Pharmacological effects of new omeprazole preparations in horses

The hope is this is the start of competition for this product which going forward may be much less expensive. Always be careful of the product design and that there is evidence that the drug becomes available to the horse for its anti-gastric acid
action. See the article for more on this. I believe this is the product discussed in this paper: https://abler.com/specials/abprazole-plus
DrO

Pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic effects of 2 registered omeprazole preparations and varying dose rates in horses
J Vet Intern Med. 2020 Dec 19.
Authors
Jessica C Wise 1 , Kristopher J Hughes 1 , Scott Edwards 1 , Glenn A Jacobson 2 , Christian K Narkowicz 2 , Sharanne L Raidal 1
Affiliations

1 School of Animal and Veterinary Sciences, Charles Sturt University, Wagga Wagga, New South Wales, Australia.
2 School of Pharmacy and Pharmacology, University of Tasmania, Hobart, Tasmania, Australia.

Abstract

Background: Omeprazole preparations vary in bioavailability in horses.

Hypothesis/objectives: To characterize the pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics of an existing enteric-coated oral omeprazole paste (REF) and a novel, in-feed, enteric-coated dry granule preparation (NOV).

Animals: Twelve Standardbred/Thoroughbred mares free from clinical disease.

Methods: A prospective, blinded randomized interventional study was trial, conducted in 3 parts: (a) bioavailability study, (b) dose titration study, and (c) comparative clinical pharmacodynamic study, each using a blocked crossover design.

Results: Consistent with the larger dose administered, Cmax (median, 1032 ng/mL; range, 576-1766) and AUC0-24 (median, 63.9 μg/mL*min; range, 42.4-152.4) were greater after single oral administration of NOV than REF (282.7 ng/mL; range, 94.8-390.2, and 319 23.8 μg/mL*min; range, 8.2-42.3, respectively; both P = .004). No differences were observed between products for absolute oral bioavailability (NOV 55% range, 15-88; REF 17% range, 10-77; P = .25). Treatment with both preparations was associated with reduced gastric squamous ulcer scores and increased pH of gastric fluid. Bioequivalence was demonstrated for pharmacodynamic measures with the exception of % time pH <4, despite differences in dose rate and subsequent plasma omeprazole concentrations.

Conclusions and clinical importance: The findings of this study indicate that the NOV product would be a suitable alternative to the reference product and confirm that plasma concentrations of omeprazole and omeprazole dose do not predict drug pharmacodynamics in horses.