MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2792844048 · doi:10.1093/jcag/gwy008.228

A227 ASSESSING THE BIOEQUIVALENCE OF NON-PRESCRIPTION ESOMEPRAZOLE 20 MG BANDED CAPSULES AND MULTIPLE-UNIT PELLET SYSTEM TABLETS UNDER FASTED AND FED CONDITION

2018· article· en· W2792844048 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Vidyavati Krishnan Kumaran, J Li, Charles V. Pollack, Sebastian Moreira

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of the Canadian Association of Gastroenterology · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicPharmaceutical studies and practices
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersPfizer
KeywordsBioequivalenceEsomeprazoleCrossover studyCmaxConfidence intervalBioavailabilityGeometric meanMedicineMathematicsAnimal sciencePharmacologyInternal medicineStatisticsPlaceboBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Esomeprazole (ESO) 20 mg will soon be available in Canada without a prescription for treating frequent heartburn. This study assessed bioequivalence between ESO 20 mg multiunit pellet system (MUPS) tablets and banded capsules. This open-label, randomized, 6-period crossover, partial-replicate study administered single doses of each study drug to healthy males and females under fasted and fed conditions. Reference product (banded capsules) administration was replicated in both the fasted and fed states to establish intrasubject variability for determining the bioequivalence method that will be used. For endpoints with high variability (based on intrasubject standard deviation [SD]) with the reference product (Swr ≥0.294) a reference-scaled average bioequivalence (RSAB) approach was used; an unscaled approach was used for endpoints with low intrasubject variability (Swr <0.294). The primary endpoints were ESO area under the concentration-time curve from zero to infinity (AUCinf) and peak plasma concentrations (Cmax) while fasted and fed. Bioequivalence was based on the geometric mean ratios (GMRs) being within 0.80, 1.25 and 95% criteria bound (CB) being ≤0 for the RSAB approach, and the 90% confidence intervals (CIs) of the GMR being within 80%, 125% for the unscaled approach. Of the 60 randomized subjects, 46 (76.7%) completed all study periods. While fasted, the mean (SD) ESO AUCinf was 1035.5 (925.7) ng*h/mL for the banded capsules and 985.5 (802.1) ng*h/mL for the MUPS tablets. The GMR (90% CI) was 0.948 (0.890, 1.010), indicating bioequivalence (unscaled). The fasted mean (SD) ESO Cmax was 511.3 (287.5) ng/mL for the banded capsule and 528.3 (292.1) ng/mL for the MUPS tablet. The GMR (95% CB) was 1.009 (-0.050), indicating bioequivalence (RSAB). Consistent with historical data, ESO AUCinf and Cmax were noticeably lower in the fed state for the ESO 20 mg banded capsule (537.9 [538.2] ng*h/mL; 154.5 [109.7] ng/mL) and MUPS tablet (637.1 [586.8] ng*h/mL; 217.9 [162.0] ng/mL) versus the fasted state. The GMR (95% CB) for AUCinf met bioequivalence criteria (0.994 [-0.061]), but Cmax (1.341 [-0.156]) did not (both RSAB). The ESO 20 mg MUPS tablets and banded capsules were found to be bioequivalent based on ESO AUCinf and Cmax under fasted conditions, suggesting these products can be used interchangeably. ClinicalTrials.gov Registration: Per the FDAAA 801 definition of an applicable clinical trial, this phase 1 trial was not registered. Medical writing support was provided by Dennis Stancavish of Peloton Advantage, LLC, and was funded by Pfizer Inc.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.036
Threshold uncertainty score0.984

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.030
GPT teacher head0.319
Teacher spread0.289 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of the Canadian Association of GastroenterologySame topicPharmaceutical studies and practicesFrench-language works237,207