This Article Full Text (PDF) References Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Citation Map Services Email this article to a friend Similar articles in this journal Similar articles in PubMed Alert me to new issues of the journal Add to Saved Citations Download to citation manager Request Permissions Request Reprints Add to My Marked Citations Citing Articles Citing Articles via Google Scholar Citing Articles via Scopus Google Scholar Articles by Bhavnani, B. R. Articles by Milne, J. K. Search for Related Content PubMed PubMed Citation Articles by Bhavnani, B. R. Articles by Nisker, J. A. Articles by Martin, J. Articles by Aletebi, F. Articles by Watson, L. Articles by Milne, J. K. Pubmed/NCBI databases Compound via MeSH Substance via MeSH Hazardous Substances DB ESTRADIOL ESTROGENIC SUBSTANCES, CONJUGATED ESTRONE Social Bookmarking                         What's this?

Comparison of Pharmacokinetics of a Conjugated Equine Estrogen Preparation (Premarin) and a Synthetic Mixture of Estrogens (C.E.S.) in Postmenopausal Women

Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, University of Western Ontario, London, Ontario; Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, University of Toronto, and St. Michael's Hospital, Inner City Health Program, Toronto, Ontario, Canada; bhavnani{at}smh.toronto.on.ca

Jeffrey A. Nisker, MD

Jim Martin, MD

Fatma Aletebi, MD

Lynn Watson, RN

J. Kenneth Milne, MD

Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, University of Western Ontario, London, Ontario; Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, University of Toronto, and St. Michael's Hospital, Inner City Health Program, Toronto, Ontario, Canada

Objective: To compare the pharmacokinetics and relative bioavailabilities of key estrogen components of Premarin (Wyeth-Ayerst, Canada) with those of a generic conjugated estrogen preparation, C.E.S. (synthetic mixture of estrogens; ICN, Montreal, Canada) in healthy postmenopausal women.

Methods: We conducted a randomized, single-dose, two-treatment, three-period crossover study in 41 postmenopausal women. After an oral dose (2 x 0.625 mg) of Premarin or C.E.S., plasma concentrations of unconjugated and total estrone (E₁), equilin (Eq), 17ß-estradiol (17ß-E₂), 17ß-dihydroequilin (17ß-Eq), ⁸-esterone (⁸-E₁) and ⁸, 17ß-estradiol (⁸, 17ß-E₂) were measured over 72 hours using gas chromatography and mass spectroscopy.

Results: After administration of C.E.S., E₁, Eq, and 17ß-Eq appeared in blood at a significantly faster rate (lower t_max) than after Premarin. The rapid appearance of estrogens after C.E.S. was associated with significantly higher (14-61%) C_max values. In contrast to the high C_max values, the area under the curve (AUC) of unconjugated and total Eq, and 17ß-Eq were significantly lower after C.E.S., whereas those of E₁ were significantly higher. Although, the t_max values for 17ß-E₂ were lower than the C_max values higher after C.E.S., only the C_max of unconjugated 17ß-E₂ was significantly different after Premarin. Unconjugated and total ⁸-E₁ and its main metabolite, ⁸, 17ß-E₂, were detectable in plasma only after administration of Premarin. The geometric mean ratio (GMR) (C.E.S./Premarin) of bioavailability parameters indicated that all C_max and t_max values for the unconjugated and total E₁, Eq, 17ß-E₂, and 17ß-Eq fell outside the regulatory requirement that the 90% confidence intervals of GMRs of two products be within 80% and 125%. Similarly, with the exception of total E₁ and total Eq, none of the AUC_t or AUC of the remaining estrogens meets the required regulatory standards of bioequivalence.

Conclusions: C.E.S. is not bioequivalent to Premarin. Because C.E.S. also is not pharmaceutically equivalent to Premarin, it cannot be assumed to be therapeutically equivalent. Until long-term clinical trials with C.E.S. demonstrate its efficacy, extrapolation of the long-term benefits described for Premarin to C.E.S. would be risky and questionable.

Key Words: Estrone • equilin • 17ß-estradiol • 17ß-dihydroequlin • 8-estrone • bioavailability of conjugated estrogens

Journal of the Society for Gynecologic Investigation, Vol. 7, No. 3, 175-183 (2000)
DOI: 10.1177/107155760000700307


CiteULike    Complore    Connotea    Del.icio.us    Digg    Reddit    Technorati    Twitter    What's this?