European Journal of Clinical Pharmacology

, Volume 62, Issue 6, pp 437–445

The relative bioavailability of loratadine administered as a chewing gum formulation in healthy volunteers

  • Lene Noehr-Jensen
  • Per Damkier
  • Tanja Busk Bidstrup
  • Rasmus Steen Pedersen
  • Flemming Nielsen
  • Kim Brosen
Pharmacokinetics and Disposition



The aim of this study was to investigate the pharmacokinetics of loratadine and its active metabolite desloratadine after single-dose administration of loratadine as a conventional tablet, orally disintegrating tablet (smelt tablet) and a chewing gum formulation with and without the collection of saliva.


Twelve healthy male volunteers participated in a four-period cross-over trial evaluating the effect of dosage forms on the pharmacokinetics of a single dose of loratadine. Loratadine was administered as two 10-mg conventional tablet, two 10-mg smelt tablet, a 30-mg portion of medicated chewing gum without collection of saliva and a 30-mg portion of medicated chewing gum with collection of saliva. Blood samples were taken at predefined sampling points 0–24 h after medication, and the plasma concentrations of loratadine and desloratadine were determined by high-performance liquid chromatography. Each study period was separated by a wash-out period of at least 7 days.


The mean dose-corrected area under the plasma concentration-time curve extrapolated to infinity AUC(0−∞) for the chewing gum formulation was statistically significantly increased compared to the tablet formulation (geometric mean ratio: 2.68; 95%CI: 1.75–4.09). Desloratadine pharmacokinetic parameters from the chewing gum formulation were not statistically significantly different from the conventional tablet. Neither loratadine nor desloratadine pharmacokinetics of the smelt tablet formulation were statistically significantly different from the conventional tablet formulation. Plasma concentrations of desloratadine following the administration of loratadine as chewing gum with saliva collection were very low.


Our study showed that formulation of loratadine as a medicated chewing gum results in an almost threefold increase in relative bioavailability. This is most likely due to a bypass of first-pass metabolism as this study suggests that approximately 40% of the absorbed loratadine was absorbed via the oral mucosa.


Biological availability Chewing gum Desloratadine Dosage forms Loratadine Pharmacokinetics 


  1. 1.
    Woodford DW and Lesko LJ (1981) Relative bioavailability of aspirin gum. J Pharm Sci 70(12):1341–1343PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Jacobsen J, Christrup LL, Jensen NH (2004) Medicated chewing gum: pros and cons. Am J Drug Delivery 2(2):75–88CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Bousquet E, Tirendi S, Bonina FP, Montenegro L, Bianchi A, Ciampini N (1992) Bioavailability of two formulations of acetylsalicylic acid gums. Pharmazie 47(8):607–609PubMedGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Christrup LL, Bonde J, Eriksen H, Rasmussen SN, Rassing MR, Simonsen K (1988) Chewing gum as a drug delivery system III. Bioavailability of salicylamide administered in tablets and chewing gum. FARMACI, Sci Ed 16:6–14Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Christrup LL, Bonde J, Rasmussen SN, Rassing MR (1990) Relative bioavailability of (+/−)-verapamil hydrochloride administered in tablets and chewing gum. Acta Pharm Nord 2(6):371–376PubMedGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Benowitz NL, Jacob PI, Savanapridi C (1987) Determinants of nicotine intake while chewing nicotine polacrilex gum. Clin Pharmacol Ther 41(4):467–473PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Hilbert J, Radwanski E, Weglein R, Luc V, Perentesis G, Symchowicz S, Zampaglione N (1987) Pharmacokinetics and dose proportionality of loratadine. J Clin Pharmacol 27(9):694–698PubMedGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Yumibe N, Huie K, Chen KJ, Snow M, Clement RP, Cayen MN (1996) Identification of human liver cytochrome P450 enzymes that metabolize the nonsedating antihistamine loratadine. Formation of descarboethoxyloratadine by CYP3A4 and CYP2D6. Biochem Pharmacol 51(2):165–172PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Katchen B, Cramer J, Chung M, Gural R, Hilbert J, Luc V, Mortizen V, Dsouza R, Symchowicz S, Zampaglione N (1985) Disposition of C-14-Sch 29851 in Humans. Ann Allergy 55(2):393Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Pedersen RS, Damkier P, Brosen K (2005) Tramadol as a new probe for CYP2D6 phenotyping – a population study. Clin Pharmacol Ther 77(6):458–467PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Shannon IL, Segreto VA (1968) Saliva specific gravity. Tech Rep SAM-TR 1–8Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Dawes C (2006) Absorption of urea through the oral mucosa and estimation of the percentage of secreted whole saliva inadvertently swallowed during saliva collection. Arch Oral Biol 51(2):111–116PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Zhang YF, Chen XY, Zhong DF, Dong YM (2003) Pharmacokinetics of loratadine and its active metabolite descarboethoxyloratadine in healthy Chinese subjects. Acta Pharmacol Sin 24(7):715–718PubMedGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Lamba JK, Lin YS, Schuetz EG, Thummel KE (2002) Genetic contribution to variable human CYP3A-mediated metabolism. Adv Drug Deliv Rev 54(10):1271–1294PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Bradford LD (2002) CYP2D6 allele frequency in European Caucasians, Asians, Africans and their descendants. Pharmacogenomics 3(2):229–243PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Yin OQ, Shi XJ, Tomlinson B, Chow MS (2005) Effect of cyp2d6*10 allele on the pharmacokinetics of loratadine in chinese subjects. Drug Metab Dispos 33(9):1283–1287PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag 2006

Authors and Affiliations

  • Lene Noehr-Jensen
    • 1
  • Per Damkier
    • 2
  • Tanja Busk Bidstrup
    • 1
  • Rasmus Steen Pedersen
    • 1
  • Flemming Nielsen
    • 1
  • Kim Brosen
    • 1
  1. 1.Institute of Public Health, Clinical PharmacologyUniversity of Southern DenmarkOdense CDenmark
  2. 2.Department of Biochemistry, Pharmacology and GeneticsOdense University HospitalOdense CDenmark

Personalised recommendations