Search

This study aimed to compare the pharmacokinetic (PK) and safety profiles of 2 fenofibric acid formulations under fasting and fed conditions. The reference was a 135 mg capsule, while the test was a 110 mg enteric-coated tablet. This randomized, open-label, two-sequence, two-period crossover phase 1 clinical trial was conducted in healthy Korean men. Sixty participants were enrolled in each of the fasting and feeding groups. Blood samples were collected 72 hours after drug administration. PK parameters were calculated using a noncompartmental method with Phoenix WinNonlin®. A total of 53 and 51 participants from the fasting and feeding groups, respectively, completed the study. The geometric mean ratio and 90% confidence intervals of the maximum concentration (Cmax) and area under the concentration-time curve to the last measurable plasma concentration were 0.9195 (0.8795-0.9614) and 0.8630 (0.8472-0.8791) in the fasting study and 1.0926 (1.0102-1.1818) and 0.9998 (0.9675-1.0332) in the fed study, respectively. The time to reach Cmax of the enteric-coated tablet compared to that of the capsule was extended by 1 and 3 hours under fasting and fed conditions, respectively. In conclusion, enteric-coated tablets have a higher bioavailability than capsules. In addition, the enteric-coated tablet was smaller than the capsule, making it easier for patients to swallow. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

UI14SDF100CW is a chewable tablet of sildenafil citrate, which was developed to improve compliance through convenience of administration. The purpose of this study was to compare the pharmacokinetic (PK) properties of sildenafil citrate chewable tablets (UI14SDF100CW) and conventional sildenafil citrate film-coated tablets (Viagra®, Pfizer). A randomized, open-label, single dose, two-treatment, two-period, two-way crossover study was conducted in 60 healthy male volunteers. In each period, the subjects received a single oral dose of UI14SDF100CW or Viagra® (both tablets contain 140.45 mg of sildenafil citrate, which is equivalent to 100 mg of sildenafil). Serial blood samples were collected up to 24 h post-dose for PK analysis. The plasma concentration of sildenafil was determined using a validated HPLC-MS/MS assay. PK parameters of sildenafil were calculated using non-compartmental methods. The plasma concentration-time profiles of sildenafil in both formulations were similar. For UI14SDF100CW, the Cmax and AUClast of sildenafil were 1068.69 ± 458.25 (mean ± standard deviation) mg/L and 3580.59 ± 1680.29 h·mg/L, and the corresponding values for Viagra® were 1146.84 ± 501.70 mg/L and 3406.35 ± 1452.31 h·mg/L, respectively. The geometric mean ratios (90% confidence intervals) of UI14SDF100CW to Viagra® for Cmax and AUClast were 0.933 (0.853-1.021) and 1.034 (0.969-1.108), respectively, which met the bioequivalence criteria of Korean regulatory agency. In conclusion, UI14SDF100CW and Viagra® showed similar PK properties. Therefore, UI14SDF100CW can be an alternative to sildenafil for the treatment of erectile dysfunction, providing better compliance. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Cilostazol controlled-release (CR) tablets have recently been developed by Korea United Pharm (Seoul, Korea). The tablets use a patented double CR system, which improves drug compliance by allowing “once daily” administration and reduces adverse events by sustaining a more even plasma concentration for 24 h. We conducted an open, randomized, two-period, two-treatment, cross-over study to compare the pharmacokinetic (PK) characteristics and tolerability of cilostazol when administered to healthy Korean male volunteers as CR or immediate release (IR) tablets (Pletal, Korea Otsuka Pharmaceutical Co., Gyeonggi-do, Korea). Each volunteer was randomly allocated to receive a single tablet of cilostazol CR (200 mg) or two tablets of cilostazol IR (100 mg) with a 7-day washout period between treatments. Plasma cilostazol, OPC-13015 (3,4-dehydrocilostazol), and OPC-13213 (4'-trans-hydroxycilostazol) were assayed using liquid chromatography-tandem mass spectrometry for PK analysis. Thirty participants completed the study with no clinically relevant safety issues. The peak concentrations (Cmax, mean ± SD) of cilostazol CR and cilostazol IR were 1414.6 ± 49.3 and 1413.1 ± 35.2 ng/mL, respectively, and the areas under the plasma concentration–time curve from 0 to the last concentration (AUClast) were 23928.7 ± 65.9 and 25312.0 ± 62.6 ng∙h/mL, respectively. The geometric mean ratios (cilostazol CR/ cilostazol IR, GMR) of the Cmax and AUClast values were 1.001 (90% CI: 0.822, 1.220) and 0.945 (90% CI: 0.814, 1.098), respectively. The frequencies of adverse events were similar. The present study showed that cilostazol PK and tolerability were comparable when administered to healthy Korean men, regardless of whether administered as cilostazol CR or IR. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]