Cargando…

A randomized, cross‐over trial of metoprolol succinate formulations to evaluate PK and PD end points for therapeutic equivalence

There are limited comparison data throughout the dosing interval for generic versus brand metoprolol extended‐release (ER) tablets. We compared the pharmacokinetics (PKs) and pharmacodynamics of brand name versus two generic formulations (drugs 1 and 2) of metoprolol ER tablets with different time t...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Mosley, Scott A., Kim, Sarah, El Rouby, Nihal, Lingineni, Karthik, Esteban, Valvanera Vozmediano, Gong, Yan, Chen, Yiqing, Estores, David, Feng, Kairui, Kim, Hyewon, Kinjo, Minori, Langaee, Taimour, Li, Zhichuan, Schmidt, Siegfried O. F., Johnson, Julie A., Frye, Reginald F., Fang, Lanyan (Lucy), Zhao, Liang, Binkley, Philip F., Schmidt, Stephan, Cavallari, Larisa H.
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: John Wiley and Sons Inc. 2022
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9283731/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35488487
http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/cts.13294
_version_ 1784747390787387392
author Mosley, Scott A.
Kim, Sarah
El Rouby, Nihal
Lingineni, Karthik
Esteban, Valvanera Vozmediano
Gong, Yan
Chen, Yiqing
Estores, David
Feng, Kairui
Kim, Hyewon
Kinjo, Minori
Langaee, Taimour
Li, Zhichuan
Schmidt, Siegfried O. F.
Johnson, Julie A.
Frye, Reginald F.
Fang, Lanyan (Lucy)
Zhao, Liang
Binkley, Philip F.
Schmidt, Stephan
Cavallari, Larisa H.
author_facet Mosley, Scott A.
Kim, Sarah
El Rouby, Nihal
Lingineni, Karthik
Esteban, Valvanera Vozmediano
Gong, Yan
Chen, Yiqing
Estores, David
Feng, Kairui
Kim, Hyewon
Kinjo, Minori
Langaee, Taimour
Li, Zhichuan
Schmidt, Siegfried O. F.
Johnson, Julie A.
Frye, Reginald F.
Fang, Lanyan (Lucy)
Zhao, Liang
Binkley, Philip F.
Schmidt, Stephan
Cavallari, Larisa H.
author_sort Mosley, Scott A.
collection PubMed
description There are limited comparison data throughout the dosing interval for generic versus brand metoprolol extended‐release (ER) tablets. We compared the pharmacokinetics (PKs) and pharmacodynamics of brand name versus two generic formulations (drugs 1 and 2) of metoprolol ER tablets with different time to maximum concentration (T (max)) in adults with hypertension. Participants were randomized to equal drug doses (50–150 mg/day) administered in one of two sequences (brand‐drug1‐brand‐drug2 or brand‐drug2‐brand‐drug1) and completed 24‐h PK, digital heart rate (HR), ambulatory blood pressure (BP), and HR studies after taking each formulation for greater than or equal to 7 days. Metoprolol concentrations were determined by liquid chromatography tandem mass spectrometry, with noncompartmental analysis performed to obtain PK parameters in Phoenix WinNonlin. Heart rate variability (HRV) low‐to‐high frequency ratio was determined per quartile over the 24‐h period. Thirty‐six participants completed studies with the brand name and at least one generic product. Among 30 participants on the 50 mg dose, the primary PK end points of area under the concentration‐time curve and C (max) were similar between products; T (max) was 6.1 ± 3.6 for the brand versus 3.5 ± 4.9 for drug 1 (p = 0.019) and 9.6 ± 3.2 for drug 2 (p < 0.001). Among all 36 participants, 24‐h BPs and HRs were similar between products. Mean 24‐h HRV low‐to‐high ratio was also similar for drug 1 (2.04 ± 1.35), drug 2 (1.86 ± 1.35), and brand (2.04 ± 1.77), but was more sustained over time for the brand versus drug 1 (drug × quartile interaction p = 0.017). Differences in T (max) between metoprolol ER products following repeated doses may have implications for drug effects on autonomic balance over the dosing interval.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-9283731
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2022
publisher John Wiley and Sons Inc.
