Pharmacokinetics and Pharmacogenomics of Bupropion in Three Different Formulations with Different Release Kinetics in Healthy Human Volunteers
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The purpose of this pharmacokinetics (PK) study was to investigate whether different release kinetics from bupropion hydrochloride (HCl) immediate release (IR), sustained release (SR), and extended release (ER) formulations alter its metabolism and to test the hypothesis that the unsuccessful bioequivalence (BE) study of the higher strength (300 mg) of bupropion HCl ER tablets based on the successful BE study of the lower strength (150 mg) was due to metabolic saturation in the gastrointestinal (GI) lumen. A randomized six-way crossover study was conducted in healthy volunteers. During each period, subjects took a single dose of IR (75/100 mg), SR (100/150 mg), or ER (150/300 mg) formulations of bupropion HCl; plasma samples for PK analysis were collected from 0-96 h for all formulations. In addition, each subject's whole blood was collected for the genotyping of various single-nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) of bupropion's major metabolic enzymes. The data indicates that the relative bioavailability of the ER formulations was 72.3-78.8% compared with IR 75 mg. No differences were observed for ratio of the area under the curve (AUC) of metabolite to AUC of parent for the three major metabolites. The pharmacogenomics analysis suggested no statistically significant correlation between polymorphisms and PK parameters of the various formulations. Altogether, these data suggested that the different release kinetics of the formulations did not change metabolites-to-parent ratio. Therefore, the differing BE result between the 150 and 300 mg bupropion HCl ER tablets was unlikely due to the metabolic saturation in the GI lumen caused by different release patterns.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".