ArticleIranian journal of pharmaceutical research : IJPR2014
Metabolite parameters as an appropriate alternative approach for assessment of bioequivalence of two verapamil formulations.
Article in Iranian journal of pharmaceutical research : IJPR, 2014. 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, 2 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
4 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
A bioequivalence study of two verapamil formulations (generic verapamil tablets and Isoptin(®) tablets) was performed by comparing pharmacokinetic parameters of the parent drug and its major metabolite, norverapamil following a single dose administration of 80 mg verapamil hydrochloride in 22 healthy volunteers according to a randomized, two-period, crossover-design study. Moreover, the feasibility of proving bioequivalence of verapamil oral dosing form by means of norverapamil pharmacokinetic parameters was evaluated. Concentrations of verapamil and norverapamil were quantified in plasma using a validated high-performance liquid chromatography (HPLC) with fluorescence detection. The 90% CIs for the log-transformed ratios of verapamil Cmax (maximum plasma concentration) and AUC0-∞(area under the plasma concentration-versus-time curve from time zero to the infinity) were 73 to 101 and 80 to 103, respectively. Similarly, the corresponding ranges for norverapamil were 80-100 and 84-103, respectively. According to the parent drug data, the 90% confidence intervals around the geometric mean ratio of AUC happened to fit within preset bioequivalence limits of 80-125%, whereas those for Cmax did not. The 90% confidence intervals for both Cmax and AUC of norverapamil met preset bioequivalence limits. The AUC and Cmax of metabolite, when compared to parent drug, showed a much lower degree of variability and the 90% confidence intervals of the metabolite were therefore narrower than those of the parent drug. These observations indicate that bioequivalence studies using metabolite, norverapamil, could be a more suitable and preferable approach to assess bioequivalence of verapamil formulations due to its much lower variability and therefore lower number of volunteers that are required to conduct the study.
Indexed as
Identifiers
25237334PMC4157014W1944214234What 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.