Iraqi J Pharm Sci, Vol.23(1) 2014                            Bioequivalence and pharmacokinetics of amlodipine tablets                                                                                   
 

60 

 

Bioequivalence and Pharmacokinetics of Two Formulations 

of Amlodipine Tablets  in Healthy Subjects 
Jaafar J. Ibraheem Al-Tamimi

*,1
 

*
Department of Pharmaceutics, College of Pharmacy, University of Baghdad, Baghdad, Iraq.  
Abstract 

 The bioequivalence of a single dose tablet containing 5 mg amlodipine as a test product in 

comparison to Norvasc
®
 5 mg tablet (Pfizer USA) as the reference product was studied. Both products 

were administered to twenty eight healthy male adult subjects applying  a fasting, single-dose, two-

treatment, two-period, two-sequence, randomized crossover design with two weeks washout period 

between dosing. Twenty blood samples were withdrawn from each subject over 144 hours period. 

Amlodipine concentrations were determined in plasma by a validated HPLC-MS/MS method. From the 

plasma concentration-time data of each individual, the pharmacokinetic parameters; Cmax, Tmax, AUC0-t, 

AUC0-, Cmax/AUC0-, Z, T0.5, MRT, Cl/F and Vd/F; were calculated applying non-compartmental 

analysis. The average values of the above parameters  for the test formula were 1.99 ng/ml, 8.3 hours, 

82.87 ng.hr/ml, 95.23 ng.hr/ml, 0.0219 hr
-1

, 0.018 hr
-1

, 38.5 hr, 56.2 hr, 60.9 l/hr and 3483 liters, 

respectively. The average values of these parameter for the reference formula were 1.92 ng/ml, 7.9 

hours, 76.3 ng.hr/ml, 89.31 ng.hr/ml, 0.0225hr
-1

, 0.019  hr
-1

, 36.7 hr, 59.9 hr, 69.5 l/hr, and 3983.4 

liters, respectively. The pharmacokinetic parameters mentioned above were statistically analyzed by 

ANOVA test. Ln-transformed values of the pharmacokinetic parameters used for bioequivalence 

testing; Cmax, AUC0-t and AUC0- ; were also statistically analyzed by ANOVA, 90% Confidence 

Interval (CI) and Schuirmann’s two one-sided t-tests. For the Tmax, parametric and nonparametric tests 

were applied. Based on FDA criteria on bioequivalence, the results of the above statistical tests 

demonstrated bioequivalence of the two products.  
Keywords: Amlodipine, Pharmacokinetic, Bioequivalence , HPLC/MS/MS. 

 

دراسة التكافؤ الحٍوي و حركٍة الذواء لمستحضرٌن من اقراص االملودبٍن على متطوعٍن 

 اصحاء
جعفر جابر ابراهٍم التمٍمً

 ،*1  

 

*
 .،تغداد ،انعزاق جايعح تغداد،كهٍح انصٍدنح  ،انصٍدالٍَاخ فزع 

 

 الخالصة
ذى دراسح انركافؤ انحٍوي وحزكٍح اندواء نًسرحضز جٍُس عهى شكم حثوب ٌحروي عهى خًسح يهٍغزاياخ يٍ دواء االيهودتٍٍ 

دواء االيهودتٍٍ و انًُرج يٍ  تانًقارَح يع انًسرحضز انًزجعً َورفاسك عهى شكم حثوب ٌحروي اٌضا عهى خًسح يهٍغزاياخ يٍ

شزكح فاٌزر االيزٌكٍح. ذى اعطاء كم انًُرجٍٍ نثًاٍَح وعشزوٌ يٍ انًرطوعٍٍ االصحاء. وقد ذًد اندراسح تاذثاع انرصًٍى انذي ٌشًم 

عٍُح دو اعطاء اندواء نهًرطوعٍٍ و هى صائًٍٍ ونفرزذٍٍ و تشكم عشوائً ويرقاطع وذفصم تٍٍ انفرزذٍٍ اسثوعٍٍ.ذى سحة عشزوٌ 

 HPLC/MS/MS. ساعح ثى حساب ذزاكٍز االيهودتٍٍ نكم يرطوع تواسطح طزٌقح 411يٍ كم يرطوع نفرزج 

 ويٍ خالل ذزاكٍز اندواء نكم يرطوع ذى حساب عوايم حزكٍح اندواء فً انجسى وهً :

