Intravaginal Tolterodine Formulation Intended for Overactive Bladder Treatment-Results of a Pharmacokinetic Phase I Pilot Study in Healthy, Postmenopausal Women.

The aim was to assess the pharmacokinetics of tolterodine released from vaginal rings and of its active metabolite 5-hydroxymethyl tolterodine (5-HMT) compared to the respective pharmacokinetics resulting from oral administration of extended-release tolterodine in healthy, postmenopausal women. In this single-center, open-label trial, subjects received 4 treatments in a fixed sequence: fasted oral extended-release tolterodine 2.74 mg/d (reference, 5 days), single vaginal rings; tolterodine releasing rates: 0.95 mg/d (test 1, 13 days), 1.40 mg/d (test 2, 28 days), 1.90 mg/d (test 3, 28 days). Systemic exposure of tolterodine, 5-HMT, and the molar sum of unbound tolterodine/5-HMT (active moiety [AM]) in steady state was determined. Sixteen of 18 included women completed the study. For the oral formulation, peak-trough fluctuations of tolterodine, 5-HMT, and AM plasma concentrations (AM: mean maximum/minimum concentration, 2580/574 pmol/L = 4.5) were large. Intravaginal application led to steadier plasma concentrations (AM, test 3: mean maximum/minimum concentration, 1880/814 pmol/L = 2.3; fluctuation due to initial peak), which is the result of constant releasing rates after ring insertion over the 28-day application period. The vaginal rings demonstrated a favorable local tolerability. The most common adverse events with oral and vaginal tolterodine were headache (n = 11) and dry mouth (n = 8). Vaginal rings releasing tolterodine represent a promising new formulation for overactive bladder treatment with little fluctuation of drug plasma levels. This is expected to lead to a more predictable and continuous therapeutic effect and a reduced frequency of side effects compared to oral tolterodine.

Investigations on dose proportionality and drug-drug interaction for a fixed-dose combination of trazodone and gabapentin.

OBJECTIVES: To establish dose proportionality for trazodone and gabapentin at fixed ratios of trazodone/gabapentin 2.5/25, 10/100, and 30/300 and investigation of potential drug-drug interaction at a dose of 10/100. MATERIALS AND METHODS: 29 out of 30 healthy subjects completed this single-center, open-label, randomized, 5-period cross-over trial with single-dose fasted administrations. Administrations were separated by a washout period of at least 6 days. Blood samples were drawn until 48 hours post dose. A validated liquid chromatography-tandem mass spectrometry method (LC-MS/MS) was applied for determination of trazodone and gabapentin in plasma. The lower limits of quantitation (LLOQ) were 1.00 ng/mL and 5.00 ng/mL for trazodone and gabapentin, respectively. Adverse events (AEs) were analyzed in the study population descriptively. RESULTS: Plasma concentrations were characterized thoroughly. For trazodone, assessment of proportionality (power model/pairwise-comparison by ANOVA) showed proportionality for AUC over all doses and for Cmax between the middle and high dose. For gabapentin, a less than proportional increase in both metrices was present with a likely proportional increase from 25 to 100 mg only. Considering common bioequivalence criteria, absence of pharmacokinetic interaction was confirmed comparing the combination and individual agents. 23 subjects experienced 53 AEs during the trial, the most frequent being fatigue (20 cases/15 subjects) and dizziness (14 cases/11 subjects). No serious AEs were reported. CONCLUSION: To our knowledge, for the first time, proportionality for trazodone at doses of 2.5 to 30 mg and for gabapentin at doses of 25 to 300 mg was investigated. Absence of a pharmacokinetic interaction was shown.

Relative bioavailability of a newly developed 5-mg levomethadone hydrochloride IR tablet (L-Polamidon® 5 mg tablets) in comparison with the 5-mg levomethadone hydrochloride oral solution (L-Polamidon® solution for substitution) as reference product.

OBJECTIVES: To establish the relative bioavailability (rBA) between two p.o. 5-mg levomethadone hydrochloride formulations, i.e., L-Polamidon® 5 mg tablets (test) vs. L-Polamidon® solution for substitution (reference). To assess the safety and tolerability of both formulations. SUBJECT AND METHODS: A total of 33 healthy male subjects, aged 29 ± 6 years (BMI: 23.9 ± 2.5 kg/m2) completed this single center, open-label, randomized, 2-period cross-over study with single dose administrations under fasting conditions and coadministration with naltrexone for safety reasons. Administrations of both investigational products were separated by a washout period of at least 2 weeks, i.e., 13 treatmentfree days. The total dose for each subject was 2 x 5 mg resulting in 10 mg levomethadone hydrochloride. For pharmacokinetic evaluation, blood samples were withdrawn until 72 hours postdose. A validated non-stereoselective liquid chromatography-tandem mass spectroscopy method (LC-MS/MS) was applied for the determination of levomethadone in plasma. The lower limit of quantitation was 0.100 ng/mL. Adverse events were descriptively analyzed in the study population. RESULTS: The geometric means of the parameters related with the extent of total exposure of levomethadone, i.e., AUC(0-tlast) and AUC(0-∞), were 244.422 ng x h/mL and 332.999 ng x h/mL for test and 246.837 ng x h/mL and 329.467 ng×h/mL for reference, respectively. The geometric means of the peak exposure for levomethadone, i.e., Cmax, were 8.923 ng/mL for test and 8.635 ng/mL for reference. The point estimates (PEs) of the Test/Reference (T/R) adjusted geometric mean ratios of AUC(0-last), AUC(0-∞), and C(max) were 99.20%, 101.42%, and 104.11%, respectively, and all of them showed 90%-confidence intervals (CIs) within the range of 80.00 - 125.00% as suggested by regulatory requirements for bioequivalence assessment In total, 21 subjects experienced 55 AEs during the study, the most frequently reported AE, i.e., headache, accounted for 13 out of the total 55 AEs (23.6%) and no AEs of severe intensity were reported. CONCLUSIONS: Bioequivalence could be demonstrated in terms of rate and extent of absorption after administration of test and reference products under naltrexone protection. Concerning the safety evaluation, no negative implications on the possible use of the test formulation could be determined.