Search

The use of water medications is a common practice in the US swine industry to treat and prevent infections in swine herds with minimal labor and without risk of needle breakage. There are concerns that FDA-approved withdrawal times (WDT) may be inadequate for several water medications when exporting pork products to countries where MRLs (maximum residue limits) are lower than US tolerance levels. In this study, withdrawal intervals (WDI) were estimated for pigs when dosed with tetracycline and sulfamethazine in water. The WDI were calculated using the FDA tolerance method (TLM) and a population-based pharmacokinetic method (PopPK). The estimated WDIs (14-16 days using TLM) were similar to the approved WDT of 15 days for sulfamethazine. However, the PopPK method extended WDIs for both sulfamethazine (19-20 days) and tetracycline (12 days) compared to the currently approved WDTs in the U.S. This study also identified potential differences in WDI between weanling and finisher pigs. In conclusion, the TLM may not always provide adequate WDT for foreign export markets especially when MRLs differ from tolerance levels approved for US markets. However, PopPK methods can provide conservative WDIs in situations with considerable variability in medication exposure such as with administration in water., (Copyright © 2015 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Sulfamethazine is often used to treat disease in the swine industry. Sulfamethazine is available as water or feed medication and historically (over the past 40 years) has been associated with residue violations in both the United States and Europe. Despite sulfamethazine's approval for use as a water medication, little research on the pharmacokinetics of the water formulation is available. Therefore, a pilot study was performed to determine the plasma levels of an approved sulfamethazine water medication. Plasma levels in pigs treated with an oral bolus (250 mg/kg), which is equivalent to the total drug consumed within a 24-h period, achieved therapeutic concentrations (50 microg/ml). Noncompartmental-based pharmacokinetic model parameters for clearance, half-life, and volume of distribution were consistent with previously published values in swine. However, the above treatment resulted in exposure of pen mates to sulfamethazine at levels currently above tolerance (0.1 ppm). Using a physiologically based pharmacokinetic model, the treatment dose simulation was compared with observed plasma levels of treated pigs. Flexibility of the physiologically based pharmacokinetic model also allowed simulation of control-pig plasma levels to estimate contamination exposure. A simulated exposure to 0.15 mg/kg twice within approximately 8 h resulted in detectable levels of sulfamethazine in the control pigs. After initial exposure, a much lower dose of 0.059 mg/kg maintained the contamination levels above tolerance for at least 3 days. These results are of concern for producers and veterinarians, because in commercial farms, the entire barn is often treated,and environmental contamination could result in residues of an unknown duration.

Twelve calves aged 6-10 months, and 12 calves aged 10-16 months were turned out onto a permanent pasture known to have been contaminated with oocysts of Eimeria alabamensis during the previous year. Two days after turnout, six of the older calves and six of the younger were each treated with one bolus per 200 kg bodyweight containing 1.6 g baquiloprim and 14.4 g sulphadimidine. The other 12 calves were left untreated. The excretion of Eimeria oocysts, the faecal dry matter and the weight gain of treated and untreated calves within each age group were compared during the first 3 weeks on pasture to assess the efficacy of the bolus in preventing E. alabamensis coccidiosis. All the older of the untreated calves and four of the younger developed gruel-like to watery diarrhoea 4-7 days after turnout. The faecal consistency of the treated calves remained firm and they lost significantly less weight than the control calves during the first 13 days on pasture. The treated calves also excreted significantly fewer oocysts during the first 20 days of grazing; their oocyst excretion remained low during days 8-10 when all but one of the diarrhoeic control calves excreted more than 850,000 oocysts per gram faeces (OPG). Starting on days 12 to 14 the oocyst excretion of 8 of the treated calves increased to 20,000-65,000 OPG and of 2 calves to 210,000-240,000 OPG. There was no difference in oocyst output between treated and untreated calves from the fourth week of grazing and no difference in weight gain among the younger calves. In the older calves there was a tendency for the untreated calves to gain more weight than treated calves.

The bioavailability of seven commercial trisulfapyrimidine suspensions was studied in 14 adult male volunteers. Fifteen blood samples were collected over a 48-hr period following administration of a 1-g dose of each suspension. Serum was assayed for each component (sulfadiazine, sulfamerazine, and sulfamethazine) by high-pressure liquid chromatography. Analysis of variance indicated several significant differences among the seven commercial preparations with respect to Cmax Tmax, and AUC for sulfadiazine, sulfamerazine, and sulfamethazine, The in vitro behavior of each suspension was then studied by the paddle method of the Food and Drug Administration. A 0.5-ml sample was introduced into 900 ml of hydrochloric acid (2.2 x 10(-4) M) at 37 degree and dissolved using a paddle speed of 25 rpm. Samples withdrawn at 15 and 30 min were analyzed by high-pressure liquid chromatography, and the percent of sulfadiazine, sulfamerazine, and sulfamethazine was calculated. Significant correlation was obtained between an in vivo parameter (Cmax for sulfadiazine) and an in vitro parameter (percent sulfadiazine dissolved in 30 min). Results indicate that this method is suitable for the in vitro screening of trisulapyrimidine suspensions.

The plasma and urine data obtained following intravenous administration of sulfamethazine to cattle were fit to a one-compartment pharmacokinetic model with a half-life of elimination of 9 hr and a volume of distribution of 0.35 liter/kg. Sulfamethazine was eliminated by excretion of unchanged sulfamethazine (18%) into urine and by formation of three metabolites subsequently excreted into urine. Sulfamethazine also was administered as a solution, a rapid-release bolus, and a sustained-release bolus. The change in the urinary metabolic pattern with different routes of administration suggested that first-pass metabolism was occurring during the absorption process. The absorption half-life was 6 hr. The absorption process for the two solid boluses kinetically appeared to include a dissolution step.