Cmax, Tmax, AUC0-t, AUC0-, Cmax/AUC0-, Z, T0.5, MRT, Cl/F ,Vd/F 

 :)انًعدل( كًا ٌهً تانُسثح نهدواء انجٍُس وحسة ذسهسم عوايم حزكٍح اندواء انًذكورج اعالِ كًا ٌهًوكاَد انُرائج 

1.99 ng/ml, 8.3 hours, 82.87 ng.hr/ml, 95.23 ng.hr/ml, 0.0219 hr
-1

, 0.018 hr
-1

, 38.5 hr, 56.2 hr, 60.9 l/hr 

and 3483 liters 

ج كًا ٌهً:ايا تانُسثح نهدواء انًزجعً فكاَد انُرائ  

1.92 ng/ml, 7.9 hours, 76.3 ng.hr/ml, 89.31 ng.hr/ml, 0.0225hr
-1

, 0.019  hr
-1

, 36.7 hr, 59.9 hr, 69.5 l/hr, 

3983.4 liters. 

دواء و تعد انرحهٍم االحصائً تاذثاع اندسرور االيزٌكً ندراسح انروافز وانركافؤ انحٍوي فقد ذثٍٍ اٌ اندواء انجٍُس يركافؤ حٍوٌا يع ان

 انًزجعً.
 HPLC/MS/MS  الحٍوي، طرٌقة كافؤاملودبٍن , حركٍة الذواء ، الت -الكلمات المفتاحٍة :

 

Corresponding author E. mail: drjaafarjaber@yahoo.com 
Received:  4 / 2 / 2014 

 Accepted: 15 / 4 /2014 
 

 

 

 

 



Iraqi J Pharm Sci, Vol.23(1) 2014                            Bioequivalence and pharmacokinetics of amlodipine tablets                                                                                   
 

61 

 

Introduction 
Amlodipine is a long-acting calcium channel 

blocker. Amlodipine is chemically described 

as (R.S.) 3-ethyl-5-methyl-1-(2- aminoethoxy- 

 methyl) - 4- (2 -chlorophenyl)-1,4-dihydro-6-

methyl-3,5-pyridinedi-carboxylate 

benzenesulphonate. Its empirical formula is: 

C20H25CIN2O5.C6H6O3S. The molecular 

weight is 567.1. Amlodipine is indicated for 

the treatment of hypertension, chronic stable 

and vasospastic angina. Absolute 

bioavailability has been estimated to be 

between 64 and 90%. The bioavailability of 

amlodipine is not altered by the presence of 

food. Amlodipine is extensively (about 90%) 

converted to inactive metabolites via hepatic 

metabolism with 10% of the parent compound 

and 60% of the metabolites excreted in the 

urine. Approximately 93% of the circulating 

drug is bound to plasma proteins. 

Pharmacokinetics of amlodipine are not 

significantly influenced by renal impairment 

and patients with renal failure may therefore 

receive the usual initial dose. After oral 

administration of therapeutic doses of 

amlodipine, absorption produces peak plasma 

concentrations between 6 and 12 hours. 

Elimination of amlodipine from plasma is 

biphasic with a terminal elimination half-life 

of about 30-50 hours. The therapeutic dose of 

amlodipine is 2.5-10 mg
  (1)

 .  

Due to wide use of amlodipine in clinical 

practice, concomitant use with other drugs, 

high interindividual variation, in addition to, 

the pharmacokinetic characteristics which 

involve slow absorption, lone time to peak and 

long elimination half-life; many investigations 

were conducted to study the pharmacokinetics, 

pharmacody-namics, bioavailability, and 

bioequivalence of amlodipine after different 

dosage forms, after food/fluid intake, and in 

different populations 
  (2-17)

.  Determination of 

amlodipine concentrations in human plasma 

were achieved by HPLC-MS method due to 

the low therapeutic doses of amlodipine and 

consequently very low plasma levels 

(nanograms/ml) 
(2-17)

.   

Bioequivalence studies are considered as 

pivotal part for registration of generic products 

since these studies are conducted to show that 

the rate and extent of bioavailability of the 

generic product is similar to the 

brand/innovator product. Consequently, the 

effect(s) and the side effect(s) of the generic 

product are essentially equivalent to the 

brand/innovator product, and hence both 

products are interchangeable in clinical 

practice.   

