Bioequivalence and Pharmacokinetics Study of Two Zidovudine/Lamivudine Tablets in Chinese Healthy Volunteers

• Published in: Clinical pharmacology in drug development Vol. 13; no. 1; pp. 14 - 20
• Main Authors: Huang, Xiaomei, Wang, Gongzhu, Huang, Jian, Liang, Wu, Guan, Huiyu, Liu, Haisha, Deng, Yuan, You, Yu, Zhang, Bikui
• Format: Journal Article
• Language: English
• Published: United States Wiley Subscription Services, Inc 01.01.2024
• Subjects: Antiretroviral drugs; Bioequivalence; Chinese healthy subjects; lamivudine; Pharmacokinetics; Variance analysis; zidovudine; pharmacokinetics; Chinese healthy subjects; zidovudine; bioequivalence; lamivudine
• ISSN: 2160-763X; 2160-7648; 2160-7648
• DOI: 10.1002/cpdd.1335

Zidovudine/lamivudine tablets are nucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitors that are used to treat human immunodeficiency virus. The objective of this study was to investigate the bioequivalence and pharmacokinetics (PKs) of test and reference preparations of zidovudine/lamivudine tablets in healthy Chinese subjects. We designed a randomized, open, single‐center, single‐dose, 2‐crossover experiment with a 7‐day washout period involving 20 healthy subjects. The subjects were given a single dose of the test or reference preparation after fasting overnight for 10 hours. Blood samples were subsequently collected at scheduled time points from 0 hour (preadministration) up to 24 hours postadministration. The plasma concentrations of zidovudine and lamivudine were determined by a validated ultra‐performance liquid chromatography‐tandem mass spectrometry method. Analysis of variance (ANOVA) was used to compare differences in the mean values of key PK parameters between the 2 preparations. Bioequivalence was evaluated by 2 one‐sided t‐tests and 90% confidence intervals (CIs) of the geometric mean ratio (GMR). In total, 19 of the 20 subjects completed the trial. Based on the analysis of PK parameters, the relative bioavailability of zidovudine and lamivudine was 101.1% ± 2.0% and 100.3% ± 1.5%, respectively. ANOVA found no significant difference in primary PK parameters when compared between the 2 formulations, and the 90% CIs of the GMR of the 2 formulations were within the bioequivalence margins of 80%–125%. No serious adverse events occurred. Thus, we confirmed that the 2 preparations were bioequivalent in healthy Chinese volunteers. Our analysis demonstrated that both products showed good tolerance in all subjects.