Pharmacodynamics and kinetics of omeprazole MUPS 20 mg and pantoprazole 40 mg during repeated oral administration in Helicobacter pylori-negative subjects

Alimentary Pharmacology and Therapeutics

Volumn 14, Issue 8, 2000, Pages 1057-1064

  Geus, W P ^a   Mathot R A A ^b   Mulder, P G H ^c   Lamers, C B H W ^d  

^a LEYENBURG HOSPITAL   (Netherlands)

^b SLOTERVAART HOSPITAL   (Netherlands)

^c ERASMUS UNIVERSITY ROTTERDAM   (Netherlands)

^d NONE

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

OMEPRAZOLE; PANTOPRAZOLE; PROTON PUMP INHIBITOR;

ADULT; AREA UNDER THE CURVE; ARTICLE; CLINICAL TRIAL; CONTROLLED CLINICAL TRIAL; CONTROLLED STUDY; CROSSOVER PROCEDURE; DRUG FORMULATION; FEMALE; HUMAN; HUMAN EXPERIMENT; MALE; PHARMACODYNAMICS; PRIORITY JOURNAL; RANDOMIZED CONTROLLED TRIAL; STOMACH PH; TABLET;

2-PYRIDINYLMETHYLSULFINYLBENZIMIDAZOLES; ADMINISTRATION, ORAL; ADOLESCENT; ADULT; ANTI-ULCER AGENTS; BENZIMIDAZOLES; DRUG ADMINISTRATION SCHEDULE; FEMALE; GASTRIC ACIDITY DETERMINATION; HUMANS; HYDROGEN-ION CONCENTRATION; MALE; OMEPRAZOLE; SULFOXIDES; TABLETS, ENTERIC-COATED;

EID: 0033861797     PISSN: 02692813     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1046/j.1365-2036.2000.00806.x     Document Type: Article

References (21)

1. 1 Lindberg P, Nordberg P, Alminger T, Brandström A, Wallmark B. The mechanism of action of the gastric acid secretion inhibitor omeprazole. J Med Chem 1986; 29: 1327-9.
2. 2 Shin JM, Besancon M, Prinz C, Simon A, Sachs G. Continuing development of acid pump inhibitors: site of action of pantoprazole. Aliment Pharmacol Ther 1994; 8(Suppl. 1): 11-23.
3. 3 Andersson T. Pharmacokinetics, metabolism and interactions of acid pump inhibitors. Focus on omeprazole, lansoprazole and pantoprazole. Clin Pharmacokinet 1996; 31: 9-28.
4. 4 Meyer UA. Metabolic interactions of the proton pump inhibitors lansoprazole, omeprazole and pantoprazole with other drugs. Eur J Gastroenterol Hepatol 1996; 8(Suppl. 1): S21-5.
5. 5 Meyer JH, Porter-Fink V, Elashof J, Dressman J, Amidon GL. Human postcibal gastric emptying of 1-3 mm spheres. Gastroenterology 1988; 94: 1315-25.
6. 6 Meyer JH. Delivery of pancreatin in microsphere preparations: transit, timing, physiological needs. In: Lankisch, PG. ed. Pancreatic Enzymes in Health and Disease. Berlin-Heidelberg: Springer-Verlag, 1991: 71-88.
7. 7 Hartmann M, Theiss U, Huber R, et al. Twenty-four-hour intragastric pH profiles and pharmacokinetics following single and repeated oral administration of the proton pump inhibitor pantoprazole in comparison to omeprazole. Aliment Pharmacol Ther 1996; 10: 359-66.
8. 8 Mossner J, Holscher AH, Herz R, Schneider A. A double-blind study of pantoprazole and omeprazole in the treatment of reflux oesophagitis: a multicentre trial. Aliment Pharmacol Ther 1995; 9: 321-6.
9. 9 Rehner M, Rohner HG, Schepp W. Comparison of pantoprazole versus omeprazole in the treatment of acute duodenal ulceration - a multicentre study. Aliment Pharmacol Ther 1995; 9: 411-6.
10. 10 Veenendaal RA, Götz JM, Schroijen V, et al. Diagnosis of Helicobacter pylori infection by specific gastric mucosal IgA and IgG pylori antibodies. J Clin Pathol 1995; 48: 990-3.
11. 11 Lagerström P-O, Persson B-A. Determination of omeprazole and metabolites in plasma and urine by liquid chromatography. J Chromatogr 1984; 309: 347-56.
12. 12 Geus WP, Mulder PGH, Nicolai JJ, van den Boomgaard DM, Lamers CBHW. Acid-inhibitory effects of omeprazole and lansoprazole in Helicobacter pylori-negative healthy subjects. Aliment Pharmacol Ther 1998; 12: 329-35.
13. 13 Geus WP, Smout AJPM, Kooiman JC, Lamers CBHW, Geus JW. Glass and antimony electrodes for long-term pH monitoring: a dynamic in vitro comparison. Eur J Gastroenterol Hepatol 1995; 7: 29-35.
14. 14 Andersson T, Andrèn K, Cedeberg C, Lagerström PO, Lundborg P, Skånberg I. Pharmacokinetics and bioavailability of omeprazole after single and repeated oral administration in healthy subjects. Br J Clin Pharmacol 1990; 29: 557-63.
15. 15 Cederberg C, Röhss K, Lundborg P, Olbe L. Effect of once daily intravenous and oral omeprazole on 24-hour intragastric acidity in healthy subjects. Scand J Gastroenterol 1993; 18: 179-84.
16. 16 Kromer W. Similarities and differences in the properties of substituted benzimidazoles: a comparison between pantoprazole and related compounds. Digestion 1995; 56: 443-54.
17. 17 Ehrlich A, Lücker PW, Wiedemann A, Sander P, Huber R, Mascher H. Comparison of the pharmacodynamics and pharmacokinetics of pantoprazole (40 g) as compared to omeprazole MUPS (20 mg) after repeated oral dose administration. Meth Find Exp Clin Pharmacol 1999; 21: 47-51.
18. 18 Burget DW, Chiverton SG, Hunt RH. Is there an optimal degree of acid suppression for healing of duodenal ulcers? A model of the relationship between ulcer healing and acid suppression. Gastroenterology 1990; 99: 345-51.
19. 19 Bell NJ, Burget D, Howden CW, Wilkinson J, Hunt RH. Appropriate acid suppression for the management of gastrooesophageal reflux disease. Digestion 1992; 51(Suppl. 1): 59-67.
20. 20 Howden CW, Burget DW, Hunt RH. Appropriate acid suppression for optimal healing of duodenal ulcer and gastrooesophageal reflux disease. Scand J Gastroenterol 1994; 201(Suppl.): 79-82.
21. 21 Mulder CJJ, Westerveld BD, Smit JM, et al. A comparison of omeprazole MUPS 20 mg, lansoprazole 30 mg and pantoprazole 40 mg in the treatment of reflux oesophagitis: a multicenter trial. Gut 1999; 45(Suppl. V): A39(Abstract).