Literature DB >> 26283447

Effect of feeding on the pharmacokinetics of oral minocycline in healthy research dogs.

Melanie L Hnot1, Lynette K Cole1, Gwendolen Lorch1, Paivi J Rajala-Schultz2, Mark G Papich3.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: The effect of food on minocycline oral absorption in dogs is unknown.
OBJECTIVE: The objective was to determine the pharmacokinetics of minocycline after administration of a single oral dose in fed and fasted dogs.
METHODS: Ten research hounds were administered oral minocycline (approximately 5 mg/kg) with and without food, in a crossover study, with a one-week wash-out between treatments. Blood samples were collected immediately prior to minocycline administration and over 24 h. Minocycline plasma drug concentrations were measured using high-performance liquid chromatography using ultraviolet detection and were analysed with compartmental modelling to determine primary pharmacokinetic parameters. Each dog was analysed independently, followed by calculation of means and variation of the dogs. The Wilcoxon signed-rank test [analysing secondary pharmacokinetic parameters - peak concentration (CMAX ), area under the concentration versus time curve (AUC)] was used to compare the two groups. A population pharmacokinetic modelling approach was performed using nonlinear mixed effects modelling of primary parameters for the population as fixed effects and the difference between subjects as a random effect. Covariate analysis was used to identify the source of variability in the population.
RESULTS: No significant difference was found between treatments for AUC (P = 0.0645), although AUC was higher in fasted dogs. A significant difference was found for CMAX (P = 0.0059), with fasted dogs attaining a higher CMAX . The covariate of fed versus fasted accounted for a significant variation in the pharmacokinetics. CONCLUSIONS AND CLINICAL IMPORTANCE: Because feeding was a significant source of variation for the population's primary pharmacokinetic parameters and fasted dogs had higher minocycline concentrations, we recommend administering minocycline without food.
© 2015 ESVD and ACVD.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2015        PMID: 26283447     DOI: 10.1111/vde.12246

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Vet Dermatol        ISSN: 0959-4493            Impact factor:   1.589


  5 in total

1.  Disposition kinetics of orbifloxacin in tissues of crucian carp (Carassius auratus) following a single intramuscular administration.

Authors:  Y R Yang; F Yang; N Sun; G Y Wang
Journal:  Iran J Vet Res       Date:  2019       Impact factor: 1.376

2.  Considerations for using minocycline vs doxycycline for treatment of canine heartworm disease.

Authors:  Mark G Papich
Journal:  Parasit Vectors       Date:  2017-11-09       Impact factor: 3.876

3.  ACVIM consensus update on Lyme borreliosis in dogs and cats.

Authors:  Meryl P Littman; Bernhard Gerber; Richard E Goldstein; Mary Anna Labato; Michael R Lappin; George E Moore
Journal:  J Vet Intern Med       Date:  2018-03-22       Impact factor: 3.333

4.  Efficacy of Minocycline in Naturally Occurring Nonacute Ehrlichia canis Infection in Dogs.

Authors:  S Jenkins; J K Ketzis; J Dundas; D Scorpio
Journal:  J Vet Intern Med       Date:  2017-12-02       Impact factor: 3.333

5.  Population Pharmacokinetic Study of Cefazolin Used Prophylactically in Canine Surgery for Susceptibility Testing Breakpoint Determination.

Authors:  Petra Cagnardi; Federica Di Cesare; Pierre-Louis Toutain; Alain Bousquet-Mélou; Giuliano Ravasio; Roberto Villa
Journal:  Front Pharmacol       Date:  2018-10-09       Impact factor: 5.810

  5 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.