Arzneimittelforschung 2008; 58(8): 405-409
DOI: 10.1055/s-0031-1296528
Analgesics · Anti-inflammatories · Antiphlogistics · Antirheumatic Drugs
Editio Cantor Verlag Aulendorf (Germany)

Bioequivalence Study of Two Capsule Formulations Containing Diacerein 50 mg in Healthy Human Subjects

Uday S Chakrabarty
Bioequivalence Study Centre, Department of Pharmaceutical Technology, Jadavpur University, Kolkata, India
,
Uttam Mandal
Bioequivalence Study Centre, Department of Pharmaceutical Technology, Jadavpur University, Kolkata, India
,
Uttam Bhaumik
Bioequivalence Study Centre, Department of Pharmaceutical Technology, Jadavpur University, Kolkata, India
,
Bappaditya Chatterjee
Bioequivalence Study Centre, Department of Pharmaceutical Technology, Jadavpur University, Kolkata, India
,
Animesh Ghosh
Bioequivalence Study Centre, Department of Pharmaceutical Technology, Jadavpur University, Kolkata, India
,
Anirban Bose
Bioequivalence Study Centre, Department of Pharmaceutical Technology, Jadavpur University, Kolkata, India
,
Tapan K Pal
Bioequivalence Study Centre, Department of Pharmaceutical Technology, Jadavpur University, Kolkata, India
› Author Affiliations
Further Information

Publication History

Publication Date:
15 December 2011 (online)

Abstract

This study presents the results of a two-way, two-period, two-treatment crossover investigation in 12 healthy Indian male subjects to assess the bioequivalence of two oral formulations containing 50 mg of diacerein (CAS 13739-02-1). Both formulations were administered orally as a single dose separated by a one-week washout period. The content of diacerein in plasma was determined by a validated HPLC method with UV detection. The formulations were compared using the parameters area under the plasma concentration-time curve (AUC0–t), area under the plasma concentration-time curve from zero to infinity (AUC0–∞), peak plasma concentration (Cmax), and time to reach peak plasma concentration (tmax). The results of this study indicated that there were no statistically significant differences between the logarithmically transformed AUC0–∞ and Cmax values of the two preparations. The 90% confidence interval for the ratio of the logarithmically transformed AUC0–t, AUC0–∞ and Cmax were within the bioequivalence limit of 0.8–1.25 and the relative bioavailability of the test formulation was 96.63% of that of the reference formulation. Thus, these findings clearly indicate that the two formulations are bioequivalent in terms of rate and extent of drug absorption.

 
  • References

  • 1 Pujol JP, Felisaz N, Boumediene K, Ghayor C, Herrouin JF, Bogdanowicz P et al. Effects of diacerein on biosynthesis activities of chondrocytes in culture. Biorheology. 2000; 37 (1–2) 177-184
  • 2 Wang L, Mao YJ, Wang WJ. Inhibitory effect of diacerein on osteoclastic bone destruction and its possible mechanism of action. Yao Xue Xue Bao. 2006; June 41 (6) 555-560
  • 3 Felisaz N, Boumediene K, Ghayor C, Herrouin JF, Bogdanowicz P, Galerra P et al. Stimulating effect of diacerein on TGF-beta1 and beta2 expression in articular chondrocytes cultured with and without interleukin-1. Osteoarthritis Cartilage. 1999; May 7 (3) 255-264
  • 4 Debrod P, Louchahi K, Tod M, Cournot A, Perret G, Petitjean O. Influence of renal function on the pharmacokinetics of diacerein after a single oral dose. Eur J Drug Metab Pharmacokinet. 1994; 19: 13-19
  • 5 Dahms M, Lotz R, Lang W, Renner U, Bayer E, Spahn-Lang-guth H. Elucidation of Phase I and Phase II Metabolic Pathways of Rhein: Species Differences and Their Potential Relevance. Drug Metab Dispos. 1997; 25 (4) 442-452
  • 6 Hauschke D, Steinijans V, Diletti E. A distribution free procedure for the statistical analysis of bioequivalence studies. Int J Clin Pharmacol Ther Toxicol. 1990; 30: 37-43
  • 7 Schulz HU, Steinijans VW. Striving for standards in bioequivalence assessment: a review. Int J Clin Pharmacol Ther Toxicol. 1992; 30: 51-56
  • 8 Farolfi M, Power JD, Rescigno A. On the determination of bioequivalence. Pharmacol Res. 1999; 39: 1-4
  • 9 Mandal U, Musmade P, Chakraborty M, Rajan DS, Chakravarti M, Pal TK et al. Bioequivalence Study of Sildenafil citrate tablets in healthy human volunteers. Boll Chim Farm. 2004; a 143: 345-349
  • 10 Mandal U, Ganesan M, Pal TK, Jayakumar M, Chattaraj TK, Ray K et al. Bioequivalence Study of Rabeprazole Sodium on Healthy Human Volunteers. J Indian Med Asso. 2004; b 102 (1) 26-30
  • 11 Mandal U, Jayakumar M, Ganesan M, Senthil DR, Pal TK, Gowda VK. Bioequivalence Study on quetiapine fumarate tablets by HPLC. Indian Drugs. 2005; 42 (6) 353-356
  • 12 Gowda KV, Rajan DS, Mandal U, Selvan PS, Solomon WDS, Bose A et al. Evaluation of bioequivalence of two formulations containing 100 miligrams of aceclofenac. Drug Dev Ind Pharm. 2006; 32: 1219-1225
  • 13 U. S. Food and Drug Administration Guidance for Industry: Bioavailability and Bioequivalence Studies for orally Administered Drug Products. General Considerations Rock-ville, MD: Center for Drug Evaluation and Research; 2000
  • 14 EMEA. Note for guidance on the investigation of bioavailability and bioequivalence CPMP/EWP/QWP/1401/98. 2002.
  • 15 Committee for Proprietary Medicinal Products (CPMP) Note for Guidance: Investigation of Bioavailability and Bioequivalence. London: Working Party on the Efficacy of the Medicinal Products; 1991
  • 16 Nation RL, Sansom LN. Bioequivalence requirements for generic products. Pharmacol Ther. 1994; 62: 41-55
  • 17 Shah VP, Midha KK, Sighe S. Analytical method validation: bioavailability, bioequivalence and Pharmacokinetic studies. Eur J Drug Metab Pharmacokinet. 1992; 16: 249-255