Cargando…

Pharmacokinetics of a Novel Sildenafil Orodispersible Film Administered by the Supralingual and the Sublingual Route to Healthy Men

BACKGROUND: Sildenafil was the first selective drug available on the market as oral therapy for erectile dysfunction (ED). A novel sildenafil orodispersible film (ODF) for ED treatment, containing sildenafil citrate, has recently been marketed. OBJECTIVES: Study objective was to investigate sildenaf...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Loprete, Luca, Leuratti, Chiara, Frangione, Valeria, Radicioni, Milko
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Springer International Publishing 2018
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6061399/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/29909432
http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s40261-018-0665-x
Descripción
Sumario:BACKGROUND: Sildenafil was the first selective drug available on the market as oral therapy for erectile dysfunction (ED). A novel sildenafil orodispersible film (ODF) for ED treatment, containing sildenafil citrate, has recently been marketed. OBJECTIVES: Study objective was to investigate sildenafil bioavailability of the novel ODF formulation after sublingual and supralingual administration. METHODS: In this randomised, two-way cross-over study, 12 healthy male volunteers received a single 50 mg sildenafil dose by the sublingual and supralingual administration routes. Plasma sildenafil was determined up to 12 h post-dose. Peak concentration (C(max)) and area under concentration-time curve (AUC(0–t)) were calculated and compared between the two administration routes by analysis of variance (ANOVA). RESULTS: Sublingual and supralingual administration can be claimed equivalent regarding the extent of sildenafil exposure since AUC(0–t) 90 % CIs corresponded to 94.90–110.58% and were within the pre-specified acceptance range. C(max) 90% CIs (79.92–125.57%) were only slightly outside the 80.00–125.00% limits, due to the small sample size, while the time to achieve C(max) did not differ between treatments (p = 0.9277). Rate of exposure of the two administration routes was therefore similar. Reported treatment-related adverse events were mild to moderate headache (33.3% of subjects) and vomiting (8.3%). CONCLUSIONS: In healthy men, sublingual and supralingual administration of sildenafil ODF resulted in a remarkably similar pharmacokinetic profile and confirmed the safety of both study treatments. The recently marketed sildenafil ODF, administered by both investigated routes, can provide a valuable alternative to the marketed solid oral forms (tablets) in ED treatment.