Table 2.
Data of previous studies investigating the pharmacokinetic properties of pimobendan in dogs [all presented as arithmetic mean ± SD except for Yata et al. presented as (median, range)].
| Bell et al. (1) | Yata et al. (6) | Package insert | Her et al. (this study) | Guth et al. (21) | ||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Formulation | Capsule | Solution | IV | Solution | Tablet | Tablet | Solution | Suspension | ||||
| Route | PO | IV | PO | PO | PO | PR | PO | |||||
| Dose (mg/kg) | 0.25 | 0.125 | 0.27 | 0.25 | 0.5 | 0.5 | 0.3 | |||||
| PIM | PIM | ODMP | PIM | ODMP | PIM | ODMP | PIM | ODMP | PIM | |||
| Cmax (ng/ml) | 38.1 ± 18.3 | 39.4 ± 23.4 | 51.1 ± 28.5 | 18.6 (6.1–25.3) | 16.2 (6.0–22.3) | 3.09 ± 0.76 | 3.66 ± 1.21 | 49.1 ± 28.7 | 30.9 ± 10.4 | 10.1 ± 2 | 8.8 ± 4.8 | 7.3 ± 2.7 |
| Tmax (h) | N/A | N/A | N/A | 1.1 (0.5–2.0) | 1.3 (0.8–2.0) | 2 | 3 | 2.1 ± 0.9 | 3.2 ± 1.6 | 1 ± 0.4 | 1.7 ± 1.1 | 3.2 ± 1.3 |
| AUC (ng*h/ml) | N/A | N/A | N/A | 27.1 (15.2–44.2) | 42.1 (25.1–52.7) | N/A | N/A | 148.4 ± 71.6 | 167.8 ± 36.2 | 31.1 ± 11.9 | 50.1 ± 19.2 | 22.5 ± 10.4 |
| t1/2 (h) | N/A | N/A | N/A | 0.9 (0.7–1.1) | 1.6 (1.3–1.9) | N/A | N/A | 1.8 ± 0.8 | 5.0 ± 2.7 | 2.2 ± 0.6 | 8.3 ± 4.8 | N/A |
| F | N/A | N/A | N/A | N/A | N/A | N/A | N/A | 25 ± 8 | 28 ± 6 | N/A | ||
| LLOQ (ng/ml) | 2.5 | 2.5 | 2.5 | 0.5 | 0.5 | N/A | N/A | 1 | 2 | 1 | 2 | N/A |
| Analytical method | LCMS | LCMS | LCMS | UHPLC-MS | UHPLC-MS | N/A | N/A | HPLC | HPLC | HPLC | HPLC | N/A |
AUC, area under the concentration vs.-time curve; Cmax, maximum plasma concentration; F, relative bioavailability; LCMS, normal-phase liquid chromatography–mass spectrometry analysis assay; LLOQ, lower limit of quantification; ODMP, o-desmethyl-pimobendan; PIM, pimobendan; PO, per os; PR, per rectum; t1/2, disappearance half-life; Tmax, time to maximum concentration; UHPLC-MS, ultra-high-performance liquid chromatography–mass spectrometer assay.