Home About us Contact
|
Home About us Contact | ||
|
|
||
Comparative Pharmacokinetics (comparative + pharmacokinetic)
Selected AbstractsComparative pharmacokinetics of amikacin in Greyhound and Beagle dogsJOURNAL OF VETERINARY PHARMACOLOGY & THERAPEUTICS, Issue 2 2008B. KUKANICH The purpose of the study was to compare the pharmacokinetics of amikacin administered i.v., to Greyhound and Beagle dogs and determine amikacin pharmacokinetics administered subcutaneously to Greyhounds. Amikacin was administered i.v. at 10 mg/kg to six healthy Greyhounds and six healthy Beagles. The Greyhounds also received amikacin, 10 mg/kg s.c. Plasma was sampled at predetermined time points and amikacin concentrations determined by a fluorescence polarization immunoassay (FPIA). The volume of distribution was significantly smaller in Greyhounds (mean = 176.5 mL/kg) compared to Beagles (234.0 mL/kg). The C0 and AUC were significantly larger in Greyhounds (86.03 ,g/mL and 79.97 h·,g/mL) compared to Beagles (69.97 ,g/mL and 50.04 h·,g/mL). The plasma clearance was significantly lower in Greyhounds (2.08 mL/min/kg) compared to Beagles (3.33 mL/min/kg). The fraction of the dose absorbed after s.c. administration to Greyhounds was 0.91, the mean absorption time was 0.87 h, and the mean maximum plasma concentration was 27.40 ,g/mL at 0.64 h. Significant differences in the pharmacokinetics of amikacin in Greyhounds indicate it should be administered at a lower dose compared to Beagles. The dose in Greyhounds to achieve a Cmax:AUC , 8 for bacteria (with an MIC , 4 ,g/mL) is 12 mg/kg q24 h compared to 22 mg/kg q24 in Beagles. [source] Comparative pharmacokinetics of sulfamethazine after intravenous administration in bovine (Bos taurus) and buffalo (Bubalis bubalis) calvesJOURNAL OF VETERINARY PHARMACOLOGY & THERAPEUTICS, Issue 3 2007E. E. BARONI First page of article [source] Comparative pharmacokinetics of single doses of doxylamine succinate following intranasal, oral and intravenous administration in ratsBIOPHARMACEUTICS AND DRUG DISPOSITION, Issue 6 2002Andries Pelser Abstract The intranasal route of administration provides a potential useful way of administering a range of systemic drugs. In order to assess the feasibility of this approach for the treatment of nausea and vomiting, doxylamine succinate was studied in rats for the pharmacokinetics (AUC, Cmax, tmax) following intranasal, oral and intravenous administrations. Subjects (six male Sprague,Dawley rats per time interval for each route of administration) received 2-mg doses of doxylamine succinate orally and I-mg doses intranasally and intravenously, respectively. The various formulations were formulated in isotonic saline (0.9% w/v) at 25±1°C. Doxylamine succinate concentrations in plasma were determined with a high-performance liquid chromatographic assay and a liquid,liquid extraction procedure. Intranasal and oral bioavailabilities were determined from AUC values relative to those after intravenous dosing. Intranasal bioavailability was greater than that of oral doxylamine succinate (70.8 vs 24.7%). The intranasal and oral routes of administration differed significantly from the intravenous route of administration. Peak plasma concentration (Cmax) was 887.6 ng/ml (S.D. 74.4), 281.4 ng/ml (S.D. 24.6) and 1296.4 ng/ml (S.D. 388.9) for the intranasal, oral and intravenous routes, respectively. The time to achieve Cmax for the intranasal route (tmax=0.5 h) was faster than for the oral route (tmax=1.5 h), but no statistically significant differences between the Cmax values were found using 95% confidence intervals. The results of this study show that doxylamine succinate is rapidly and effectively absorbed from the nasal mucosa. Copyright © 2002 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. [source] Comparative pharmacokinetics, safety, and tolerability after subcutaneous administration of recombinant human erythropoietin formulated with different stabilizersBIOPHARMACEUTICS AND DRUG DISPOSITION, Issue 6 2000Wing K. Cheung Abstract This report summarizes the results of two double-blind, single-center, randomized studies that used a two-period crossover design. The objective of these two studies was to compare the safety, tolerability, pharmacokinetics, and pain score at the subcutaneous (sc) injection site of a phosphate-buffered recombinant human erythropoietin (EPREX®, epoetin alfa, r-HuEPO) formulated with a new stabilizer (glycine and Polysorbate 80) with the commercially available EPREX® formulations, which uses human serum albumin (HSA) as the stabilizer. Twenty-four healthy male volunteers were enrolled in each of the two studies. In the first study, subjects received a single 150 IU/kg sc dose of r-HuEPO using the 2000 IU/mL (2K) phosphate-buffered formulation with or without the new stabilizer (12 subjects/group). In the second study, subjects received a single 750 IU/kg sc dose of r-HuEPO using the 40,000 IU/mL (40K) phosphate-buffered formulation with or without the new stabilizer (12 subjects/group). In each study, r-HuEPO was administered over two separate dosing periods, each separated with a 28-day washout period. There were no significant differences in AUC and Cmax for either strength of r-HuEPO formulated with or without the new stabilizer, indicating that the absorption and disposition characteristics of the two formulations were similar after sc administration. Both r-HuEPO strengths with and without the new stabilizer were safe and well tolerated; the safety and tolerability profiles of both formulations for each r-HuEPO concentration were comparable. There were no statistically significant differences in pain score for either strength of r-HuEPO with and without the new stabilizer. It was concluded that the two phosphate-buffered r-HuEPO concentrations formulated with and without the new stabilizer are pharmacokinetically equivalent. Copyright © 2000 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. [source] | ||||||||||