax/AUC(0-infinity) by the Schuirmann's two 1-sided t-tests. Therefore, the 2 formulations were considered to be bioequivalent.     

Bioequivalence evaluation of two brands of cefuroxime 500 mg tablets (Cefuzime and Zinnat) in healthy human volunteers

A bioequivalence study of two oral formulations of 500 mg cefuroxime axetil was carried out in 24 healthy volunteers following a single dose, standard two-treatment cross-over design at the College of Pharmacy, King Saud University, Riyadh, Saudi Arabia, working jointly with King Khalid University Hospital. The two formulations used were Cefuzime (Julphar, United Arab Emirates) as the test and Zinnat (Glaxo Wellcome, England) as the reference product. Both test and reference tablets were administered to each subject after an overnight fasting on two treatment days separated by a 1-week washout period. After dosing, serial blood samples were collected for a period of 8 h. Plasma harvested from blood was analysed for cefuroxime by a sensitive, reproducible and accurate high pressure liquid chromatography (HPLC) method. Various pharmacokinetic parameters including AUC(0-t), AUC(0-infinity), C(max), T(max), T(1/2) and K(el) were determined from plasma concentrations of both formulations and found to be in good agreement with reported values. AUC(0-t), AUC(0-infinity) and C(max) were tested for bioequivalence after log-transformation of data. No significant difference was found based on an analysis of variance (ANOVA); 90% confidence interval for test/reference ratio of these parameters were found within bioequivalence acceptance range of 80-125%. Based on these statistical inferences, it was concluded that Cefuzime is bioequivalent to Zinnat.     

A new oral formulation of tiapride (drops): pharmacokinetic profile and therapeutic applications

Tiapride is a substituted benzamide widely used in the management of agitation and aggressiveness in the elderly. The development of an oral solution is of particular interest in geriatric medicine and in patients with difficulties swallowing solid formulations. The bioequivalence between a sweetened, flavoured oral drop and tablet forms of tiapride was investigated in a crossover design in 18 healthy male volunteers after a 100mg single-dose administration of each formulation. Plasma concentration profiles were determined. No significant differences in the extent and rate of absorption (t(max), C(max), AUC(0-t) or AUC(0-infinity), C(max )/AUC(0-infinity)) were observed, where t(max) is the time to reach the maximum plasma concentration (C(max)), AUC(0-t) is the area under the concentration-time curve from zero to the last sample at which plasma concentration could be quantified, and AUC(0-infinity) is the area under the curve extrapolated to infinity. The plasma elimination half-lives were similar (4.37 hours and 4.61 hours) and the relative bioavailability of the drop formulation was 99.7%. These results demonstrated the bioequivalence of the two formulations. The drop formulation in this bioequivalence study was the one used for clinical evaluation in the target population of elderly patients experiencing restlessness and aggressive behaviour that was assessed in a prospective double-blind, randomised, previously published trial in 176 patients. In that study, tiapride as a drop formulation compared with melperone was safe and effective with regard to restlessness and aggressive behaviour in elderly patients.     

Bioequivalence of two oral ciprofloxacin tablets formulations

The relative bioavailability of a new 750 mg tablet formulation of ciprofloxacin (test formulation supplied by Dr. August Wolff GmbH and Co., Germany) was compared with that of Ciprobay tablets 750 mg (reference formulation from Bayer Vital GmbH and Co., Germany). Twenty-four healthy volunteers (12 male and 12 female) were included in this single-dose, 2-sequence, crossover randomized study. Blood samples were obtained prior to dosing and at 0.5, 0.75, 1, 1.5, 2, 3, 4, 6, 8, 10, 12, 18, 24 and 30 hours after drug administration. Plasma concentrations of ciprofloxacin were determined by HPLC. No differences were found when the in vitro dissolution profiles of both formulations were compared. The pharmacokinetic parameters AUC(0-t), AUC(0-infinity), Cmax and Cmax/AUC(0-infinity) were tested for bioequivalence after log-transformation of data, and ratios of tmax were evaluated nonparametrically. The parametric analysis revealed the following mean values for the test/reference ratios (90% standard confidence intervals in parenthesis (ln-transformed data): 1.01 (0.95-1.07) for AUC(0-t), 0.99 (0.93-1.05) for AUC(0-infinity), 1.05 (0.97-1.14) for Cmax and 1.06 (0.97-1.15) for Cmax/AUC(0-infinity). The nonparametric confidence interval for tmax was 0.77-1.15. All parameters showed bioequivalence between both formulations as their confidence intervals were within the bioequivalence acceptable range of 0.80-1.25 limits; the 90% confidence interval for tmax slightly exceeded limits of bioequivalence. We conclude that both formulations show bioequivalence for both the rate and the extent of absorption.     

