Comparative pharmacokinetics and bioavailability of tapentadol following oral administration of immediate- and prolonged-release formulations

Objective: To evaluate the bioavailability and pharmacokinetics of orally administered tapentadol immediate release (IR) compared with tapentadol prolonged release (PR). Methods: Three randomized, open-label, crossover studies were conducted in subjects under fasted conditions. Studies 1 and 2 determined the absolute bioavailability and pharmacokinetics of oral tapentadol IR 86 mg and tapentadol PR 86 mg, respectively, relative to a 34-mg intravenous (i.v.) dose of tapentadol. Study 3 determined the relative bioavailability of tapentadol PR 86 mg vs. tapentadol IR 86 mg. Pharmacokinetic parameters were calculated using non-compartmental analysis and relative bioavailability using dose-adjusted, log-transformed analysis of variance models for maximum concentration (C-max) and areas under the serum concentration-time curve (AUC(0-t) and AUC). Adverse events (AEs), vital signs, 12-lead electrocardiograms (ECGs), and laboratory parameters were assessed. Results: Absolute bioavailability was estimated to be 32% (95% confidence interval (CI), 29.4 - 34.8%; n = 24) for tapentadol IR 86 mg and 32% (95% CI, 28.0 - 35.9%; n = 18) for tapentadol PR 86 mg. Based on AUC, the relative bioavailability of tapentadol PR vs. tapentadol IR was 96% (90% CI, 87.8 - 104.4%; n = 16). Following IV administration, tapentadol had an elimination half-life of similar to 4 hours; in Studies 1 and 2, respectively, mean tapentadol volumes of distribution were 540 and 4711, and mean clearance was 1,531 and 1,603 ml/min Compared to tapentadol IR 86 mg, the prolonged-release characteristics of tapentadol PR 86 mg were evident with a lower C-max (22.5 ng/ml vs. 64.2 ng/ml), a longer time to C-max (5.0 h vs. 1.5 h), a higher half-value duration (HVD: 12.5 h vs. 3.6 h), and a longer mean residence time (MRT: 10.6 h vs. 6.0 h). The most common AEs reported were dizziness, headache, fatigue, nausea, somnolence, and dry mouth; most AEs were mild. No clinically relevant changes in vital signs, ECG parameters, or laboratory values were observed. Conclusions: Absolute bioavailability for both tapentadol IR and tapentadol PR was similar to 32% under fasted conditions. Extent of exposure (AUC) for tapentadol PR was very similar to tapentadol IR, whereas C-max was lower and HVD/MRT longer for the prolonged-release formulation. Overall, the pharmacokinetic characteristics of tapentadol PR enable a twice-daily dosing regimen to be used; such a regimen is expected to improve patient compliance during chronic use.