Arzneimittelforschung 2007; 57(5): 269-273
DOI: 10.1055/s-0031-1296617
Antiemetics · Gastrointestinal Drugs · Uricosuric Drugs · Urologic Drugs
Editio Cantor Verlag Aulendorf (Germany)

Bioeqivalence Assessment of Two Domperidone Tablet Formulations

Rajaa Hussein
1   Centre for Clinical Research, King Faisal Specialist Hospital and Research Centre, Riyadh, Saudi Arabia
,
Marilyn Lockyer
1   Centre for Clinical Research, King Faisal Specialist Hospital and Research Centre, Riyadh, Saudi Arabia
,
Ahmed Yusuf
1   Centre for Clinical Research, King Faisal Specialist Hospital and Research Centre, Riyadh, Saudi Arabia
,
Eman Al Gaai
1   Centre for Clinical Research, King Faisal Specialist Hospital and Research Centre, Riyadh, Saudi Arabia
,
Abdelraheem Abdelgaleel
1   Centre for Clinical Research, King Faisal Specialist Hospital and Research Centre, Riyadh, Saudi Arabia
,
Muhammad M. Hammami
1   Centre for Clinical Research, King Faisal Specialist Hospital and Research Centre, Riyadh, Saudi Arabia
› Institutsangaben
Weitere Informationen

Publikationsverlauf

Publikationsdatum:
21. Dezember 2011 (online)

Abstract

A randomized, single-dose, crossover study was conducted to assess the bioavailability of two domperidone (CAS 57808-66-9) tablet formulations, DomperidoneTM (test) and a commercially available original preparation (reference) under fasting conditions. A 10 mg dose of each formulation was administered to 36 healthy male volunteers with a one-week washout period, 17 blood samples were collected over 48 h, plasma concentrations of domperidone were analyzed by a locally validated LC-MS-MS assay, and the pharmacokinetic parameters were determined by the standard non-compartmen-tal method. Mean ± SD maximum concentration (Cmax), time to reach maximum concentration (Tmax), areas under the curve (AUC0→t and AUC0→∞), and elimination constant (Kel) were 17.13 ± 9.62 and 17.67 ± 7.97 ng/ml, 0.87 ± 0.58, and 0.89 ± 0.33 h, 73.12 ± 43.37 and 71.45 ± 35.41 ng · h/ml, 90.32 ± 48.55 and 87.08 ± 40.29 ng · h/ml, and 0.069 ± 0.046 and 0.068 ± 0.048 h−1 for the test and reference formulation, respectively. The parametric 90% confidence intervals on the mean difference between log-transformed values of the two formulations were within the acceptable bioequiva-lence range for AUC0->t (87.84 % to 109.60%), AUC0→∞ (89.05% to 111.67%) and Cmax (83.28% to 107.50%). ANOVA revealed significant subject's effect for AUC0→t, AUC0→∞, Cmax, and t1/2 with a ratio of the inter-subject to intra-subject coefficient of variation of 2.10, 1.55, 1.10, and 1.02, respectively. The results indicate that the two formulations are equivalent in relation to the extent and rate of absorption and confirm the previously reported marked intra-individual variations in the pharmacokinetics of domperidone.