Relative bioavailability of isoniazid in a fixed-dose combination product in healthy Mexican subjects
SETTING: Subtherapeutic plasma isoniazid (INH) concentrations and the development of bacterial resistance may be attributed to poor quality and reduced bioavailability of fixed-dose combination (FDC) formulations. The bioavailability of INH from a generic and that of a branded FDC formulation had no...
Saved in:
Published in: | The international journal of tuberculosis and lung disease Vol. 18; no. 1; pp. 49 - 54 |
---|---|
Main Authors: | , , , , , , |
Format: | Journal Article |
Language: | English |
Published: |
Paris, France
International Union Against Tuberculosis and Lung Disease
01-01-2014
International Union against Tuberculosis and Lung Disease |
Subjects: | |
Online Access: | Get full text |
Tags: |
Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
|
Summary: | SETTING: Subtherapeutic plasma isoniazid (INH) concentrations and the development of bacterial resistance may be attributed to poor quality and reduced bioavailability of fixed-dose combination (FDC) formulations. The bioavailability of INH from a generic and that of a branded FDC formulation
had not been compared in the Mexican population.OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the bioequivalence of a generic three-drug FDC formulation (3FDC) in comparison with a 3FDC reference with doses of 300 mg INH in 20 healthy Mexican adults, and to generate data regarding the oral relative bioavailability
of the drug in this population.DESIGN: A single-dose, randomised-sequence, open-label, two-period crossover study.RESULTS: Both formulations were well tolerated. The pharmacokinetic parameters of INH showed wide inter-individual variability. The average relative bioavailability calculated
for maximum serum concentration area under the concentration-time curve (AUC), AUC0-24h and AUC0-∞ of the test 3FDC formulation vs. the 3FDC reference were respectively 64.84% (90%CI 56.01-75.06), 59.05% (90%CI 50.27-69.36) and 57.26% (90%CI
46.93-69.84).CONCLUSIONS: The 3FDC test and reference formulations were not bioequivalent because the 90%CI for the geometric mean ratios did not meet the regulatory requirements for bioequivalence (range 80-125%) based on the rate and extent of absorption. |
---|---|
Bibliography: | (R) Medicine - General 1027-3719(20140101)18:1L.49;1- ObjectType-Article-2 SourceType-Scholarly Journals-1 ObjectType-News-1 ObjectType-Feature-3 content type line 23 |
ISSN: | 1027-3719 1815-7920 |
DOI: | 10.5588/ijtld.13.0266 |