首页> 外文期刊>Clinical therapeutics >Pharmacokinetics of gabapentin after a single day and at steady state following the administration of gastric-retentive- extended-release and immediate-release tablets: A randomized, open-label, multiple-dose, three-way crossover, exploratory study in healthy subjects.
【24h】

Pharmacokinetics of gabapentin after a single day and at steady state following the administration of gastric-retentive- extended-release and immediate-release tablets: A randomized, open-label, multiple-dose, three-way crossover, exploratory study in healthy subjects.

机译:加巴喷丁在服用胃滞留性缓释和速释片剂后的第一天并处于稳定状态的药代动力学:在健康受试者中进行的一项随机,开放标签,多剂量,三向交叉,探索性研究。

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
           

摘要

Background: 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. Objective: 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. Methods: 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 1200 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 ofeach study period. The subjects underwent a 10-day washout between study periods. Gabapentin plasma concentrations were measured in serial plasma samples collected >/=48 hours following dosing on days 1 and 8 using a validated highperformance 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. Results: 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. Conclusions: 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.
机译:背景:加巴喷丁的吸收是由位于上消化道的饱和转运系统介导的,表明吸收的窗口很短。因此,常规剂型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会通过吸收窗口。目的:本研究的目的是比较每日一次和多次服用健康的口服,胃滞留性加巴喷丁缓释(G-ER)制剂与加巴喷丁即释(G-IR)制剂的药代动力学。科目。方法:在这项开放性,多剂量,三向交叉,探索性研究中,健康的男性和女性受试者(年龄在18-65岁之间)根据以下方案随机接受1800 mg G-ER的剂量: G-ER QD(晚上8点),G-ER BID分次服用(上午8点600 mg和晚上8点1200 mg)或G-IR TID(下午8点,下午2点和晚上8点600 mg)每个学习期的第1天和第4至8天。在研究期间,受试者经历了10天的冲洗。加巴喷丁血浆浓度在第1天和第8天给药后≥48小时收集的连续血浆样品中进行测定,使用的是经验证的高效液相色谱/串联质谱系统,最低定量限为75 ng / mL。在整个研究期间,在每个研究期的临床和冲洗阶段,均监测并记录不良事件(AE)。结果:在研究的24名受试者中,有21名(男性11名,女性10名;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公斤[范围:56-95公斤];平均体重指数26.2公斤/平方米[范围,21.5-29.7公斤/平方米])完成了研究。完成的科目包括8位白人,7位黑人,3位亚裔和3位西班牙裔。在稳态下,两种G-ER方案(QD和BID)的暴露与G-IR相似。但是,BID剂量明显降低了C(max)(平均比率:81%; CI为90%,76%-86%)和更高的C(min)值(平均比率:118%; CI为90%,107%- 130%),而G-ER QD剂量在数值上与更高的C(max)(平均比率:116%; CI 90%,109%-123%)和更低的C(min)值相关(平均比率:52%) ;相对于G-IR TID,在24小时内,CI为90%,48%-56%)。在研究期间,共有17例患者发生了47种治疗性AE。最常见的AE是头痛(25%G-ER BID分次剂量,10%G-ER QD剂量和14%G-IR TID剂量),头晕(6%,0%和19%)和肌肉抽筋(19%,0%和10%)。 AE在G-IR研究组中最普遍。结论:这项探索性研究发现,在这些健康受试者中,较少频率的G-ER剂量提供的每日暴露与相同频率的G-IR每日剂量并没有显着不同,后者的给药频率更高。与G-IR TID方案相比,G-ER BID剂量产生的波动较小,而G-ER QD剂量产生的最大浓度更高。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号