http://jcps.bjmu.edu.cn

• 研究论文 • 上一篇    下一篇

四种市售尼莫地平口服片剂的生物利用度及生物等效性评价

徐小薇, 傅强, 李大魁, Charles H Nightingale   

  1. 1. 中国医学科学院北京协和医院药剂科,北京100730;
    2. Pharmacy Research. Hartford Hospital. Pharmacy School of University of Connecticut. Hartford CT 06102, USA
  • 收稿日期:1999-05-15 修回日期:1999-08-25 出版日期:2000-03-15 发布日期:2000-03-15

Study of the Bioequivalence of Four Formulations of Nimodipine in Healthy Volunteers

Xu Xiaowei, Fu Qiang, Li Dakui, Charles H Nightingale   

  1. 1. Department of Pharmacy Peking Union Medical College Hospital, Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences. Beijing 100730;
    2. Pharmacy Research, Hartford Hospital, Pharmacy School of University of Connecticut, Hartford CT 06102, USA
  • Received:1999-05-15 Revised:1999-08-25 Online:2000-03-15 Published:2000-03-15

摘要: 本实验选择12名健康受试者,采用随机交叉四组试验, 对分别口服120 mg采用固体分散技术生产的三种国产尼莫地平片与德国拜尔药石生产的尼莫通片后的体内过程进行了研究。血浆药物浓度由本实验室改进的高效液相色谱测定法获得, 采用非房室模型分析法用PCNONLIN程序(SCI,v4.2)获得个体生物利用度参数Tmax,CmaxAUC0-∞。根据被测不同尼莫地平片剂间AUC0-∞之比得出相对生物利用度(f); 并将AUC0-∞等参数对数转换进行方差分析, 在方差分析基础上再行双单侧检验(two one sided tests)进行生物等效性评价。生物等效性判定标准是以试验制剂生物利用度参数AUC平均值的90%可信限, 应落在标准参比制剂的80%125%置信区间之内。统计学意义在p = 0.05显著性水平上判定。结果表明, A, B, CD四种片剂的达峰时间Tmax分别为0.6±0.2 h1.1±12 h0.5±0.1 h0.5±0.2 h; 峰浓度Cmax分别为108.8±59.5 ng·ml-156.1±30.7 ng·ml-173.2±34.9 ng·ml-194.7±41.1 ng·ml-1; 血浆药物浓度-时间曲线下面积AUC0-∞分别为175.4±77.9 ng·h·ml-1135.8±62.4 ng·ml154.8±69.5 ng·h·ml-1154.5±51.6 ng·h·ml-1。片剂BCD相对于片剂A的相对生物利用度分别为83.7%93.1%97.6%; 90%置信区间结果显示, 片剂BCDAUC0-∞平均值分别为A66.7-88.8%, 77.2-102.7%80.5-107.1%, 片剂D与片剂A具生物等效性。

关键词: 莫地平, 高效液相色谱测定法, 生物利用度, 生物等效性

Abstract: Aim: The objective was to compare the rate and extent of absorption of three generic formulations with that of a reference formulation when administered in equal doses. Methods: The study design was a singledose, randomized four-way crossover with a 1-week washout period between each phase of the experiment dosing. Plasma concentration-time profiles were determined and the bioavailability of different formulations of nimodipine tablets (A, B, C and D) following oral administration of a 120 mg nimodipine single dose was compared. Results: The Tmax of the tablet A, B, C and D was 0.6±0.2 h,1.1±1.2 h,0.5±0.1 h and 0.5±0.2 h, respectively, the Cmax was 108.8±59.5 ng·ml-1, 56.1±30.7 ng·ml-1, 73.2±34.9 ng·ml-1 and 94.7±41.1 ng.ml-1, respectively; and the AUC was 175.4±77.9 ng·h·ml-1, 135.8±62.4 ng.h.ml-1, 154.8±69.5 ng.h.ml-1 and 154.5±51.6ng·h·ml-1, respectively. The relative bioavailabilities of tablets B, C and D compared with tablet A were 83.7%, 93.1% and 97.6%, respectively. The 90% confidence interval for the AUC shown for tablets B and C were 66.7-88.8% and 77.2-102.7%, respectively, less than 80% compared to the reference at the low-range estimate, tablet D was 80.5-107. 1%, greater than 80% compared to the reference at the low-range estimate. Conclusion: The 90% confidence interval with respect to AUC was between 80% and 125%, the formulations B and C were not considered bioequivalent, formulation D was considered bioequivalent compared with formulation A.

Key words: Nimodipine, Nimodipine, High performance liquid chromatography, High performance liquid chromatography, Bioavailability, Bioavailability, Bioequivalence, Bioequivalence

Supporting: