Suppr超能文献

单位剂量干粉吸入器递送的沙丁胺醇的药代动力学:与定量气雾剂和都保干粉吸入器的比较。

Pharmacokinetics of Salbutamol Delivered from the Unit Dose Dry Powder Inhaler: Comparison with the Metered Dose Inhaler and Diskus Dry Powder Inhaler.

作者信息

Moore Alison, Riddell Kylie, Joshi Shashidhar, Chan Robert, Mehta Rashmi

机构信息

1 GSK , Stockley Park, Uxbridge, United Kingdom .

2 GSK , Sydney, Australia .

出版信息

J Aerosol Med Pulm Drug Deliv. 2017 Jun;30(3):164-172. doi: 10.1089/jamp.2015.1277. Epub 2017 Feb 7.

Abstract

AIM

To compare the systemic exposure of salbutamol following delivery from the unit dose dry powder inhaler (UD-DPI) system with that from the Diskus and metered dose inhaler (MDI).

MATERIALS AND METHODS

This open-label, two-part, six-way crossover, randomized single-dose study in healthy subjects evaluated salbutamol systemic exposure of three dose strengths (using three inhalations: 3 × 150 μg [450 μg], 3 × 200 μg [600 μg], and 3 × 250 μg [750 μg]) and 2% of drug in lactose blends (1.6% and 1.0% [600 μg dose only] by weight) following delivery through the UD-DPI compared with systemic exposure from the Diskus and MDI (600 μg dose). Systemic exposure in the presence of charcoal block was also evaluated. Primary treatment comparisons were area under the concentration-time curve from time zero to 12 hours [AUC] and maximum plasma concentration [C].

RESULTS

Delivery of salbutamol 600 μg from the UD-DPI resulted in total systemic exposure similar to that from the Diskus and approximately half of that from the MDI (AUC geometric least squares mean ratio [GMR] [90% confidence interval (CI)] for UD-DPI [1.6% blend]/Diskus: 0.91 [0.83-1.00]; UD-DPI [1.6% blend]/MDI: 0.46 [0.42-0.50]. C GMR [90% CI] for UD-DPI [1.6% blend]/Diskus: 1.20 [1.07-1.33]; UD-DPI [1.6% blend]/MDI: 0.58 [0.52-0.64]). Results were consistent between the 1.6% and the 1.0% blends and systemic exposure for the 3 dose strengths of salbutamol (1.6% blend) showed increases that were 12-16% greater than dose proportional. Systemic exposure due to pulmonary absorption (as calculated from AUC in the presence and absence of charcoal block) was 48% for the UD-DPI, 24% for Diskus, and 37% for MDI of the total salbutamol systemic exposure, and the corresponding estimated lung dose was 65% for the UD-DPI and 34% for the Diskus relative to the MDI.

CONCLUSIONS

Salbutamol total systemic exposure following UD-DPI was similar to that from the Diskus and was lower than that following the MDI. The different blend formulations tested resulted in consistent salbutamol systemic exposure. The contribution of the lung and gut to systemic exposure revealed a different profile for the three inhaler platforms. These data suggest that the UD-DPI warrants further evaluation.

摘要

目的

比较单位剂量干粉吸入器(UD-DPI)系统、都保(Diskus)和定量吸入器(MDI)递送沙丁胺醇后的全身暴露情况。

材料与方法

这项在健康受试者中开展的开放标签、两部分、六路交叉、随机单剂量研究,评估了三种剂量强度(使用三次吸入:3×150μg[450μg]、3×200μg[600μg]和3×250μg[750μg])以及乳糖混合剂中2%药物(仅600μg剂量时为1.6%和1.0%重量比)通过UD-DPI递送后沙丁胺醇的全身暴露情况,并与都保和MDI(600μg剂量)的全身暴露情况进行比较。还评估了存在活性炭阻断时的全身暴露情况。主要治疗比较指标为从时间零点至12小时的浓度-时间曲线下面积[AUC]和最大血浆浓度[C]。

结果

UD-DPI递送600μg沙丁胺醇后的总全身暴露与都保相似,约为MDI的一半(UD-DPI[1.6%混合剂]/都保的AUC几何最小二乘均值比[GMR][90%置信区间(CI)]:0.91[0.83 - 1.00];UD-DPI[1.6%混合剂]/MDI:0.46[0.42 - 0.50]。UD-DPI[1.6%混合剂]/都保的C GMR[90%CI]:1.20[1.07 - 1.33];UD-DPI[1.6%混合剂]/MDI:0.58[0.52 - 0.64])。1.6%和1.0%混合剂的结果一致,三种剂量强度的沙丁胺醇(1.6%混合剂)的全身暴露增加幅度比剂量比例高12 - 16%。肺部吸收导致的全身暴露(根据存在和不存在活性炭阻断时的AUC计算)在总沙丁胺醇全身暴露中,UD-DPI为48%,都保为24%,MDI为37%,相对于MDI,UD-DPI和都保相应的估计肺部剂量分别为65%和34%。

结论

UD-DPI递送后沙丁胺醇的总全身暴露与都保相似,低于MDI。所测试的不同混合剂配方导致沙丁胺醇全身暴露情况一致。肺和肠道对全身暴露的贡献显示三种吸入器平台的情况不同。这些数据表明UD-DPI值得进一步评估。

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验