Pharmacokinetic study of metformin to compare voglibose/metformin fixed-dose combination with coadministered voglibose and metformin.

Article Details

Citation
Copy to clipboard

Choi HK, Oh M, Kim EJ, Song GS, Ghim JL, Shon JH, Kim HS, Shin JG

Pharmacokinetic study of metformin to compare voglibose/metformin fixed-dose combination with coadministered voglibose and metformin.

Int J Clin Pharmacol Ther. 2015 Feb;53(2):147-53. doi: 10.5414/CP202197.

PubMed ID
25546164 [ View in PubMed
]
Abstract

The aim of this study was to compare the pharmacokinetic characteristics of metformin between a fixed-dose combination (FDC) of voglibose/metformin and coadministered individual voglibose and metformin tablets in healthy Korean volunteers under fasting conditions. A randomized, open-label, single-dose, two-treatment, two-way crossover study with a 7-day wash-out period was conducted. Plasma samples were collected for up to 24 hours and were analyzed for metformin using a validated liquid chromatography tandem mass-spectrometry (LC/MS). A noncompartmental method was used to calculate the pharmacokinetic parameters. Vital signs and adverse events were monitored, and physical examinations and laboratory tests were conducted to evaluate safety. In total, 28 subjects completed the study. The geometric mean ratio (GMR) and the 90% confidence interval (CIs) of Cmax and AUC0-t of metformin were 102.4 (94.5-111.0) and 107.1 (100.1-114.7), respectively. In total, 7 adverse drug reactions occurred in 4 subjects during the study; of these, 3 cases were from 3 subjects in the test treatment group, and 4 cases were from 3 subjects in the reference treatment group. All adverse drug reactions had been reported previously, and all subjects recovered fully without any sequelae. In conclusion, the pharmacokinetic profiles of metformin in two different study treatments, a voglibose/metformin FDC vs. the coadministration of the individual formulations, met the regulatory criteria for bioequivalence in healthy Korean subjects under fasting conditions. There was no significant difference in safety profiles between the two treatments.

DrugBank Data that Cites this Article

Drugs