Comparative pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic evaluation of branded and generic formulations of meloxicam in healthy male volunteers.

PURPOSE: The primary aim of the present study was to assess the pharmacokinetic bioequivalence between a generic formulation of meloxicam 15 mg tablets (Meloxicam Hexal) and its respective brand product (Mobic), in order to verify whether the generic product conforms to the regulatory standards of bioequivalence in the postmarketing setting. As a secondary exploratory aim, the pharmacodynamic effects of the two formulations were also evaluated by means of rating scales following hyperalgesia induced by cutaneous freeze injury. SUBJECTS AND METHODS: A single 15 mg dose of generic or branded meloxicam tablets was administered to 24 healthy male volunteers in a crossover fashion. Plasma samples, collected for 24 hours after dosing, were assayed for meloxicam concentration by a validated highperformance liquid chromatography method. RESULTS: THE ANALYSIS OF PHARMACOKINETIC PARAMETERS DID NOT SHOW ANY SIGNIFICANT DIFFERENCE BETWEEN THE TWO MELOXICAM FORMULATIONS: the 90% confidence intervals fell within the acceptance range of 80%-125% (0.84-1.16 for area under the curve [0-24], and 0.89-1.23 for peak concentration). No difference in the pharmacodynamic end point was observed between the two groups. CONCLUSION: The pharmacokinetic profiles of the two meloxicam formulations confirm the regulatory criteria for bioequivalence; pharmacodynamic data indicate a similar antihyperalgesic effect. The two formulations can be used interchangeably in the clinical setting.

Pharmacokinetic interactions between omeprazole/pantoprazole and clarithromycin in health volunteers.

The association omeprazole/clarithromycin is of current wide use in the treatment of Helicobacter pylori associated gastroduodenal ulcer. This combination may result in increased levels of omeprazole with potential interactions with commonly associated drugs. Kinetic/metabolic changes occurring after omeprazole/clarithromycin were compared to those occurring after pantoprazole/clarithromycin in healthy volunteers. Eight healthy volunteers, all males, age 25-34 years, all EM for CYP2C19, participated in a randomized, double blind crossover study in two periods of 7 days, separated by a 14-day washout. In each treatment period, subjects took either omeprazole 20mg b.i.d. together with clarithromycin 500 mg b.i.d., or pantoprazole 40 mg b.i.d. with the same dose of the antibiotic. The pharmacokinetic parameters of omeprazole and pantoprazole were compared to those after intake of both agents alone. Kinetics of unchanged clarithromycin was evaluated at the end of the two periods. The mean value of the area under the plasma concentration versus time curve (AUC) of unchanged omeprazole increased almost two-fold after concomitant administration of clarithromycin; the average 5-OH-omeprazole AUC was instead significantly reduced by 42%. Omeprazole clearance and volume of distribution were reduced significantly by 75 and 56%, respectively, after administration of the drug with clarithromicyn. No significant changes of the kinetic of pantoprazole and metabolites were observed. Kinetics of clarithromycin did not differ after the two associated treatments. The administration of clarithromycin with two different proton pump inhibitors indicates that the antibiotic can markedly increase omeprazole, not pantoprazole, levels. This observation may result in a better therapeutic response to omeprazole, but it may also potentially affect either the metabolism of CYP3A4 substrates or interfere with the absorption of drugs requiring an intact gastric digestion system.