Clinical Pharmacokinetics

, Volume 50, Issue 8, pp 541–550 | Cite as

Randomized, Open-Label, Multicentre Pharmacokinetic Studies of Two Dose Levels of Pantoprazole Granules in Infants and Children Aged 1 Month through <6 Years with Gastro-Oesophageal Reflux Disease

  • Brinda K. Tammara
  • Janice E. Sullivan
  • Kim G. Adcock
  • Jaroslaw Kierkus
  • John Giblin
  • Natalie Rath
  • Xu Meng
  • Mary K. Maguire
  • Gail M. Comer
  • Robert M. Ward
Original Research Article


Background and Objective: The primary objective of this study was to characterize the pharmacokinetic profile of pantoprazole delayed-release granules in infants and children aged 1 month to <6 years with gastro-oesophageal reflux disease (GORD). The studies described in this manuscript were conducted to fulfil the requirements of the paediatric written request for pantoprazole by the US FDA.

Methods: Two randomized, open-label, multicentre studies were conducted in infants aged 1 month to <12 months (study 1) and children aged 1 year through <6 years (study 2) with GORD. Patients were randomly assigned to either the low-dose pantoprazole group (0.6mg/kg equivalent) or the high-dose pantoprazole group (1.2mg/kg equivalent) in a 1:1 fashion. Pantoprazole granules were administered approximately 30 minutes before breakfast for at least five consecutive doses. Blood samples were obtained at prespecified intervals. Plasma pantoprazole concentration-time data were analysed by non-compartmental methods. Descriptive statistics were calculated for pharmacokinetic parameters. Patients in study 2 additionally received pantoprazole for 28 days. Safety was monitored throughout.

Results: In study 1, 43 patients were randomized; 42 were included in the single-dose pharmacokinetic evaluation (15 females, 27 males; mean postnatal age 6.3 months). In study 2,17 patients were randomized, and all were included in the single-dose pharmacokinetic evaluation (6 females, 11 males; mean age 3.2 years). In both studies, exposure increased with dose. Mean (standard deviation) maximum (peak) plasma concentration values for the low and high doses were 503 (506) ng/mL and 1318 (1307) ng/mL, respectively, in study 1, and 229 (196) ng/mL and 653 (645) ng/mL, respectively, in study 2. Area under the plasma concentration-time curve values for the low and high doses were 1046 (1043) ngh/mL and 3602 (3269) ng • h/mL, respectively, in study 1, and 293 (146) ng • h/mL and 2448 (2170) ng • h/mL, respectively, in study 2. There was a trend for increasing clearance with increasing age across the ages 1 month through <6 years. There was no evidence of drug accumulation after multiple doses. On-treatment adverse events (AEs) occurred in 19 of 43 patients in study 1 and in 11 of 17 patients in study 2. Serious AEs occurred in two patients in study 1 (gastroenteritis in one patient and acute gastroenteritis from rota virus infection resulting in discontinuation of one patient); the serious AEs resolved and were not considered by the investigators to be drug related. No other safety-related discontinuations occurred in either study.

Conclusions: Exposure increased with increasing doses of pantoprazole granules, even though wide inter-individual variability was observed. Compared with that in adults receiving pantoprazole 40 mg, exposure obtained with the 1.2 mg/kg dose was similar in study 1 and slightly lower in study 2. Pantoprazole was generally well tolerated in infants and children aged 1 month through <6 years with GORD.


Rota Virus Lansoprazole Esomeprazole Pantoprazole Apple Juice 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.



