These tools will no longer be maintained as of December 31, 2024. Archived website can be found here. PubMed4Hh GitHub repository can be found here. Contact NLM Customer Service if you have questions.


Pubmed for Handhelds

PUBMED FOR HANDHELDS

Search MEDLINE/PubMed

  • Title: Can Pharmacokinetic Studies Assess the Pulmonary Fate of Dry Powder Inhaler Formulations of Fluticasone Propionate?
    Author: Hochhaus G, Chen MJ, Kurumaddali A, Schilling U, Jiao Y, Drescher SK, Amini E, Berger SM, Kandala B, Tabulov C, Shao J, Seay B, Abu-Hasan MN, Baumstein SM, Winner L, Shur J, Price R, Hindle M, Wei X, Carrasco C, Sandell D, Oguntimein O, Kinjo M, Delvadia R, Saluja B, Lee SL, Conti DS, Bulitta JB.
    Journal: AAPS J; 2021 Mar 25; 23(3):48. PubMed ID: 33768368.
    Abstract:
    In the context of streamlining generic approval, this study assessed whether pharmacokinetics (PK) could elucidate the pulmonary fate of orally inhaled drug products (OIDPs). Three fluticasone propionate (FP) dry powder inhaler (DPI) formulations (A-4.5, B-3.8, and C-3.7), differing only in type and composition of lactose fines, exhibited median mass aerodynamic diameter (MMAD) of 4.5 μm (A-4.5), 3.8 μm (B-3.8), and 3.7 μm (C-3.7) and varied in dissolution rates (A-4.5 slower than B-3.8 and C-3.7). In vitro total lung dose (TLDin vitro) was determined as the average dose passing through three anatomical mouth-throat (MT) models and yielded dose normalization factors (DNF) for each DPI formulation X (DNFx = TLDin vitro,x/TLDin vitro,A-4.5). The DNF was 1.00 for A-4.5, 1.32 for B-3.8, and 1.21 for C-3.7. Systemic PK after inhalation of 500 μg FP was assessed in a randomized, double-blind, four-way crossover study in 24 healthy volunteers. Peak concentrations (Cmax) of A-4.5 relative to those of B-3.8 or C-3.7 lacked bioequivalence without or with dose normalization. The area under the curve (AUC0-Inf) was bio-IN-equivalent before dose normalization and bioequivalent after dose normalization. Thus, PK could detect differences in pulmonary available dose (AUC0-Inf) and residence time (dose-normalized Cmax). The differences in dose-normalized Cmax could not be explained by differences in in vitro dissolution. This might suggest that Cmax differences may indicate differences in regional lung deposition. Overall this study supports the use of PK studies to provide relevant information on the pulmonary performance characteristics (i.e., available dose, residence time, and regional lung deposition).
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related] [New Search]