Laboratory of Pharmacology, Faculty of Veterinary Medicine, Universidad Nacional del Centro de la Provincia de Buenos Aires, Paraje Arroyo Seco s/n., 7000 Tandil, Argentina ; Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Tecnológicas (CONICET), Argentina ; Tandil Veterinary Research Center (CIVETAN-CONICET), Argentina.
Biomed Res Int. 2013;2013:392010. doi: 10.1155/2013/392010. Epub 2013 Aug 29.
Azithromycin (AZM) therapeutic failure and relapses of patients treated with generic formulations have been observed in clinical practice. The main goal of this research was to compare in a preclinical study the serum exposure and lung tissue concentration of two commercial formulations AZM-based in murine model. The current study involved 264 healthy Balb-C. Mice were divided into two groups (n = 44): animals of Group A (reference formulation -R-) were orally treated with AZM suspension at 10 mg/kg of b.w. Experimental animals of Group B (generic formulation -G-) received identical treatment than Group A with a generic formulation AZM-based. The study was repeated twice as Phase II and III. Serum and lung tissue samples were taken 24 h post treatment. Validated microbiological assay was used to determine the serum pharmacokinetic and lung distribution of AZM. After the pharmacokinetic analysis was observed, a similar serum exposure for both formulations of AZM assayed. In contrast, statistical differences (P < 0.001) were obtained after comparing the concentrations of both formulations in lung tissue, being the values obtained for AUC and Cmax (AZM-R-) +1586 and 122%, respectively, than those obtained for AZM-G- in lung. These differences may indicate large differences on the distribution process of both formulations, which may explain the lack of efficacy/therapeutic failure observed on clinical practice.
在临床实践中,已经观察到使用通用配方治疗的患者的阿奇霉素(AZM)治疗失败和复发。本研究的主要目的是在小鼠模型中比较两种商业配方 AZM 的血清暴露和肺组织浓度的临床前研究。本研究涉及 264 只健康的 Balb-C 小鼠。将小鼠分为两组(n = 44):A 组(参考制剂 -R-)的动物经口给予 10 mg/kg b.w 的 AZM 混悬液。B 组(通用制剂 -G-)的实验动物接受与 A 组相同的治疗,但使用基于通用制剂的 AZM。该研究作为 II 期和 III 期重复了两次。在治疗后 24 小时采集血清和肺组织样本。使用经过验证的微生物测定法来确定 AZM 的血清药代动力学和肺分布。进行药代动力学分析后,发现两种 AZM 制剂的血清暴露相似。相比之下,在比较两种制剂在肺组织中的浓度时,观察到统计学差异(P < 0.001),AUC 和 Cmax(AZM-R-)分别为 1586 和 122%,而 AZM-G-的 AUC 和 Cmax 分别为 122%和 1586%。这些差异可能表明两种制剂的分布过程存在很大差异,这可能解释了在临床实践中观察到的疗效/治疗失败。