作者
Jian Liu,Lihua Wu,Xingjiang Hu,Guolan Wu,Yunliang Zheng,Huili Zhou,You Zhai,Meixiang Zhu,Jianzhong Shentu
摘要
The aim of the present study was to compare the pharmacokinetic profiles between a new generic and a branded reference formulation of irbesartan/ hydrochlorothiazide FDC tablets, and to assess the bioequivalence of the two products in healthy Chinese male volunteers.24 male healthy volunteers participated in the open-label, single-dose, randomized-sequence, 2-way crossover study. Eligible subjects were randomly assigned (1:1) to receive a single 300/12.5-mg dose of either the test or reference formulation followed by a 1-week washout. Blood samples were obtained before (0 hours) and 0.5, 1, 1.5, 2, 2.5, 3, 4, 5, 6, 8, 12, 24, 36, 48, and 72 hours after dosing. Plasma concentrations of irbesartan and hydrochlorothiazide were analyzed by two separate validated liquid chromatography/tandem mass spectrometric (LC-MS/MS) methods.For irbesartan, the 90% confidence intervals (CIs) of AUC0-t, AUC0-∞, and Cmax were 103.27-116.71%, 105.01-121.47%, and 84.15-96.88%, respectively. For hydrochlorothiazide, the 90% CIs of AUC0-t, AUC0-∞, and Cmax were 96.11-109.02%, 95.15-107.35%, and 91.66-101.40%, respectively. A total of 3 mild AEs were reported in 3 subjects (12.5%).In this study, a single dose (300/12.5-mg) of the test formulation of irbesartan and hydrochlorothiazide FDC tablet in fasting healthy Chinese male volunteers met WHO's and China's FDA regulatory criteria for assumption of bioequivalence to the reference formulation based on AUC and Cmax. Both formulations were well tolerated.