Julia M E Berends, Ettina J Wimmenhove, Marcel Hoppentocht, Paul Hagedoorn, Henderik W Frijlink, Floris Grasmeijer
{"title":"两种吸入用左旋多巴干粉产品的体内外比较:一项比较英布里加和左旋多巴Cyclops的随机试验。","authors":"Julia M E Berends, Ettina J Wimmenhove, Marcel Hoppentocht, Paul Hagedoorn, Henderik W Frijlink, Floris Grasmeijer","doi":"10.3390/pharmaceutics17091149","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p><b>Background/Objectives</b>: The pulmonary administration of levodopa enables a rapid absorption and onset of action, making it a suitable administration route for managing OFF episodes in Parkinson's disease. Currently, one dry powder product for inhalation (Inbrija) is available on the market, while another (Levodopa Cyclops) is in development. These two products differ substantially in terms of inhaler design, their use and resistance, and their powder formulations. This study aimed to investigate whether these differences translate into in vitro differences in aerosol characteristics and dissolution kinetics and whether any differences were also reflected in the in vivo performance. <b>Methods</b>: The in vitro aerosol characteristics were determined via Next Generation Impactor experiments, and the dissolution kinetics were determined with a modified paddle apparatus. A randomized crossover comparative bioavailability study with fasted healthy volunteers was conducted with Inbrija 84 mg and Levodopa Cyclops 45 mg, 90 mg, and 135 mg. <b>Results</b>: The results showed similar aerosol characteristics, but Levodopa Cyclops showed substantially faster dissolution behavior than Inbrija. Despite this in vitro difference, the pharmacokinetic profiles of Inbrija 84 mg and Levodopa Cyclops 90 mg were similar, with no differences in C<sub>max</sub>, T<sub>max</sub>, and AUC, showing bioequivalence between the two products. <b>Conclusions</b>: This suggests that the systemic absorption of levodopa via the lungs is not limited by dissolution but most likely by its permeation rate. This finding underscores the need to critically apply in vitro tests and critically interpret the results for predicting the in vivo performance of inhaled products.</p>","PeriodicalId":19894,"journal":{"name":"Pharmaceutics","volume":"17 9","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":5.5000,"publicationDate":"2025-09-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12473563/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"An In Vitro-In Vivo Comparison of Two Levodopa Dry Powder Products for Inhalation: A Randomized Trial Comparing Inbrija and Levodopa Cyclops.\",\"authors\":\"Julia M E Berends, Ettina J Wimmenhove, Marcel Hoppentocht, Paul Hagedoorn, Henderik W Frijlink, Floris Grasmeijer\",\"doi\":\"10.3390/pharmaceutics17091149\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p><b>Background/Objectives</b>: The pulmonary administration of levodopa enables a rapid absorption and onset of action, making it a suitable administration route for managing OFF episodes in Parkinson's disease. Currently, one dry powder product for inhalation (Inbrija) is available on the market, while another (Levodopa Cyclops) is in development. These two products differ substantially in terms of inhaler design, their use and resistance, and their powder formulations. This study aimed to investigate whether these differences translate into in vitro differences in aerosol characteristics and dissolution kinetics and whether any differences were also reflected in the in vivo performance. <b>Methods</b>: The in vitro aerosol characteristics were determined via Next Generation Impactor experiments, and the dissolution kinetics were determined with a modified paddle apparatus. A randomized crossover comparative bioavailability study with fasted healthy volunteers was conducted with Inbrija 84 mg and Levodopa Cyclops 45 mg, 90 mg, and 135 mg. <b>Results</b>: The results showed similar aerosol characteristics, but Levodopa Cyclops showed substantially faster dissolution behavior than Inbrija. Despite this in vitro difference, the pharmacokinetic profiles of Inbrija 84 mg and Levodopa Cyclops 90 mg were similar, with no differences in C<sub>max</sub>, T<sub>max</sub>, and AUC, showing bioequivalence between the two products. <b>Conclusions</b>: This suggests that the systemic absorption of levodopa via the lungs is not limited by dissolution but most likely by its permeation rate. This finding underscores the need to critically apply in vitro tests and critically interpret the results for predicting the in vivo performance of inhaled products.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":19894,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Pharmaceutics\",\"volume\":\"17 9\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":5.5000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-09-02\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12473563/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Pharmaceutics\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.3390/pharmaceutics17091149\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"PHARMACOLOGY & PHARMACY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Pharmaceutics","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3390/pharmaceutics17091149","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"PHARMACOLOGY & PHARMACY","Score":null,"Total":0}
An In Vitro-In Vivo Comparison of Two Levodopa Dry Powder Products for Inhalation: A Randomized Trial Comparing Inbrija and Levodopa Cyclops.
Background/Objectives: The pulmonary administration of levodopa enables a rapid absorption and onset of action, making it a suitable administration route for managing OFF episodes in Parkinson's disease. Currently, one dry powder product for inhalation (Inbrija) is available on the market, while another (Levodopa Cyclops) is in development. These two products differ substantially in terms of inhaler design, their use and resistance, and their powder formulations. This study aimed to investigate whether these differences translate into in vitro differences in aerosol characteristics and dissolution kinetics and whether any differences were also reflected in the in vivo performance. Methods: The in vitro aerosol characteristics were determined via Next Generation Impactor experiments, and the dissolution kinetics were determined with a modified paddle apparatus. A randomized crossover comparative bioavailability study with fasted healthy volunteers was conducted with Inbrija 84 mg and Levodopa Cyclops 45 mg, 90 mg, and 135 mg. Results: The results showed similar aerosol characteristics, but Levodopa Cyclops showed substantially faster dissolution behavior than Inbrija. Despite this in vitro difference, the pharmacokinetic profiles of Inbrija 84 mg and Levodopa Cyclops 90 mg were similar, with no differences in Cmax, Tmax, and AUC, showing bioequivalence between the two products. Conclusions: This suggests that the systemic absorption of levodopa via the lungs is not limited by dissolution but most likely by its permeation rate. This finding underscores the need to critically apply in vitro tests and critically interpret the results for predicting the in vivo performance of inhaled products.
PharmaceuticsPharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutics-Pharmaceutical Science
CiteScore
7.90
自引率
11.10%
发文量
2379
审稿时长
16.41 days
期刊介绍:
Pharmaceutics (ISSN 1999-4923) is an open access journal which provides an advanced forum for the science and technology of pharmaceutics and biopharmaceutics. It publishes reviews, regular research papers, communications, and short notes. Covered topics include pharmacokinetics, toxicokinetics, pharmacodynamics, pharmacogenetics and pharmacogenomics, and pharmaceutical formulation. Our aim is to encourage scientists to publish their experimental and theoretical details in as much detail as possible. There is no restriction on the length of the papers. The full experimental details must be provided so that the results can be reproduced.