Literature DB >> 15625815

Intra-subject variability in lung dose in healthy volunteers using five conventional portable inhalers.

Osama Aswania1, Sue Ritson, S M Iqbal, Jayesh Bhatt, Alan S Rigby, Mark L Everard.   

Abstract

High intra-subject variability in lung dose achieved when using aerosol delivery systems may impact on the efficacy of treatment in clinical practice. While the dose delivered by metered dose inhalers (pMDIs) is highly reproducible when tested in vitro, the variability in dose delivered to the lungs is known to be high. It has been suggested that newer delivery systems such as dry powder inhalers (DPIs) or breath actuated pMDIs significantly reduce the intra-subject variability in lung dose, but this remains untested. The 30-min urinary salbutamol technique was used to assess intra-subject variability in lung dose for five portable inhaler devices. Thirteen healthy adult subjects inhaled salbutamol from five different devices. Each device was used at five separate study days, a total of 25 visits. The devices studied were the Evohaler pMDI, a pMDI with Volumatic (pMDI + HC), the Easibreath, the Accuhaler and the Turbohaler. Subjects inhaled 400 microg of salbutamol and produced a urine sample exactly 30 min later. Quantities of salbutamol contained in the urine were determined using an HPLC technique. The mean coefficient of variation (CV% and range) for lung dose were 31.8% (20.1-87.4) for the pMDI + HC, Easi-breathe 35.9% (10.4-66.2), Accuhaler 40.4% (15.6-75.2), Turbohaler 42.4% (20.7-74.2), and 52.0% (27.1-49.3) for the pMDI alone. There was no significant statistical significant difference between any of the devices. In seven of 13 subjects, the greatest lung dose was achieved with the Volumatic. The observed intra-subject in health volunteers is similar to the reported intra-subject variability of bioavailability for a number of oral medications. Though there was trend towards higher variability when using the pMDI, this was not statistically significant and was largely attributable to one subject in with a poor technique.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2004        PMID: 15625815     DOI: 10.1089/jam.2004.17.231

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Aerosol Med        ISSN: 0894-2684


  3 in total

Review 1.  Generics, chemisimilars and biosimilars: is clinical testing fit for purpose?

Authors:  John B Warren
Journal:  Br J Clin Pharmacol       Date:  2013-01       Impact factor: 4.335

2.  The interaction between the oropharyngeal geometry and aerosols via pressurised metered dose inhalers.

Authors:  T Ehtezazi; I Saleem; I Shrubb; D R Allanson; I D Jenkinson; C O'Callaghan
Journal:  Pharm Res       Date:  2009-11-10       Impact factor: 4.200

Review 3.  The Diskus: a review of its position among dry powder inhaler devices.

Authors:  H Chrystyn
Journal:  Int J Clin Pract       Date:  2007-06       Impact factor: 2.503

  3 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.