Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item: https://ahro.austin.org.au/austinjspui/handle/1/13151
Full metadata record
DC FieldValueLanguage
dc.contributor.authorConway, Elizabeth Len
dc.contributor.authorO'Callaghan, Christopher Jen
dc.contributor.authorDrummer, Olaf Hen
dc.contributor.authorHowes, L Gen
dc.contributor.authorLouis, William Jen
dc.date.accessioned2015-05-16T02:56:22Z
dc.date.available2015-05-16T02:56:22Z
dc.date.issued1994-04-01en
dc.identifier.citationBiopharmaceutics & Drug Disposition; 15(3): 253-61en
dc.identifier.govdoc7880985en
dc.identifier.otherPUBMEDen
dc.identifier.urihttps://ahro.austin.org.au/austinjspui/handle/1/13151en
dc.description.abstractThe oral bioavailability of aluminium was compared after administration of 1 g sucralphate as either a tablet or a suspension (1 g/5 ml) in a crossover study in 16 healthy volunteers. Aluminium levels were detectable in all subjects pre-dose (21.4 +/- 8.8 micrograms l-1 before tablet; 21.4 +/- 7.4 micrograms l-1 before suspension) and there was a measurable increase in the plasma concentrations of aluminium in all subjects after administration of the suspension, and in 14 of the subjects after administration of the tablet formulation, with Cmax reached within the first 8 h in most subjects. Plasma levels were still elevated 72 h after dosing. The variability in plasma levels of aluminium was significantly higher after administration of the suspension (CV 39-53%) than after administration of the tablet (CV 29-44%), reflecting greater absorption of aluminium from the suspension formulation in three subjects. Similarly, the variance of the Cmax, AUC(0-72 h), and AUC(0-infinity) (for both the raw data and the baseline adjusted data) were all higher for the suspension than for the tablet. A point estimate of the difference of the pharmacokinetic parameters (determined from the median of the arithmetic Walsh averages) indicated little or no difference in Cmax, Tmax, or AUC(0-infinity) in the two formulations. In summary, the performance of the suspension formulation of sucralphate is more variable than the tablet formulation in vivo and some patients may therefore have higher circulating levels of aluminium on therapy with the suspension formulation.en
dc.language.isoenen
dc.subject.otherAdministration, Oralen
dc.subject.otherAdulten
dc.subject.otherAluminum.blooden
dc.subject.otherAluminum Compounds.adverse effects.pharmacokineticsen
dc.subject.otherBiological Availabilityen
dc.subject.otherFemaleen
dc.subject.otherFormularies as Topicen
dc.subject.otherHumansen
dc.subject.otherMaleen
dc.subject.otherSucralfate.adverse effects.pharmacokineticsen
dc.titleA single-dose comparison of the bioavailability of aluminium from two formulations of sucralphate in normal volunteers.en
dc.typeJournal Articleen
dc.identifier.journaltitleBiopharmaceutics & drug dispositionen
dc.identifier.affiliationDepartment of Clinical Pharmacology & Therapeutics, Austin Hospital, Heidelberg, Victoria, Australiaen
dc.description.pages253-61en
dc.relation.urlhttps://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/7880985en
dc.type.austinJournal Articleen
local.name.researcherLouis, William J
item.fulltextNo Fulltext-
item.openairecristypehttp://purl.org/coar/resource_type/c_18cf-
item.languageiso639-1en-
item.openairetypeJournal Article-
item.grantfulltextnone-
item.cerifentitytypePublications-
crisitem.author.deptClinical Pharmacology and Therapeutics-
crisitem.author.deptClinical Pharmacology and Therapeutics-
Appears in Collections:Journal articles
Show simple item record

Page view(s)

12
checked on May 26, 2024

Google ScholarTM

Check


Items in AHRO are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.