Sergei Noskov, Olesya Parulya, Lyudmila Lutskova, Anna Arefeva, Ekaterina Protsenko, Veniamin Banko, Kseniia Radaeva, Iuliia Matvienko, Maria Gefen, Polina Karnakova, Alina Knyazeva, Timofey Komarov, Olga Archakova, Igor Shohin
{"title":"与品牌产品相比,仿制药 Glecaprevir/Pibrentasvir 的生物等效性和安全性:一项针对健康志愿者的随机交叉研究。","authors":"Sergei Noskov, Olesya Parulya, Lyudmila Lutskova, Anna Arefeva, Ekaterina Protsenko, Veniamin Banko, Kseniia Radaeva, Iuliia Matvienko, Maria Gefen, Polina Karnakova, Alina Knyazeva, Timofey Komarov, Olga Archakova, Igor Shohin","doi":"10.1002/cpdd.1463","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>This was an open-label, randomized, single-dose, 2-period, crossover clinical trial with an adaptive design to evaluate the bioequivalence and comparative pharmacokinetics of generic glecaprevir/pibrentasvir versus the brand name product in healthy White male and female volunteers under fed conditions. Safety profiles were also assessed. A total of 56 healthy adult volunteers were enrolled and randomly assigned in a 1:1 ratio to receive a single dose of either the generic or reference formulation. After a 7-day washout period, subjects received the alternate product. Blood samples were collected at pre-specified time points up to 48 hours post-dosing. Plasma concentrations of glecaprevir and pibrentasvir were determined using a validated high-performance liquid chromatography-tandem mass spectrometry method. The geometric mean ratios of the test to the reference formulation for maximum plasma concentration (C<sub>max</sub>) and area under the concentration-time curve from drug administration to the last measurable concentration (AUC<sub>0-t</sub>) fell within the predefined bioequivalence range of 80%-125%. Both formulations demonstrated comparable pharmacokinetic profiles for glecaprevir and pibrentasvir, and can be considered bioequivalent. No adverse events were reported, and both formulations were well tolerated by all participants.</p>","PeriodicalId":10495,"journal":{"name":"Clinical Pharmacology in Drug Development","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.5000,"publicationDate":"2024-08-14","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Bioequivalence and Safety of Generic Glecaprevir/Pibrentasvir Compared to a Branded Product: A Randomized, Crossover Study in Healthy Volunteers.\",\"authors\":\"Sergei Noskov, Olesya Parulya, Lyudmila Lutskova, Anna Arefeva, Ekaterina Protsenko, Veniamin Banko, Kseniia Radaeva, Iuliia Matvienko, Maria Gefen, Polina Karnakova, Alina Knyazeva, Timofey Komarov, Olga Archakova, Igor Shohin\",\"doi\":\"10.1002/cpdd.1463\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>This was an open-label, randomized, single-dose, 2-period, crossover clinical trial with an adaptive design to evaluate the bioequivalence and comparative pharmacokinetics of generic glecaprevir/pibrentasvir versus the brand name product in healthy White male and female volunteers under fed conditions. Safety profiles were also assessed. A total of 56 healthy adult volunteers were enrolled and randomly assigned in a 1:1 ratio to receive a single dose of either the generic or reference formulation. After a 7-day washout period, subjects received the alternate product. Blood samples were collected at pre-specified time points up to 48 hours post-dosing. Plasma concentrations of glecaprevir and pibrentasvir were determined using a validated high-performance liquid chromatography-tandem mass spectrometry method. The geometric mean ratios of the test to the reference formulation for maximum plasma concentration (C<sub>max</sub>) and area under the concentration-time curve from drug administration to the last measurable concentration (AUC<sub>0-t</sub>) fell within the predefined bioequivalence range of 80%-125%. Both formulations demonstrated comparable pharmacokinetic profiles for glecaprevir and pibrentasvir, and can be considered bioequivalent. No adverse events were reported, and both formulations were well tolerated by all participants.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":10495,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Clinical Pharmacology in Drug Development\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.5000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-08-14\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Clinical Pharmacology in Drug Development\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1002/cpdd.1463\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"PHARMACOLOGY & PHARMACY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Clinical Pharmacology in Drug Development","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1002/cpdd.1463","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"PHARMACOLOGY & PHARMACY","Score":null,"Total":0}
Bioequivalence and Safety of Generic Glecaprevir/Pibrentasvir Compared to a Branded Product: A Randomized, Crossover Study in Healthy Volunteers.
This was an open-label, randomized, single-dose, 2-period, crossover clinical trial with an adaptive design to evaluate the bioequivalence and comparative pharmacokinetics of generic glecaprevir/pibrentasvir versus the brand name product in healthy White male and female volunteers under fed conditions. Safety profiles were also assessed. A total of 56 healthy adult volunteers were enrolled and randomly assigned in a 1:1 ratio to receive a single dose of either the generic or reference formulation. After a 7-day washout period, subjects received the alternate product. Blood samples were collected at pre-specified time points up to 48 hours post-dosing. Plasma concentrations of glecaprevir and pibrentasvir were determined using a validated high-performance liquid chromatography-tandem mass spectrometry method. The geometric mean ratios of the test to the reference formulation for maximum plasma concentration (Cmax) and area under the concentration-time curve from drug administration to the last measurable concentration (AUC0-t) fell within the predefined bioequivalence range of 80%-125%. Both formulations demonstrated comparable pharmacokinetic profiles for glecaprevir and pibrentasvir, and can be considered bioequivalent. No adverse events were reported, and both formulations were well tolerated by all participants.
期刊介绍:
Clinical Pharmacology in Drug Development is an international, peer-reviewed, online publication focused on publishing high-quality clinical pharmacology studies in drug development which are primarily (but not exclusively) performed in early development phases in healthy subjects.