Gordi Toufigh, Hou Eddie, Kasichayanula Sreeneeranj, Berner Bret
Depomed, Inc., 1360 O'Brien Drive, Menlo Park, CA 94025, USA.
Clin Ther. 2008 May;30(5):909-16. doi: 10.1016/j.clinthera.2008.05.008.
Gabapentin absorption is mediated by a saturable transporter system located in the upper gastrointestinal tract, indicating a short window of absorption. Therefore, conventional sustained formulations would likely result in decreased bioavailability, as the dosage form would pass through the window of absorption before the drug could be completely released.
The aim of this study was to compare the pharmacokinetics of an oral, gastric-retentive, gabapentin extended-release (G-ER) formulation with a gabapentin immediate-release (G-IR) formulation after single and multiple daily doses in healthy subjects.
In this open-label, multiple-dose, 3-way crossover, exploratory study, healthy male and female subjects (aged 18-65 years) were randomized to receive doses of 1800 mg G-ER in accordance with the following regimens: G-ER QD (8 pm), G-ER BID in divided doses (600 mg at 8 am and 1,200 mg at 8 pm), or G-IR TID (600 mg at 8 am, 2 pm, and 8 pm) on day 1 and on days 4 through 8 of each study period. The subjects underwent a 10-day washout between study periods. Gabapentin plasma concentrations were measured in serial plasma samples collected >or=48 hours following dosing on days 1 and 8 using a validated high performance liquid chromatography/tandem mass spectrometry system with a lowest limit of quantitation of 75 ng/mL. Adverse events (AEs) were monitored and documented throughout the confinement in the clinic and washout phases of each study period.
Of the 24 subjects enrolled in the study, 21 (11 males, 10 females; mean age, 37 years [range, 23- 60 years]; mean height, 172 cm [range, 158-188 cm], mean weight, 77 kg [range, 56-95 kg]; mean body mass index, 26.2 kg/m2 [range, 21.5-29.7 kg/m2]) completed the study. The completing subjects consisted of 8 whites, 7 blacks, 3 Asians, and 3 Hispanics. At steady state, exposure of both G-ER regimens (QD and BID) appeared similar compared with that of G-IR. However, BID dosing resulted in apparently lower C(max) (mean ratio: 81%; CI 90%, 76%-86%) and greater C(min) values (mean ratio: 118%; CI 90%, 107%-130%), while G-ER QD dosing was associated with numerically greater C(max) (mean ratio: 116%; CI 90%, 109%-123%), and lower C(min) values (mean ratio: 52%; CI 90%, 48%-56%) compared with G-IR TID during a 24-hour dosing period. A total of 47 treatment-emergent AEs occurred in 17 patients during the study. The most common AEs were headache (25% G-ER BID divided dose, 10% G-ER QD dosing, and 14% in G-IR TID dosing), dizziness (6%, 0%, and 19%), and muscle cramp (19%, 0%, and 10%). AEs were most prevalent in the G-IR study group.
This exploratory study found that in these healthy subjects, the daily exposure provided by less frequent G-ER dosing was not significantly different from same daily dose with G-IR, administered more frequently. The G-ER BID dosing resulted in less fluctuation, while the G-ER QD dosing produced higher maximum concentrations compared with a G-IR TID regimen.
加巴喷丁的吸收由位于上消化道的可饱和转运系统介导,这表明其吸收窗口较短。因此,传统的缓释制剂可能会导致生物利用度降低,因为剂型在药物完全释放之前就会通过吸收窗口。
本研究旨在比较健康受试者单次和每日多次给药后,口服胃滞留型加巴喷丁缓释(G-ER)制剂与加巴喷丁速释(G-IR)制剂的药代动力学。
在这项开放标签、多剂量、三交叉的探索性研究中,健康男性和女性受试者(年龄18 - 65岁)被随机分配,按照以下方案接受1800 mg G-ER剂量:在每个研究周期的第1天以及第4至8天,G-ER每日一次(晚上8点)、G-ER每日两次分剂量给药(早上8点600 mg,晚上8点1200 mg)或G-IR每日三次(早上8点、下午2点和晚上8点各600 mg)。受试者在研究周期之间进行为期10天的洗脱期。在第1天和第8天给药后≥48小时采集的系列血浆样本中,使用经过验证的高效液相色谱/串联质谱系统测量加巴喷丁血浆浓度,定量下限为75 ng/mL。在每个研究周期的临床禁闭期和洗脱期全程监测并记录不良事件(AE)。
本研究纳入的24名受试者中,21名(11名男性,10名女性;平均年龄37岁[范围23 - 60岁];平均身高172 cm[范围158 - 188 cm],平均体重77 kg[范围56 - 95 kg];平均体重指数26.2 kg/m²[范围21.5 - 29.7 kg/m²])完成了研究。完成研究的受试者包括8名白人、7名黑人、3名亚洲人和3名西班牙裔。在稳态时,与G-IR相比,两种G-ER给药方案(每日一次和每日两次)的暴露量似乎相似。然而,每日两次给药导致C(max)明显较低(平均比值:81%;90%置信区间,76% - 86%)且C(min)值较高(平均比值:118%;90%置信区间,107% - 130%),而在24小时给药期间,与G-IR每日三次给药相比,G-ER每日一次给药的C(max)数值上更高(平均比值:116%;90%置信区间,109% - 123%),C(min)值较低(平均比值:52%;90%置信区间,48% - 56%)。研究期间共有17名患者出现47例治疗中出现的不良事件。最常见的不良事件是头痛(G-ER每日两次分剂量给药组为25%,G-ER每日一次给药组为10%,G-IR每日三次给药组为14%)、头晕(6%、0%和19%)和肌肉痉挛(19%、0%和10%)。不良事件在G-IR研究组中最为普遍。
这项探索性研究发现,在这些健康受试者中,较少给药频率的G-ER方案提供的每日暴露量与更频繁给药的相同每日剂量G-IR相比无显著差异。与G-IR每日三次给药方案相比,G-ER每日两次给药导致的波动较小,而G-ER每日一次给药产生的最高浓度更高。