The authors thank Tuli Ahmed, medical writer, for professional medical writing assistance, which was funded by Wyeth Research. Wyeth was acquired by Pfizer Inc. in October 2009. The authors acknowledge Wyeth Research, the sponsor, for designing and conducting these studies. Investigators collected the data, Wyeth Research conducted the analyses, and the authors conducted the data interpretation. J.E. Sullivan, K.G. Adcock, M.A. Springer, J. Kierkus, J. Giblin and R.M. Ward were investigators in the studies, and their institutions received compensation from Wyeth Research. Dr Sullivan’s participation was supported by National Institute of Child Health and Human Development (NICHD) grant #U10 HD045986. Dr Ward’s participation was supported in part by NICHD Pediatric Pharmacology Research Network grant #U10 HD045986. The remaining authors were employees of Wyeth Research at the time of the study and employees of Wyeth Research and Pfizer Inc. during the time of manuscript preparation. All authors approved the final manuscript and made the decision to submit the manuscript for publication. In addition to Pfizer authors, other designated Pfizer employees reviewed the manuscript.

Clinical Investigators: The following investigators enrolled ≥1 patient in the pharmacokinetic portion of study 1 and enrolled ≥1 patient aged <6 years in study 2: Phyllis R. Bishop (University of Mississippi Medical Center, Jackson, MS, USA; studies 1 and 2); Krysztof Fyderek (Krakowie Klinika Pediatrii, Gastroenterologii Zywienia Ul Wielicka, Uniwersytecki Szpital Dzieciecy W, Krakow, Poland; study 1); John M. Giblin (Clinical Study Centers, LLC, Little Rock, AR, USA; studies 1 and 2); Thirumazhisai S. Gunasekaran (Advocate Lutheran General Children’s Hospital, Park Ridge, IL, USA; studies 1 and 2); Sandeep Gupta (James Whitcomb Riley Hospital for Children, Indiana University Medical Center, Indianapolis, IN, USA; study 2); Mitchell H. Katz (Children’s Hospital of Orange County, Orange, CA, USA; study 2); Jaroslaw Kierkus (Department of Gastroenterology, Hepatology and Immunology, Children’s Memorial Health Institute, Warsaw, Poland; study 1); Alan Sacks (Division of Gastroenterology, Nemours Children’s Clinic, Pensacola, FL, USA; studies 1 and 2); Margaret Ann Springer (Louisiana State University Health Sciences Center-Shreveport, Shreveport, LA, USA; study 1); Janice E. Sullivan (Kosair Charities Pediatric Clinical Research Unit, University of Louisville, Louisville, KY, USA; studies 1 and 2); Neelesh A. Tipnis (Medical College of Wisconsin, Milwaukee, WI, USA; study 2); Philip Toltzis (University Hospitals of Cleveland, Cleveland, OH, USA; study 1); Robert Ward (Primary Children’s Medical Center, University of Utah, Salt Lake City, UT, USA; study 2); and Harland S. Winter (Pediatric GI Unit, Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, MA, USA; study 2).


