Skip to main content
NCBI home page
Antimicrobial Agents and Chemotherapy logoLink to Antimicrobial Agents and Chemotherapy
. 1992 May;36(5):962–965. doi: 10.1128/aac.36.5.962

Effect of antacid on the bioavailability of cefprozil.

W C Shyu 1, R B Wilber 1, K A Pittman 1, R H Barbhaiya 1
PMCID: PMC188789  PMID: 1510420

Abstract

The effect of antacid on the bioavailability of cefprozil was investigated in a two-way crossover study. Eight healthy male subjects received a single 500-mg oral dose of cefprozil with and without coadministration of 30 ml of an antacid suspension containing magnesium hydroxide and aluminum hydroxide (Maalox). Cefprozil consists of cis and trans isomers in an approximate 90:10 ratio. When cefprozil was administered alone (treatment A), the mean maximum concentrations (Cmax) of the cis and trans isomers were 9.2 and 1.2 micrograms/ml, respectively. When cefprozil was coadministered with Maalox (treatment B), the Cmax values of the cis and trans isomers were 8.7 and 1.3 micrograms/ml, respectively. The mean values of the area under the curve from time zero to infinity (AUC0-infinity) were 27.7 and 3.5 micrograms.h/ml for treatment A and 27.5 and 3.5 micrograms.h/ml for treatment B for the cis and trans isomers, respectively. The other pharmacokinetic parameters, time to Cmax, elimination half-life, mean residence time, renal clearance, and percent urinary excretion, were essentially the same for the two isomers. The respective values of the elimination half-life for the cis and trans isomers were 1.36 and 1.32 h for treatment A and 1.36 and 1.42 h for treatment B. Mean urinary excretion was 63 and 60% for treatment A and 58 and 56% for treatment B for the cis and trans isomers, respectively. No significant differences between the two treatments were found for any of the pharmacokinetic parameters for either isomer. For the cis isomer, bioavailability point estimates (90% confidence intervals) of the mean Cmax and AUG0-infinity values for the Maalox treatment relative to those for the reference treatment were 95% (87%, 103%) and 99% (95%, 104%), respectively. For the trans isomer, the value were 109% (92%, 126%) for Cmax and 97% (88%, 106%) for AUC0-infinity. On the basis of the results of this study, it is concluded that the bioavailability of cefprozil is not affected by the coadministration of Maalox.

Full text

PDF
962

Selected References

These references are in PubMed. This may not be the complete list of references from this article.

