MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3011153961 · doi:10.1002/cpdd.789

The Bioequivalence of Tafamidis 61‐mg Free Acid Capsules and Tafamidis Meglumine 4 × 20‐mg Capsules in Healthy Volunteers

2020· article· en· W3011153961 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Peter Lockwood, Vu Le, Melissa O’Gorman, Terrell A. Patterson, Marla B. Sultan, Ekaterina Tankisheva, Qiang Wang, Steve Riley

Bibliographic record

VenueClinical Pharmacology in Drug Development · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicAmyloidosis: Diagnosis, Treatment, Outcomes
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersPfizer
KeywordsMedicineBioequivalenceDosingTolerabilityPharmacologyCrossover studyPharmacokineticsInternal medicinePlaceboAdverse effect

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Tafamidis, a non-nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory benzoxazole derivative, acts as a transthyretin (TTR) stabilizer to slow progression of TTR amyloidosis (ATTR). Tafamidis meglumine, available as 20-mg capsules, is approved in more than 40 countries worldwide for the treatment of adults with early-stage symptomatic ATTR polyneuropathy. This agent, administered as an 80-mg, once-daily dose (4 × 20-mg capsules), is approved in the United States, Japan, Canada, and Brazil for the treatment of hereditary and wild-type ATTR cardiomyopathy in adults. An alternative single solid oral dosage formulation (tafamidis 61-mg free acid capsules) was developed and introduced for patient convenience (approved in the United States, United Arab Emirates, and European Union). In this single-center, open-label, randomized, 2-period, 2-sequence, crossover, multiple-dose phase 1 study, the rate and extent of absorption were compared between tafamidis 61-mg free acid capsules (test) and tafamidis meglumine 80-mg (4 × 20-mg) capsules (reference) after 7 days of repeated oral dosing under fasted conditions in 30 healthy volunteers. Ratios of adjusted geometric means (90%CI) for the test/reference formulations were 102.3 (98.0-106.8) for area under the concentration-time profile over the dosing interval and 94.1 (89.1-99.4) for the maximum observed concentration, satisfying prespecified bioequivalence acceptance criteria (90%CI, 80-125). Both tafamidis regimens had an acceptable safety/tolerability profile in this population.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Non-randomized trial · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.018

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0020.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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 head0.033
GPT teacher head0.350
Teacher spread0.317 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNon-randomized trial
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

Citations54
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueClinical Pharmacology in Drug DevelopmentSame topicAmyloidosis: Diagnosis, Treatment, OutcomesFrench-language works237,207