Literature DB >> 9208360

Postabsorption concentration peaks with brand-name and generic verapamil: a double-blind, crossover study in elderly hypertensive patients.

J J Saseen1, J A Porter, D J Barnette, J L Bauman, E J Zajac, B L Carter.   

Abstract

The pharmacokinetic actions, bioequivalence, and cardiovascular effects of two verapamil products were studied in a randomized, double-blind, crossover study in eight elderly hypertensive patients (median age, 69.5 years; range, 60-79 years) given brand-name or generic immediate-release verapamil in 120-mg twice-daily doses for 14 days. Blood pressures, heart rates, P-R intervals; and serum concentrations of R-/S-verapamil and norverapamil were measured multiple times in patients during the last day of each therapy. Median blood pressure decreased more with generic verapamil than with the brand-name drug, with the largest difference occurring at 0.5 hours (137/74 mmHg versus 144.5/80.5 mmHg; P = 0.05 and 0.091, respectively). Pharmacokinetic parameters were not different for the two products (P < 0.01). However, the generic product, compared with the brand-name drug, had mean area under the concentration-time curve (time 0 to 12 hours) ratios (90% CI) of 1.09 (0.78-1.52), 1.16 (0.87-1.55) and 1.11 (0.81-1.52) for R-, S-, and total verapamil. Seventy concentration peaks (31 with the brand-name drug, 39 with the generic drug) appeared between 8 and 24 hours. Median percentages of increase of these peaks, compared with those of previous concentrations, were 48.3% and 36.3% for brand-name and generic drugs, respectively. Fifty of the 70 peaks (71%) were associated with a stereospecific concentration peak of norverapamil and, temporally, with meals. Our findings suggest that whereas the two verapamil products may not be bioequivalent by Food and Drug Administration criteria, the observed differences in effects were not clinically significant in this elderly population. Multiple concentration peaks after absorption were observed in all patients with both verapamil products and were perhaps related to enterohepatic recirculation.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  1997        PMID: 9208360     DOI: 10.1002/j.1552-4604.1997.tb04331.x

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Clin Pharmacol        ISSN: 0091-2700            Impact factor:   3.126


  5 in total

Review 1.  Clinical equivalence of generic and brand-name drugs used in cardiovascular disease: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Authors:  Aaron S Kesselheim; Alexander S Misono; Joy L Lee; Margaret R Stedman; M Alan Brookhart; Niteesh K Choudhry; William H Shrank
Journal:  JAMA       Date:  2008-12-03       Impact factor: 56.272

2.  Fixed-dosed combinations are not indicated as initial therapy: a debate.

Authors:  Barry L Carter
Journal:  J Clin Hypertens (Greenwich)       Date:  2009-02       Impact factor: 3.738

3.  Are Generic Drugs Used in Cardiology as Effective and Safe as their Brand-name Counterparts? A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.

Authors:  Jacinthe Leclerc; Magalie Thibault; Jennifer Midiani Gonella; Claudia Beaudoin; John Sampalis
Journal:  Drugs       Date:  2020-05       Impact factor: 9.546

Review 4.  Generic versus brand-name drugs used in cardiovascular diseases.

Authors:  Lamberto Manzoli; Maria Elena Flacco; Stefania Boccia; Elvira D'Andrea; Nikola Panic; Carolina Marzuillo; Roberta Siliquini; Walter Ricciardi; Paolo Villari; John P A Ioannidis
Journal:  Eur J Epidemiol       Date:  2015-11-30       Impact factor: 8.082

5.  Enteric reabsorption processes and their impact on drug pharmacokinetics.

Authors:  Manuel Ibarra; Iñaki F Trocóniz; Pietro Fagiolino
Journal:  Sci Rep       Date:  2021-03-11       Impact factor: 4.379

  5 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.