 

 

 

The purpose of  this study was to investigate 

the pharmacokinetics and relative 

bioavailability (bioequivalence) of two 

amlodipine formulations; a test product as 

tablet containing 5 mg amlodipine, in 

comparison to Norvasc
®
 5 mg tablet (Pfizer 

USA) as the reference product, after 

administration to 28 healthy male adult 

subjects applying randomized crossover 

design. 

Materials and Methods 
Study products information 

A test product as tablet containing 5 mg 

amlodipine. The reference product was 

Norvasc
®
 tablet manufactured by Pfizer USA. 

Ethical consideration 

The study was carried out according to the 

provisions of the declaration of Helsinki 
(18)

 

and ICH guidelines for good clinical practice 
(19)

. The subjects provided informed consent 

before the commencement of the study.  

Study design 

 A fasting, single-dose, two-treatment, two-

period, two-sequence, randomized crossover 

design was applied as recommended by FDA 

guidance for bioavailability and 

bioequivalence.  Twenty eight subjects 

participated in the study. Equal number of 

subjects (14 subjects) were randomly 

assigned to each dosing sequence of the 

treatments (test and reference formulations). 

The treatments were separated by two weeks 

washout interval between period I and period 

II dosing.  

Inclusion criteria 

Twenty eight subjects were selected 

according to the following inclusion criteria: 

age between 18-48 years; normal Body-

Mass-Index (BMI) =18-28; non smokers; no 

drug or alcohol abuse; no history of 

contraindication and/or allergy to the drug 

and any related compounds; normal physical 

and clinical examinations including vital 

signs, hepatic, renal, respiratory, cardiac, 

gastrointestinal and psychiatric; normal 

clinical laboratory tests including 

biochemistry, hematology, routine urine 

analysis, negative for HIV, hepatitis B and C; 

no consumption of drugs for two weeks prior 

the study; no blood donation, hospitalization 

or participation in any study (clinical, 

pharmacokinetic, bioavailability or 

bioequivalence) within the last 2 months prior 

to the present study. 

Drug product administration and the 

conditions of the study 

The drug was administered with 240 ml of 

water after an overnight fasting of 12 hours. 

No water was permitted 2 hours before and 



Iraqi J Pharm Sci, Vol.23(1) 2014                            Bioequivalence and pharmacokinetics of amlodipine tablets                                                                                   
 

62 

 

after dosing. Water was allowed 2 hours after 

dosing. Standard diets (breakfast, lunch and 

dinner) were administered and were identical 

in both periods of the study. Xanthine 

containing products were not allowed twelve 

hours before dosing and then twelve hours 

after dosing. Grapefruit juice or beverages 

containing grapefruit were not allowed within 

the past week prior the study and until the 

completion of the whole study (both periods 

of the study). The subjects were not allowed 

to sleep or lie during the first four hours of 

drug administration, they remained seated 

upright. 

Blood samples collection 

 Seven ml of blood samples were withdrawn 

via an Indwelling Cannula placed in the 

forearm anticubital vein at zero time (one 

hour before dosing), and then at: 1.0, 3.0, 4.0, 

5.0, 6.0, 7.0, 8.0, 9.0, 10.0, 11.0, 12.0, 16.0, 

24.0, 36.0, 48.0, 72.0, 96.0, 120.0 & 144.0 

hours post dosing. The blood samples were 

directly transferred to heparinized tubes and 

then immediately centrifuged for 5 minutes at 

4000 rpm. The plasma samples were 

separated by polypropylene disposable tips 

and transferred to Eppendorf tubes and then 

immediately stored at -20C until analysis for 

determination of amlodipine concentrations 

in plasma. 

Clinical observations 

 Vital signs (blood pressure and pulse) of 

each subject were measured one hour before 

dosing and then at 3, 6, 9 and 12 hours post 

dosing. 