  1. 1.
    Sherman PM, Hassall E, Fagundes-Neto U, et al. A global, evidence-based consensus on the definition of gastroesophageal reflux disease in the pediatric population. Am J Gastroenterol 2009; 104: 1278–95PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Vandenplas Y, Rudolph CD, Di Lorenzo C, et al. Pediatric gastroesophageal reflux clinical practice guidelines: joint recommendations of the North American Society of Pediatric Gastroenterology, Hepatology, and Nutrition and the European Society of Pediatric Gastroenterology, Hepatology, and Nutrition. J Pediatr Gastroenterol Nutr 2009 Sep 9; 49: 498–547PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Poets C. Gastroesophageal reflux: a critical review of its role in preterm infants. Pediatrics 2004; 113(2): e128–32PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Rudolph CD. Are proton pump inhibitors indicated for the treatment of gastroesophageal reflux in infants and children?. J Pediatr Gastroenterol Nutr 2003; 37: S60–4PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Cezard J. Managing gastro-oesophageal reflux disease in children. Digestion 2004; 69 (Suppl. 1): S3–8CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Orenstein SR, Hassall E, Furmaga-Jablonska W, et al. Multicenter, double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled trial assessing the efficacy and safety of proton pump inhibitor lansoprazole in infants with symptoms of gastroesophageal reflux disease. J Pediatr 2009; 154(4): 514–20PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Winter H, Kum-Nji P, Mahomedy S, et al. Efficacy and safety of pantoprazole delayed-release granules for oral suspension in a placebo-controlled treatment-withdrawal study in infants 1 through 11 months with symptomatic gastroesophageal reflux disease. J Pediatr Gastroenterol Nutr 2010 June; 50(6): 609–18PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Winter H, Gunasekaran T, Tolia V, et al. Esomeprazole for the treatment of gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) in infants [abstract no. T1123]. Gastroenterology 2009; 136 (5 Suppl. 1): A–504Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Baker R, Tsou VM, Tung J, et al. Clinical results from a randomized, double-blind, dose-ranging study of pantoprazole in children aged 1 through 5 years with symptomatic histologic or erosive esophagitis. Clin Pediatr (Phila) 2010 Sep; 49(9): 852–65CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Tolia V, Bishop P, Tsou V, et al. Multicenter, randomized, double-blind study comparing 10, 20 and 40 mg pantoprazole in children (5-11 years) with symptomatic gastroesophageal reflux disease. J Pediatr Gastroenterol Nutr 2006; 42(4): 384–91PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Tsou VM, Baker R, Book L, et al. Multicenter, randomized, double-blind study comparing 20 and 40 mg of pantoprazole for symptom relief in adolescents (12 to 16 years of age) with gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD). Clin Pediatr (Phila) 2006; 45(8): 741–9CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Gilger MA, Tolia V, Vandenplas Y, et al. Safety and tolerability of esomeprazole in children with gastroesophageal reflux disease. J Pediatr Gastroenterol Nutr 2008 May; 46(5): 524–33PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Gold BD, Gunasekaran T, Tolia V, et al. Safety and symptom improvement with esomeprazole in adolescents with gastroesophageal reflux disease. J Pediatr Gastroenterol Nutr 2007 Nov; 45(5): 520–9PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Richter JE, Fraga P, Mack M, et al. Prevention of erosive oesophagitis relapse with pantoprazole. Aliment Pharmacol Ther 2004; 20(5): 567–75PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Dettmer A, Vogt R, Sielaff F, et al. Pantoprazole 20 mg is effective for relief of symptoms and healing of lesions in mild reflux oesophagitis. Aliment Pharmacol Ther 1998; 12(9): 865–72PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Armstrong D, Paré P, Pericak D, et al. Symptom relief in gastroesophageal reflux disease: a randomized, controlled comparison of pantoprazole and nizatidine in a mixed patient population with erosive esophagitis or endoscopy-negative reflux disease. Am J Gastroenterol 2001; 96(10): 2849–57PubMedGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Hogan D, Pratha V, Riff D, et al. Oral pantoprazole in the form of granules or tablets are pharmacodynamically equivalent in suppressing acid output in patients with gastro-oesophageal reflux disease and a history of erosive oesophagitis. Aliment Pharmacol Ther 2007; 26(2): 249–56PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Protonix® (pantoprazole sodium) delayed-release tablets and Protonix® (pantoprazole sodium) for delayed-release oral suspension: US package insert. Collegeville (PA): Wyeth, 2009Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Tammara B, Weisel K, Katz A, et al. Bioequivalence study of pantoprazole granules administered to healthy subjects: oral administration with applesauce and apple juice and by nasogastric tube. Am J Health Syst Pharm 2009; 66: 1923–8PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Tammara B, Orczyk G, Nightingale C, et al. Bioavailability of the new pantoprazole spheroid formulation to the currently marketed tablet formulation in healthy adult subjects [abstract no. 275]. AAPS J 2004; 6 (Suppl. 1) [online]. Available from URL: [Accessed 2011 Apr 27]
