口服和舌下赛庚啶的药代动力学比较。

Narendra Gunja, Michael Collins, Andis Graudins
{"title":"口服和舌下赛庚啶的药代动力学比较。","authors":"Narendra Gunja,&nbsp;Michael Collins,&nbsp;Andis Graudins","doi":"10.1081/clt-120028749","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Cyproheptadine is reported to be effective in treating serotonin syndrome. It is only available as an oral preparation and administration after SSRI overdose treated with activated charcoal is problematic. Sublingual administration may circumvent this problem. The pharmacokinetics of sublingual cyproheptadine are not characterized. This study compares the pharmacokinetics of cyproheptadine following oral and sublingual administration.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Cross-over, non-blinded, volunteer study using five healthy males. Eight milligrams of oral and sublingual cyproheptadine were administered on separate occasions with a one-week washout period. Sublingual arm subjects were pretreated with 50 g of oral activated charcoal 30 min prior to cyproheptadine, to prevent any gut absorption. Serum cyproheptadine concentration was measured at baseline, 30 min, and 1, 2, 3, 4, 6, 8, and 10 h by liquid chromatography and mass spectroscopy.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Mean C(max) for oral and sublingual were 30.0 microg/L and 4.0 microg/L respectively: mean T(max) were 4 h and 9.6 h; mean AUC were 209 and 25 microg x hr/L. Mean +/- SEM within-subject difference between oral and sublingual C(max) was 25.9 +/- 4.1 (p = 0.003) and AUC was 184 +/- 31 (p = 0.004).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Serum concentrations after sublingual cyproheptadine are significantly less than after oral administration. At these concentrations, the sublingual route is unlikely to be effective in treating serotonin syndrome.</p>","PeriodicalId":17447,"journal":{"name":"Journal of toxicology. Clinical toxicology","volume":"42 1","pages":"79-83"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2004-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1081/clt-120028749","citationCount":"14","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"A comparison of the pharmacokinetics of oral and sublingual cyproheptadine.\",\"authors\":\"Narendra Gunja,&nbsp;Michael Collins,&nbsp;Andis Graudins\",\"doi\":\"10.1081/clt-120028749\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Cyproheptadine is reported to be effective in treating serotonin syndrome. It is only available as an oral preparation and administration after SSRI overdose treated with activated charcoal is problematic. Sublingual administration may circumvent this problem. The pharmacokinetics of sublingual cyproheptadine are not characterized. This study compares the pharmacokinetics of cyproheptadine following oral and sublingual administration.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Cross-over, non-blinded, volunteer study using five healthy males. Eight milligrams of oral and sublingual cyproheptadine were administered on separate occasions with a one-week washout period. Sublingual arm subjects were pretreated with 50 g of oral activated charcoal 30 min prior to cyproheptadine, to prevent any gut absorption. Serum cyproheptadine concentration was measured at baseline, 30 min, and 1, 2, 3, 4, 6, 8, and 10 h by liquid chromatography and mass spectroscopy.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Mean C(max) for oral and sublingual were 30.0 microg/L and 4.0 microg/L respectively: mean T(max) were 4 h and 9.6 h; mean AUC were 209 and 25 microg x hr/L. Mean +/- SEM within-subject difference between oral and sublingual C(max) was 25.9 +/- 4.1 (p = 0.003) and AUC was 184 +/- 31 (p = 0.004).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Serum concentrations after sublingual cyproheptadine are significantly less than after oral administration. At these concentrations, the sublingual route is unlikely to be effective in treating serotonin syndrome.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":17447,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of toxicology. Clinical toxicology\",\"volume\":\"42 1\",\"pages\":\"79-83\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2004-01-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1081/clt-120028749\",\"citationCount\":\"14\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of toxicology. Clinical toxicology\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1081/clt-120028749\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of toxicology. Clinical toxicology","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1081/clt-120028749","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 14

摘要

背景:据报道,赛庚啶可有效治疗血清素综合征。它只能作为口服制剂,在SSRI过量使用活性炭治疗后给药是有问题的。舌下给药可以避免这个问题。舌下赛庚啶的药代动力学尚未确定。本研究比较了口服和舌下给药的赛庚啶的药代动力学。方法:5名健康男性进行交叉、非盲、自愿研究。8毫克的口服和舌下赛庚啶在不同的场合进行,并有一周的洗脱期。舌下臂受试者在使用赛庚啶前30分钟用50g口服活性炭预处理,以防止任何肠道吸收。采用液相色谱和质谱法分别在基线、30 min和1、2、3、4、6、8和10 h测定血清赛庚啶浓度。结果:口腔和舌下平均C(max)分别为30.0和4.0 μ g/L;平均T(max)分别为4 h和9.6 h;平均AUC分别为209和25 μ g × hr/L。口腔和舌下C的受试者内平均+/- SEM差异(max)为25.9 +/- 4.1 (p = 0.003), AUC为184 +/- 31 (p = 0.004)。结论:舌下给药后血药浓度明显低于口服给药后。在这些浓度下,舌下途径不太可能有效治疗血清素综合征。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
A comparison of the pharmacokinetics of oral and sublingual cyproheptadine.

Background: Cyproheptadine is reported to be effective in treating serotonin syndrome. It is only available as an oral preparation and administration after SSRI overdose treated with activated charcoal is problematic. Sublingual administration may circumvent this problem. The pharmacokinetics of sublingual cyproheptadine are not characterized. This study compares the pharmacokinetics of cyproheptadine following oral and sublingual administration.

Methods: Cross-over, non-blinded, volunteer study using five healthy males. Eight milligrams of oral and sublingual cyproheptadine were administered on separate occasions with a one-week washout period. Sublingual arm subjects were pretreated with 50 g of oral activated charcoal 30 min prior to cyproheptadine, to prevent any gut absorption. Serum cyproheptadine concentration was measured at baseline, 30 min, and 1, 2, 3, 4, 6, 8, and 10 h by liquid chromatography and mass spectroscopy.

Results: Mean C(max) for oral and sublingual were 30.0 microg/L and 4.0 microg/L respectively: mean T(max) were 4 h and 9.6 h; mean AUC were 209 and 25 microg x hr/L. Mean +/- SEM within-subject difference between oral and sublingual C(max) was 25.9 +/- 4.1 (p = 0.003) and AUC was 184 +/- 31 (p = 0.004).

Conclusions: Serum concentrations after sublingual cyproheptadine are significantly less than after oral administration. At these concentrations, the sublingual route is unlikely to be effective in treating serotonin syndrome.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信