Hao L-H, Guo S-C, Liu C-C, Zhu H, Wang B, Fu L, Chen M-T, Zhou L, Chi J-Y, Yang W, Nie W-J, Lu Y
Beijing Key Laboratory of Drug Resistance Tuberculosis Research, Department of Pharmacology, Beijing Chest Hospital, Capital Medical University, Beijing Tuberculosis & Thoracic Tumour Research Institute, Beijing, China.
National Center for Tuberculosis Control and Prevention, Chinese Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Beijing, China.
Int J Tuberc Lung Dis. 2014 Dec;18(12):1505-12. doi: 10.5588/ijtld.13.0647.
The bioavailability of rifampicin (RMP) decreases by ∼30% on interaction with isoniazid (INH) in stomach acid conditions, which can result in the development of drug resistance and treatment failure.
To compare the bioavailability in healthy volunteers of five anti-tuberculosis fixed-drug combinations (FDCs) used in China (formulations A-E) containing RMP and INH against single-drug formulations taken as reference.
Two- or three-period, two- or three-sequence crossover study of drugs.
Only RMP formulation E passed the bioequivalence criteria, with 90% confidence intervals for the log-transformed ratios of AUC₀₋₂₄, AUC₀₋∞, and Cmax of respectively 89.9-103.7, 89.6-102.2 and 87.7-107.9. For INH, formulations A, B, C and D passed the bioequivalence test, but not product E, where the 90%CIs of the log-transformed ratios of AUC₀₋₂₄, AUC₀₋∞, and Cmax were respectively 85.2-100.7, 85.2-100.7 and 73.8-100.9.
According to the results of the bioequivalence analysis carried out in this study, RMP formulations A, B, C and D were not within the acceptable range and only formulation E passed the bioequivalence criteria of 80-125%. In comparison, four-test INH formulations (A, B, C and D) were bioequivalent to the corresponding single-drug formulation, while product E failed in the bioequivalence criteria.
在胃酸环境中,利福平(RMP)与异烟肼(INH)相互作用后,其生物利用度会降低约30%,这可能导致耐药性的产生和治疗失败。
比较中国使用的五种含RMP和INH的抗结核固定剂量复方制剂(FDC,即制剂A - E)与作为对照的单药制剂在健康志愿者中的生物利用度。
药物的两期或三期、两序列或三序列交叉研究。
仅RMP制剂E符合生物等效性标准,AUC₀₋₂₄、AUC₀₋∞和Cmax对数转换比值的90%置信区间分别为89.9 - 103.7、89.6 - 102.2和87.7 - 107.9。对于INH,制剂A、B、C和D通过了生物等效性测试,但制剂E未通过,其AUC₀₋₂₄、AUC₀₋∞和Cmax对数转换比值的90%置信区间分别为85.2 - 100.7、85.2 - 100.7和73.8 - 100.9。
根据本研究进行的生物等效性分析结果,RMP制剂A、B、C和D不在可接受范围内,只有制剂E通过了80 - 125%的生物等效性标准。相比之下,四种INH制剂(A、B、C和D)与相应的单药制剂生物等效,而制剂E未达到生物等效性标准。