Comparison of two marketed nifedipine modified-release formulations:: An exploratory clinical food interaction study

被引:22
|
作者
Wonnemann, Meinolf [1 ]
Schug, Barbara [1 ]
Anschuetz, Maria [1 ]
Brendel, Erich [2 ]
De Nucci, Gilberto [3 ]
Blume, Henning [1 ]
机构
[1] SocraTec R&D GmbH, Oberursel, Germany
[2] Bayer HealthCare, Wuppertal, Germany
[3] SocraTec Cartesius, Campinas, Brazil
关键词
nifedipine; food interaction; bioavailability; modified-release products;
D O I
10.1016/j.clinthera.2008.01.001
中图分类号
R9 [药学];
学科分类号
1007 ;
摘要
Objective: The objective of this study was to compare the in vitro and in vivo characteristics of 2 nifedipine modified-release tablet formulations for once-daily dosing marketed in the European community, which were expected to be bioequivalent. Methods: In vitro dissolution was tested at different pH values prior to the clinical part of the study. Either 1 tablet of a test formulation or of the reference formulation, both containing 30 mg nifedipine, were administered to healthy white male volunteers immediately after a high-fat breakfast in a randomized, open-label, 2-period crossover design. Plasma samples obtained over the subsequent period of 48 hours were analyzed using a validated LC-MS/MS method. Safety profile and tolerability of the study medications were assessed by analysis of adverse events obtained by vital sign measurements, electrocardiography, and clinical laboratory analysis. Results: Twelve volunteers were enrolled (median age, 28.0 years [range, 21-42 years]; mean body mass index, 24.2 kg/m(2) [range, 19.3-27.0 kg/m(2)]). In vitro dissolution experiments revealed a significant pH dependency in drug release from the investigational tablets, while the reference tablets were found to have pH-independent dissolution. After oral administration of both tablet formulations in the fed state, marked differences in rate and extent of bioavailability were observed. Geometric mean of AUC(0-last) (test, 504.21 h . ng/mL; reference, 361.28 h . ng/mL) was significantly higher for the test product, with a point estimate of 140% and a corresponding 90% CI of 121% to 161%. For the comparison of C-max values, geometric means were: test, 76.46 ng/mL; reference, 19.20 ng/mL, with a point estimate of 398% and a CI of 316% to 503%. Thus, a significant difference in rate and extent of bioavailability was observed between the 2 products. Conclusions: Although both treatments were well tolerated by all volunteers, the test and reference tablets were found to have different pharmacokinetic properties when administered after a high-fat meal.
引用
收藏
页码:48 / 58
页数:11
相关论文
共 48 条
  • [21] Comparative pharmacokinetics of two modified-release oral morphine formulations (Reliadol® and Kapanol®) and an immediate-release morphine tablet (Morfin 'DAK') in healthy volunteers
    Bochner, F
    Somogyi, AA
    Christrup, LL
    Larsen, U
    Danz, C
    Elbaek, K
    CLINICAL DRUG INVESTIGATION, 1999, 17 (01) : 59 - 66
  • [22] Effect of food on the comparative bioavailability of two commercially available sustained-release tablet formulations containing nifedipine.
    Qato, MK
    Naddaf, AR
    Mohammed, FA
    FASEB JOURNAL, 1999, 13 (05): : A809 - A809
  • [23] Comparative Pharmacokinetics of Two Modified-Release Oral Morphine Formulations (Reliadol® and Kapanol®) and an Immediate-Release Morphine Tablet (Morfin ‘DAK’) in Healthy Volunteers
    F. Bochner
    A. A. Somogyi
    L. L. Christrup
    U. Larsen
    C. Danz
    K. Elbæk
    Clinical Drug Investigation, 1999, 17 : 59 - 66
  • [24] The effect of food on the pharmacokinetics of nifedipine in two slow release formulations: pronounced lag-time after a high fat breakfast
    Schug, BS
    Brendel, E
    Chantraine, E
    Wolf, D
    Martin, W
    Schall, R
    Blume, HH
    BRITISH JOURNAL OF CLINICAL PHARMACOLOGY, 2002, 53 (06) : 582 - 588
  • [25] Relative bioavailability, food effect, and safety of the single-dose pharmacokinetics of omecamtiv mecarbil following administration of different modified-release formulations in healthy subjects
    Palaparthy, Rameshraja
    Banfield, Christopher
    Alvarez, Paco
    Yan, Lucy
    Smith, Brian
    Johnson, Jessica
    Monsalvo, Maria Laura
    Malik, Fady
    INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF CLINICAL PHARMACOLOGY AND THERAPEUTICS, 2016, 54 (03) : 217 - 227
  • [26] Comparative Bioequivalence and Food Effect of Two Formulations of 30-mg Nifedipine Controlled-Release Tablets in Healthy Chinese Adults
    Zhang, Huizi
    Wang, Siyang
    Wang, Hongxia
    Zhi, Tingting
    Ren, Jian
    Wang, Yanhui
    Yao, Zhiqing
    Zhang, Pan
    Ye, Naobei
    Zhang, Ruiqin
    CLINICAL PHARMACOLOGY IN DRUG DEVELOPMENT, 2024, 13 (05): : 499 - 505
  • [27] A comparison of the effects of two modified release preparations of nifedipine - Nifedipine retard 10 mg twice daily and nifedipine GITS 20 mg once daily - In the treatment of mild to moderate hypertension
    Kirby, BJ
    Kitchin, N
    INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF CLINICAL PRACTICE, 1999, 53 (05) : 339 - 343
  • [28] Relative bioavailability and pharmacokinetic study of two trimetazidine modified release formulations in healthy Bangladeshi male volunteers
    Chowdhury, Md. Mazharul Islam
    Ullah, Md. Ashik
    Iqbal, Naushin
    Al Maruf, Abdullah
    Shohag, Md. Hasanuzzaman
    Harun, Saima
    Akter, Khondker Ayesha
    Begum, Bilkis
    Latif, A. H. M. Mahbub
    Hasnat, Abul
    ARZNEIMITTELFORSCHUNG-DRUG RESEARCH, 2011, 61 (07): : 393 - 398
  • [29] Pharmacokinetic and Tolerability Comparison of Sustained and Immediate Release Oral Formulations of Nifedipine Tablet Formulations: A Single-Dose, Randomized, Open-Label, Two-Period, Two-Way Crossover Study in Healthy, Fasting Egyptian Male Volunteers
    El-Masry, Soha Mahmoud
    El-Khodary, Noha Mahmoud
    DRUG RESEARCH, 2020, 70 (2-3) : 91 - 96
  • [30] Cost-effectiveness assessment through theoretical cost-minimization analysis of the use of two gastro-resistant modified-release mesalazine formulations in the management of ulcerative colitis in Spain
    Gisbert, Javier P.
    Gomollon, Fernando
    Mendez, Ignacio
    GASTROENTEROLOGIA Y HEPATOLOGIA, 2016, 39 (03): : 199 - 212