Effect of sucralfate on the absorption and pharmacokinetics of chlorpropamide

Lack of effect of sucralfate on the absorption and pharmacokinetics of rosiglitazone

The aim of the present study was to investigate the effect of sucralfate pretreatment on the pharmacokinetics of rosiglitazone following a single oral dose in healthy male volunteers. After an over night fast, and according to a randomized schedule, each volunteer (n = 9) received a single oral dose of rosiglitazone 8 mg (Avandia tablets, 4 mg x 2) with or without pretreatment of sucralfate 2 g (Recolfate tablets, 1 g x 2) in an open-label crossover study with a 2-week washout period. Plasma samples were collected over a period of 24 hours at regular intervals. Safety assessment included monitoring of the vital signs, blood parameters, and ECG. No statistically significant differences (p > 0.05) were observed for any of the calculated rosiglitazone pharmacokinetic parameters in the two treatment groups. The mean parameters, AUC0-infinity and Cmax, following rosiglitazone administration alone were 3825.02 ng x h/ml and 664.47 ng/ml, respectively, and for rosiglitazone administered after pretreatment with sucralfate were 4848.19 ng x h/ml and 624.88 ng/ml, respectively. The t(max) for rosiglitazone alone and for rosiglitazone after sucralfate treatments was 1.11 and 1.67 hours, respectively. The mean elimination half-life for rosiglitazone and rosiglitazone after sucralfate treatment was 4.35 and 4.51 hours, respectively. Fraction of rosiglitazone absorbed was calculated by the Wagner-Nelson method, and no statistically significant difference (p > 0.05) was observed for the two treatments. Since sucralfate pretreatment did not show any significant difference in the pharmacokinetics of rosiglitazone, no dose adjustment is warranted for rosiglitazone when it is administered with sucralfate.

Effect of concurrent sucralfate administration on the absorption of erythromycin

To determine the influence of sucralfate on the absorption of erythromycin, prior to evaluating its efficacy in decreasing erythromycin-associated gastrointestinal (GI) intolerance, we assessed pharmacokinetic parameters in six healthy adult volunteers. Erythromycin ethylsuccinate administered alone or with sucralfate as a single dose was compared. Sucralfate did not significantly alter the elimination rate constant, half-life, or area under the curve for erythromycin ethylsuccinate. It is therefore unlikely that efficacy of erythromycin ethylsuccinate will be altered when sucralfate is coadministered.

Sucralfate reduces the gastrointestinal absorption of norfloxacin

The effect of sucralfate on the bioavailability of norfloxacin after single 400-mg doses of norfloxacin was evaluated in eight healthy males. Subjects received each of the following treatments in random sequence: (i), norfloxacin, 400 mg alone; (ii) sucralfate, 1 g, concurrently with norfloxacin, 400 mg; and (iii) sucralfate, 1 g, followed by norfloxacin, 400 mg, 2 h later. One day before administration of treatments 2 and 3, 1 g of sucralfate was given at 7 a.m., 11 a.m., 5 p.m., and 10 p.m. Blood samples were collected immediately before the norfloxacin dose and at 0.25, 0.5, 0.75, 1.0, 1.5, 2, 3, 4, 6, 8, 12, and 24 h postdose. Urine was collected in divided intervals: from 0 to 12, from 12 to 24, and from 24 to 48 h. Norfloxacin concentrations in plasma and urine were determined by high-performance liquid chromatography. Mean area under the plasma concentration-versus-time curve extrapolated to infinity decreased significantly (P less than 0.001) after norfloxacin was given with and 2 h after sucralfate. The relative bioavailabilities were 1.8% when norfloxacin was taken with sucralfate and 56.6% when it was taken 2 h after sucralfate. After norfloxacin was given alone, the mean norfloxacin concentrations in urine collected during intervals of 0 to 12, 12 to 24, and 24 to 28 h were 118.9 +/- 72.3, 18.8 +/- 12.5, and 2.4 +/- 2.2 micrograms/ml, respectively. After norfloxacin was given with sucralfate, however, the mean norfloxacin concentrations in urine collected during the same time intervals were 6.8 +/- 4.7, 1.8 +/- 1.4, and 0 +/- 0 microgram/ml, respectively. Because of low pH and relatively high magnesium concentration in urine, susceptibilities of bacteria in urine are 8- to 32-fold lower than in broth. This fact, in combination with the reduced bioavailability of norfloxacin in the presence of sucralfate or antacids, is likely to result in treatment failure. The effect of sucralfate given after norfloxacin was not examined, nor was the effect of sucralfate given more than 2 h before norfloxacin. Administration or norfloxacin with sucralfate should therefore by avoided.