AIM: To compare a test version of HFA fluticasone/salmeterol (FP/SM) combination inhaler (Neolab, UK) with the reference product Seretide (GlaxoSmithKline, UK). METHODS: An in vitro Anderson cascade impactor was used to compare the fine particle dose (<4.7 microm). Two separate randomized cross-over studies were performed to compare the systemic bioavailability of test vs. reference (T vs. R) formulations of FP/SM 250/25 microg pMDI in healthy volunteers. In study 1 blood pharmacokinetic analysis using oral charcoal block was performed over 24 h following a single dose of four puffs via pMDI alone. In study 2 systemic bioactivity was measured following single doses of four and eight puffs via a spacer device: serum potassium (K(+)) to reflect SM, and overnight urinary cortisol : creatinine (OUCC) for FP. An early pharmacokinetic profile was also assessed over 120 min. RESULTS: The in vitro fine particle dose was similar for test vs. reference pMDI alone and via spacer. The results of both studies were consistent: No significant differences between formulations were seen in terms of FP kinetics. Analysis of SM kinetics revealed superiority of the test product. No significant dose-response or difference in T : R ratio was noted for OUCC. Fall in K(+) revealed a significant dose-response with a non-significant T : R ratio. CONCLUSIONS: The in vitro fine particle dose may not predict pharmacokinetic and systemic pharmacodynamic outcomes. Single dosing studies with fluticasone/salmeterol 250/25 microg via pMDI or with spacer showed pharmacokinetic equivalence with FP, but not SM. No significant difference between formulations was seen with either adrenal suppression or hypokalaemia.
RCT Entities:
AIM: To compare a test version of HFAfluticasone/salmeterol (FP/SM) combination inhaler (Neolab, UK) with the reference product Seretide (GlaxoSmithKline, UK). METHODS: An in vitro Anderson cascade impactor was used to compare the fine particle dose (<4.7 microm). Two separate randomized cross-over studies were performed to compare the systemic bioavailability of test vs. reference (T vs. R) formulations of FP/SM 250/25 microg pMDI in healthy volunteers. In study 1 blood pharmacokinetic analysis using oral charcoal block was performed over 24 h following a single dose of four puffs via pMDI alone. In study 2 systemic bioactivity was measured following single doses of four and eight puffs via a spacer device: serum potassium (K(+)) to reflect SM, and overnight urinary cortisol : creatinine (OUCC) for FP. An early pharmacokinetic profile was also assessed over 120 min. RESULTS: The in vitro fine particle dose was similar for test vs. reference pMDI alone and via spacer. The results of both studies were consistent: No significant differences between formulations were seen in terms of FP kinetics. Analysis of SM kinetics revealed superiority of the test product. No significant dose-response or difference in T : R ratio was noted for OUCC. Fall in K(+) revealed a significant dose-response with a non-significant T : R ratio. CONCLUSIONS: The in vitro fine particle dose may not predict pharmacokinetic and systemic pharmacodynamic outcomes. Single dosing studies with fluticasone/salmeterol 250/25 microg via pMDI or with spacer showed pharmacokinetic equivalence with FP, but not SM. No significant difference between formulations was seen with either adrenal suppression or hypokalaemia.
Authors: Leslie Hendeles; Peter T Daley-Yates; Robert Hermann; Jan De Backer; Sanjeeva Dissanayake; Stephen T Horhota Journal: AAPS J Date: 2015-02-26 Impact factor: 4.009
Authors: Lester I Harrison; Victoria Sessions; Christopher J Wiggenhorn; David Chalmers; Pui Leung; John Efthimiou Journal: Br J Clin Pharmacol Date: 2017-08-01 Impact factor: 4.335