• Biomolecules & Therapeutics
• /
• 제15권2호
• /
• pp.118-122
• /
• 2007

This study was performed to evaluate the bioequivalency between the Osmetone$^{TM}$ Tablet (Myeongmoon Pharm. Co., Ltd.) as a test formulation and the Relafen$^{TM}$ Tablet (Handok Pharm. Co., Ltd.) as a reference formulation. Twenty-four healthy male volunteers were administered the formulations by the randomized Latin square crossover design, and the plasma samples were determined by a high performance liquid chromatography (HPLC) with Ultra-Violet (UV) detector. AUC$_t$, C$_{max}$ and T$_{max}$ were obtained from the time-plasma concentration curves, and log-transformed AUC$_t$ and C$_{max}$ and log-untransformed T$_{max}$ values for two formulations were compared by statistical tests and analysis of variation. AUC$_t$ was determined to be 897.8${\pm}$431.1 ug.hr/ml for the reference formulation and 902.3${\pm}$408.4 ug.hr/ml for the test formulation. The mean values of C$_{max}$ for the reference and test formulations were 24.2${\pm}$8.9 and 24.0${\pm}$9.5 ug/ml, respectively. The AUC$_t$ and C$_{max}$ ratios of the reference Relafen$^{TM}$ Tablet to the test Osmetone$^{TM}$ Tablet were +5.01% and -0.83%, respectively, showing that the mean differences were satisfied the acceptance criteria within 20%. The results from analysis of variance for logtransformed AUC$_t$ and C$_{max}$ indicated that sequence effects between groups were not exerted and 90% confidence limits of the mean differences for AUC$_t$ and C$_{max}$ were located in ranges from log 0.80 to log 1.25, satisfying the acceptance criteria of the KFDA bioequivalence. The Osmetone$^{TM}$ Tablet as the test formulation was considered to be bioequivalant to the Relafen$^{TM}$ Tablet used as its reference formulation, based on AUC$_t$ and C$_{max}$ values.

• Journal of Pharmaceutical Investigation
• /
• 제38권1호
• /
• pp.73-78
• /
• 2008

To evaluate the bioequivalence of two ramipril formulations, a standard 2-way randomized cross-over study was conducted in twenty-six healthy male Korean volunteers. A single oral dose of 10 mg of test formulation $Ramiprin^{(R)}$ (tablet) or reference formulation Tritace $Protect^{(R)}$ (tablet) was administered with one-week washout period. Plasma concentrations of ramipril were assayed over a period of 12 hr with a well validated method using liquid chromatography coupled to tandem mass spectrometry (LC-MS/MS). The values of area under the plasma concentration-time curve, from time zero to last sampling time $(AUC_t)$ and from time zero to time infinity $(AUC_{inf})$ were $77.45{\pm}44.78\;and\;78.96{\pm}45.64$ for test, and $70.30{\pm}42.27\;and\;71.99{\pm}43.55ng\;hr/mL$ for reference formulation, respectively. Similarly, maximum concentration $(C_{max})$ and elimination half-life $(t_{1/2})$ were $65.61{\pm}19.96ng/mL$ and $2.15{\pm}0.75hr$ for test, and $63.63{\pm}25.50ng/mL$ and $2.16{\pm}0.73hr$ for reference formulations, respectively. Time to reach maximum concentration $(T_{max})$ for the test and the reference, were $0.51{\pm}0.22hr\;and\;0.52{\pm}0.18hr$, respectively. The parametric 90% confidence intervals on the mean of the differences between the two formulations (test-reference) of the log-transformed values of $AUC_t\;and\;C_{max}$ were 1.03 to 1.19 and 0.98 to 1.17, respectively. The overall results indicate that the two formulations are bioequivalent and can be prescribed interchangeably.