Analytical procedure 
Amlodipine’s concentrations in plasma were 

determined by a modified HPLC-MS/MS 

method obtained from previously published 

HPLC-MS/MS methods 
(20-23)

. The validation 

of the method was evaluated following FDA 

bioanalytical method validation criteria 
(24)

 

and GLP guidelines 
(25)

. Samples were 

extracted using liquid-liquid extraction 

technique. In each run, 1ml of plasma was 

alkalinized using 2 ml of 0.2 M borate buffer 

then extracted using 6 ml of Hexane: ethyl 

acetate (1:1) extraction solvent. Diazepam 

was used as an internal standard. The samples 

were then shaken for 20 minutes at 250 rpm 

and later centrifuged for 5 minutes at 4000 

rpm. The upper organic layer was aspirated 

and placed into another tube and then 

evaporated to complete dryness under 

nitrogen stream. The residual samples were 

reconstituted with 50 µl of 1% acetic acid in 

methanol: water 1:1 to be ready for direct 

injection into the HPLC. Drug quantitation 

was done using a Finnigan LCQ DUO ion 

trap mass spectrometer (Finnigan 

Thermoquest, USA) equipped with an (ESI) 

source (Finnegan) and run by: Xcalibur 1.2 

software (USA). Calibration standard 

responses were linear over the range of 0.1-

10 ng/ml of amlodipine concentrations in 

human plasma with a lower limit of 

quantitation (LLOQ) of 0.1 ng/mL. 

The plasma samples were analyzed after the 

completion of the clinical part of the study as 

recommended in bioequivalence studies. 

Plasma samples of each subject for both 

periods were analyzed with their own 

calibration curve and quality control (QC) 

samples as one batch in a single run. For each 

run, six QC samples (dispersed evenly in a 

low-high and high-low sequence throughout 

the batch) were analyzed. No determination 

was done by extrapolation below the LLOQ 

and above the upper limit of quantitation 

(ULOQ) of the standard calibration curve as 

recommended by FDA bioanalytical method 

validation guidance 
(24)

. 

Pharmacokinetic analysis  

Kinetica 2000 (V4.0) software was used for 

all pharmacokinetic analysis of data. A non-

compartmental analysis was applied for all 

pharmacokinetic calculations as 

recommended by FDA and EMEA guidance 

in bioavailability and bioequivalence 
(26, 27)

. 

The pharmacokinetic parameters clearance 

(Cl), apparent volume of distribution (Vd), 

elimination rate contant (K), terminal 

elimination half-life (T0.5), area under plasma 

concentration-time curve (AUC), area under 

moment curve (AUMC), and mean residence 

time (MRT) were calculated applying 

standard methods 
(28)

. 

Statistical analysis 

 Kinetica 2000 software (V4.0) was used for 

the statistical analysis of data. For the 

purpose of bioequivalence evaluation 
(26, 27, 

29)
, analysis of variance (ANOVA), 90% 

confidence interval and Schuirmann’s two 

one-sided t-test were applied. ANOVA were 

carried out to account for the effects of the 

following sources of variation: treatment, 

period, sequence and subjects nested in 

sequence; on the pharmacokinetic 

parameters; Cmax, Tmax, AUC0-t, AUC0-, 

Cmax/AUC0-, Z and T0.5. ANOVA was also 

executed for the Ln-transformed values of the 

pharmacokinetic parameters; Cmax, AUC0-t, 

AUC0-, and Cmax/AUC0-. The difference 

between the pharmacokinetic parameters of 

both products were declared statistically 

insignificant at 5% significance level ( = 

0.05) when P  0.05. The 90% Confidence 

Interval (CI) for the ratio of the mean 

test/mean reference (T/R) for the Ln-

transformed values of the pharmacokinetic 



Iraqi J Pharm Sci, Vol.23(1) 2014                            Bioequivalence and pharmacokinetics of amlodipine tablets                                                                                   
 

63 

 

parameters; Cmax, AUC0-t and AUC0-  were 

concluded bioequivalent if the lower 

 CI ≥ 80% and the upper CI ≤125%, as 

recommended by FDA guidance in 

bioavailability and bioequivalence 
(26, 29)

. 

Schuirmann’s  two one-sided t-test 
(30)

 was 

also applied for the pharmacokinetic 

parameters; Cmax, AUC0-t, and AUC0- as a 

check and further support of bioequivalence 

between both products. Both products were 

concluded bioequivalent by the Schuirmann’s 

test if the lower-T (TL)  (T0.05 –26 df) and the 

upper T (TU)  (T0.05 –26df). For the Tmax 

values, the parametric point estimate was 

measured as the difference between the mean 

values of the test and the reference products. 

The acceptance limit for the Tmax was within 

± 20% of the mean value of the reference 

product. Nonparametric test was also applied 

for the Tmax. ANOVA testing was applied for 

the pharmacokinetic parameters; MRT, Cl/F 

and Vd/F; of the test product versus the 

reference product.   

