Pharmacokinetic Evaluation of a Single 5-Gram Bolus of Creatine Monohydrate Versus Two Other Creatine-Containing Investigational Products

Jose Antonio; Cassandra Evans; Lia Jiannine; Jason Curtis; Katarzyna Wojnas; Victoria Burgess; Darryn Willoughby; Corbin Hohl; Brent Petersen; Sarah Flynn; Joshua Baisley; Gaurav Parekh; Doug Kalman

doi:10.7759/cureus.24395

Pharmacokinetic Evaluation of a Single 5-Gram Bolus of Creatine Monohydrate Versus Two Other Creatine-Containing Investigational Products

Cureus. 2022 Apr 22;14(4):e24395. doi: 10.7759/cureus.24395. eCollection 2022 Apr.

Authors

Affiliations

¹ Health Care Sciences, Nova Southeastern University, Fort Lauderdale, USA.
² Nutrition, Nova Southeastern University, Fort Lauderdale, USA.
³ Exercise Science, Keiser University, Fort Lauderdale, USA.
⁴ Psychology and Neuroscience, Nova Southeastern University, Fort Lauderdale, USA.
⁵ Health and Human Performance, Concordia University, Chicago, USA.
⁶ Exercise and Sport Science, University of Mary Hardin-Baylor, Belton, USA.
⁷ Protein Research and Development, Glanbia Nutritionals, Twin Falls, USA.
⁸ Ingredients Research and Development, Glanbia Nutritionals, Twin Falls, USA.
⁹ Product Strategy and Technology, Glanbia Nutritionals, Twin Falls, USA.
¹⁰ Clinical Design and Delivery, Nutrasource Pharmaceutical and Nutraceutical Services Inc., Guelph, CAN.
¹¹ Research and Development, Glanbia Nutritionals, Twin Falls, USA.
¹² Scientific Affairs, Nutrasource Pharmaceutical and Nutraceutical Services Inc., Guelph, CAN.

Abstract

The purpose of this study was to determine the relative pharmacokinetics of creatine monohydrate delivered as a formula or as a pure powder (all mixed in solution). A single 5 g bolus of creatine monohydrate was ingested as CreaBev 1, CreaBev 2, or creatine monohydrate. Participants we assigned a test product and monitored in a supervised laboratory setting for ingestion and all blood draws starting 30 min post-ingestion to the 6-h mark. Standard pharmacokinetic analysis was undertaken to determine relative maximum concentration (Cmax), time to maximum concentration (Tmax), and area under the curve (AUC) for the products. Cmax data indicate that CreaBev 1 10.55±4.10, CreaBev 2 15.45±5.48, and creatine monohydrate 12.77±4.0 nmol/h/μL. The Tmax analysis demonstrated CreaBev 1 1.20±1.01, CreaBev 2 1.23±0.65, and creatine monohydrate 0.91±0.2 h. The AUC data indicate that CreaBev 1 22.90±9.17, CreaBev 2 33.92±9.52, and creatine monohydrate 29.58±11.93 nmol/h/μL. When examining the data for pharmacokinetics, the AUC and Cmax pharmacokinetics were greatest for CreaBev 2 (p<0.021 and 0.020). Within the confines of this study, CreaBev 2 produced the highest blood concentrations of creatine as compared to creatine monohydrate and CreaBev 1.

Keywords: creatine; creatine monohydrate; dietary supplements; nutrition; pharmacokinetic.

Grants and funding

This research was funded by Glanbia Nutritionals, Twin Fall, ID (project #R10347-PK) to the ISSN. This grant and study were overseen and administered by the Contract Research Organization, Nutrasource Pharmaceutical and Nutraceutical Services (Guelph, Canada)