Comparative bioavailability of two oral formulations of clopidogrel: Determination of clopidogrel and its carboxylic acid metabolite (SR26334) under fasting and fed conditions in healthy subjects
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Two randomized, single dose, 2-period, 2-sequence crossover studies were conducted to evaluate the comparative bioavailability of two clopidogrel formulations under fasting and fed conditions. Assessment of bioequivalence was based upon measurement of plasma concentrations of the parent drug, clopidogrel, and its major (inactive) metabolite, clopidogrel carboxylic acid, using improved methanol-free extraction. Bioequivalence of Krka's formulation to the innovator's formulation was demonstrated under both fasting and fed conditions on 205 volunteers. Confidence intervals for AUC0-t, AUC0-inf and Cmax of clopidogrel and its main metabolite were well within the acceptance range of 80.00 to 125.00 %. Food substantially increased the bioavailability of clopidogrel from both formulations, while no effect of food on the extent and rate of exposure to the metabolite was observed. The effect of food was comparable between the two formulations, as indicated by the same direction and rank of food impact on the bioavailability of both formulations.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".