Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 4 de 4
Filter
Add more filters










Database
Language
Publication year range
1.
Mol Pharm ; 20(11): 5690-5700, 2023 11 06.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-37773975

ABSTRACT

To assess bioequivalence of locally acting suspension-based nasal sprays, the U.S. FDA currently recommends a weight-of-evidence approach. In addition to in vitro and human pharmacokinetic (PK) studies, this includes a comparative clinical endpoint study to ensure equivalent bioavailability of the active pharmaceutical ingredient (API) at the site of action. The present study aimed to assess, within an in vitro/in vivo correlation paradigm, whether PK studies and dissolution kinetics are sensitive to differences in drug particle size for a locally acting suspension-based nasal spray product. Two investigational suspension-based nasal formulations of mometasone furoate (MF-I and MF-II; delivered dose: 180 µg) differed in API particle size and were compared in a single-center, double-blind, single-dose, randomized, two-way crossover PK study in 44 healthy subjects with oral charcoal block. Morphology-directed Raman spectroscopy yielded volume median diameters of 3.17 µm for MF-I and 5.50 µm for MF-II, and dissolution studies showed that MF-II had a slower dissolution profile than MF-I. The formulation with larger API particles (MF-II) showed a 45% smaller Cmax and 45% smaller AUC0-inf compared to those of MF-I. Systemic bioavailability of MF-I (2.20%) and MF-II (1.18%) correlated well with the dissolution kinetics, with the faster dissolving formulation yielding the higher bioavailability. This agreement between pharmacokinetics and dissolution kinetics cross-validated both methods and supported their use in assessing potential differences in slowly dissolving suspension-based nasal spray products.


Subject(s)
Nasal Sprays , Humans , Biological Availability , Mometasone Furoate/pharmacokinetics , Particle Size , Therapeutic Equivalency , Double-Blind Method , Cross-Over Studies
3.
AAPS J ; 23(3): 48, 2021 03 25.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-33768368

ABSTRACT

In the context of streamlining generic approval, this study assessed whether pharmacokinetics (PK) could elucidate the pulmonary fate of orally inhaled drug products (OIDPs). Three fluticasone propionate (FP) dry powder inhaler (DPI) formulations (A-4.5, B-3.8, and C-3.7), differing only in type and composition of lactose fines, exhibited median mass aerodynamic diameter (MMAD) of 4.5 µm (A-4.5), 3.8 µm (B-3.8), and 3.7 µm (C-3.7) and varied in dissolution rates (A-4.5 slower than B-3.8 and C-3.7). In vitro total lung dose (TLDin vitro) was determined as the average dose passing through three anatomical mouth-throat (MT) models and yielded dose normalization factors (DNF) for each DPI formulation X (DNFx = TLDin vitro,x/TLDin vitro,A-4.5). The DNF was 1.00 for A-4.5, 1.32 for B-3.8, and 1.21 for C-3.7. Systemic PK after inhalation of 500 µg FP was assessed in a randomized, double-blind, four-way crossover study in 24 healthy volunteers. Peak concentrations (Cmax) of A-4.5 relative to those of B-3.8 or C-3.7 lacked bioequivalence without or with dose normalization. The area under the curve (AUC0-Inf) was bio-IN-equivalent before dose normalization and bioequivalent after dose normalization. Thus, PK could detect differences in pulmonary available dose (AUC0-Inf) and residence time (dose-normalized Cmax). The differences in dose-normalized Cmax could not be explained by differences in in vitro dissolution. This might suggest that Cmax differences may indicate differences in regional lung deposition. Overall this study supports the use of PK studies to provide relevant information on the pulmonary performance characteristics (i.e., available dose, residence time, and regional lung deposition).


Subject(s)
Bronchodilator Agents/pharmacokinetics , Drugs, Generic/pharmacokinetics , Fluticasone/pharmacokinetics , Administration, Inhalation , Adolescent , Adult , Aerosols , Area Under Curve , Bronchodilator Agents/administration & dosage , Cross-Over Studies , Double-Blind Method , Drug Liberation , Drugs, Generic/administration & dosage , Dry Powder Inhalers , Female , Fluticasone/administration & dosage , Healthy Volunteers , Humans , Male , Middle Aged , Powders , Therapeutic Equivalency , Young Adult
4.
Pediatr Pulmonol ; 51(6): 570-5, 2016 Jun.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-26575323

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Bronchoprovocation with methacholine (MC) is the most sensitive method of determining bioequivalence of inhaled bronchodilators. FEV1 is used to determine the endpoint, but many children cannot perform spirometry reproducibly. The purpose of this study was to determine whether MC, using impulse oscillometry (IOS) as the endpoint, can differentiate between two doses of salmeterol (SM). METHODS: This was a single-blind, randomized study of 10 subjects with mild stable asthma, ages 4-11 years. None were taking a long-acting ß-agonist but most were on low-dose inhaled corticosteroid. On one study day, MC was performed 1 hr after one inhalation from each of two separate Advair 100/50 Diskus (100 µg salmeterol treatment). On a second day, MC was performed after one inhalation from Advair Diskus and one inhalation from Flovent Diskus 100 (50 µg salmeterol treatment). The provocative concentration of methacholine causing a 40% increase in total airway resistance (PC40 R5 ) was calculated. RESULTS: The reduction in R5 (bronchodilator effect) was 15.5% and 18.4% for 50 and 100 µg, respectively (NS). After MC (bronchoprotective effect), the geometric mean (95%CI) PC40 R5 (mg/ml) was 2.4 (1.3-4.4) during screening, 22.9 (8.5-61.6) after 50 µg SM and 47.0 (25.2-87.8) after 100 µg SM (P = 0.051 for 50 vs. 100 using a linear mixed effects model). No adverse effects were observed. CONCLUSIONS: MC with IOS endpoint will be a useful method for determining bioequivalence of a generic inhaler in children. Seventy-two subjects will be required to achieve 80% power to assess bioequivalence of SM. Pediatr Pulmonol. 2016;51:570-575. © 2015 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.


Subject(s)
Biological Assay/methods , Bronchoconstrictor Agents/administration & dosage , Bronchoconstrictor Agents/pharmacokinetics , Methacholine Chloride/administration & dosage , Methacholine Chloride/adverse effects , Oscillometry , Salmeterol Xinafoate/administration & dosage , Salmeterol Xinafoate/pharmacokinetics , Administration, Inhalation , Airway Resistance/drug effects , Asthma/chemically induced , Asthma/drug therapy , Asthma/physiopathology , Bronchial Provocation Tests , Child , Child, Preschool , Cross-Over Studies , Female , Forced Expiratory Volume/drug effects , Humans , Male , Prospective Studies , Single-Blind Method , Therapeutic Equivalency
SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL
...