AIMS: Clinical studies comparing nebulized drug delivery systems could be flawed because of the high doses used. We have compared lung and total systemic delivery of salbutamol from a nebuliser with that from a metered dose inhaler by measuring urinary recovery of drug and its sulphate metabolite. METHODS:Twelve healthy volunteers provided urine samples at 0, 0.5, 1, 2, 4, 8, 12 and 24 h after the start of dosing. Formulations and doses were 5 x 100 microg oral solution (ORAL), 5 x 100 microg from a metered dose inhaler (MDI), 2.5 mg using a nebuliser (NEB) and NEB with 25 g oral charcoal (NEBC). Each study phase was separated by 7 days and the order of dosing was randomized. RESULTS: Mean (s.d.) 30 min urinary salbutamol excretion after ORAL, MDI, NEB and NEBC was 0.4 (0.7), 12.1 (3.7), 15.0 (3.9) and 18.2 (5.7) microg, respectively (all P<0.001 compared with ORAL). When normalized for the dose available for inhalation from MDI, NEB and NEBC, the mean (s.d.) 30 min urinary excretion of salbutamol was 2.4 (0.7), 2.9 (0.6) and 2.7 (0.6)%, respectively, with a mean ratio (90% confidence interval) between NEB and NEBC, of 95.3 (91.1, 99.5)%. The mean (s.d.) excretion of salbutamol plus its metabolite over 24 h post ORAL, MDI, NEB and NEBC dosing was 297.9 (38.3), 290.3 (41.4), 266.5 (44.6) and 151.7 (40.9) microg, respectively. The mean ratio (90% confidence interval) between MDI and ORAL, and NEB and ORAL were 97.5 (94.1, 101.0) and 90.7 (81.2, 100.2)%, respectively. The NEBC data indicate that 6.07 (1.04)% of the nominal nebulized dose was delivered to the lungs. CONCLUSIONS: The 30 min urinary recovery of salbutamol, an index of the relative systemic bioavailability of salbutamol following inhalation, can be used to compare the lung deposition of nebulized systems. Similarly, the urinary 24 h recovery of salbutamol plus its metabolite, an index of the relative systemic bioavailability of salbutamol following inhalation, can be used to compare the delivery of nebulized drug to the systemic circulation.
RCT Entities:
AIMS: Clinical studies comparing nebulized drug delivery systems could be flawed because of the high doses used. We have compared lung and total systemic delivery of salbutamol from a nebuliser with that from a metered dose inhaler by measuring urinary recovery of drug and its sulphate metabolite. METHODS: Twelve healthy volunteers provided urine samples at 0, 0.5, 1, 2, 4, 8, 12 and 24 h after the start of dosing. Formulations and doses were 5 x 100 microg oral solution (ORAL), 5 x 100 microg from a metered dose inhaler (MDI), 2.5 mg using a nebuliser (NEB) and NEB with 25 g oral charcoal (NEBC). Each study phase was separated by 7 days and the order of dosing was randomized. RESULTS: Mean (s.d.) 30 min urinary salbutamol excretion after ORAL, MDI, NEB and NEBC was 0.4 (0.7), 12.1 (3.7), 15.0 (3.9) and 18.2 (5.7) microg, respectively (all P<0.001 compared with ORAL). When normalized for the dose available for inhalation from MDI, NEB and NEBC, the mean (s.d.) 30 min urinary excretion of salbutamol was 2.4 (0.7), 2.9 (0.6) and 2.7 (0.6)%, respectively, with a mean ratio (90% confidence interval) between NEB and NEBC, of 95.3 (91.1, 99.5)%. The mean (s.d.) excretion of salbutamol plus its metabolite over 24 h post ORAL, MDI, NEB and NEBC dosing was 297.9 (38.3), 290.3 (41.4), 266.5 (44.6) and 151.7 (40.9) microg, respectively. The mean ratio (90% confidence interval) between MDI and ORAL, and NEB and ORAL were 97.5 (94.1, 101.0) and 90.7 (81.2, 100.2)%, respectively. The NEBC data indicate that 6.07 (1.04)% of the nominal nebulized dose was delivered to the lungs. CONCLUSIONS: The 30 min urinary recovery of salbutamol, an index of the relative systemic bioavailability of salbutamol following inhalation, can be used to compare the lung deposition of nebulized systems. Similarly, the urinary 24 h recovery of salbutamol plus its metabolite, an index of the relative systemic bioavailability of salbutamol following inhalation, can be used to compare the delivery of nebulized drug to the systemic circulation.
Authors: T R MacGregor; R ZuWallack; V Rubano; M A Castles; H Dewberry; M Ghafouri; C C Wood Journal: Clin Transl Sci Date: 2016-03-06 Impact factor: 4.689