...
首页> 外文期刊>International journal of clinical pharmacology and therapeutics >A randomized, open-label, crossover study to compare the safety and pharmacokinetics of two tablet formulations of tenofovir (tenofovir disoproxil and tenofovir disoproxil fumarate) in healthy subjects
【24h】

A randomized, open-label, crossover study to compare the safety and pharmacokinetics of two tablet formulations of tenofovir (tenofovir disoproxil and tenofovir disoproxil fumarate) in healthy subjects

机译:随机,开放式标签,交叉研究,比较健康受试者替诺福韦(替诺福韦毒性毒素和替诺福韦富马酸骨纤维富马酸薄荷酸薄膜富马酸骨种的两种片剂配方的安全和药代动力学

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
           

摘要

Purpose: This study was performed to compare the pharmacokinetic properties and assess bioequivalence for the test formulation (HUG116 tablet; tenofovir disoproxil) and reference formulation (Viread tablet; tenofovir disoproxil fumarate). Materials and methods: A randomized, open-label, single-dosing, two-treatment, two-period, two-sequence cross-over study was conducted in 50 healthy subjects. All subjects were randomly assigned to one of the two sequences, and they received a single dose of test or reference formulation in the first period and the alternative formulation during the next period under fasting conditions. Serial blood samples for pharmacokinetic evaluation were collected up to 72 hours post dose, and the pharmacokinetic parameters were estimated by noncompartmental methods. Throughout the study, tolerability was assessed based on adverse events, vital signs, and clinical laboratory tests. Results: The test formulation showed similar pharmacokinetic profiles to those of the reference formulation. The geometric mean ratio and 90% confidence interval (CI) of the test formulation to the reference formulation for maximum plasma concentration (C-max) was 0.93 (0.87 - 0.99), and the corresponding value for the area under the concentration-time curve from time zero to time of last quantifiable concentration (AUC(t)) was 0.94 (0.89 - 0.99). Both CIs were within the conventional bioequivalence range of 0.8 -1.25. The tolerability profile was not significantly different between the test and reference formulations. Conclusion: This study found that the PKs of the test formulation (HUG116 tablet; tenofovir disoproxil) and reference formulation (Viread tablet; tenofovir disoproxil fumarate) were similar, and the test formulation met the regulatory criteria for assuming bioequivalence with the reference formulation.
机译:None

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号