Damle Bharat D, Kaul Sanjeev, Behr Douglas, Knupp Catherine
Clinical Discovery, Bristol-Myers Squibb Pharmaceutical Research Institute, Princeton, New Jersey 08543, USA.
J Clin Pharmacol. 2002 Jul;42(7):791-7. doi: 10.1177/009127002401102623.
Didanosine is an acid labile drug and hence has been given with buffering agents. To avoid the need for concurrent administration with antacids, an encapsulated enteric-coated bead formulation of didanosine was developed. The objective of this study was to assess the bioequivalence of the encapsulated enteric-coated beads compared to the buffered tablet. Two separate open-label, randomized, two-way crossover studies were conducted, one in healthy subjects and the other in HIV-infected subjects (with CD4 cell counts > 200 cells/mm3). All subjects received a 400-mg dose of the buffered tablet (reference formulation) and the encapsulated enteric-coated beads (test formulation). Blood samples were collected over 12 hours, and plasma levels of didanosine were determined using a validated assay. The 90% confidence interval (CI) of the ratio of the geometric means of log-transformed Cmax and AUCinfinity values were used to assess bioequivalence between the two formulations using the equivalence interval of 0.80 and 1.25. In healthy volunteers (n = 46), the point estimate and 90% CI of the ratios of Cmax and AUCinfinity values were 0.58 (0.52, 0.64) and 1.02 (0.95, 1.01), respectively. In HIV-infected subjects (n = 30), the point estimate and 90% CI of the ratios of Cmax and AUCinfinity values were 0.64 (0.56, 0.72) and 0.95 (0.86, 1.06), respectively. Median t(max) value increased significantly from 0.67 hours for the buffered tablet in both studies to 2.33 hours (in healthy subjects) or 2.0 hours (in HIV-infected subjects) for the enteric-coated beads. The mean half-life of didanosine was similar between treatments and ranged between 1.60 and 1.70 hours across healthy and HIV-infected subjects. It was concluded that the encapsulated enteric-coated bead formulation of didanosine is equivalent to the buffered tablet in the extent of exposure but differs in the rate of absorption. The pharmacokinetic profile of the enteric formulation appears to be similar in healthy and HIV-infected subjects.
去羟肌苷是一种酸不稳定药物,因此一直与缓冲剂一起给药。为避免与抗酸剂同时给药的需要,开发了一种去羟肌苷的胶囊型肠溶包衣微丸制剂。本研究的目的是评估该胶囊型肠溶包衣微丸与缓冲片相比的生物等效性。进行了两项独立的开放标签、随机、双向交叉研究,一项在健康受试者中进行,另一项在HIV感染受试者(CD4细胞计数>200个细胞/mm³)中进行。所有受试者均接受400mg剂量的缓冲片(参比制剂)和胶囊型肠溶包衣微丸(受试制剂)。在12小时内采集血样,并使用经过验证的分析方法测定血浆中去羟肌苷的水平。使用0.80至1.25的等效区间,通过对数转换后的Cmax和AUC∞值的几何均值之比的90%置信区间(CI)来评估两种制剂之间的生物等效性。在健康志愿者(n = 46)中,Cmax和AUC∞值之比的点估计值和90%CI分别为0.58(0.52,0.64)和1.02(0.95,1.01)。在HIV感染受试者(n = 30)中,Cmax和AUC∞值之比的点估计值和90%CI分别为0.64(0.56,0.72)和0.95(0.86,1.06)。在两项研究中,中位t(max)值从缓冲片的0.67小时显著增加到肠溶包衣微丸的2.33小时(在健康受试者中)或2.0小时(在HIV感染受试者中)。去羟肌苷的平均半衰期在各治疗组之间相似,在健康和HIV感染受试者中为1.60至1.70小时。得出的结论是,去羟肌苷的胶囊型肠溶包衣微丸制剂在暴露程度上与缓冲片等效,但在吸收速率上有所不同。肠溶制剂在健康和HIV感染受试者中的药代动力学特征似乎相似。