Background：Decreases in the bioavailability of rifampicin （RFP） can lead to the development of drug resistance and treatment failure.Therefore,we investigated the relative bioavailability of RFP from one four-drug ...Background：Decreases in the bioavailability of rifampicin （RFP） can lead to the development of drug resistance and treatment failure.Therefore,we investigated the relative bioavailability of RFP from one four-drug fixed-dose combination （FDC; formulation A） and three two-drug FDCs （formulations B,C,and D） used in China,compared with RFP in free combinations of these drugs （reference）,in healthy volunteers.Methods：Eighteen and twenty healthy Chinese male volunteers participated in two open-label,randomized two-period crossover （formulations A and C） or one three-period crossover （formulations B and D） study,respectively.The washout period between treatments was 7 days.Bioequivalence was assessed based on 90％ confidence intervals,according to two one-sided t-tests.All analyses were done with DAS 3.1.5 （Mathematical Pharmacology Professional Committee of China,Shanghai,China）.Results：Mean pharmacokinetic parameter values of RFP obtained for formulations A,B,C,and D products were 11.42 ± 3.41 μg/ml,7.86 ± 5.78 μg/ml,13.05 ± 6.80 μg/ml,and 16.18 ± 3.87 μg/ml,respectively,for peak plasma concentration （Cmax）,91.43± 30.82 μg·h-1 ·ml-1,55.49 ± 37.58 μg·h-1·ml-1,96.50 ± 47.24 μg·h-1·ml-1,101.47 ± 33.07 μg·h-1·ml-1,respectively,for area under the concentration-time curve （AUC0-2,4 h）.Conclusions：Although the concentrations of RFP for formulations A,C,and D were within the reported acceptable therapeutic range,only formulation A was bioequivalent to the reference product.The three two-drug FDCs （formulations B,C and D） displayed inferior RFP bioavailability compared with the reference （Chinese Clinical Trials registration number：ChiCTR-TTRCC-12002451）.展开更多
To the Editor： A patient presented with oral mucosa, ulcerated pain, and limitation of mouth opening from January 2016. Local doctors diagnosed him with oral ulcer and prescribed courses of related medicine which did...To the Editor： A patient presented with oral mucosa, ulcerated pain, and limitation of mouth opening from January 2016. Local doctors diagnosed him with oral ulcer and prescribed courses of related medicine which did not relieve symptoms. Frozen section of oral mucosa （March 31, 2016） showed granulomatous reaction [Figure 1 ]. He was referred to our hospital.展开更多
文摘Background：Decreases in the bioavailability of rifampicin （RFP） can lead to the development of drug resistance and treatment failure.Therefore,we investigated the relative bioavailability of RFP from one four-drug fixed-dose combination （FDC; formulation A） and three two-drug FDCs （formulations B,C,and D） used in China,compared with RFP in free combinations of these drugs （reference）,in healthy volunteers.Methods：Eighteen and twenty healthy Chinese male volunteers participated in two open-label,randomized two-period crossover （formulations A and C） or one three-period crossover （formulations B and D） study,respectively.The washout period between treatments was 7 days.Bioequivalence was assessed based on 90％ confidence intervals,according to two one-sided t-tests.All analyses were done with DAS 3.1.5 （Mathematical Pharmacology Professional Committee of China,Shanghai,China）.Results：Mean pharmacokinetic parameter values of RFP obtained for formulations A,B,C,and D products were 11.42 ± 3.41 μg/ml,7.86 ± 5.78 μg/ml,13.05 ± 6.80 μg/ml,and 16.18 ± 3.87 μg/ml,respectively,for peak plasma concentration （Cmax）,91.43± 30.82 μg·h-1 ·ml-1,55.49 ± 37.58 μg·h-1·ml-1,96.50 ± 47.24 μg·h-1·ml-1,101.47 ± 33.07 μg·h-1·ml-1,respectively,for area under the concentration-time curve （AUC0-2,4 h）.Conclusions：Although the concentrations of RFP for formulations A,C,and D were within the reported acceptable therapeutic range,only formulation A was bioequivalent to the reference product.The three two-drug FDCs （formulations B,C and D） displayed inferior RFP bioavailability compared with the reference （Chinese Clinical Trials registration number：ChiCTR-TTRCC-12002451）.
文摘To the Editor： A patient presented with oral mucosa, ulcerated pain, and limitation of mouth opening from January 2016. Local doctors diagnosed him with oral ulcer and prescribed courses of related medicine which did not relieve symptoms. Frozen section of oral mucosa （March 31, 2016） showed granulomatous reaction [Figure 1 ]. He was referred to our hospital.
