Levothyroxine Bioequivalence Study and Its Narrow Therapeutic Index: Comparative Bioavailability Results Between Two Formulations Available in Latin America

左甲状腺素生物等效性研究及其窄治疗指数:拉丁美洲两种制剂的生物利用度比较结果

阅读:1

Abstract

INTRODUCTION: The history of levothyroxine has been linked to advances in the treatment of thyroid disease and to date it is the standard therapy for the treatment of hypothyroidism. Bioequivalence studies are the most widely used method to demonstrate interchangeability, although controversy persists regarding the best design for this molecule declared as a narrow therapeutic index product in many countries. This study aimed to evaluate the pharmacokinetic profile of two formulations of levothyroxine to determine bioequivalence between them. METHODS: This two-period, randomized, crossover, blind study was conducted in 80 healthy volunteers, of both sexes, using a single levothyroxine dose of 600 μg with a washout period of 42 days. Blood sampling was performed at - 30 min, - 15 min, and 0 h pre-dose and 30 min, 1, 1.5, 2, 2.5, 3, 4, 6, 8, 10, 12, 16, 24, and 48 h post-dose. RESULTS: A total of 78 subjects successfully completed both periods. There were no serious adverse events during the study and both formulations were well tolerated. Baseline correction of serum levothyroxine concentrations was performed before statistical analysis. The mean maximum plasma concentration of the test product (Levotiroxina MK(®)) was 57.49 ng/mL while for the reference product it reached 59.32 ng/mL. Importantly, both test and reference formulations reached maximum concentrations in plasma at about the same time. The areas under the pharmacokinetic curves with the test product showed AUC(0-t) of 1407.1 ng h/mL and the reference product 1394.3 ng h/mL. The bioequivalence statistical analysis showed that the 90% confidence interval (CI(90%)) of the ratio of test over reference formulation was within the bioequivalence margins of 90-111%. For C(max), the test/reference ratio was 96.2% with CI(90%) of 91.6-100.9%, and for AUC(0-t) the test/reference ratio was 99.9 with CI(90%) of 93.3-107.0%. CONCLUSIONS: Both formulations have the same pharmacokinetic profile and are bioequivalent in the narrow therapeutic index required by some health authorities.

特别声明

1、本页面内容包含部分的内容是基于公开信息的合理引用;引用内容仅为补充信息,不代表本站立场。

2、若认为本页面引用内容涉及侵权,请及时与本站联系,我们将第一时间处理。

3、其他媒体/个人如需使用本页面原创内容,需注明“来源:[生知库]”并获得授权;使用引用内容的,需自行联系原作者获得许可。

4、投稿及合作请联系:info@biocloudy.com。