• Biomolecules & Therapeutics
• /
• 제14권1호
• /
• pp.50-55
• /
• 2006

The objective of the study was to evaluate the bioequivalency between the $Rozid^{TM}$ Tablet (Ilhwa Pharm. Co., Ltd.) as a test formulation and the $Rulid^{TM}$ Tablet (Handok Pharm. Co., Ltd) as a reference formulation. Twenty-four healthy male volunteers were administered the formulations by the randomized Latin square crossover design, and the plasma samples were determined by a high performance liquid chromatography (HPLC) with fluorescence detector. $AUC_t,\;C_{max}\;and\;T_{max}$ were obtained from the time-plasma concentration curves, and log-transformed $AUC_t\;and\;C_{max}$ and log-untransformed $T_{max}$ values for two formulations were compared by statistical tests and analysis of variation. $AUC_t$ was determined to be $63.30{\pm}25.57{\mu}g.hr/ml$ for the test formulation and $64.02{\pm}29.27mg.hr/ml$ for the reference formulation. The mean values of $C_{max}$ for the test and reference formulations were $5.07{\pm}2.14\;and\;5.53{\pm}2.60{\mu}g/ml$, respectively. The $AUC_t,\;and\;C_{max}$ ratios of the test $Rozid^{TM}$ Tablet to the reference $Rulid^{TM}$ Tablet were -1.12% and -8.32%, respectively, showing that the mean differences were satisfied the acceptance criteria within 20%. The results from analysis of variance for log-transformed $AUC_t,\;and\;C_{max}$ indicated that sequence effects between groups were not exerted and 90% confidence limits of the mean differences for $AUC_t,\;and\;C_{max}$ were located in ranges from log 0.80 and log 1.25, satisfying the acceptance criteria of the KFDA bioequivalence. The RozidTM Tablet as the test formulation was considered to be bioequivalent to the RulidTM Tablet used as its reference formulation, based on $AUC_t,\;and\;C_{max}$ values.

• 한국임상약학회지
• /
• 제18권1호
• /
• pp.38-44
• /
• 2008

Rebamipide, ($\pm$)-2-(4-chlorobenzoylamino)-3-[2(1H)-quinolinon-4-yl] propionic acid, is used for mucosal protection, healing of gastroduodenal ulcers, and treatment of gastritis. It works by enhancing mucosal defense, scavenging free radicals and temporarily activating genes encoding cyclooxygenase-2. The purpose of the present study was to evaluate the bioequivalence of two rebamipide tablets, $Mucosta^{(R)}$ (Korea Otsuca Pharmaceuticals Co., Ltd.) and Mustar (Korean Drug Co., Ltd.), according to the guidelines of the Korea Food and Drug Administration (KFDA). The release of rebamipide from the two rebamipide formulations in vitro was tested using KP VIII Apparatus II method with pH 6.8 dissolution medium. Twenty six healthy male subjects, $23.46{\pm}2.63$ years in age and $66.62{\pm}8.97\;kg$ in body weight, were divided into two groups and a randomized $2{\times}2$ cross-over study was employed. After a single tablet containing 100 mg as rebamipide was orally administered, blood samples were taken at predetermined time intervals and the concentrations of rebamipide in serum were determined using HPLC with fluorescence detector. The dissolution profiles of two formulations were similar in the tested dissolution medium. The pharmacokinetic parameters such as $AUC_t$, $C_{max}$ and $T_{max}$ were calculated, and ANOVA test was utilized for the statistical analysis of the parameters using logarithmically transformed $AUC_t$, $C_{max}$ and untransformed $T_{max}$. The results showed that the differences between two formulations based on the reference drug, $Mucosta^{(R)}$ were -5.08, 3.52 and -9.71 % for $AUC_t$, $C_{max}$ and $T_{max}$, respectively. There were no sequence effects between two formulations in these parameters. The 90% confidence intervals using logarithmically transformed data were within the acceptance range of log 0.8 to log 1.25 (e.g., log 0.84$\sim$log 1.07 and log 0.90$\sim$log 1.17 for $AUC_t$ and $C_{max}$, respectively). Thus, the criteria of the KFDA bioequivalence guideline were satisfied, indicating Mustar tablet was bioequivalent to $Mucosta^{(R)}$ tablet.

• 약학회지
• /
• 제52권3호
• /
• pp.188-194
• /
• 2008

Fexofenadine, ($\pm$)-4-1-hydroxy-4-{4-(hydroxydiphenylmethyl)-1-piperidinyl}-butyl-a,a-dimethyl benzeneacetic acid, is a selective histamine $H_1$ receptor antagonist, and is clinically effective in the treatment of seasonal allergic rhinitis and chronic idiopathic urticaria as a first-line therapeutic agent. The purpose of the present study was to evaluate the bioequivalence of two fexofenadine hydrochloride tablets, $Allegra^{(R)}$ (Handok Pharmaceuticals Co., Ltd.) and Alecort (Samchundang Pharmaceutical Co., Ltd.), according to the guidelines of the Korea Food and Drug Administration (KFDA). The release of fexofenadine from the two fexofenadine hydrochloride formulations in vitro was tested using KP VIII Apparatus II method with various dissolution media. Twenty six healthy male subjects, 25.62$\pm$3.35 years in age and 70.05$\pm$11.71 kg in body weight, were divided into two groups and a randomized 2$\times$2 cross-over study was employed. After a single tablet containing 120 mg as fexofenadine hydrochloride was orally administered, blood samples were taken at predetermined time intervals and the concentrations of fexofenadine in serum were determined using HPLC with fluorescence detector. The dissolution profiles of two formulations were similar in all tested dissolution media. The harmacokinetic parameters such as $AUC_t$, $C_{max}$ and $T_{max}$ were calculated, and ANOVA test was utilized for the statistical analysis of the parameters using logarithmically transformed $AUC_t$, $C_{max}$ and untransformed $T_{max}$. The results showed that the differences between two formulations based on the reference drug, $Allegra^{(R)}$, were -1.37, 5.22 and 16.50% for $AUC_t$, $C_{max}$ and $T_{max}$, respectively. There were no sequence effects between two formulations in these parameters. The 90% confidence intervals using logarithmically transformed data were within the acceptance range of log 0.8 to log 1.25 (e.g., log 0.83$\sim$log 1.08 and log 0.81$\sim$log 1.03 for $AUC_t$ and $C_{max}$, respectively). Thus, the criteria of the KFDA bioequivalence guideline were satisfied, indicating Alecort tablet was bioequivalent to $Allegra^{(R)}$ tablet.