  1. Barbhaiya R. H., Gleason C. R., Shyu W. C., Wilber R. B., Martin R. R., Pittman K. A. Phase I study of single-dose BMY-28100, a new oral cephalosporin. Antimicrob Agents Chemother. 1990 Feb;34(2):202–205. doi: 10.1128/aac.34.2.202. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  2. Barbhaiya R. H., Shukla U. A., Gleason C. R., Shyu W. C., Pittman K. A. Comparison of the effects of food on the pharmacokinetics of cefprozil and cefaclor. Antimicrob Agents Chemother. 1990 Jun;34(6):1210–1213. doi: 10.1128/aac.34.6.1210. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  3. Barbhaiya R. H., Shukla U. A., Gleason C. R., Shyu W. C., Wilber R. B., Martin R. R., Pittman K. A. Phase I study of multiple-dose cefprozil and comparison with cefaclor. Antimicrob Agents Chemother. 1990 Jun;34(6):1198–1203. doi: 10.1128/aac.34.6.1198. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  4. Barbhaiya R. H., Shukla U. A., Gleason C. R., Shyu W. C., Wilber R. B., Pittman K. A. Comparison of cefprozil and cefaclor pharmacokinetics and tissue penetration. Antimicrob Agents Chemother. 1990 Jun;34(6):1204–1209. doi: 10.1128/aac.34.6.1204. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  5. Blouin R. A., Kneer J., Ambros R. J., Stoeckel K. Influence of antacid and ranitidine on the pharmacokinetics of oral cefetamet pivoxil. Antimicrob Agents Chemother. 1990 Sep;34(9):1744–1748. doi: 10.1128/aac.34.9.1744. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  6. Chin N. X., Neu H. C. Comparative antibacterial activity of a new oral cephalosporin, BMY-28100. Antimicrob Agents Chemother. 1987 Mar;31(3):480–483. doi: 10.1128/aac.31.3.480. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  7. Deppermann K. M., Lode H., Höffken G., Tschink G., Kalz C., Koeppe P. Influence of ranitidine, pirenzepine, and aluminum magnesium hydroxide on the bioavailability of various antibiotics, including amoxicillin, cephalexin, doxycycline, and amoxicillin-clavulanic acid. Antimicrob Agents Chemother. 1989 Nov;33(11):1901–1907. doi: 10.1128/aac.33.11.1901. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  8. Eliopoulos G. M., Reiszner E., Wennersten C., Moellering R. C., Jr In vitro activity of BMY-28100, a new oral cephalosporin. Antimicrob Agents Chemother. 1987 Apr;31(4):653–656. doi: 10.1128/aac.31.4.653. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  9. Healy D. P., Sahai J. V., Sterling L. P., Racht E. M. Influence of an antacid containing aluminum and magnesium on the pharmacokinetics of cefixime. Antimicrob Agents Chemother. 1989 Nov;33(11):1994–1997. doi: 10.1128/aac.33.11.1994. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  10. Hughes G. S., Heald D. L., Barker K. B., Patel R. K., Spillers C. R., Watts K. C., Batts D. H., Euler A. R. The effects of gastric pH and food on the pharmacokinetics of a new oral cephalosporin, cefpodoxime proxetil. Clin Pharmacol Ther. 1989 Dec;46(6):674–685. doi: 10.1038/clpt.1989.204. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  11. Leitner F., Pursiano T. A., Buck R. E., Tsai Y. H., Chisholm D. R., Misiek M., Desiderio J. V., Kessler R. E. BMY 28100, a new oral cephalosporin. Antimicrob Agents Chemother. 1987 Feb;31(2):238–243. doi: 10.1128/aac.31.2.238. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  12. Lode H. Drug interactions with quinolones. Rev Infect Dis. 1988 Jan-Feb;10 (Suppl 1):S132–S136. doi: 10.1093/clinids/10.supplement_1.s132. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  13. Petitjean O., Brion N., Tod M., Montagne A., Nicolas P. Etude de l'interaction pharmacocinétique entre le céfixime et deux antiacides. Résultats préliminaires. Presse Med. 1989 Oct 11;18(32):1596–1598. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  14. Riegelman S., Collier P. The application of statistical moment theory to the evaluation of in vivo dissolution time and absorption time. J Pharmacokinet Biopharm. 1980 Oct;8(5):509–534. doi: 10.1007/BF01059549. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  15. Schuirmann D. J. A comparison of the two one-sided tests procedure and the power approach for assessing the equivalence of average bioavailability. J Pharmacokinet Biopharm. 1987 Dec;15(6):657–680. doi: 10.1007/BF01068419. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  16. Shyu W. C., Pittman K. A., Wilber R. B., Matzke G. R., Barbhaiya R. H. Pharmacokinetics of cefprozil in healthy subjects and patients with renal impairment. J Clin Pharmacol. 1991 Apr;31(4):362–371. doi: 10.1002/j.1552-4604.1991.tb03719.x. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  17. Shyu W. C., Shukla U. A., Shah V. R., Papp E. A., Barbhaiya R. H. Simultaneous high-performance liquid chromatographic analysis of cefprozil diastereomers in a pharmacokinetic study. Pharm Res. 1991 Aug;8(8):992–996. doi: 10.1023/a:1015896722170. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  18. Shyu W. C., Wilber R. B., Pittman K. A., Garg D. C., Barbhaiya R. H. Pharmacokinetics of cefprozil in healthy subjects and patients with hepatic impairment. J Clin Pharmacol. 1991 Apr;31(4):372–376. doi: 10.1002/j.1552-4604.1991.tb03720.x. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  19. Sommers D. K., van Wyk M., Moncrieff J., Schoeman H. S. Influence of food and reduced gastric acidity on the bioavailability of bacampicillin and cefuroxime axetil. Br J Clin Pharmacol. 1984 Oct;18(4):535–539. doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2125.1984.tb02501.x. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

Articles from Antimicrobial Agents and Chemotherapy are provided here courtesy of American Society for Microbiology (ASM)

RESOURCES