Results and Discussion 
Clinical observations 

Both test and reference products were well 

tolerated by all subjects. No incidences of 

serious side effects or adverse reactions were 

observed during the study. All the subjects 

who started the study participated to the end 

of the study. 

Plasma concentrations 

The developed LC-MS/MS method presented 

in this study with LLOQ of 0.1 ng/mL was 

rapid, sensitive, precise, accurate and specific 

for quantitation of amlodipine in human 

plasma. Therefore, the present method can 

successfully applied to analyze large number 

of plasma samples for pharmacokinetic, 

bioavailability and bioequivalence studies of 

amlodipine in human plasma. No significant 

differences (P > 0.05) in the plasma 

concentrations were found in all sampling 

time points between the test and the reference 

products. One hour before dosing (pre-dose 

sample), amlodipine was not detected in 

plasma samples of any subject indicating the 

absence of carryover effects and insuring a 

sufficient washout period. The drug was 

detected in plasma samples of 21 volunteers 

and 20 volunteers after 1.0 hour post dosing 

of the test product and Norvasc
®
 tablets, 

respectively. This indicates rapid appearance 

of amlodipine in plasma. Figure 1 shows the 

profiles of the mean amlodipine plasma 

concentration-time data of the 28 volunteers 

for each product. This figure indicates that 

the plasma concentration-time profiles of 

amlodipine for both products are to a very 

good extent superimposable. 

 

 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Figure 1:  Mean plasma concentrations (± SD)  of amlodipine after a single dose administration 

of a   test product (tablet containing 5 mg amlodipine) and the reference product    (Norvasc 5 mg 

tablet) to twenty eight healthy male adult subjects.   

 

 

 

 

 

 



Iraqi J Pharm Sci, Vol.23(1) 2014                            Bioequivalence and pharmacokinetics of amlodipine tablets                                                                                   
 

64 

 

Table (1) Mean (± SD) of pharmacokinetic parameters of amlodipine after a single dose 

administration of a test formulation (tablet containing 5 mg amlodipine) and the reference 

formulation (Norvasc
®
 5 mg tablet) to 28 healthy male adult subjects. 

  

Pharmacokinetic 

Parameters 

Test Formula Reference Formula 

Mean ± SD Mean ± SD 

Cmax (ng/ml) 1.99 0.817 1.92 0.94 

AUC0-t (ng.hr/ml) 82.87 44.52 76.30 45.68 

AUC0- (ng.hr/ml) 95.23 46.12 89.31 48.83 

Cmax /AUC0- (hr
-1

) 0.0219 0.0059 0.0225 0.0057 

Tmax (hr) 8.3 2.19 7.9 2.7 

Z  (hr
-1

) 0.018 0.0057 0.019 0.0048 

T0.5 (hr) 38.5 10.07 36.7 11.21 

MRT (hr) 56.2 11.78 59.9 15.68 

Cl/F (l/hr) 60.9 33.54 69.5 42.09 

Vd/F (l) 3483 1954.8 3983.4 2467.5 
 

Cmax = Maximum concentration of drug in plasma, obtained directly from the concentration versus time 

curves of individual volunteers. 

Tmax = The time to attain Cmax, obtained directly from the concentration versus time curves of 

individual volunteers. 

AUC0- t = Area under the plasma concentration-time curve from time zero to tlast, calculated by 

trapezoidal rule. 

AUCt-   = Extrapolated area under the plasma concentration-time curve from tlast to infinity, calculated 

as Clast/Z. 

AUC0-   = Total area under the plasma concentration-time curve from time zero to infinity, calculated 

from the sum of AUC0-t + AUCt-. 

Z     =  First order terminal elimination rate constant, estimated by linear regression of not less than 3 

points of the last points at the terminal phase of the   log-concentration versus time curves of individual 

volunteers. 

T0.5  = First order terminal elimination half-life, equal to 0.693/Z.  

Clast   = Last measurable concentration which meet or exceed the lower limit of quantitation. 

tlast   = Time at which Clast occur.  

MRT = Mean residence time, calculated as AUMC0-/ AUC0-  . 

AUMC0- = Area under the moment curve from time zero to infinity.  

Cl/F = Oral body clearance, calculated as F x Dose/ AUC0-. Dose=5 mg , F=0.7. 

Vd/F   = Oral volume of distribution, calculated as Cloral / Z  . 

