Search

Purpose: To provide consistent pain relief and improve convenient sustained release (SR), a fixed-dose combination tramadol/acetaminophen tablet was formulated. This study aimed to evaluate the pharmacokinetic profiles of an SR 75-mg tramadol/650-mg acetaminophen formulation after a single dose compared with an immediate release (IR) 37.5-mg tramadol/325-mg acetaminophen formulation after 2 doses and at steady state and to assess the effect of food on the pharmacokinetic SR formulation profile after a single dose. Methods: Two clinical trials were conducted: (1) an open-label, randomized, 3-period, 3-treatment, crossover study to assess the pharmacokinetic SR (one 75- mg tramadol/650-mg acetaminophen combination tablet) formulation profiles after a single dose and IR (one 37.5-mg tramadol/325-mg acetaminophen combination tablet q6h for 2 doses) formulation profiles after 2 doses and the effect of food intake on healthy male subjects and (2) an open, randomized, 2-period, 2-treatment multiple dose crossover study to evaluate the steady-state pharmacokinetic SR and IR formulation profiles. Safety assessments were performed. Findings: Forty-three subjects completed each study protocol. The SR combination tramadol/acetaminophen formulation was clinically and statistically equivalent to the IR combination formulation in the fasting state. When tramadol and acetaminophen tablets were administered with food, the time to peak plasma concentrations and the tramadol/acetaminophen absorption were unaffected. There was no serious adverse event reported. Implications: The SR combination tramadol/acetaminophen tablet exhibited similar exposure and absorption rates compared with those of the IR formulation of tramadol, O-desmethyltramadol, and acetaminophen. The SR formulation may be more convenient for patients and has the potential to enhance compliance and pain control. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Purpose: Amitriptyline is the most widely used tricyclic antidepressant (TCA). Although amitriptyline hydrochloride 10 and 25 mg has been marketed in Korea, no data on the dose proportionality of amitriptyline in Korean subjects are available. This clinical trial was designed to evaluate and compare the relative bioavailability with regard to dose proportionality between the two marketed strengths of amitriptyline hydrochloride tablets after a single-dose, oral administration under fasting conditions in healthy, male, Korean volunteers. Methods: This single-dose, randomized, open-label, 2-way crossover study was conducted in healthy male Korean subjects. Subjects were randomly assigned to 1 of 2 dose groups and received a single dose of 10 or 25 mg amitriptyline hydrochloride under fasting conditions, followed by the alternate dose in the subsequent study period. High performance liquid chromatography (HPLC)-mass spectrometry (MS)/ MS detection was applied to determine plasma concentrations. Pharmacokinetic parameters were calculated, Cmax, AUClast, AUC0-∞, t½, and Tmax. Statistical analysis was performed for the assessment of dose proportionality. Tolerability was assessed for up to 96 hours after administration. Findings: Twelve healthy Korean subjects completed this trial (mean [SD] age, 21.7 [1.9] years; height, 174.5 [5.0] cm; and weight, 66.7 [9.4] kg). Although 4 subjects experienced a total 5 adverse events (AEs), no serious AEs were reported during the study. The mean values of Cmax and AUC were proportional to the doses of 10 and 25 mg. The Cmax, AUClast, and AUC0-∞ of amitriptyline hydrochloride 10 mg were 5.96 ng/mL, 91.35 ng . h/mL and 109.74 ng . h/mL, respectively. The Cmax, AUClast, and AUC0-∞ of amitriptyline hydrochloride 25 mg were 17.69 ng/mL, 260.68 ng . h/mL, and 296.87 ng . h/ mL, respectively. Implications: Our results suggest that the 2 strengths of amitriptyline hydrochloride (10 and 25 mg) exhibited linear (dose-dependent) pharmacokinetics in these healthy, male, Korean subjects. Based on these results, a predictable and linear increase in systemic exposure can be expected. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Purpose: Platelet-function suppression with antiplatelet therapy is effective in preventing and treating cardiovascular disease. Clopidogrel is a thienopyridine derivative that blocks platelet activation by adenosine diphosphate receptor binding. This study demonstrates the effects of generic clopidogrel bisulfate in comparison to branded clopidogrel bisulfate in patients with acute coronary syndromes. Methods: This prospective, 2-arm, single-center, open-label trial used 1:1 randomization to assign patients to receive generic or branded clopidogrel bisulfate. Patients with unstable angina or non-STsegment elevation myocardial infarction and scheduled to undergo coronary angiography were enrolled. Platelet function was measured with a P2Y12 assay and reported in P2Y12 reaction units (PRU) and aspirin reaction units (ARU) after