Bioequivalence evaluation of norfloxacin 400 mg tablets (Uroxin and Noroxin) in healthy human volunteers.

A bioequivalence study of two oral formulations of 400 mg norfloxacin was carried out in 18 healthy volunteers according to a single dose, two-sequence, cross-over randomized design at College of Pharmacy, King Saud University, Riyadh, Saudi Arabia, jointly with King Khalid University Hospital. The two formulations were: Uroxin (Julphar, United Arab Emirates) as test and Noroxin (Merck Sharpe & Dohme, BV, Netherlands). Both test and reference formulations were administered to each subject after an overnight fasting on 2 treatment days separated by 1 week wash-out period. After dosing, serial blood samples were collected for a period of 24 h. Plasma harvested from blood, was analysed for norfloxacin by a sensitive, reproducible and accurate HPLC method. Various pharmacokinetic parameters including AUC(0-t), AUC(0-infinity), C(max), T(max), T(1/2), and K(el) were determined from plasma concentrations for both the formulations and found to be in good agreement with reported values. AUC(0-t), AUC(0-infinity), and C(max) were tested for bioequivalence after log-transformation of data. No significant difference was found based on ANOVA; 90% confidence interval for test/reference ratio of these parameters were found within a bioequivalence acceptance range of 80-125%. Based on these statistical inferences, it was concluded that Uroxin is bioequivalent to Noroxin.

Bioequivalence evaluation of two brands of cefuroxime 500 mg tablets (Cefuzime and Zinnat) in healthy human volunteers.

A bioequivalence study of two oral formulations of 500 mg cefuroxime axetil was carried out in 24 healthy volunteers following a single dose, standard two-treatment cross-over design at the College of Pharmacy, King Saud University, Riyadh, Saudi Arabia, working jointly with King Khalid University Hospital. The two formulations used were Cefuzime (Julphar, United Arab Emirates) as the test and Zinnat (Glaxo Wellcome, England) as the reference product. Both test and reference tablets were administered to each subject after an overnight fasting on two treatment days separated by a 1-week washout period. After dosing, serial blood samples were collected for a period of 8 h. Plasma harvested from blood was analysed for cefuroxime by a sensitive, reproducible and accurate high pressure liquid chromatography (HPLC) method. Various pharmacokinetic parameters including AUC(0-t), AUC(0-infinity), C(max), T(max), T(1/2) and K(el) were determined from plasma concentrations of both formulations and found to be in good agreement with reported values. AUC(0-t), AUC(0-infinity) and C(max) were tested for bioequivalence after log-transformation of data. No significant difference was found based on an analysis of variance (ANOVA); 90% confidence interval for test/reference ratio of these parameters were found within bioequivalence acceptance range of 80-125%. Based on these statistical inferences, it was concluded that Cefuzime is bioequivalent to Zinnat.

Bioequivalence evaluation of lomefloxacin 400 mg tablets (Lomax versus Maxaquin in healthy human volunteers.

This study represents the results of a randomized, single dose, two-treatment, two-period crossover study in 18 healthy male volunteers to assess the bioequivalence of two tablets of 400 mg lomefloxacin. The two formulations were: Lomax(R) (Julphar, United Arab Emirates) as the test formulation and Maxaquin(R) (Searle, S.A., UK) as the reference formulation. The study was conducted at the College of Pharmacy, King Saud University, Riyadh, Saudi Arabia, jointly with King Khalid University Hospital, Riyadh, Saudi Arabia. After overnight fasting the two products were administered as a single dose on two treatment days separated by a 1 week washout period. Serial blood samples were collected thereafter, for a period of 48 h. Plasma harvested from blood was analysed for lomefloxacin by a sensitive, reproducible and accurate HPLC method. Various pharmacokinetic parameters including AUC(0-t), AUC(0-infinity), C(max,) T(max), T(1/2), K(elm) and C(max)/AUC(0-infinity) were determined from plasma concentrations for both formulations and found to be in good agreement with reported values. Statistical modules applied to AUC(0-t), AUC(0-infinity) and C(max) revealed no significant difference in the two tested products. Based on these statistical inferences it was concluded that Lomax(R) is bioequivalent to Maxaquin(R).