Previous studies of healthy volunteers and small numbers of transplant recipients have suggested that the oral solution formulation of Sandimmune (cyclosporine [CsA]; Sandoz Pharmaceuticals, East Hanover, NJ) is bioequivalent to the soft gelatin capsule (SGC) formulation. However, there is conflicting evidence as to whether the two formulations are bioequivalent in all patients; to date, there are no published studies that explicitly address their bioequivalence in patients. We conducted a randomized, open-label, two-sequence, two-period, crossover study. Of 20 maintenance renal transplant recipients shown by a screening pharmacokinetic (PK) profile to be poor absorbers of CsA, half were randomized to receive first the SGC formulation and half the oral solution formulation for a period of 7 days. Each patient then underwent a 12-hour PK profile on the last day of the assigned formulation before a crossover to receive the other formulation and repeat the 7-day treatment and PK profile cycle. The results showed that peak and total exposure to CsA was greater with the SGC formulation. The SGC-oral solution ratios indicated an average 38% greater peak and 11% greater total exposure for the SGC formulation (P < 0.01 and P = 0.09, respectively). Trough levels were more similar between formulations, with SGC showing an average of 5% greater troughs (P > 0.10). In our selected population of malabsorbers, the SGC formulation made a difference in drug exposure.

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0272-6386(99)70044-2DOI Listing

Publication Analysis

Top Keywords

sgc formulation
20
formulation
9
maintenance renal
8
renal transplant
8
transplant recipients
8
oral solution
8
solution formulation
8
total exposure
8
sgc
6
differences bioavailability
4

Similar Publications

Want AI Summaries of new PubMed Abstracts delivered to your In-box?

Enter search terms and have AI summaries delivered each week - change queries or unsubscribe any time!