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-92837312022-07-15 A randomized, cross‐over trial of metoprolol succinate formulations to evaluate PK and PD end points for therapeutic equivalence Mosley, Scott A. Kim, Sarah El Rouby, Nihal Lingineni, Karthik Esteban, Valvanera Vozmediano Gong, Yan Chen, Yiqing Estores, David Feng, Kairui Kim, Hyewon Kinjo, Minori Langaee, Taimour Li, Zhichuan Schmidt, Siegfried O. F. Johnson, Julie A. Frye, Reginald F. Fang, Lanyan (Lucy) Zhao, Liang Binkley, Philip F. Schmidt, Stephan Cavallari, Larisa H. Clin Transl Sci Research There are limited comparison data throughout the dosing interval for generic versus brand metoprolol extended‐release (ER) tablets. We compared the pharmacokinetics (PKs) and pharmacodynamics of brand name versus two generic formulations (drugs 1 and 2) of metoprolol ER tablets with different time to maximum concentration (T (max)) in adults with hypertension. Participants were randomized to equal drug doses (50–150 mg/day) administered in one of two sequences (brand‐drug1‐brand‐drug2 or brand‐drug2‐brand‐drug1) and completed 24‐h PK, digital heart rate (HR), ambulatory blood pressure (BP), and HR studies after taking each formulation for greater than or equal to 7 days. Metoprolol concentrations were determined by liquid chromatography tandem mass spectrometry, with noncompartmental analysis performed to obtain PK parameters in Phoenix WinNonlin. Heart rate variability (HRV) low‐to‐high frequency ratio was determined per quartile over the 24‐h period. Thirty‐six participants completed studies with the brand name and at least one generic product. Among 30 participants on the 50 mg dose, the primary PK end points of area under the concentration‐time curve and C (max) were similar between products; T (max) was 6.1 ± 3.6 for the brand versus 3.5 ± 4.9 for drug 1 (p = 0.019) and 9.6 ± 3.2 for drug 2 (p < 0.001). Among all 36 participants, 24‐h BPs and HRs were similar between products. Mean 24‐h HRV low‐to‐high ratio was also similar for drug 1 (2.04 ± 1.35), drug 2 (1.86 ± 1.35), and brand (2.04 ± 1.77), but was more sustained over time for the brand versus drug 1 (drug × quartile interaction p = 0.017). Differences in T (max) between metoprolol ER products following repeated doses may have implications for drug effects on autonomic balance over the dosing interval. John Wiley and Sons Inc. 2022-05-21 2022-07 /pmc/articles/PMC9283731/ /pubmed/35488487 http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/cts.13294 Text en © 2022 The Authors. Clinical and Translational Science published by Wiley Periodicals LLC on behalf of American Society for Clinical Pharmacology and Therapeutics. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/This is an open access article under the terms of the http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/) License, which permits use, distribution and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited and is not used for commercial purposes.
spellingShingle Research
Mosley, Scott A.
Kim, Sarah
El Rouby, Nihal
Lingineni, Karthik
Esteban, Valvanera Vozmediano
Gong, Yan
Chen, Yiqing
Estores, David
Feng, Kairui
Kim, Hyewon
Kinjo, Minori
Langaee, Taimour
Li, Zhichuan
Schmidt, Siegfried O. F.
Johnson, Julie A.
Frye, Reginald F.
Fang, Lanyan (Lucy)
Zhao, Liang
Binkley, Philip F.
Schmidt, Stephan
Cavallari, Larisa H.
A randomized, cross‐over trial of metoprolol succinate formulations to evaluate PK and PD end points for therapeutic equivalence
title A randomized, cross‐over trial of metoprolol succinate formulations to evaluate PK and PD end points for therapeutic equivalence
title_full A randomized, cross‐over trial of metoprolol succinate formulations to evaluate PK and PD end points for therapeutic equivalence
title_fullStr A randomized, cross‐over trial of metoprolol succinate formulations to evaluate PK and PD end points for therapeutic equivalence
title_full_unstemmed A randomized, cross‐over trial of metoprolol succinate formulations to evaluate PK and PD end points for therapeutic equivalence
title_short A randomized, cross‐over trial of metoprolol succinate formulations to evaluate PK and PD end points for therapeutic equivalence
title_sort randomized, cross‐over trial of metoprolol succinate formulations to evaluate pk and pd end points for therapeutic equivalence
topic Research
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9283731/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35488487
http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/cts.13294
work_keys_str_mv AT mosleyscotta arandomizedcrossovertrialofmetoprololsuccinateformulationstoevaluatepkandpdendpointsfortherapeuticequivalence
AT kimsarah arandomizedcrossovertrialofmetoprololsuccinateformulationstoevaluatepkandpdendpointsfortherapeuticequivalence
AT elroubynihal arandomizedcrossovertrialofmetoprololsuccinateformulationstoevaluatepkandpdendpointsfortherapeuticequivalence
