Key result
Unlicensed liquid captopril formulations fail to achieve bioequivalence compared to licensed tablets.
Why the study?
Unlicensed liquid captopril formulations are commonly used in children with heart disease but their bioequivalence to the licensed tablet form is unknown.
Are unlicensed liquid captopril formulations bioequivalent to the licensed tablet form in healthy adult volunteers?
RCT (n=18)
Open-label
Randomized
Are unlicensed liquid captopril formulations bioequivalent to the licensed tablet form in healthy adult volunteers?
Unlicensed liquid captopril formulations are not bioequivalent to the licensed tablet form, highlighting the need for careful monitoring when substituting formulations in pediatric patients.
Unlicensed captopril liquids failed bioequivalence in adults; substitution in children warrants caution and prospective pediatric pharmacokinetic studies.
OBJECTIVE: Unlicensed liquid captopril formulations are commonly used to treat children with heart disease. This study assessed the bioequivalence of two liquid preparations against a licensed tablet form. DESIGN: An open label, single dose, three-treatment, three-period, crossover trial. SETTING: Outpatient. PATIENTS: Healthy adult volunteers (n=18). INTERVENTIONS: Each subject was randomly assigned to one of six dosing sequences, and dosed with 25 mg captopril on each of three dosing visits separated by a washout of at least 14 days. Blood samples for pharmacokinetic analysis were taken at regular intervals (0 min to 10 h) post-dose. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Bioequivalence of the formulations would be concluded if the 90% CI for the estimated ratio of the means of C(max) (maximum plasma concentrations) and area under curve(AUC) (extent of absorption) lay entirely within the range 0.8 to 1.25 RESULTS: Both liquid formulations failed the bioequivalence assessment with respect to C(max) and AUC. The 90% CI of the mean ratios of liquid/licensed tablet for both C(max) and AUC, fell outside the 0.8 to 1.25 limits. There was also considerable within-subject variability in C(max) (97.5%) and AUC (78.5%). CONCLUSIONS: Unlicensed captopril formulations are not bioequivalent to the licensed tablet form, or to each other, and so cannot be assumed to behave similarly in therapeutic use. Thus formulation substitution must be done with care and may require a period of increased monitoring of the patient. There is also significant within-subject variability in performance which has clinical implications with respect to titrating to an optimum therapeutic dose.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Mulla et al. (2010) conducted an RCT in Healthy (n=18). Unlicensed liquid captopril formulations vs. Licensed captopril tablet was evaluated on Bioequivalence based on Cmax and AUC. Two unlicensed liquid captopril formulations failed to demonstrate bioequivalence to a licensed tablet, with 90% CIs for Cmax and AUC falling outside the 0.8 to 1.25 limits.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: