ArticleCurrent therapeutic research, clinical and experimental2011
Bioequivalence of 2 azithromycin capsule formulations: a randomized, single-dose, open-label, 2-period crossover study in healthy male pakistani volunteers.
Article in Current therapeutic research, clinical and experimental, 2011. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed, 4 citations in OpenAlex.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundApproximately 68 brands of azithromycin capsule formulations are available in Pakistan; however, published data on their bioequivalence in the Pakistani population are not available.
objectiveUpon instructions from and approval of the Ministry of Health, Pakistan, this study was designed to evaluate the bioequivalence of a locally manufactured azithromycin capsule formulation with a reference formulation from a multinational manufacturer. This study compared dissolution profiles, relative bioavailability, and other pharmacokinetic parameters of the 2 formulations.
methodsA single oral 500-mg dose of the 2 formulations was administered to 12 healthy adult Pakistani male volunteers under fasting conditions in a randomized, open-label, 2-period crossover study. The trial included collection of blood samples over 48 hours and a 2-week washout period. Azithromycin serum concentrations were quantified using a validated RP-HPLC/ultraviolet (UV) detection method. These results were used to determine the intended pharmacokinetic parameters. As mandated by the US Food and Drug Administration and the European Medicine Agency, the test and reference formulations were considered bioequivalent if the 90% CIs of the geometric mean ratios for the log-transformed values of their pharmacokinetic parameters were within the predetermined range of 0.8 to 1.25.
resultsWhen subjected to a simple model independent approach of dissolution profile comparison, f 1 (difference) and f 2 (similarity factor) were found to be 5.47 and 70.04, respectively. Similarly, the 2 azithromycin capsule formulations were well tolerated by all volunteers. Low %CV of the pharmacokinetic parameters at a sample size of 12 and significance level of 0.05 contributed to acceptable (>0.8) power of the test. The 90% CIs for the ratios of Cmax, AUC0-48, Tmax, t1/2, and mean residence time, respectively, were 0.83-0.93, 0.85-1.10, 0.86-1.08, 0.92-1.17, and 0.92-1.16.
conclusionThis single-dose study found that test and reference formulations met the regulatory criteria for bioequivalence in these fasted, healthy male Pakistani volunteers.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.