Abstract
The bioequivalence of two nilvadipine products was evaluated in 16 normal male volunteers (age 22-32 yr, body weight 57-80 kg) following sidle oral dose. Test product was Overca $l_{R}$ tablet (Choong-Wae Pharm. Corp., Korea) and reference product was Nivadi $l_{R}$ tablet (Hyundai Pharm. Corp., Korea). Both products contain 4 mg of nilvadipine. One tablet of the test or the reference product was administered to the volunteers, respectively, by randomized two period cross-over study (2$\times$2 Latin square method). The determination of nilvadipine was accomplished using a validated capillary column GC with electron-capture detection. As a result of the assay validation, the quantiflcation of nilvadipine in human plasma by this technique was possible down to 0.5 ng/ml using 1 ml of plasma. Absolute overall recovery from five replicate analyses of nilvadipine-spiked sample were 88.4$\pm$ 10.24% (mean$\pm$ 5.D.) for human plasma of 10 ng/ml. The coefficients of variation (C.V.) were less than 20% and the actual concentration of nilvadipine measured by GC ranged from 80 to 99% in all plasma. Average drug concentrations at each sampling time and pharmacokinetic parameters calculated were not significantly different between two products (p>0.05); the area under the curve from time zero to 8 hr (AUCo-$_{8 hr}$) (22.8$\pm$5.90 vs 22.2$\pm$6.10 ng . hr/ml), maximum plasma concentration ( $C_{max}$) (10.0$\pm$2.85 vs 9.3$\pm$3.28 ng/ml) and time to reach maximum plasma concentration ( $T_{max}$) (1.2$\pm$0.31 vs 1.3 $\pm$0.47 hr). The differences of mean AU $Co_{8hr}$ $C_{max}$, and $T_{max}$ between the two products (2.25, 7.65, and 10.30%, respectively) were less than 20%. The power (1-$\beta$) and treaeent difference (7) for AU $Co_{8hr}$, and $C_{max}$ were more than 0.8 and less than 0.2, respectively. Although the power for Tmax was under 0.8, Tm\ulcorner of the two products was not significantly different from each other (p>0. 05). These results suggest that the bioavailability of Overeat tablet is not significantly different from that of Nivadil tablet. Therefore, two products are bioequivalent based on the current results.sults.lts.lts.lts.