F    = Oral bioavailability.  

Statistical evaluation 

ANOVA tests were performed for all the 

calculated pharmacokinetic parameters 

presented in Table 1, whereas 90% CI and 

Schuirmann’s two one-sided t-test (Table 2) 

were applied only for the pharmacokinetic 

parameters Cmax, AUC0-t and AUC0-, since 

these three parameters are considered as the 

primary pharmacokinetic parameters for 

bioequivalence evaluation as recommended 

by FDA Guidance 
(26, 29)

.  

ANOVA tests for the Cmax, AUC0-t, AUC0-

, Tmax, Cmax/AUC0-, Z and T0.5 values and 

for the corresponding Ln-transformed 

values of Cmax, AUC0-t, AUC0-, and 

Cmax/AUC0-, revealed no significant effects 

(P > 0.05) for the sources of variation: 

treatment, period and sequence. However,  

for the subjects nested in sequence, a 

significant effect (P < 0.05) was found  

 

which may be due to the interindividual 

variation in the above mentioned 

parameters as shown in Table 1. 

Moreover,ANOVA tests for MRT, Cl/F and  

Vd/F showed no significant difference (P > 

0.05) between the test and the reference 

formulas. These findings support the 

similarity in the pharmacokinetic behaviors 

of the test and the reference formulas.   

The calculated ranges of the 90% CI (Table 

2) for the Ln-transformed values of Cmax, 

AUC0-t and  

AUC0-, were well within the FDA 

bioequivalence acceptance criteria 
(26, 29)

. 

The ranges of  Schuirmann’s two-one-sided 

t-test (Table 2) for the above 

pharmacokinetic parameters were also well 

within the bioequivalence acceptance 

criteria 
(29, 30)

. Moreover, power calculations 



Iraqi J Pharm Sci, Vol.23(1) 2014                            Bioequivalence and pharmacokinetics of amlodipine tablets                                                                                   
 

65 

 

for Cmax and AUC demonstrated that sample 

size of 28 subjects is adequate to obtain 

power above 80% for bioequivalence  

evaluation of amlodipine tablets. Therefore, 

according to FDA Guidance on 

bioequivalence,
 

it is concluded from the 

results of the above statistical tests that the 

test product and the reference brand product 

(Norvasc
®
 tablet) are bioequivalent.  

 

Table (2) 90% Confidence Interval and Schuiramann’s two one-sided T-tests for the 

pharmacokinetic   parameters of the test versus the reference products. 
  

Pharmacokinetic 

Parameters 

T/R 

Geometric 

Mean Ratio 

90% Confidence Interval* Schuiramann’s Two One-Sided 

T-Test** 

Lower 

limit 

Upper limit Lower limit Upper limit 

Cmax 1.03 95.29 109.82 3.3996 6.7666 

AUC0-t 1.07 100.3 115.23 2.3308 8.0969 

AUC0- 1.04 97.76 112.48 2.8818 7.4447 

  *   Acceptance criteria = lower limit  80 and upper limit  125.0. 

  ** Acceptance criteria = lower limit and upper limit  1.7081. 

 
Conclusion 
The present study introduced pharmacokinetic 

characteristics of amlodipine after therapeutic 

oral dose to healthy male adult subjects. The 

pharmacokinetics of the test product are 

statistically similar to the reference brand 

product (Norvasc
®
 tablet) produced by Pfizer 

USA. Therefore, according to FDA guidance 

on bioavailability and bioequivalence, it is 

concluded that the test product is bioequivalent 

to Norvasc
®
 tablet. Therefore, both products 

are interchangeable in therapy with 

amlodipine, and the test formula can be 

considered presecribable as Norvasc
®
 tablets 

produced by Pfizer USA.   
 

References 
1. Physician’s Desk Reference

®
 (PDR), 68

th
 

edition, 2014; Norvasc
®
 product 

information, Pfizer USA . 

2. Vincent M, Uma K, Akula TB, Rong W, 
Bharat D. Pharmacokinetics of a novel 

orodispersible tablet of amlodipine in 

healthy subjects. J Bioequiv Availab 2013; 

5:2. 

3. Gorain B, Choudhury H, Halder D, Sarkar 
AK, Sarkar P, Biswas E, Ghosh B, Pal TK. 

A comparative pharmacokinetic study of a 

fixed dose combination for essential 

hypertensive patients: a randomized 

crossover study in healthy human 

volunteers. Drug Res (Stuttg) 2013; 63 (4): 

177-84. 