randomization. Platelet function was measured at 2, 4, 8, and 24 hours after 600-mg clopidogrel loading. The clinical outcome was checked at 1 month after coronary angiography. Findings: Ninety-five patients were enrolled and randomized to the generic or branded group. Ninety patients (62 men [69%], 28 women [31%]; mean age, 58 years) completed the study protocol. The clinical characteristics were similar between the 2 groups. The difference in the baseline PRU measurements between the generic and branded groups was not significant (274.8 [59.7] vs 285.4 [62.4], respectively; P=0.414). There were significant differences in 2-hour PRU (231.1 [71.3] vs 266.9 [67.4]; P=0.017) and 4-hour PRU (227.3 [80.4] vs 265.7 [71.0]; P=0.020); however, 24-hour PRU (200.5 [82.1] vs 220.6 [75.8]; P= 0.253) was similar. No death, myocardial infarction, target lesion revascularization, stent thrombosis, or Thrombolysis in Myocardial Infarction-defined major bleeding complications were reported during in-hospital stay or 1-month followup. Implication: In patients with ACS, loading of generic clopidogrel bisulfate was associated with an antiplatelet effect comparable to that of branded clopidogrel bisulfate. ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT02060786. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Purpose: The aim of this study was to determine whether the efficacy and tolerability of amlodipine camsylate/ losartan 5/100 mg/d (AML/LOS) are noninferior to those of losartan/hydrochlorothiazide 100/12.5 mg/d (LOS/HCTZ) fixed-dose combination in hypertensive patients unresponsive to losartan 100-mg/d monotherapy. Methods: Male and female patients aged ⩾18 years with hypertension despite 4-week, stable treatment with losartan 100-mg/d monotherapy were eligible for inclusion in this multicenter, randomized, double-blind study. Patients were randomly assigned to receive AML/LOS or LOS/HCTZ once daily for 8 weeks. The primary end point was the change from baseline to week 8 in sitting diastolic blood pressure (ΔsiDBP), and the secondary end points were the changes from baseline to 4 weeks in siDBP and sitting systolic BP (ΔsiSBP) and changes from baseline to 4 and 8 weeks in BP response rate. Tolerability was evaluated by physical examination, including vital sign measurement; laboratory analysis; and ECG. Findings: Of 275 patients screened at 9 cardiovascular centers, 199 were enrolled (AML/LOS, n = 101; LOS/HCTZ, n = 98), and 183 completed the study. The demographic characteristics were similar between the 2 groups (mean age, 51.56 [9.97] years; men, 70.53%). At 8 weeks, the mean ΔsiDBP values were -11.54 (7.89) and -9.05 (6.57) mm Hg in the AML/LOS and LOS/HCTZ groups, respectively (both, P < 0.0001 vs baseline). The mean difference between the 2 groups was -2.57 mm Hg, a nonsignificant difference, meaning that AML/LOS was noninferior to LOS/HCTZ with regard to the primary end point. At 8 weeks, the mean uric acid level was changed significantly from baseline in the LOS/HCTZ group (+0.41 [0.80] mg/dL; P < 0.0001) but not in the AML/LOS group (-0.12 [0.82] mg/dL), representing a significant intergroup difference (P < 0.0001). Nineteen patients each in the AML/LOS (18.81%) and LOS/HCTZ (20.00%) groups experienced ⩾1 adverse event, with 4 (3.96%) and 3 (3.16%) patients, respectively, experiencing 1 or more events considered by the investigators to have been treatment related. Implications: The efficacy and tolerability of AML/ LOS 5/100 mg/d was found to have been noninferior to those of LOS/HCTZ 100/12.5 mg/d in these hypertensive patients nonresponsive to losartan 100-mg/d monotherapy. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Purpose: Evening administration of the conventional immediate-release (IR) formulation of simvastatin is recommended because of its short half-life (1.9 hours). In a healthy population, morning administration of a controlled-release (CR) formulation of simvastatin was shown to have equivalent lipidlowering efficacy and a safety profile similar to that of evening doses of IR simvastatin. The present study aimed to verify noninferiority and to compare the safety of morning administration of CR simvastatin with that of evening administration of IR simvastatin in patients with chronic kidney disease (CKD) who have dyslipidemia. Methods: The present study was a prospective, multicenter, double-blind, Phase IV trial with an active comparator. We randomly assigned 122 patients with CKD and dyslipidemia to 1 of 2 drug administration groups: morning administration of CR simvastatin 20 mg (test group) and evening administration of IR simvastatin 20 mg (control group). After 8 weeks, the treatment outcomes and adverse effects of the 2 treatments were compared. Findings: The mean (SD) percentage of change in serum LDL-C at the end of treatment was -35.1% (15.7%) for the test group and -35.6% (14.6%) for the control group. The difference between the 2 groups was not