4.5 Article

Safety, tolerability, and pharmacokinetics of single ascending doses of synthetic genistein (Bonistein (TM)) in healthy volunteers

期刊

ADVANCES IN THERAPY
卷 22, 期 1, 页码 65-78

出版社

SPRINGER
DOI: 10.1007/BF02850186

关键词

Bonistein; genistein; humans; pharmacokinetics; single-dose

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Genistein, an isoflavone and phytoestrogen predominantly found in soy, is considered a potentially safe therapeutic option to prevent postmenopausal bone loss. A novel purified product consisting of 99.4% synthetic genistein aglycone was investigated in a phase I clinical study to assess safety and tolerability in healthy volunteers as well as to obtain pharmacokinetic data. Single oral doses of 30, 60, 150, or 300 mg were administered to 40 healthy volunteers in this prospective, randomized, open-label and sequential-group study. Tolerability of the different genistein doses was very good. No clinically significant effects on vital signs, ECG, and clinical laboratory parameters were observed. Genistein was rapidly absorbed and the kinetic profiles revealed a one-peak plasma concentration-time course. Mean C-max values of 252.0, 605.0, 1518.0, and 1808.0 ng/mL were observed after 4.0 to 6.0 hours. The mean terminal elimination half-lives were calculated to be 7.7, 7.5, 8.1, and 10.2 hours resulting in mean AUCs((0-infinity)) of 2761.8, 8022.3, 21655.0, and 27537.8 ngxhr/mL. Linear regression of the dose-normalized AUCs((0-infinity)) was not significantly different from zero, whereas the analysis for C-max showed significance. Based on consecutive administration of single oral doses of genistein, dose linearity was assumed for extent of absorption [AUC((0-infinity))] for all doses (30-300 mg) and for rate of absorption (C-max) up to 150 mg. At the highest dose the intestinal rate of absorption of genistein seemed to be limited. Genistein was safe and well tolerated in the dose range investigated and showed nearly dose-linear pharmacokinetic characteristics.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.5
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据