Bioequivalence research of cyclosporin soft capsules.
- Author:
Yue WU
1
;
Mian MAO
;
Ling WANG
;
Xuehua JIANG
Author Information
1. Department of Clinical Pharmacy and Pharmacy Administration, West China School of Pharmacy, Sichuan University, Chengdu 610041, China.
- Publication Type:Journal Article
- MeSH:
Area Under Curve;
Biological Availability;
Capsules;
Chemistry, Pharmaceutical;
Chromatography, High Pressure Liquid;
methods;
Cross-Over Studies;
Cyclosporine;
administration & dosage;
blood;
pharmacokinetics;
Humans;
Immunosuppressive Agents;
administration & dosage;
blood;
pharmacokinetics;
Therapeutic Equivalency
- From:
Journal of Biomedical Engineering
2012;29(2):311-331
- CountryChina
- Language:Chinese
-
Abstract:
This paper is aimed to study the bioavailability and bioequivalence of Cyclosporin Soft Capsules (test preparation and reference preparation) in Chinese healthy volunteers. A high performance liquid chromatography-ultraviolet (HPLC-UV) method for determining the concentration of Cyclosporin A in human whole blood was developed and methodological validated. In accordance with the randomized two-period self crossover study, 24 volunteers received a single oral dose of 400 mg of test preparation or reference preparation. Multiple blood samples were collected post dose and then the concentration of Cyclosporin A in human whole blood samples was determined using the validated assay. The pharmacokinetic parameters including AUC0-t, Cmax, Tmax, and T1/2 were calculated using the non-compartmental method. The bioequivalence of the two preparations was evaluated. After receiving single dose of 400 mg of Cyclosporine A, the pharmacokinetic parameters of T1/2, Cmax, Tmax, and AUC0-t, of Cyclosporin A were (10.114 +/- 6.329) h and (9.717 +/- 4.076) h, (2021.235 +/- 298.581) ng x ml(-1) and (1992.192 +/- 1286.923) ng x ml(-1) (1.729 +/- 0.361) h and (1.813 +/- 0.323) h, (9824.811 +/- 1633.026) ng x h x ml(-1) and (10316.514 +/- 1395.955) ng x h x ml(-1) for test preparation and reference preparation, respectively. The statistical results suggested that these parameters were comparable between the two preparations. The results showed that the test preparation was bioequivalent with the reference preparation in healthy volunteers.
