The Annals
home help contact us subscription past issues search current issue
 QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced]


     


Drug Intelligence & Clinical Pharmacy: Vol. 18, No. 2, pp. 147-153.
© 1984 Harvey Whitney Books Company.
This Article
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow Articles Ahead of Print
Right arrow [Order Reprint]
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Kotzan, J.
Right arrow Articles by Brown, W.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Kotzan, J.
Right arrow Articles by Brown, W.


Research Articles

An in vivo single- and multiple-dose study of several marketed brands of conventional and controlled-release theophylline

JA Kotzan, JV Vallner, JT Stewart, IL Honigberg, and WJ Brown

In a single-dose study, 18 healthy adult males consumed each of six dosage forms of theophylline. A conventional-release tablet, a syrup, and four competing brands of controlled-release theophylline were studied. Serial serum samples were obtained and analyzed via high pressure liquid chromatography (HPLC). After achieving steady state, 15 healthy adult males consumed each of five dosage forms of theophylline in a multiple-dose study. Serial blood samples were obtained between 0 and 72 hours and subjected to analysis with HPLC. The results indicated that the controlled-release products were not bioequivalent, although they achieved longer time-to-peak values than did the immediate-release syrup and the conventional-release tablet. A single sustained-release product was uniquely different on most pharmacokinetic parameters when compared with the remaining three controlled-release products. In general, the dosage form variation exceeded the individual subject variation on the single-dose study, but the opposite was true for the multiple-dose study.





homecopy help contact us subscription past issues search current issue
Copyright © 1984 by Harvey Whitney Books Company.