| 1. |
- Bergquist, Filip, et al.
(författare)
-
Pharmacokinetics of Intravenously (DIZ101), Subcutaneously (DIZ102), and Intestinally (LCIG) Infused Levodopa in Advanced Parkinson Disease
- 2022
-
Ingår i: Neurology. - : Lippincott, Williams & Wilkins. - 0028-3878 .- 1526-632X. ; 99:10, s. E965-E976
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Background and Objectives Intestinal levodopa/carbidopa gel infusion (LCIG) is superior to oral treatment in advanced Parkinson disease. The primary objective of this trial was to investigate whether continuous subcutaneous or intravenous infusion with a continuously buffered acidic levodopa/carbidopa solution yields steady-state plasma concentrations of levodopa that are equivalent in magnitude, and noninferior in variability, to those obtained with LCIG in patients with advanced Parkinson disease. Methods A concentrated acidic levodopa/carbidopa (8:1) solution buffered continuously and administered intravenously (DIZ101) or subcutaneously (DIZ102) was compared with an approved LCIG in a randomized, 3-period crossover, open-label, multicenter trial. Formulations were infused for 16 hours to patients with Parkinson disease who were using LCIG as their regular treatment. Patients were recruited from several university neurology clinics but came to the same phase I unit for treatment. Pharmacokinetic variables and safety including dermal tolerance are reported. The primary outcomes were bioequivalence and noninferior variability of DIZ101 and DIZ102 vs LCIG with respect to levodopa plasma concentrations. Results With dosing adjusted to estimated bioavailability, DIZ101 and DIZ102 produced levodopa plasma levels within standard bioequivalence limits compared with LCIG in the 18 participants who received all treatments. Although the levodopa bioavailability for DIZ102 was complete, it was 80% for LCIG. Therapeutic concentrations of levodopa were reached as quickly with subcutaneous administration of DIZ102 as with LCIG and remained stable throughout the infusions. Owing to poor uptake of LCIG, carbidopa levels in plasma were higher with DIZ101 and DIZ102 than with the former. All individuals receiving any of the treatments (n = 20) were included in the evaluation of safety and tolerability. Reactions at the infusion sites were mild and transient. Discussion It is feasible to rapidly achieve high and stable levodopa concentrations by means of continuous buffering of a subcutaneously administered acidic levodopa/carbidopa-containing solution.
|
|
| 2. |
- Nyholm, Dag, et al.
(författare)
-
Pharmacokinetics of levodopa/carbidopa microtablets versus levodopa/benserazide and levodopa/carbidopa in healthy volunteers
- 2012
-
Ingår i: Clinical neuropharmacology. - 0362-5664 .- 1537-162X. ; 35:3, s. 111-117
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- OBJECTIVES: To compare bioavailability and pharmacokinetics of single doses of 3 different levodopa formulations given orally in healthy volunteers. Two marketed formulations, standard levodopa/carbidopa, 100/25 mg (LC-100), and dispersible levodopa/benserazide, 100/25 mg (LB-100), were used as reference formulations for a newly developed dispersible microtablet formulation of levodopa/carbidopa, 5/1.25 mg (LC-5). The microtablets are intended for individualized dosing of levodopa/carbidopa in Parkinson disease by means of an electronic dose dispenser with a built-in diary for symptom registration. METHODS: A single-dose, open, randomized, 3-way crossover study was performed in 19 healthy subjects. Concentrations of levodopa, carbidopa, and the metabolite 3-O-MD in plasma were determined after intake of 100 mg of levodopa, that is, one tablet of reference formulations and 20 microtablets of the new formulation. RESULTS: The LC-5 microtablets were bioequivalent to the LC-100 tablets in area under the curve (AUC) and maximum concentration in plasma (Cmax) for levodopa, and to the LB-100 tablets in AUC. The dispersible levodopa/benserazide formulation showed earlier time to Cmax and significantly higher Cmax for levodopa in plasma compared to the microtablets. Carbidopa showed larger interindividual variation in AUC and Cmax than levodopa, and the bioequivalence comparison LC-5/LC-100 for this compound did not reach the target. Nevertheless, comparison of 3-O-MD levels for LC-5/LC-100, assuming proportionality to levodopa levels, demonstrated bioequivalence. CONCLUSIONS: The new levodopa/carbidopa microtablets had a pharmacokinetic profile that would allow for a convenient switch of therapy from standard tablets. Frequent dose administration of levodopa/carbidopa microtablets with an electronic dose dispenser might offer an optimal oral drug delivery in Parkinson disease.
|
|
