Hui Liu, Yang Xiong, Xinlei Chen, Hongling Yu, Li Lan, Wengang He, Wenjia Wang, Yulei Zhuang, Li Deng, Kanghua Huang, Linfeng Guo, Yerong Yu
{"title":"Evaluation of pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic similarity of an IDegAsp biosimilar versus the originator in healthy Chinese volunteers.","authors":"Hui Liu, Yang Xiong, Xinlei Chen, Hongling Yu, Li Lan, Wengang He, Wenjia Wang, Yulei Zhuang, Li Deng, Kanghua Huang, Linfeng Guo, Yerong Yu","doi":"10.1080/13543784.2025.2463085","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objectives: </strong>22011 is an insulin degludec/insulin aspart co-formulation (IDegAsp) that shares an identical amino acid sequence with Ryzodeg, the originator IDegAsp. This study aimed to compare the pharmacokinetics (PK), pharmacodynamics (PD), and safety of 22,011 with Ryzodeg.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>In a single-center, randomized, open-label, two-treatment, two-period, two-sequence, crossover, euglycemic clamp study, healthy Chinese adults were randomized to receive 0.5 U/kg of 22,011 and Ryzodeg under fasting conditions. PK was evaluated for up to 120 hours and PD (represented by glucose infusion rate [GIR]) was assessed for up to 24 hours.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Of 46 subjects randomized, all completed both treatment periods and were included in the PK/PD and safety analysis set. Insulin exposure (AUC<sub>IDeg, 0-24 h</sub>, AUC<sub>IAsp, 0-12 h</sub>, and C<sub>max, IAsp</sub>) and activity (GIR<sub>max</sub> and AUC<sub>GIR, 0-24 h</sub>) were comparable (estimates of treatment ratios 0.916 ~ 1.076 for primary PK parameters and 0.946 ~ 1.037 for primary PD parameters), with 90% confidence intervals for the ratios of least square means falling within the range of 0.80 ~ 1.25. Adverse events were similar for both products and no significant safety concerns were noted in the laboratory results, vital signs, or electrocardiogram.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>This study demonstrated the PK/PD similarity of 22,011 to Ryzodeg with a comparable safety profile.</p>","PeriodicalId":12313,"journal":{"name":"Expert opinion on investigational drugs","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":4.9000,"publicationDate":"2025-02-10","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Expert opinion on investigational drugs","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/13543784.2025.2463085","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"PHARMACOLOGY & PHARMACY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Objectives: 22011 is an insulin degludec/insulin aspart co-formulation (IDegAsp) that shares an identical amino acid sequence with Ryzodeg, the originator IDegAsp. This study aimed to compare the pharmacokinetics (PK), pharmacodynamics (PD), and safety of 22,011 with Ryzodeg.
Methods: In a single-center, randomized, open-label, two-treatment, two-period, two-sequence, crossover, euglycemic clamp study, healthy Chinese adults were randomized to receive 0.5 U/kg of 22,011 and Ryzodeg under fasting conditions. PK was evaluated for up to 120 hours and PD (represented by glucose infusion rate [GIR]) was assessed for up to 24 hours.
Results: Of 46 subjects randomized, all completed both treatment periods and were included in the PK/PD and safety analysis set. Insulin exposure (AUCIDeg, 0-24 h, AUCIAsp, 0-12 h, and Cmax, IAsp) and activity (GIRmax and AUCGIR, 0-24 h) were comparable (estimates of treatment ratios 0.916 ~ 1.076 for primary PK parameters and 0.946 ~ 1.037 for primary PD parameters), with 90% confidence intervals for the ratios of least square means falling within the range of 0.80 ~ 1.25. Adverse events were similar for both products and no significant safety concerns were noted in the laboratory results, vital signs, or electrocardiogram.
Conclusion: This study demonstrated the PK/PD similarity of 22,011 to Ryzodeg with a comparable safety profile.
期刊介绍:
Expert Opinion on Investigational Drugs (ISSN 1354-3784 [print], 1744-7658 [electronic]) is a MEDLINE-indexed, peer-reviewed, international journal publishing review articles and original papers on drugs in preclinical and early stage clinical development, providing expert opinion on the scope for future development.
The Editors welcome:
Reviews covering preclinical through to Phase II data on drugs or drug classes for specific indications, and their potential impact on future treatment strategies
Drug Evaluations reviewing the clinical and pharmacological data on a particular drug
Original Research papers reporting the results of clinical investigations on agents that are in Phase I and II clinical trials
The audience consists of scientists, managers and decision-makers in the pharmaceutical industry, and others closely involved in R&D.