4. Noh YH, Lim HS, Kim YH, Choi YH, Sung 
HR, Jin SJ, Lim J, Bae KS. Pharmacokinetic 

interaction of telmisartan with s-amlodipine: 

an open-label, two- 

 

 

 

 

   period  crossover  study  in  healthy male   

  volunteers. Clin Ther 2012; 34 (7): 1625-  

   35. 

5. Liu Y, Jia G, Li S, Lu C, Liu Y, Yu C. 
Pharmacokinetics and bioequivalence 

evaluation of two formulations of 10-mg 

amlodipine besylate: an open-label, single-

dose, randomized, two-way crossover study 

in healthy Chinese male volunteers. Clin 

Ther 2009; 31 (4): 777-83. 

6. Rohatagi S, Lee J, Shenouda M, Haworth S, 
Bathala MS, Allison M, Rubets I, Heyrman 

R, Noveck R, Salazar DE. Pharmcokinetics 

of amlodipine and olmesartan after 

administration of amlodipine besylate and 

olmesartan medoxomil in separate gosage 

forms and as a fixed-dose combination. J 

Clin Pharmacol 2008; 48 (11): 1309-22. 

7. Effi S, Sukmayadi, Danong AY, Lucia RH, 
Gunawan H, Iwan DS, Siti HD, Asri 

P.Bioequivalence of two amlodipine tablet 

formulations. May Kedokt Indom 2008; 58 ( 

2): 41-46. 

8. Setiawati E, Sukmayadi, Yanaidi DA, 
Handayani LR, Harinato G, Santoso ID, 

Deniati SH. Comparative bioavailability of 

two amlodipine formulation in healthy 

volunteers. Arzneimittelforschung 2007; 57 

(7): 467-71. 

9. Park JY, Kim KA, Park PW, Lee OJ, Kim 
JS, Lee GH, Ha MC, Park JH, O MJ, Ryu 

JH. Comparative pharmacokinetic and 

pharmacodynamic characteristics of 

amlodipine besylate and amlodipine 

nicotinate in healthy subjects. Int J Clin 

Pharmacol Ther 2006; 44 (12): 641-7.  

 



Iraqi J Pharm Sci, Vol.23(1) 2014                            Bioequivalence and pharmacokinetics of amlodipine tablets                                                                                   
 

66 

 

10. hung M, Calcagni A, Glue P, Bramson C. 
Bioavailability of amlodipine 

besylate/atorvastatin calcium combination 

tablet. J Clin Pharmacol 2006; 46:1030-

1037. 

11. Menger C, Albert C, Paul G, Candace B. 
Effect of food on the bioavailability of 

amlodipine besylate/atorvastatin calcium 

combination tablet. J Clin Pharmacol 2006; 

46 (10):1212-6. 

12. Chung M, Garza D, Gaffney M, Glue P. 
Bioavailability of amlodipine besylate 

following oral administration as a tablet 

dispersed in applesauce. J Clin Pharmacol 

2005; 45 (6): 695-8. 

13. Kuo-Liong C, Chia-Lun C, Ta-Cheng S. 
Bioavailability study of fixed-dose tablet 

versus capsule formulation of amlodipine 

plus benazepril: A randomized, single-dose, 

two-sequence, two-period, open-label, 

crossover study in healthy volunteers.  Curr 

Ther Res 2005; 66 (2): 69-79. 

14.  Abad-Santos F, Novalbos J, Galvez-
Mugica MA, Gallego-Sandin S, Almeida S, 

Vallee F, Garcia AG. Assessment of sex 

differences in pharmacokinetics and 

pharmacodynamics of amlodipine in a 

bioequivalence study. Pharmacol Res 2005; 

51 (5): 445-52. 

15. Ji-Young P, Kyoung-Ah K, Gwan-Sun L, 
Pil-Whan P, Su-Lyun K, Young-                                                        

Suk L, Young-Wook L, Eak-Kyun S. 

Randomized, open-label, two-period 

crossover comparison of the 

pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic 

properties of two amlodipine formulation in 

healthy adult male Korean subjects. Clin 

Ther 2004; 26 (5): 715-23. 