• Journal of Pharmaceutical Investigation
• /
• 제38권4호
• /
• pp.277-282
• /
• 2008

The purpose of the present study was to evaluate the bioequivalence of two topiramate tablets, Topamax tablet (Janssen Korea. Co., Ltd., Seoul, Korea, reference drug) and Topamin tablet (Myungmoon Pharm. Co., Ltd., Seoul, Korea, test drug), according to the guidelines of Korea Food and Drug Administration (KFDA). Twenty-four healthy male Korean volunteers received one tablet at the dose of 100 mg topiramate in a $2{\times}2$ crossover study. There were two-weeks washout period between the doses. Plasma concentrations of topiramate were monitored by an LC-MS/MS for over a period of 96 hr after administration. $AUC_t$ (the area under the plasma concentration-time curve from time zero to 96 hr) was calculated by the linear trapezoidal rule method. $C_{max}$ (maximum plasma drug concentration) and $T_{max}$ (time to reach $C_{max}$) were compiled from the plasma concentration-time data. Analysis of variance (ANOVA) was carried out using logarithmically transformed $AUC_t$ and $C_{max}$. The 90% confidence intervals of the $AUC_t$, ratio and the $C_{max}$ ratio for Topamin/Topamax were $\log0.88{\sim}\log1.02$ and $\log0.87{\sim}\log1.03$, respectively. These values were within the acceptable bioequivalence intervals of $\log0.80{\sim}\log1.25$. Taken together, our study demonstrated the bioequivalence of Topamax and Topamin with respect to the rate and extent of absorption.

• 한국임상약학회지
• /
• 제14권2호
• /
• pp.85-90
• /
• 2004

Bisoprolol, one of the $\beta_1-adrenorecepter$ antagonist, has been used for the treatment of mild to moderate essential hypertension anti stable angina pectoris. The oral bloavailability of bisoprolo1 is high $(90\%)$ and the drug has a long elimination half-life, $9{\sim}12\;hr$, which allows once-daily administration. The bioequivalence of two bisoprolol preparations was evaluated according to the guidelines of Korea Food & Drug Administration (KFDA). The test product was Concor $tablet^{(R)}$ made by Newgenpharm and the reference product was Monocor $tablet^{(R)}$ made by Wyeth Korea. Twenty healthy male subjects, 23.8 (21-30) years old and 03.8(52-92) kg, were randomly divided into two groups and a randomized $2\times2$ cross-over study was employed. After two tablets containing 10 mg bisoprolol hemifumarate were orally administered, blood was taken at predetermined time intervals and the concentration of bisoprolol in plasma was determined using an HPLC method with fluorescence detector. Two pharmacokinetic parameters, $AUC_t\;and\;C_{max}$ were calculated and analyzed statistical]y for the evaluation of bioequivalence of the two products. Analysis of variance was carried out using logarithmically transformed parameter values. The $90\%$ confidence intervals of $AUC_t\;and\;C_{max}$ were log $0.95{\sim}1og\;1.04\;and\;1og\;0.96{\sim}1og\;1.07,\;respectively.$ These values were within the acceptable bioequivalence intervals of log $0.8{\sim}log\;1.23$. Thus, the criteria of the KFDA guidelines for the bioequivalence was satisfied, indicating that Concor tablet is bioequivalent to Monocor tablet.