AT linginenikarthik arandomizedcrossovertrialofmetoprololsuccinateformulationstoevaluatepkandpdendpointsfortherapeuticequivalence
AT estebanvalvaneravozmediano arandomizedcrossovertrialofmetoprololsuccinateformulationstoevaluatepkandpdendpointsfortherapeuticequivalence
AT gongyan arandomizedcrossovertrialofmetoprololsuccinateformulationstoevaluatepkandpdendpointsfortherapeuticequivalence
AT chenyiqing arandomizedcrossovertrialofmetoprololsuccinateformulationstoevaluatepkandpdendpointsfortherapeuticequivalence
AT estoresdavid arandomizedcrossovertrialofmetoprololsuccinateformulationstoevaluatepkandpdendpointsfortherapeuticequivalence
AT fengkairui arandomizedcrossovertrialofmetoprololsuccinateformulationstoevaluatepkandpdendpointsfortherapeuticequivalence
AT kimhyewon arandomizedcrossovertrialofmetoprololsuccinateformulationstoevaluatepkandpdendpointsfortherapeuticequivalence
AT kinjominori arandomizedcrossovertrialofmetoprololsuccinateformulationstoevaluatepkandpdendpointsfortherapeuticequivalence
AT langaeetaimour arandomizedcrossovertrialofmetoprololsuccinateformulationstoevaluatepkandpdendpointsfortherapeuticequivalence
AT lizhichuan arandomizedcrossovertrialofmetoprololsuccinateformulationstoevaluatepkandpdendpointsfortherapeuticequivalence
AT schmidtsiegfriedof arandomizedcrossovertrialofmetoprololsuccinateformulationstoevaluatepkandpdendpointsfortherapeuticequivalence
AT johnsonjuliea arandomizedcrossovertrialofmetoprololsuccinateformulationstoevaluatepkandpdendpointsfortherapeuticequivalence
AT fryereginaldf arandomizedcrossovertrialofmetoprololsuccinateformulationstoevaluatepkandpdendpointsfortherapeuticequivalence
AT fanglanyanlucy arandomizedcrossovertrialofmetoprololsuccinateformulationstoevaluatepkandpdendpointsfortherapeuticequivalence
AT zhaoliang arandomizedcrossovertrialofmetoprololsuccinateformulationstoevaluatepkandpdendpointsfortherapeuticequivalence
AT binkleyphilipf arandomizedcrossovertrialofmetoprololsuccinateformulationstoevaluatepkandpdendpointsfortherapeuticequivalence
AT schmidtstephan arandomizedcrossovertrialofmetoprololsuccinateformulationstoevaluatepkandpdendpointsfortherapeuticequivalence
AT cavallarilarisah arandomizedcrossovertrialofmetoprololsuccinateformulationstoevaluatepkandpdendpointsfortherapeuticequivalence
AT mosleyscotta randomizedcrossovertrialofmetoprololsuccinateformulationstoevaluatepkandpdendpointsfortherapeuticequivalence
AT kimsarah randomizedcrossovertrialofmetoprololsuccinateformulationstoevaluatepkandpdendpointsfortherapeuticequivalence
AT elroubynihal randomizedcrossovertrialofmetoprololsuccinateformulationstoevaluatepkandpdendpointsfortherapeuticequivalence
AT linginenikarthik randomizedcrossovertrialofmetoprololsuccinateformulationstoevaluatepkandpdendpointsfortherapeuticequivalence
AT estebanvalvaneravozmediano randomizedcrossovertrialofmetoprololsuccinateformulationstoevaluatepkandpdendpointsfortherapeuticequivalence
AT gongyan randomizedcrossovertrialofmetoprololsuccinateformulationstoevaluatepkandpdendpointsfortherapeuticequivalence
AT chenyiqing randomizedcrossovertrialofmetoprololsuccinateformulationstoevaluatepkandpdendpointsfortherapeuticequivalence
AT estoresdavid randomizedcrossovertrialofmetoprololsuccinateformulationstoevaluatepkandpdendpointsfortherapeuticequivalence
AT fengkairui randomizedcrossovertrialofmetoprololsuccinateformulationstoevaluatepkandpdendpointsfortherapeuticequivalence
AT kimhyewon randomizedcrossovertrialofmetoprololsuccinateformulationstoevaluatepkandpdendpointsfortherapeuticequivalence
AT kinjominori randomizedcrossovertrialofmetoprololsuccinateformulationstoevaluatepkandpdendpointsfortherapeuticequivalence
AT langaeetaimour randomizedcrossovertrialofmetoprololsuccinateformulationstoevaluatepkandpdendpointsfortherapeuticequivalence
AT lizhichuan randomizedcrossovertrialofmetoprololsuccinateformulationstoevaluatepkandpdendpointsfortherapeuticequivalence
AT schmidtsiegfriedof randomizedcrossovertrialofmetoprololsuccinateformulationstoevaluatepkandpdendpointsfortherapeuticequivalence
AT johnsonjuliea randomizedcrossovertrialofmetoprololsuccinateformulationstoevaluatepkandpdendpointsfortherapeuticequivalence
AT fryereginaldf randomizedcrossovertrialofmetoprololsuccinateformulationstoevaluatepkandpdendpointsfortherapeuticequivalence
AT fanglanyanlucy randomizedcrossovertrialofmetoprololsuccinateformulationstoevaluatepkandpdendpointsfortherapeuticequivalence
AT zhaoliang randomizedcrossovertrialofmetoprololsuccinateformulationstoevaluatepkandpdendpointsfortherapeuticequivalence
AT binkleyphilipf randomizedcrossovertrialofmetoprololsuccinateformulationstoevaluatepkandpdendpointsfortherapeuticequivalence
AT schmidtstephan randomizedcrossovertrialofmetoprololsuccinateformulationstoevaluatepkandpdendpointsfortherapeuticequivalence
AT cavallarilarisah randomizedcrossovertrialofmetoprololsuccinateformulationstoevaluatepkandpdendpointsfortherapeuticequivalence