DISCREPANCY BETWEEN BIOAVAILABILITY AND HYPOTENSIVE EFFECT OF ORAL AND SUBLINGUAL NIFEDIPINE

J. A. Palma-Aguirre,M. A. Montoya-Cabrera,P. du Souich,C. Hoyo‐Vadillo,F. Flores-Murrieta,G. Castañeda-Hernández
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1097/00045391-199501000-00002
1995-01-01
American Journal of Therapeutics
Abstract:Nifedipine, 10-mg capsules, were given orally and sublingually to six healthy volunteers according to a randomized crossover design. Nifedipine plasma levels, blood pressure, and heart rate were determined at several times after medication. Cmax was higher (134 ± 17 vs. 93 ± 2 ngml-1, mean ± SD, P < 0.01) and occurred earlier (0.5 vs. 1 h) with oral than with sublingual nifedipine. However, there was no significant difference in AUC (268 ± 56 vs. 288 ± 35 ng h ml-1) nor in f1/2 (1.8 ± 0.2 vs. 1.9 ± 0.3 h), indicating that sublingual administration decreased the rate but not the extent of nifedipine absorption. Notwithstanding the difference in Cmax, both routes yielded a similar reduction in diastolic blood pressure of 13 ± 1 mm Hg. Heart rate increase, which reflects the activation of homeostatic mechanisms, was greater with oral than with sublingual nifedipine, that is, 18 ± 1 vs. 13 ± 1 beats min1, P < 0.01. It is concluded that slower absorption after sublingual administration increases nifedipine hypotensive efficiency by producing less counteracting homeostatic responses than the more rapidly absorbed oral nifedipine.
What problem does this paper attempt to address?