  21. 21.
    Tanaka M, Ohkubo T, Otani K, et al. Metabolic disposition of pantoprazole, a proton pump inhibitor, in relation to S-mephenytoin 4’-hydroxylation phenotype and genotype. Clin Pharmacol Ther 1997; 62(6): 619–28PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Furuta T, Shirai N, Sugimoto M, et al. Pharmacogenomics of proton pump inhibitors. Pharmacogenomics 2004; 5(2): 181–202PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Leeder J. Pharmacogenetics and pharmacogenomics. Pediatr Clin North Am 2001; 48: 765–81PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Huber R, Hartmann M, Bliesath H, et al. Pharmacokinetics of pantoprazole in man. Int J Clin Pharmacol Ther 1996; 34(5): 185–94PubMedGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Comer G, Kierkus J, Sullivan J, et al. Pharmacodynamics (PD) and safety of pantoprazole delayed-release granules in infants aged 1 through 11 months with a clinical diagnosis of gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD). Gas-troenterology 2009; 136 (5 Suppl. 1): A443–4Google Scholar
  26. 26.
    Tammara B, Adcock K, Kearns G, et al. Pharmacokinetics of two dose levels of pantoprazole sodium granules and tablets in children aged 1 through 11 years with endoscopically proven GERD [abstract no. 1348]. Am J Gastroenterol 2008; 103 (Suppl. 1): S528–9Google Scholar
  27. 27.
    Comer G, Tammara B, Adcock K, et al. Pharmacokinetics of intravenous pantoprazole in children ages 1 to 16 years [abstract no. 1023]. Am J Gastroenterol 2005; 100 (Suppl. 9s): s373Google Scholar
  28. 28.
    Kearns GL, Blumer J, Schexnayder S, et al. Single-dose pharmacokinetics of oral and intravenous pantoprazole in children and adolescents. J Clin Pharmacol 2008; 48(11): 1356–65PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Anderson BJ, Holford NH. Mechanism-based concepts of size and maturity in pharmacokinetics. Annu Rev Pharmacol Toxicol 2008; 48: 303–32PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Hines RN, McCarver DG. The ontogeny of human drug-metabolizing enzymes: phase I oxidative enzymes. J Pharmacol Exp Ther 2002; 300: 355–60PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Tammara B, Ward R, Kearns G, et al. Pharmacokinetics of single and multiple doses of pantoprazole in adolescents with GERD [abstract no. 1347]. Am J Gastroenterol 2008; 103 (Suppl. 1): S528Google Scholar
  32. 32.
    Holford N. Dosing in children. Clin Pharmacol Ther 2010; 87(3): 367–70PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Horn JR, Howden CW. Review article: similarities and differences among delayed-release proton-pump inhibitor formulations. Aliment Pharmacol Ther 2005; 22 (Suppl. 3): 20–4PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    Andersson T, Hassall E, Lundborg P, et al. Pharmacokinetics of orally administered omeprazole in children. Am J Gastroenterol 2000; 95(11): 3101–6PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. 35.
    Tran A, Rey E, Pons G, et al. Pharmacokinetic-pharmacodynamic study of oral lansoprazole in children. Clin Pharmacol Ther 2002 May; 71(5): 359–67PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. 36.
    Koukouritaki S, Manro J, Marsh S, et al. Developmental expression of human hepatic CYP2C9 and CYP2C19. J Pharmacol Exp Ther 2004; 308(3): 965–74PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Adis Data Information BV 2011

Authors and Affiliations

  • Brinda K. Tammara
    • 1
  • Janice E. Sullivan
    • 2
  • Kim G. Adcock
    • 3
  • Jaroslaw Kierkus
    • 4
  • John Giblin
    • 5
  • Natalie Rath
    • 1
  • Xu Meng
    • 1
  • Mary K. Maguire
    • 1
  • Gail M. Comer
    • 1
  • Robert M. Ward
    • 6
  1. 1.Pfizer Inc.CollegevilleUSA
  2. 2.Kosair Charities Pediatric Clinical Research Unit/Pediatric Pharmacology Research UnitUniversity of LouisvilleLouisvilleUSA
  3. 3.University of Mississippi Medical CenterJacksonUSA
  4. 4.Department of Gastroenterology, Hepatology and ImmunologyChildren’s Memorial Health InstituteWarsawPoland
  5. 5.Clinical Study CentersLLCLittle RockUSA
  6. 6.Department of Pediatrics and Pediatric Pharmacology ProgramUniversity of UtahSalt Lake CityUSA

Personalised recommendations