ADVERTISEMENT

If you are seeing this message, you may be experiencing temporary network problems. Please wait a few minutes and refresh the page. If the problem persists, you may wish to report it to your local Network Manager.

It is also possible that your web browser is not configured or not able to display style sheets. In this case, although the visual presentation will be degraded, the site should continue to be functional. We recommend using the latest version of Microsoft or Mozilla web browser to help minimise these problems.

Wiley InterScience

< Previous Abstract  |  Next Abstract >

Save Article to My Profile      Download Citation      Request Permissions

Abstract |  References  |  Full Text: HTML, PDF (Size: 131K)  | Related Articles | Citation Tracking

Bioequivalence evaluation of two brands of cefaclor 500 mg capsules: quantification of cefaclor using solid phase extraction technique
M.Tutunji 1 , O.Jarrar 1 , M.Musameh 1 , S. M.Alam 2 Quamruzaman2 & R.Dham 2
  1 Pharmaceutical Research Unit (PRU), Amman, Jordan   2 Gulf Pharmaceutical Industries, Julphar, United Arab Emirates
Correspondence to: Dr Ruwayda Dham
Copyright Blackwell Science Ltd
KEYWORDS
bioequivalence • cefaclor • HPLC • pharmakokinetics

ABSTRACT

Objective: To assess the bioequivalence of two cefaclor 500 mg capsule formulations, and to develop a new high performance liquid chromatographic (HPLC) method using solid phase extraction technique for the quantification of cefaclor in human plasma.

Method: An open, randomized, two-way, crossover trial with a one-week washout period in 25 healthy volunteers. The two commercial brands used were Recocef® (Julphar, United Arab Emirates) as test and Ceclor® (Eli Lilly, UK) as reference product. The drug was administered with 240 mL of water after a 10-h overnight fast. After dosing, serial blood samples were collected for a period of 8 h. Plasma harvested from blood was analysed for cefaclor by a new HPLC method using a solid phase extraction technique. The limit of detection of cefaclor was 17·6 ng/mL; average recovery was 96·5%; the intraday CV was less than 8% and interday CV was less than 13%. Various pharmacokinetic parameters, including AUC0-t, AUC0-∞, Cmax, Tmax, T1/2, and Kel, were determined from plasma concentrations for both formulations. Statistical analysis (ANOVA and 90% confidence intervals) were applied to AUC0-t, AUC0-∞ and Cmax for bioequivalence evaluation of two brands. The new HPLC method with solid phase extraction circumvented the problem of mixed polarity of cefaclor and facilitated its extraction from the complex plasma matrix while keeping the background free from interference due to endogenous plasma compounds.

Results: No significant difference was observed between the two brands of cefaclor capsules.

Conclusion: Recocef® was judged bioequivalent to Ceclor,® and the two products can therefore be considered to be interchangeable in medical practice.


DIGITAL OBJECT IDENTIFIER (DOI)
10.1046/j.1365-2710.2001.00337.x About DOI

Related Articles

  • Find other articles like this in Wiley InterScience
  • Find articles in Wiley InterScience written by any of the authors

Wiley InterScience is a member of CrossRef.

Cross Ref Member