16. Rojanasthien N, Teekachunhatean S, Jakob 
K, Gaupp M, Arnold P, Chaichana N, 

Martin W. Bioequivalence study of generic 

amlodipine in healthy Thia volunteers. Int J 

Clin Pharmacol  Ther 2004; 42 (6):330-5. 

17. John V, Stuart IH, George F, Lisa CD, 
Susan W, Hylar LF. Lack of effect of 

grapefruit juice on the pharmacokinetics and 

pharmacodynamics of amlodipine. Br. J 

Clin Pharmacol 2000; 50 (5): 455-463. 

18. Latest WMA Declaration of Helsinki - 
Ethical Principles for Medical Research 

Involving Human Subjects, October 2013. 

19.  ICH Guideline for Good Clinical Practice 
(GCP), E6, 1996. 

20. Zou Q, Zhan Y, Ge Z, Wei P, Ouyang P. 
Liquid chromatography-mass spectrometry 

method for the determination of amlodipine 

in human plasma and its application in a 

bioequivalence study. 

Arzneimittelforschung 2009; 59 (8): 383-9. 

21. Nirogi RV, Kandikere VN, Mudigonda K, 
Shukla M, Maurya S. Sensitive and rapid 

liquid chromatography/tandem mass 

spectrometry assay for the quantification of 

amlodipine in human plasma. Biomed 

Chromatogr 2006; 20 (9): 833-42. 

22. Cavalho M,  Oliveira CH, Mendes GD, 
Sucupira M,  Moraes MEA, De Nucci G.  

Amlodipine bioequivalence study: 

quantification by liquid chromatography 

coupled to  tendem mass spectrometry. 

Biopharm Drug Dispos 2001; 22 (9):383-90. 

23. Antonio M, Lorenzo DB, Paolo M, Nunzia 
CM, Fabrizio C, Shevqet I, Mario RU, 

Paolo LC. Amlodipine bioequivalence 

achieved with a very sensitive liquid 

chromatography tandem mass spectrometric 

bioassay. Arzneimittelforschung 2000; 50 

(8): 688-94. 

24. Guidance For Industry. Bioanalytical 
Method Validation for human studies. U.S. 

Department of Health and Human Services. 

Food and Drug Administration.  Center for 

Drug Evaluation and Research (CDER), 

May, 2001. 

25. GLP, FDA, September, 1987. 
26. Guidance For Industry. Bioavailability and 

Bioequivalence Studies for Orally 

Administered Drug Products – General 

Considerations. U.S. Department of Health 

and Human Services. Food and Drug 

Administration.  Center for Drug Evaluation 

and Research (CDER), March, 2003. 

27. EMEA Guidance on Bioavailability and 
Bioequivalence, October, 2010. 

28. Shargel L and Andrew Yu. Applied 
Biopharmaceutics & Pharmacokinetics. 

Sixth Edition. Appleton & Lange: USA 

2012.  

29. Guidance For Industry. Statistical 
Approaches to Establishing Bioequivalence. 

U.S. Department of Health and Human 

Services. Food and Drug Administration.  

Center for Drug Evaluation and Research 

(CDER), January, 2001. 

30. Shein-Chung C and Jen-Pei L. Design and 
Analysis of Bioavailability and 

Bioequivalence Studies. Second Edition. 

Revised and Expanded. Marcel Dekker, 

Inc.: New York, 2000. 

31. Lacey LF,  Keene ON,  Duquesony C, Bye 
A. Evaluation of different indirect measures 

of rate of drug absorption in comparative 

pharmacokinetic studies. J  Pharm Sci 1994; 

83: (2):  212-5.  

32. Endrenyi L, Tothfalusi L. Secondary 
metrics for the assessment of 

bioequivalence. J Pharm  Sci 1997; 86 (3): 

401-2. 



Iraqi J Pharm Sci, Vol.23(1) 2014                            Bioequivalence and pharmacokinetics of amlodipine tablets                                                                                   
 

67 

 

33. Duquesony C, Lacey LF,  Keene ON, Bye 
A. Evaluation of different partial AUCs as 

indirect measures of rate of drug absorption 

in comparative pharmacokinetic studies. Eur 

J Pharm Sci 1998;  6 (4): 259-64. 

34. Flynn JT, Nahata MC, Mahan JD, Portman 
RJ. Population pharmacokinetics of 

amlodipine in hypertensive children and 

adolescents. J Clin Phartmacol 2006; 46 (8): 

905-16.