4.4 Article

In-vitro-in-silico investigation of the negative food effect of zolpidem when administered as immediate-release tablets

期刊

JOURNAL OF PHARMACY AND PHARMACOLOGY
卷 71, 期 11, 页码 1663-1676

出版社

OXFORD UNIV PRESS
DOI: 10.1111/jphp.13161

关键词

biorelevant dissolution; food effect; in-vitro-in-vivo correlation; PBPK modelling; zolpidem

资金

  1. European Union [674909]
  2. Marie Curie Actions (MSCA) [674909] Funding Source: Marie Curie Actions (MSCA)

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Objectives: The main objective of the present work was to combine in-vitro and in-silico tools to better understand the in-vivo behavior of the immediate-release (IR) formulation of zolpidem in the fasted and fed states. Methods: The dissolution of zolpidem was evaluated using biorelevant media simulating the gastric and intestinal environment in the fasted and fed states. Additionally, the influence of high-viscosity and high-fat content on the release of zolpidem under fed state conditions was investigated. The in-vitro results were combined with a physiologically based pharmacokinetic (PBPK) model constructed with Simcyp to simulate the zolpidem pharmacokinetic profile in both prandial states. Key findings: Biorelevant dissolution experiments representing the fasted and fed states, combined with PBPK modelling, were able to simulate the plasma proles from the clinical food effect studies well. Experiments reflecting the pH and fat content of the meal led to a good prediction of the zolpidem plasma profile in the fed state, whereas increasing the viscosity of the gastric media led to an underprediction. Conclusions: This work demonstrates that the combination of biorelevant dissolution testing and PBPK modelling is very useful for understanding the in-vivo behavior of zolpidem in the fasted and fed states. This approach could be implemented in the development of other drugs exhibiting negative food effects, saving resources and bringing new drug products to the market faster.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.4
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据