Indexé dans
- Base de données des revues académiques
- Ouvrir la porte J
- Genamics JournalSeek
- Clés académiques
- JournalTOCs
- Infrastructure nationale des connaissances en Chine (CNKI)
- CiteFactor
- Scimago
- Répertoire des périodiques d'Ulrich
- Bibliothèque des revues électroniques
- RechercheRef
- Université Hamdard
- EBSCO AZ
- OCLC - WorldCat
- Catalogue en ligne SWB
- Bibliothèque virtuelle de biologie (vifabio)
- Publions
- MIAR
- Commission des bourses universitaires
- Fondation genevoise pour la formation et la recherche médicales
- Pub européen
- Google Scholar
Liens utiles
Partager cette page
Dépliant de journal
Revues en libre accès
- Agriculture et aquaculture
- Alimentation et nutrition
- Biochimie
- Bioinformatique et biologie des systèmes
- Business & Management
- Chimie
- Génétique et biologie moléculaire
- Immunologie & Microbiologie
- Ingénierie
- La science des matériaux
- Neurosciences & Psychologie
- Science générale
- Sciences cliniques
- Sciences environnementales
- Sciences médicales
- Sciences pharmaceutiques
- Sciences vétérinaires
- Soins infirmiers et soins de santé
Abstrait
Study to Determine Bioequivalence of Three Ceftiofur Crystalline Free Acid in Pigs
Luis Ocampo-Camberos, Minerva Monroy-Barreto, Agustín Nieto-Carmona, Juan Angel Jaime, Lilia Gutierrez
Background: Antimicrobial resistance has the potential to affect sustainable development goals in food-producing livestock. Poor quality antibacterial pharmaceutical preparations significantly contribute to heighten this problem. Bioequivalence (BE) studies are very important for the development of dependable pharmaceutical preparations.
Methods: In this trial 3 Ceftiofur Crystalline Free Acid (CCFA) pharmaceutical preparations (1 reference and 2 experimental), intended for swine medicine and freely sold in Mexico, were tested to assess as to whether or not they can be regarded as generic ones.
Results: Three commercially available products of CCFA containing 200 mg of ceftiofur crystalline free acid were compared taking Excede® brand as reference preparation and preparations A and B as experimental ones. Thirty-six Landrace/Duroc pigs randomly divided into three groups received a single injection in phase 1 and after a washout period the same procedure was repeated in a crossover phase. Based on PK data obtained through HPLC analytical recollection of serum concentrations of ceftiofur, it is possible to conclude that preparations A and B cannot be regarded as bioequivalent to Excede® in pigs given that AUC0-168, MRT and K½el values obtained from preparations A and B are statistically different beyond a 20% limit from the corresponding ones obtained for the reference preparation, with confidence intervals >0.05.
Conclusion: Based on the area under the concentration vs time curve from zero to 168 h, mean residence time, and elimination constant values obtained from preparations A and B it is possible to conclude that they cannot be regarded as bioequivalent to Excede® in pigs (CI>0.05).