significant (P -- 0.858). The 95% CI of the difference in the percentage of change of LDL-C between the test and control groups was -6.0 to 5.0. There was no difference in the percentage of change of total cholesterol (-24.3% [12.5%] vs -26.5% [12.0%], P -- 0.317), triglyceride (-10.6% [35.1%] vs -12.4% [33.2%], P -- 0.575) and HDL-C (10.2% [20.7%] vs 4.5% [11.4%], P -- 0.064). Treatmentrelated adverse events were similar in both groups (10 events in the test group vs 8 events in the control group, P -- 0.691). Implications: The efficacy of morning administration of CR simvastatin was noninferior to evening administration of IR simvastatin in patients with CKD. Furthermore, the safety profile analysis showed no significant difference between the 2 treatments. Morning administration of CR simvastatin is expected to increase patient compliance and therefore better control of dyslipidemia in CKD patients. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Fimasartan, a selective angiotensin II type 1 receptor blocker, was approved in Korea for the treatment of patients with mild to moderate hypertension. Objective: The aim of this study was to evaluate the 24-hour blood pressure (BP) profiles before and after 8-week treatment with fimasartan and to compare them with those of valsartan. Methods: A multicenter, randomized, double-blind, active-controlled, parallel-group study was conducted using ambulatory BP monitoring (ABPM). Korean patients with mild to moderate essential hypertension were enrolled and randomly received once-daily oral fimasartan 60 or 120 mg or valsartan 80 mg for 8 weeks. ABPM was performed before and after 8-week treatment, and clinic BP was also measured. Based on ABPM data, trough-to-peak ratio and smoothness index were derived. Tolerability was monitored throughout the study. Results: Ninety-two patients were enrolled (mean [SD] age, 54.1 [8.2] years; weight, 67.9 [10.2] kg). After 8 weeks, 24-hour, daytime, and nighttime mean ambulatory systolic and diastolic BPs (SBP and DBP, respectively) were significantly decreased in all 3 treatment groups (range: SBP, -9.2 to -15.6 mm Hg; DBP, -5.0 to -10.7 mm Hg; P <0.0001-<0.05). The global trough-to-peak ratios of ambulatory DBP in the fimasartan groups were 0.74 (60 mg/d) and 0.81 (120 mg/d)--45.1% and 58.8% higher, respectively, than the ratio of 0.51 in the valsartan group. Fima-sartan 60 mg/d was associated with 53.5% (SBP) and 68.3% (DBP) greater smoothness index scores com-pared with those with valsartan 80 mg/d (SBP, 1.52 vs. 0.99; DBP, 1.38 vs. 0.82). The decrease in clinic-measured DBP was significantly greater in the fima-sartan 60-mg/d group compared with that in the valsartan 80-mg/d group (-14.0 vs -8.7 mm Hg; P = 0.0380). Fimasartan was well tolerated; headache was the most common adverse event. Conclusion: Once-daily fimasartan effectively main-tained a BP-reduction profile over the full 24-hour dosing interval; this profile was comparable to or slightly better than that of once-daily valsartan. Fimasartan was well tolerated; headache was the most common adverse event. ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT00922441. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Flexibility in the recommended dosing time for a statin may improve patient compliance. Objective: This study was designed to compare the efficacy and tolerability of morning and evening doses of controlled-release simvastatin in Korean adults with dyslipidemia. It was carried out as a requirement to obtain authorization from the Korean regulatory agency to market the product. Methods: In this prospective, randomized, double- blind, multicenter, placebo-controlled Phase III study, we randomly assigned 132 patients with hypercholes-terolemia to a morning-dose group or an evening-dose group. Patients in the morning-dose group received 20 mg controlled-release simvastatin in the morning and a placebo in the evening, and those in the evening-dose group received a placebo in the morning and 20 mg controlled-release simvastatin in the evening. Results: After 8 weeks of the treatment, the differ-ence in the mean change of LDL-C between the morning-dose and evening-dose groups was --2.78% (95% confidence interval, --7.65 to 2.10). The changes in total cholesterol, triglycerides, HDL-C, apolipoprotein A1, apolipoprotein B, and lipoprotein (a) after treatment did not differ between groups Also, the achievement rates of the target LDL-C goal suggested by the dyslipidemia treatment guideline of the Korean Society of Lipidology and Atherosclerosis were not different. No serious adverse event was observed in either group. Mild and moderate adverse events were observed similarly in both groups. Conclusions: Although controlled-release simvasta-tin significantly reduces LDL-C levels with good tolerability in Korean adults with dyslipidemia, the time of administration does not affect its efficacy. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]