Format

Send to

Choose Destination
Int J Clin Pharmacol Ther. 2016 Sep;54(9):682-92. doi: 10.5414/CP202548.

Advantage of population pharmacokinetic method for evaluating the bioequivalence and accuracy of parameter estimation of pidotimod.

Abstract

OBJECTIVE:

This study was aimed at exploring the accuracy of population pharmacokinetic method in evaluating the bioequivalence of pidotimod with sparse data profiles and whether this method is suitable for bioequivalence evaluation in special populations such as children with fewer samplings. Methods In this single-dose, two-period crossover study, 20 healthy male Chinese volunteers were randomized 1 : 1 to receive either the test or reference formulation, with a 1-week washout before receiving the alternative formulation. Noncompartmental and population compartmental pharmacokinetic analyses were conducted. Simulated data were analyzed to graphically evaluate the model and the pharmacokinetic characteristics of the two pidotimod formulations. Various sparse sampling scenarios were generated from the real bioequivalence clinical trial data and evaluated by population pharmacokinetic method.

RESULTS:

The 90% confidence intervals (CIs) for AUC0-12h, AUC0-∞, and Cmax were 97.3 - 118.7%, 96.9 - 118.7%, and 95.1 - 109.8%, respectively, within the 80 - 125% range for bioequivalence using noncompartmental analysis. The population compartmental pharmacokinetics of pidotimod were described using a one-compartment model with first-order absorption and lag time. In the comparison of estimations in different dataset, the estimation of random three- and< fixed four-point sampling strategies can provide results similar to those obtained through rich sampling. The nonlinear mixed-effects model requires fewer data points. Moreover, compared with the noncompartmental analysis method, the pharmacokinetic parameters can be more accurately estimated using nonlinear mixed-effects model.

CONCLUSIONS:

The population pharmacokinetic modeling method was used to assess the bioequivalence of two pidotimod formulations with relatively few sampling points and further validated the bioequivalence of the two formulations. This method may provide useful information for regulating bioequivalence evaluation in special populations.

PMID:
27390049
DOI:
10.5414/CP202548
[Indexed for MEDLINE]

Supplemental Content

Full text links

Icon for Dustri-Verlag Dr. Karl Feistle GmbH & Co. KG
Loading ...
Support Center