Cited by 12Analytical Methods in PharmaceuticalsDrug Solubulity and Delivery SystemsPharmaceutical studies and practices

Formulation and bioequivalence studies of choline alfoscerate tablet comparing with soft gelatin capsule in healthy male volunteers

Open access
Min, Mi-Hong, Park, Jin-Hyong, Hur, Jong-Hyun, Shin, Ho-Chul, Cho, Young-Joo, Kim, Dae-Duk·2019·Drug Design Development and Therapy

Abstract

Purpose: The aim of this study was to develop a tablet formulation of choline alfoscerate and to assess its bioequivalence by comparing its pharmacokinetic parameters with those of a commercially available soft gelatin capsule (Gliatilin ® ) in healthy Korean male volunteers. Materials and methods: Film-coated tablet formulation was optimized to control the hygroscopicity of choline alfoscerate. Bioequivalence study was performed under fasted condition with a randomized, single-dose, two-period crossover design. Subjects were orally treated with 1,200 mg of test or reference choline alfoscerate (400 mg × three doses) formulation. Blood samples were collected up to 12 hours the day before dosing to correct the baseline level of choline and 12 hours after dosing to obtain drug absorption profile. Pharmacokinetic parameters were determined after analyzing plasma concentration of choline by using LC–MS/MS. Results: Hygroscopicity of choline alfoscerate was successfully controlled by adding suitable amount of Neusilin ® (magnesium aluminometasilicate) in the film-coated tablet. Stability of the tablet formulation was also confirmed under the accelerated condition for 3 months. Bioequivalence study showed that the mean area under the plasma concentration–time curve from time 0 to infinity of test tablet and reference soft capsule was 3.428±2.170 and 3.305±1.803 µg·h/mL, respectively; the mean C max was 0.365±0.158 and 0.380±0.108 µg/mL, respectively; and the mean T max was 3.51±2.57 and 3.85±3.19 hours, respectively. The 90% CIs for geometric mean ratios of test to reference formulation for AUC 0–t and C max were 84.51%–111.98% and 83.31%–104.10%, respectively, and satisfied the EMA regulatory criteria for bioequivalence. Conclusion: Pharmacokinetic parameters including the C max and AUC 0–t determined after oral administration of the two formulations in healthy Korean male volunteers showed that the differences between the formulations (tablet vs soft capsule) were not significant for bioequivalence. Both formulations were well tolerated, with no serious adverse events reported. Keywords: choline alfoscerate, bioequivalence study, tablet, healthy Korean male volunteers

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.2147/dddt.s193424

Cites

11 of 11 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 1

  1. [13]The Korean Pharmacopoeia eleventh edition Choline alfoscerate capsules P1269 2014 P1269. Available from: https://nedrug.mfds.go.kr/bbs/5/1/ Accessed February 11, 2019

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Min, M.-H., Park, J.-H., Hur, J.-H., Shin, H.-C., Cho, Y.-J., & Kim, D.-D.
Affiliations
Seoul National University (KR)
Corresponding author
Kim, Dae-Duk
Venue
Drug Design Development and Therapy
Published
2019-04
Volume
Volume 13
Pages
1049-1058
ISSN
1177-8881 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2925382963
Cited by
12
References
11
Citations by year
2026: 3 · 2024: 2 · 2023: 3 · 2022: 2 · 2021: 1 · 2019: 1
FWCI
0.56
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Drug Design Development and Therapy (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Dove Medical Press (Taylor and Francis Group) (submittedVersion, cc-by-nc)
  • Seoul National University Open Repository (Seoul National University) (submittedVersion)
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Chemistry › Analytical Chemistry › Analytical Methods in Pharmaceuticals
  • Life Sciences › Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutics › Pharmaceutical Science › Drug Solubulity and Delivery Systems
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Pediatrics, Perinatology and Child Health › Pharmaceutical studies and practices
Keywords
choline alfoscerate, tablet formulation, soft gelatin capsules, bioequivalence, pharmacokinetics, film-coated tablets, hygroscopicity, tablet stability, oral drug delivery, healthy volunteers, drug formulation comparison, LC-MS/MS quantification, accelerated stability testing
MeSH terms
Adult, Capsules, Chromatography, High Pressure Liquid, Gelatin, Glycerylphosphorylcholine, Humans, Male, Middle Aged, Molecular Conformation, Tablets, Therapeutic Equivalency, Cross-Over Studies, Young Adult, Republic of Korea, Healthy Volunteers

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review