Suppr超能文献

鼻腔与直肠给予地西泮的生物利用度比较。

Bioavailability of intranasal vs. rectal diazepam.

机构信息

Center for Orphan Drug Research, United States.

出版信息

Epilepsy Res. 2013 Feb;103(2-3):254-61. doi: 10.1016/j.eplepsyres.2012.07.018. Epub 2012 Sep 13.

Abstract

There remains an unmet medical need in the out-of-hospital management of seizure emergencies because older children and adults often refuse treatment with diazepam rectal gel due to social objections. We have previously reported that intranasal diazepam (DZP) administration is feasible, with maximum plasma concentrations (C(max)) and time to maximum concentration (T(max)) that are comparable to rectal DZP; but tolerability was poor. In the present study, the tolerability and pharmacokinetics of two investigational nasal formulations were compared with DZP rectal gel. Twelve healthy volunteers were enrolled into an active-control, double-blind, four-period, crossover pharmacokinetic and tolerability study. Three intranasal treatments (Nas-A 10mg, Nas-B 10mg and Nas-B 13.4 mg) were compared to a 10mg dose of the rectal gel. A single dose of each formulation was administered followed by at least a 14 day washout period. Blood samples for plasma DZP concentration-time characterization were collected pre-dose and at regular intervals to 240 h post-dose. Tolerability and sedation were assessed using visual analog scales. Mean DZP C(max) (±SD) was 181.8 ± 84.16, 151.3 ± 108.1 and 180.7 ± 82.1 ng/mL for Nas-A 10mg, Nas-B 10 and Nas-B 13.4 mg respectively; in comparison the C(max) for the rectal gel was 160.9 ± 109.4 ng/mL. Median T(max) was 0.75 h for all treatments. Both intranasal formulations were well tolerated and exhibited relatively rapid, but variable, absorption with bioavailability of 70-90% relative to DZP rectal gel. This study shows that the development of a well-tolerated nasal formulation is possible and that the rate and extent of absorption approximates that of DZP rectal gel. We conclude that intranasal DZP offers a viable alternative to rectal administration, but enhancement of formulations is needed to improve the extent and consistency of absorption.

摘要

在院外处理癫痫急症方面,仍然存在着未满足的医疗需求,因为大龄儿童和成人常常因为社会反对而拒绝使用直肠用二氮䓬(diazepam rectal gel)治疗。我们之前曾报道过,经鼻给予二氮䓬(diazepam,DZP)是可行的,其血药浓度达峰时间(time to maximum concentration,T(max))和最大血药浓度(maximum plasma concentration,C(max))与直肠用 DZP 相当;但耐受性较差。在本研究中,我们比较了两种研究性鼻内制剂与直肠用 DZP 凝胶的耐受性和药代动力学。12 名健康志愿者被纳入一项活性对照、双盲、四周期、交叉药代动力学和耐受性研究。将三种经鼻治疗(Nas-A 10mg、Nas-B 10mg 和 Nas-B 13.4mg)与 10mg 剂量的直肠凝胶进行比较。每种制剂均给予单次剂量,随后至少进行 14 天的洗脱期。在给药前和给药后 240 小时内定期采集血样以进行血浆 DZP 浓度-时间特征描述。使用视觉模拟量表评估耐受性和镇静程度。Nas-A 10mg、Nas-B 10 和 Nas-B 13.4mg 的平均 DZP C(max)(±SD)分别为 181.8 ± 84.16、151.3 ± 108.1 和 180.7 ± 82.1ng/ml;而直肠凝胶的 C(max)为 160.9 ± 109.4ng/ml。所有治疗的中位 T(max)均为 0.75 小时。两种经鼻制剂均具有良好的耐受性,且吸收相对较快,但具有变异性,生物利用度为 DZP 直肠凝胶的 70-90%。本研究表明,开发一种耐受良好的鼻内制剂是可行的,且吸收速率和程度与 DZP 直肠凝胶相近。我们得出结论,经鼻给予 DZP 是直肠给药的可行替代方案,但需要增强制剂以提高吸收的程度和一致性。

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