Literature DB >> 2931047

Pharmacokinetics of three oral formulations of ciprofloxacin.

R L Davis, J R Koup, J Williams-Warren, A Weber, A L Smith.   

Abstract

We compared the absorption of three formulations of ciprofloxacin after oral administration in 18 normal adult male volunteers. Each subject received 500 mg of ciprofloxacin as two 250-mg tablets, one 500-mg tablet, or a solution in a randomized crossover sequence. Pharmacokinetic parameters were determined by model independent methods. Because a solution is considered to be the ideal oral dosage form, the results determined for the tablets were compared to those for the solution. Mean values for the maximum concentration of drug in serum, the time to maximum concentration of drug in serum, and the elimination half-life were 3.23 micrograms/ml, 1.00 h, and 5.04 h, respectively, for the solution. The mean renal clearance of ciprofloxacin was 372 ml/min and accounted for at least 50% of the total clearance. We recovered 44.4, 48.6, and 55.8% of the administered ciprofloxacin from the urine as unchanged drug within 24 h after dosing with the 250-mg tablets, 500-mg tablets, or solution, respectively. The 500-mg tablets were found to be bioequivalent to the solution with regard to all pharmacokinetic parameters. The 250-mg tablet was not bioequivalent to either of the other formulations; the relative bioavailability values were 78.7 and 74.1%, respectively, for the 500-mg tablet and the solution. The clinical significance of this difference in bioavailability is yet to be determined.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  1985        PMID: 2931047      PMCID: PMC176313          DOI: 10.1128/AAC.28.1.74

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Antimicrob Agents Chemother        ISSN: 0066-4804            Impact factor:   5.191


  6 in total

1.  Pharmacokinetics and tissue penetration of ciprofloxacin.

Authors:  B Crump; R Wise; J Dent
Journal:  Antimicrob Agents Chemother       Date:  1983-11       Impact factor: 5.191

2.  Pharmacokinetics of intravenously administered ciprofloxacin.

Authors:  R Wise; R M Lockley; M Webberly; J Dent
Journal:  Antimicrob Agents Chemother       Date:  1984-08       Impact factor: 5.191

3.  In vitro activity of ciprofloxacin (Bay o 9867).

Authors:  R J Fass
Journal:  Antimicrob Agents Chemother       Date:  1983-10       Impact factor: 5.191

4.  Comparative activities of ciprofloxacin (Bay o 9867), norfloxacin, pipemidic acid, and nalidixic acid.

Authors:  H L Muytjens; J van der Ros-van de Repe; G van Veldhuizen
Journal:  Antimicrob Agents Chemother       Date:  1983-08       Impact factor: 5.191

5.  In vitro activity of ciprofloxacin, norfloxacin and nalidixic acid.

Authors:  A Bauernfeind; C Petermüller
Journal:  Eur J Clin Microbiol       Date:  1983-04       Impact factor: 3.267

6.  In vitro activity of Bay 09867, a new quinoline derivative, compared with those of other antimicrobial agents.

Authors:  R Wise; J M Andrews; L J Edwards
Journal:  Antimicrob Agents Chemother       Date:  1983-04       Impact factor: 5.191

  6 in total
  20 in total

1.  Pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics of ciprofloxacin in cystic fibrosis patients.

Authors:  M LeBel; M G Bergeron; F Vallée; C Fiset; G Chassé; P Bigonesse; G Rivard
Journal:  Antimicrob Agents Chemother       Date:  1986-08       Impact factor: 5.191

2.  Susceptibility of Pseudomonas aeruginosa urinary tract isolates and influence of urinary tract conditions on antibiotic tolerance.

Authors:  Maike Narten; Nathalie Rosin; Max Schobert; Petra Tielen
Journal:  Curr Microbiol       Date:  2011-10-08       Impact factor: 2.188

3.  Penetration of ciprofloxacin into bronchial secretions.

Authors:  E Bergogne-Bérézin; G Berthelot; P Even; M Stern; P Reynaud
Journal:  Eur J Clin Microbiol       Date:  1986-04       Impact factor: 3.267

4.  Relationships between renal function and disposition of oral ciprofloxacin.

Authors:  A Forrest; M Weir; K I Plaisance; G L Drusano; J Leslie; H C Standiford
Journal:  Antimicrob Agents Chemother       Date:  1988-10       Impact factor: 5.191

5.  Randomized, double-blind comparison of ciprofloxacin and trimethoprim-sulfamethoxazole for complicated urinary tract infections.

Authors:  J M Allais; L C Preheim; T A Cuevas; J S Roccaforte; M A Mellencamp; M J Bittner
Journal:  Antimicrob Agents Chemother       Date:  1988-09       Impact factor: 5.191

6.  Interaction study of lomefloxacin and ciprofloxacin with omeprazole and comparative pharmacokinetics.

Authors:  H Stuht; H Lode; P Koeppe; K L Rost; T Schaberg
Journal:  Antimicrob Agents Chemother       Date:  1995-05       Impact factor: 5.191

7.  Therapeutic implications of inhibition versus killing of Mycobacterium avium complex by antimicrobial agents.

Authors:  D M Yajko; P S Nassos; W K Hadley
Journal:  Antimicrob Agents Chemother       Date:  1987-01       Impact factor: 5.191

Review 8.  Clinical pharmacokinetics of ciprofloxacin.

Authors:  K Vance-Bryan; D R Guay; J C Rotschafer
Journal:  Clin Pharmacokinet       Date:  1990-12       Impact factor: 6.447

9.  Distribution kinetics of enoxacin and its metabolite oxoenoxacin in excretory fluids of healthy volunteers.

Authors:  U Jaehde; F Sörgel; K G Naber; J Zürcher; W Schunack
Journal:  Antimicrob Agents Chemother       Date:  1995-09       Impact factor: 5.191

Review 10.  Clinical pharmacokinetics of the newer antibacterial 4-quinolones.

Authors:  M Neuman
Journal:  Clin Pharmacokinet       Date:  1988-02       Impact factor: 6.447

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.