Bioequivalence evaluation of lomefloxacin 400 mg tablets (Lomax versus Maxaquin in healthy human volunteers

This study represents the results of a randomized, single dose, two-treatment, two-period crossover study in 18 healthy male volunteers to assess the bioequivalence of two tablets of 400 mg lomefloxacin. The two formulations were: Lomax(R) (Julphar, United Arab Emirates) as the test formulation and Maxaquin(R) (Searle, S.A., UK) as the reference formulation. The study was conducted at the College of Pharmacy, King Saud University, Riyadh, Saudi Arabia, jointly with King Khalid University Hospital, Riyadh, Saudi Arabia. After overnight fasting the two products were administered as a single dose on two treatment days separated by a 1 week washout period. Serial blood samples were collected thereafter, for a period of 48 h. Plasma harvested from blood was analysed for lomefloxacin by a sensitive, reproducible and accurate HPLC method. Various pharmacokinetic parameters including AUC(0-t), AUC(0-infinity), C(max,) T(max), T(1/2), K(elm) and C(max)/AUC(0-infinity) were determined from plasma concentrations for both formulations and found to be in good agreement with reported values. Statistical modules applied to AUC(0-t), AUC(0-infinity) and C(max) revealed no significant difference in the two tested products. Based on these statistical inferences it was concluded that Lomax(R) is bioequivalent to Maxaquin(R).     

Comparative bioavailability study of cefixime (equivalent to 100 mg/5 ml) suspension (Winex vs Suprax) in healthy male volunteers

This investigation was carried out to evaluate the bioavailability of a new suspension formulation of cefixime (100 mg/5 ml), Winex, relative to the reference product, Suprax (100 mg/5 ml) suspension. The bio-availability study was carried out in 24 healthy male volunteers who received a single oral dose (200 mg) of the test (A) and the reference (B) products on 2 treatment days after an overnight fast of at least 10 hours. The treatment periods were separated by a one-week washout period. A randomized, balanced two-way crossover design was used. After dosing, serial blood samples were collected over a period of 16 hours. Plasma concentrations of cefixime were analyzed using a sensitive high-performance liquid chromatographic assay. The pharmacokinetic parameters for cefixime were determined using standard non-compartmental method. The parameters AUC(0-t), AUC(0-infinity), Cmax, Kel, t1/2 and Cmax/AUC(0-infinity) were analyzed statistically using raw and log-transformed data. The time to maximum concentration (tmax) was analyzed using raw data. The parametric 90% confidence intervals of the mean values of the pnfinity harmacokinetic parameters: AUC(0-t), AUC(0-infinity) Cmax, and Cmax/AUC(0-infinity) were within the range 80 - 125% which is acceptable for bioequivalence (using log-transformed data). The calculated 90% confidence intervals based on the ANOVA analysis for the mean test/reference ratios of AUC(0-t), AUC(0-infinity), Cmax, and Cmax/AUC(0-infinity) were 88.93 - 107.10%, 89.09 - 107.11%, 89.63 - 108.58% and 96.85 - 105.29%, respectively. The test formulation was found bioequivalent to the reference formulation with regard to AUC(0-t), AUC(0-infinity), and Cmax using the Schuirmann's two one-sided t-tests. Therefore, the two formulations were considered to be bioequivalent.     

Technological evaluation and equivalence assessment of lorazepam tablets in rabbits

Four different oral lorazepam tablets (Tavor tablets as reference preparation and three generic tablet formulations, A, B and C) were investigated after administration to 12 rabbits to evaluate their bioequivalence. A single 2 mg/kg dose was administered orally as powder and lorazepam plasma concentrations were determined by a validated HPLC method. Maximum plasma concentrations (Cmax), of 207 ng/ml (reference), 198 ng/ml (A), 166 ng/ml (B) and 169 ng/ml (C) were achieved. Lorazepam appeared in the plasma at 0.66 h (Tmax) for all formulations, probably because the disintegration step was bypassed due to the pulverization of the administered doses. Areas under the plasma concentration-time curves (AUC(0-t) and AUC(0-infinity)) were determined. The obtained AUC(0-t) values were 556.57 ng h/ml (reference), 554.70 ng h/ml (A), 493.08 ng h/ml (B), and 487.88 ng h/ml (C). ANOVA results (P > or = 0.05) and 90% confidence intervals for the mean ratio (T/R) of AUC(0-t), AUC(0-infinity), and Cmax were within the EMEA acceptance range. Pharmacokinetic and statistical results of this study show that the four tested drug products (Tavor, A, B, C) are to be considered bioequivalent and interchangeable in medical practice.     

