Suppr超能文献

高血压患者急性和慢性给药后缓释可乐定与传统制剂的药代动力学比较。

Pharmacokinetic comparison of a slow-release clonidine with a conventional formulation after acute and chronic administration in hypertensives.

作者信息

Conway E L, Anavekar S N, Howes L G, Louis W J

机构信息

Department of Clinical Pharmacology and Therapeutics, Austin Hospital, Heidelberg, Victoria, Australia.

出版信息

J Clin Pharmacol. 1992 May;32(5):427-33. doi: 10.1002/j.1552-4604.1992.tb03858.x.

Abstract

The pharmacokinetic characteristics of a slow-release formulation of clonidine (150 micrograms) were compared with those of a conventional formulation (75 micrograms) after acute and chronic (2 week) administration to 12 hypertensive subjects. The Tmax of the slow-release formulation was significantly later than for the conventional formulation after both acute (8.3 +/- 6 hr vs. 2.1 +/- 2 hr) and chronic administration (4.0 +/- 3 hr vs. 2.5 +/- 2 hr). Although the Tmax did not change significantly with acute and chronic administration of the conventional preparation, it was significantly shorter after chronic administration of the slow-release formulation when acute and chronic administration were compared. The Cmax was approximately 60% lower for the slow-release formulation (1 x 150 micrograms; 0.42 +/- 0.09 ng/mL) compared with the conventional formulation (2 x 75 micrograms; 0.70 +/- 0.12 ng/mL) after acute administration, whereas in the steady state, in which the dose of the conventional preparation was halved (75 micrograms), the Cmax values were comparable: 1 x 150 micrograms-0.99 +/- 0.27 ng/mL, 1 x 75 micrograms-0.84 +/- 0.20 ng/mL and the dose-normalized interdose AUC were identical for the conventional (16.2 +/- 4.3 ng/mL.hr) and slow release (16.6 +/- 5.3 ng/mL.hr) products. T1/2 values for the conventional formulation of clonidine exceeded 20 hours in all but one subject and were considerably longer than those in previous reports, including those of the authors, in which a less sensitive assay was used.(ABSTRACT TRUNCATED AT 250 WORDS)

摘要

在对12名高血压患者进行急性和慢性(2周)给药后,比较了可乐定缓释制剂(150微克)与传统制剂(75微克)的药代动力学特征。急性给药(8.3±6小时对2.1±2小时)和慢性给药(4.0±3小时对2.5±2小时)后,缓释制剂的达峰时间(Tmax)明显晚于传统制剂。虽然传统制剂急性和慢性给药时Tmax变化不显著,但与急性给药比较时,缓释制剂慢性给药后的Tmax显著缩短。急性给药后,缓释制剂(1×150微克;0.42±0.09纳克/毫升)的最大血药浓度(Cmax)比传统制剂(2×75微克;0.70±0.12纳克/毫升)低约60%,而在稳态时,传统制剂剂量减半(75微克),Cmax值相当:1×150微克-0.99±0.27纳克/毫升,1×75微克-0.84±0.20纳克/毫升,传统制剂(16.2±4.3纳克/毫升·小时)和缓释制剂(16.6±5.3纳克/毫升·小时)的剂量标准化给药间期曲线下面积(AUC)相同。除一名患者外,可乐定传统制剂的半衰期(T1/2)值均超过20小时,且比之前的报告(包括作者的报告,其中使用的检测方法灵敏度较低)中的值长得多。(摘要截短于250字)

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验