Mascher H, Kikuta C, Schiel H
Pharm-analyt Labor GmbH, Baden bei Wien, Austria.
Arzneimittelforschung. 2001;51(6):465-9. doi: 10.1055/s-0031-1300064.
Enteric coating of peppermint oil/caraway oil capsules avoids subjective discomfort to the patient caused by gastroesophageal reflux. In order to confirm bioequivalence of an enteric coated formulation containing peppermint oil and caraway oil (CAS 277309-55-4, Enteroplant) and an immediate release formulation of both oils, the pharmacokinetics of menthol and carvone after oral administration of the two formulations were studied in a randomized, two-period cross-over study in 16 healthy male volunteers. The subjects received 180 mg peppermint oil and 100 mg caraway oil, once as 2 enteric coated capsules of the fixed enteric coated combination preparation containing 90 mg peppermint oil (WS 1340) and 50 mg caraway oil (WS 1520) each (test) and once in the form of 5 capsules of an immediate release formulation (reference) containing 36 mg peppermint (WS 1340) oil and 20 mg caraway oil (WS 1520) each. The capsules were taken with 250 ml water after a 10 h fast. Both substances were determined in plasma by GC/MS after extraction. The limit of quantification was 10 ng/ml for menthol and 0.5 ng/ml for carvone. The mean maximum plasma levels for menthol were 1196 ng/ml after administration of the test medication and 1492 ng/ml after administration of the reference medication. The bioavailability with respect to the AUC was comparable after administration of test and reference preparation, the 90% confidence interval was 97 to 105%. As expected, there were considerable differences for Tmax. After application of the enteric coated form the maximum concentration was reached significantly later (3.0 h vs. 1.7 h) compared to the immediate release capsule. Corresponding data were also calculated for carvone. After application of the test medication the maxima of 14 ng/ml for both formulations were reached later (2.5 h vs. 1.3 h). The 90% confidence interval of the AUC for carvone was 79 to 119% and therefore slightly outside the acceptable range for bioequivalence of 80 to 125%. However, this fact should not be relevant, in particular since the dosage of the enteric coated capsule lies at the upper limit of the model text and positive clinical studies, also on the therapeutic equivalence of the two formulations, are available.
薄荷油/葛缕子油胶囊的肠溶包衣可避免胃食管反流给患者带来的主观不适。为了确认含薄荷油和葛缕子油的肠溶包衣制剂(CAS 277309 - 55 - 4,Enteroplant)与两种油的速释制剂的生物等效性,在16名健康男性志愿者中进行了一项随机、两周期交叉研究,以研究口服这两种制剂后薄荷醇和香芹酮的药代动力学。受试者接受180 mg薄荷油和100 mg葛缕子油,一次服用2粒固定肠溶包衣复方制剂的肠溶胶囊,每粒含90 mg薄荷油(WS 1340)和50 mg葛缕子油(WS 1520)(试验制剂),另一次以5粒速释制剂胶囊(参比制剂)的形式服用,每粒含36 mg薄荷油(WS 1340)和20 mg葛缕子油(WS 1520)。禁食10小时后,用250 ml水送服胶囊。提取后通过气相色谱/质谱法测定血浆中的两种物质。薄荷醇的定量限为10 ng/ml,香芹酮的定量限为0.5 ng/ml。服用试验药物后,薄荷醇的平均最大血浆浓度为1196 ng/ml,服用参比药物后为1492 ng/ml。试验制剂和参比制剂给药后的AUC生物利用度相当,90%置信区间为97%至105%。正如预期的那样,达峰时间(Tmax)存在显著差异。与速释胶囊相比,服用肠溶包衣制剂后达到最大浓度的时间明显更晚(3.0小时对1.7小时)。也计算了香芹酮的相应数据。服用试验药物后,两种制剂的最大浓度14 ng/ml均在较晚时间达到(2.5小时对1.3小时)。香芹酮AUC的90%置信区间为79%至119%,因此略超出生物等效性可接受范围80%至125%。然而,这一事实可能并不重要,特别是因为肠溶包衣胶囊的剂量处于模拟文本的上限,而且也有关于两种制剂治疗等效性的阳性临床研究。
Arzneimittelforschung. 2010
Phytother Res. 2000-2
Arzneimittelforschung. 1995-11
Nat Biomed Eng. 2025-2-14