Pharmacokinetics and comparative bioavailability of two terbinafine hydrochloride formulations after single-dose administration in Chinese healthy subjects

The bioavailability of a new terbinafine (CAS 91161-71-6) preparation was compared with a commercially available original preparation (reference) of the drug in 19 Chinese healthy male volunteers. The study was performed in an open, randomized, single blind two-sequence, two-period crossover design. Under fasting conditions, each subject received a single oral dose of 250 mg terbinafine as a test or reference formulation with a 7-day washout period between the two preparations. The plasma concentrations of terbinafine were analyzed by a sensitive liquid chromatography-ultraviolet spectrometry method. The pharmacokinetic parameters included AUC(0-t) AUC(0-infinity), C(max), t1/2, and T(max). The values of AUC(0-t) demonstrated nearly identical bioavailability of terbinafine from the examined formulations. The AUC(0.48) of terbinafine was 5982.85 +/- 2449.17 and 6761.63 +/- 3140.33 ng x h/ml for the test and reference formulation, respectively. The maximum plasma concentration (C(max)) of terbinafine was 1656.25 +/- 623.18 ng/ml for the test and 1552.07 +/- 660.35 ng/ml for the reference product, respectively. No statistical differences were observed for C(max) and the area under the plasma concentration time curve for terbinafine. The 90% confidence limits calculated for C(max) and AUC from zero to infinity (AUC(0-infinity)) of terbinafine were within the bioequivalence range (80%-125% for AUC). This study shows that the test formulation is bioequivalent to the reference formulation of terbinafine.     

Bioequivalence study of two tablet formulations containing rimonabant 20 mg in healthy Indian subjects

A randomized, two-treatment and two-way crossover study on twelve healthy Indian male subjects was conducted to assess the bioequivalence of two tablet formulations containing 20 mg of rimonabant (CAS 158681-13-1). Both of the formulations were administered orally as a single dose with a 45-day washout period between two dosing sessions. The content of rimonabant in plasma was determined by a validated HPLC method with UV detection. The formulations were compared using the parameters area under the plasma concentration-time curve (AUC(0-t)), area under the plasma concentration-time curve from zero to infinity (AUC(0-infinity)), peak plasma concentration (Cmax), and time to reach peak plasma concentration (tmax). The results of this investigation indicated that there were no statistically significant differences between the logarithmically transformed AUC(0-infinity) and Cmax values of the two preparations. The 90% confidence interval for the ratio of the logarithmically transformed AUC(0-t), AUC(0-infinity) and Cmax were within the bioequivalence limit of 0.8-1.25 and the relative bioavailability of the test formulation was 96.62% of that of the reference formulation. Thus, these findings clearly indicate that the two formulations are bioequivalent in terms of rate and extent of drug absorption.     

Pharmacokinetics of three organic nitrates in Chinese healthy male volunteers

Eighteen Chinese male subjects completed a single-blind, randomized, three-treatment, three-period, cross-over study. In each treatment phase, subjects received a single dose of 20 mg isosorbide dinitrate (CAS 87-33-2, ISDN) intravenous infusion, 20 mg isosorbide 5-mononitrate (CAS 16051-77-7, 5-ISMN) tablet or 20 mg isosorbide 5-mononitrate intravenous infusion. Each consecutive dosing was separated by a washout period of 7 days. Following each dosing, venous blood samples were collected over a period of 16 h. Plasma concentrations of ISDN and its two active metabolites isosorbide 2-mononitrate (2-ISMN), 5-ISMN had been measured by a validated gas chromatographic method. Various pharmacokinetic parameters including AUC0-t, AUC0-infinity, Cmax, tmax, t1/2, Kelm and MRT were determined for the three formulations and found to be in good agreement with literature values. AUC0-t and AUC0-infinity of 5-ISMN tablet and intravenous infusion were 2694 +/- 496 ng x ml(-1) x h vs. 2548 +/- 556 ng x ml(-1) x h and 3266 +/- 624 ng x ml(-1) x h vs. 3178 +/- 769 ng x ml(-1) x h, respectively, and the relative bioavailability of 5-ISMN tablet was 105 +/- 20%. As compared with 5-ISMN intravenous infusion, ISDN can rapidly reach the plateau concentration and metabolize to its active metabolites 5-ISMN and 2-ISMN, which both have vasodilator effect. The results of this study suggest that as evaluated from the pharmacokinetic profiles of the three formulations, 5-ISMN tablet and ISDN intravenous infusion are ideal vasodilators and anti-angina drugs especially in acute conditions due to their rapid onset and long duration of action.