Pharmacokinetics and Safety of Esketamine in Chinese Patients Undergoing Painless Gastroscopy in Comparison with Ketamine: A Randomized, Open-Label Clinical Study

To assess the pharmacokinetics and safety of pure S-ketamine (esketamine) in Chinese patients undergoing painless gastroscopy and evaluate the potential advantage of esketamine in clinical treatment compared with racemate ketamine hydrochloride injection. A randomized, open-label, parallel-controlle...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:Drug design, development and therapy development and therapy, 2019-12, Vol.13, p.4135-4144
Hauptverfasser: Wang, Jing, Huang, Jie, Yang, Shuang, Cui, Chang, Ye, Ling, Wang, Sai-Ying, Yang, Guo-Ping, Pei, Qi
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
Beschreibung
Zusammenfassung:To assess the pharmacokinetics and safety of pure S-ketamine (esketamine) in Chinese patients undergoing painless gastroscopy and evaluate the potential advantage of esketamine in clinical treatment compared with racemate ketamine hydrochloride injection. A randomized, open-label, parallel-controlled, Phase I study was performed with 32 patients undergoing painless gastroscopy. Patients received a single dose of esketamine (0.5 mg/kg) or racemic ketamine (1 mg/kg, esketamine:R-ketamine=1:1), injected in 10 s. Blood samples were collected for pharmacokinetic analysis. The concentrations of esketamine, R-ketamine, S-norketamine, and R-norketamine were measured with a validated liquid chromatography with tandem mass spectrometry (LC-MS/MS) method. After administering a single dose of esketamine and racemate ketamine, the pharmacokinetics parameters of esketamine and S-norketamine are both similar in treatment groups. The clearance of esketamine in two groups was 18.1±3.2 and 18.4±3.4 mL/min•kg, respectively. However, in the ketamine group, esketamine has a larger clearance than R-ketamine (18.4±3.4 mL/min·kg vs 15.8±3.1 mL/min·kg,
ISSN:1177-8881
1177-8881
DOI:10.2147/DDDT.S224553