Pharmacokinetics of Lamivudine, Zidovudine, and Nevirapine Administered as a Fixed‐Dose Combination Formulation Versus Coadministration of the Individual Products
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The pharmacokinetics of 150 mg lamivudine, 300 mg zidovudine, and 200 mg nevirapine were assessed following single oral administration of a fixed-dose combination tablet and coadministration of the separate innovator products in healthy male subjects (n = 64) under fasting conditions in an open-label, randomized, 2-way crossover study. Multiple blood samples were collected up to 72 hours and plasma concentrations of antiretrovirals were assayed using liquid chromatography/tandem mass spectrometry methods. Pharmacokinetic parameters were calculated using noncompartmental methods, and bioequivalence was assessed using an analysis of variance model. The ratio of the least squares mean (fixed-dose combination to individual products) and 90% confidence intervals of AUC(0-t), AUC(0-infinity), and C(max) for lamivudine, zidovudine, and nevirapine were all within 80.0% to 125.0%, suggesting a similar rate and extent of antiretroviral exposure in the bloodstream. Mean oral clearance (CL/F) values of lamivudine, zidovudine, and nevirapine for the fixed-dose combination were 23.7, 127, and 1.65 L/h, respectively. The fixed-dose combination and individual products were equally safe and well tolerated, with only a few subjects experiencing drug-related adverse events. The current fixed-dose combination of lamivudine, zidovudine, and nevirapine is expected to provide a similar efficacy/safety profile as coadministration of the individual products, a better adherence to treatment, and considerable cost savings in the treatment of HIV.
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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 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".