Drug design, development and therapy · 2025
Relative Bioavailability of Inhaled Fluticasone Propionate and Salmeterol - is Population Pharmacokinetic Modelling a Relevant Alternative to a Non-Compartmental Approach?
СтатьяРандомизированное исследованиеНазвание и аннотация: Перевод в очереди
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Rosenborg Johan, Bäckman Per, Bengtsson Thomas, Haughie Scott
Аннотация
BACKGROUND: Conventional statistical analysis of clinical data based on standard methods suggests that fixed combinations of fluticasone propionate (FP) and salmeterol (SALM) inhaled via Wixela® Inhub® dry powder (test) are therapeutically and pharmacokinetically equivalent to Advair® Diskus® (reference). Assessment of bioequivalence, test/reference, based on empirical population pharmacokinetic modelling was compared with published outcomes based on a non-compartmental analysis (NCA) approach.
METHODS: Three inhalations of FP/SALM were administered to healthy subjects with 7-day washouts via test and reference and delivered doses of 100/50, 250/50, or 500/50 µg (total matched doses of 300/150, 750/150, or 1500/150 µg) in studies 1, 2, and 3, respectively. Empirically derived pharmacokinetic structural models, considering random effects of subject (FP, SALM) or study (SALM), emulating linear first-order input, disposition and elimination were fitted to plasma concentrations with a frequentist approach, by study/dose of FP, and across studies of SALM, using product as categorical covariate. Bioequivalence was assessed using individually predicted relative systemic extent of bioavailability (F4_rel) and ratio of individually predicted peak concentrations (Cmax).
RESULTS: The models adequately described plasma concentration versus time data. Descriptive statistics and bioequivalence assessments (90% confidence interval generally within 0.80-1.25) reflected NCA-derived outcomes.
CONCLUSION: Model- and NCA-based approaches to assess bioequivalence were consistent. However, a frequentist parametric approach that fully utilizes the population analysis potential and mechanistically predicts regional pulmonary deposition of FP and SALM would require a demographically more heterogenous data set and analysis including additional outcomes of parenteral and oral administration to discriminate presystemic from systemic disposition.
METHODS: Three inhalations of FP/SALM were administered to healthy subjects with 7-day washouts via test and reference and delivered doses of 100/50, 250/50, or 500/50 µg (total matched doses of 300/150, 750/150, or 1500/150 µg) in studies 1, 2, and 3, respectively. Empirically derived pharmacokinetic structural models, considering random effects of subject (FP, SALM) or study (SALM), emulating linear first-order input, disposition and elimination were fitted to plasma concentrations with a frequentist approach, by study/dose of FP, and across studies of SALM, using product as categorical covariate. Bioequivalence was assessed using individually predicted relative systemic extent of bioavailability (F4_rel) and ratio of individually predicted peak concentrations (Cmax).
RESULTS: The models adequately described plasma concentration versus time data. Descriptive statistics and bioequivalence assessments (90% confidence interval generally within 0.80-1.25) reflected NCA-derived outcomes.
CONCLUSION: Model- and NCA-based approaches to assess bioequivalence were consistent. However, a frequentist parametric approach that fully utilizes the population analysis potential and mechanistically predicts regional pulmonary deposition of FP and SALM would require a demographically more heterogenous data set and analysis including additional outcomes of parenteral and oral administration to discriminate presystemic from systemic disposition.