Bioequivalence of enteric coated tablet of Zhengqing Fengtongning
HE Hai-xia
Abstract
HE Hai-xia
Abstract
Objective: To explore the pharmacokinetics and bioequivalence of two kinds of enteric coated tablet of Zhengqing Fengtongning.Method: A single dose of 45 mg·kg-1 test or reference preparation was administrated by randomized crossover way in 12 rabbits.The plasma concentrations of drug were determined by HPLC.The pharmacokinetics parameters and relative bioequivalence were calculated with 3p97 program.Result: The concentration curves based on drug-time of both test and control preparations were presented by one-compartment model,tmax were(0.81±0.34),(0.60±0.30) h respectively,Cmax were(11.16±0.58),(11.90±1.44) μg·mL-1 respectively,AUC0→t were(61.58±6.70),(60.56±6.67) μg·h·mL-1 respectively,relative bioavailability was(102.77%±15.63)%.Suggesting no significant diffirence between the main pharmacokinetic parameters of two prepations.Conclusion: The two preparations are bioequivalent.
A significance statement is not available in the OpenAlex record.
A contribution statement is not available in the OpenAlex record.
Method details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.
Findings are not separately available in the OpenAlex metadata.
Limitations are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.
Application details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.
Objective: To explore the pharmacokinetics and bioequivalence of two kinds of enteric coated tablet of Zhengqing Fengtongning.Method: A single dose of 45 mg·kg-1 test or reference preparation was administrated by randomized crossover way in 12 rabbits.The plasma concentrations of drug were determined by HPLC.The pharmacokinetics parameters and relative bioequivalence were calculated with 3p97 program.Result: The concentration curves based on drug-time of both test and control preparations were presented by one-compartment model,tmax were(0.81±0.34),(0.60±0.30) h respectively,Cmax were(11.16±0.58),(11.90±1.44) μg·mL-1 respectively,AUC0→t were(61.58±6.70),(60.56±6.67) μg·h·mL-1 respectively,relative bioavailability was(102.77%±15.63)%.Suggesting no significant diffirence between the main pharmacokinetic parameters of two prepations.Conclusion: The two preparations are bioequivalent.
Key concepts: Bioequivalence, Pharmacokinetics, Bioavailability, Cmax, Crossover study, Pharmacology, High-performance liquid chromatography, Chromatography