METHOD: This is a single-center, single-dose, open-label, randomized, 2-treatment, 2-sequence and 2-period crossover study with a washout period of 7 days. Paracetamol/Orphenadrine tablets were administered after a 10-h fast. Blood samples for pharmacokinetic analysis were collected at scheduled time intervals prior to and up to 72 h after dosing. Blood samples were centrifuged, and separated plasma were kept frozen (- 15 °C to - 25 °C) until analysis. Plasma concentrations of orphenadrine and paracetamol were quantified using liquid-chromatography-tandem mass spectrometer using diphenhydramine as internal standard. The pharmacokinetic parameters AUC0-∞, AUC0-t and Cmax were determined using plasma concentration time profile for both preparations. Bioequivalence was assessed according to the ASEAN guideline acceptance criteria for bioequivalence which is the 90% confidence intervals of AUC0-∞, AUC0-t and Cmax ratio must be within the range of 80.00-125.00%.
RESULTS: There were 28 healthy subjects enrolled, and 27 subjects completed this trial. There were no significant differences observed between the AUC0-∞, AUC0-t and Cmax of both test and reference preparations in fasted condition. The 90% confidence intervals for the ratio of AUC0-t (100.92-111.27%), AUC0-∞ (96.94-108.08%) and Cmax (100.11-112.50%) for orphenadrine (n = 25); and AUC0-t (94.29-101.83%), AUC0-∞ (94.77-101.68%) and Cmax (87.12-101.20%) for paracetamol (n = 27) for test preparation over reference preparation were all within acceptable bioequivalence range of 80.00-125.00%.
CONCLUSION: The test preparation is bioequivalent to the reference preparation and can be used interchangeably.
TRIAL REGISTRATION: NMRR- 17-1266-36,001; registered and approved on 12 September 2017.
METHODS: Plasma concentrations of artesunic acid and dihydroartemisinin were determined simultaneously by HPLC with electrochemical detection. The test drug was well tolerated and no undesirable adverse effects were observed.
RESULTS: Comparison of pharmacokinetic parameters of artesunic acid after oral and rectal administration showed statistically significant differences in t(max) and AUC, with no changes for Cmax and t1/2. As for dihydroartemisinin, differences were observed for t(max) and Cmax but not for AUC.
CONCLUSION: There appear to be pharmacokinetic differences between oral and rectal modes of administration. The significance of these findings should be explored in malaria patients before appropriate therapeutic regimens are devised.
AIM OF THE REVIEW: The present review aims to compile an up-to-date information on the progress made in the protective role of swertiamarin in cardiac and metabolic diseases with the objective of providing a guide for future research on this bioactive molecule.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: Information on the swertiamarin was collected from major scientific databases (Pubmed, Springer, google scholar, and Web of Science) for publication between1974-2016. In this review, the protective role of swertiamarin on cardiac and metabolic diseases was discussed.
RESULTS: Swertiamarin reported to exhibit a wide range of biological activities such as anti-atherosclerotic, antidiabetic, anti-inflammatory and antioxidant effects. These activities were mainly due to its effect on various signaling pathways associated with cardiac remodeling events such as inhibition of NF-kB expression, LDL oxidation, apoptosis, inflammatory and lipid peroxidation markers and stimulation of antioxidant enzymes.
CONCLUSION: Sweriamarin exhibit a wide range of biological activities. This review presents evidence supporting the point of view that swertiamarin should be considered a potential therapeutic agent against cardiac and metabolic diseases, giving rise to novel applications in their prevention and treatment.
OBJECTIVE: The review was performed to answer the following research question: "In VPNs, are high amounts of arginine in PN, compared with low amounts of arginine, associated with appropriate circulating concentrations of arginine?" Therefore, the aims were to 1) quantify the relationship between parenteral arginine intakes and plasma arginine concentrations in PN-dependent VPNs; 2) identify any features of study design that affect this relationship; and 3) estimate the target parenteral arginine dose to achieve desirable preterm plasma arginine concentrations.
DATA SOURCES: The PubMed, Scopus, Web of Science, and Cochrane databases were searched regardless of study design; review articles were not included.
DATA EXTRACTION: Only articles that discussed amino acid (AA) intake and measured plasma AA profile post PN in VPNs were included. Data were obtained using a data extraction checklist that was devised for the purpose of this review.
DATA ANALYSIS: Twelve articles met the inclusion criteria. The dose-concentration relationship of arginine content (%) and absolute arginine intake (mg/(kg × d)) with plasma arginine concentrations showed a significant positive correlation (P < 0.001).
CONCLUSION: Future studies using AA solutions with arginine content of 17%-20% and protein intakes of 3.5-4.0 g/kg per day may be needed to achieve higher plasma arginine concentrations.
METHODS: The intrasubject coefficient of variation was estimated from the residual mean square error obtained from analysis of variance of the parameters AUC0-infinity, Cmax and Cmax/AUC0-infinity after logarithmic transformation. The test power in the analyses of the above parameters was subsequently estimated using nomograms provided by Diletti et al. [1991].
RESULTS AND CONCLUSION: Thirty products covering 16 drugs were studied in which 22 were immediate-release (including one dispersible tablet) and 8 were sustained-release formulations. The intrasubject coefficient of variation for the parameter AUC0-infinity was smaller than Cmax, and hence considerably more studies were able to attain a power of greater than 80% using 12 volunteers for the AUC0-infinity, compared to the Cmax. However, the variability in the Cmax could be reduced by using the parameter Cmax/ AUC0-infinity, and thus, provide a more realistic estimation of sample size, since the latter reflects only the rate of absorption and not both the rate and extent as in the case of Cmax [Endrenyi et al. 1991].