• Journal of Pharmaceutical Investigation
• /
• 제37권1호
• /
• pp.57-62
• /
• 2007

The purpose of the present study was to evaluate the bioequivalence of two donepezil tablets, $Aricept^{TM}$ tablet (Dae Woong Pharm. Co., Ltd., Korea, reference drug) and $Donpezil^{TM}$ tablet (Dong Wha Pharm. Ind. Co., Ltd., Korea, test drug), according to the guidelines of Korea Food and Drug Administration (KFDA). Twenty-four healthy male Korean volunteers received one tablet containing donepezil hydorchloride 10 mg in a $2{\times}2$ crossover study. There was a three-week washout period between the doses. Plasma concentrations of donepezil were monitored by an LC-MS/MS far over a period of 240 hr after the administration. $AUC_t$, (the area under the plasma concentration-time curve from time zero to 240 hr) was calculated by the linear trapezoidal rule method. $C_{max}$ (maximum plasma drug concentration) and $T_{max}$ (time to reach $C_{max}$)were compiled from the plasma concentration-time data. Analysis of variance was carried out using logarithmically transformed $AUC_t$ and $C_{max}$, No significant sequence effects were found for all of the bioavailability parameters indicating that the crossover design was properly performed. The 90% confidence intervals of the $AUC_t$ and $C_{max}$ were log 0.95${\sim}$log 1.03 and log 0.94${\sim}$log 1.08, respectively. These values were within the acceptable bioequivalence intervals of log 0.80${\sim}$log 1.25. Taken together, our study demonstrated the bioequivalence of $Aricept^{TM}$ and $Donpezil^{TM}$ with respect to the rate and extent of absorption.

• Journal of Pharmaceutical Investigation
• /
• 제38권5호
• /
• pp.343-348
• /
• 2008

The bioequivalence of two cyclosporine A (CyA) 100 mg soft capsules (Chong Kun Dang's $Cipol-N^{(R)}$ as the test drug; Korea Novartis' Sandimmun $Neoral^{(R)}$ as the reference drug) was assessed in healthy male Korean volunteers after oral administration of 200 mg CyA according to a randomized crossover design. The whole blood samples were analyzed for the determination of parent CyA in the blood by using a validated HPLC/diode array detector method. The mean $AUC_t$ values for reference and test products were $4095.3{\pm}1397.2$ and $3958.3{\pm}1138.2\;ng{\cdot}hr/mL$, respectively. The mean $C_{max}$ values were $1135.9{\pm}293.2\;ng/mL$ for the reference product, and $985.0{\pm}207.9\;ng/mL$ for the test product. $T_{max}$ was $1.6{\pm}0.4\;hr$ for the reference and $1.8{\pm}0.5\;hr$ for the test product. The differences of $AUC_t$, $C_{max}$ and $T_{max}$ were -3.35, -13.28 and +10.63%, respectively. The point estimates and 90% confidence intervals for $AUC_t$ and $C_{max}$ were 0.981 (0.9171 to 1.0514) and 0.876 (0.8229 to 0.9336), respectively. Based on the pharmacokinetic and statistical data, we conclude that these two products are bioequivalent and can be considered interchangeable in the medical practice.

• Archives of Pharmacal Research
• /
• 제28권4호
• /
• pp.488-492
• /
• 2005

The purpose of this study is to investigate the bioequivalence of two haloperidol 5 mg tablets, Myung In haloperidol (Myung In Pharm. Co., Ltd., test drug) and $Peridol^{R}$(Whanin Pharm. Co., Ltd., reference drug), and also to estimate the pharmacokinetic parameters of haloperidol in Korean volunteers. The bioavailability and pharmacokinetics of haloperidol tablets were examined on 24 healthy volunteers who received a single oral dose of each preparation in the fasting state in a randomized balanced 2 way crossover design. After an oral dosing, blood samples were collected for a period of 60 h. Plasma concentrations of haloperidol were determined using a liquid chromatographic electrospray mass spectrometric (LC-MS) method. The pharmacokinetic parameters were calculated with noncompartmental pharmacokinetic analysis. The geometric means of $AUC_{0-60h} and C_{max}$ between test and reference formulations were $17.21\pm8.26 ng\cdot/mL vs 17.31\pm13.24 ng\cdot/mL and 0.87\pm0.74 ng/mL vs 0.85\pm0.62 ng/mL$. respectively. The $90\%$ confidence intervals of mean difference of logarithmic transformed $AUC_{0-60h} and C_{max} were log0.9677{\sim}log1.1201 and log0.8208{\sim}log1.1981$, respectively. It shows that the bioavailability of test drug is equivalent with that of reference drug. The geometric means of other pharmacokinetic parameters ($AUC_{inf}. t_{1/2}, V_{d}/F, and CL/F$) between test drug and reference drug were $21.75\pm8.50 ng{\cdot}h/mL vs 21.77\pm15.63 ng{\cdot}h/mL, 29.87\pm8.25 h vs 29.60\pm7.56 h, 11.51\pm5.45 L vs 12.90\pm6.12 L and 0.26\pm0.09 L/h vs 0.31\pm0.17 L/h$, respectively. These observations indicate that the two formulation for haloperidol was bioequivalent and, thus, may be clinically interchangeable.