MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3124773781 · doi:10.1111/cts.12967

Pharmacokinetic equivalence of CT‐P17 to high‐concentration (100 mg/ml) reference adalimumab: A randomized phase I study in healthy subjects

2021· article· en· W3124773781 on OpenAlexaff
Kyung‐Sang Yu, In‐Jin Jang, Hyeong‐Seok Lim, Jang Hee Hong, Min‐Gul Kim, Min Kyu Park, Doo‐Yeoun Cho, Min Soo Park, Jae‐Yong Chung, Jong‐Lyul Ghim, SeungHwan Lee, Seok Kyu Yoon, In Sun Kwon, Sang Joon Lee, Sung Hyun Kim, Yun Ju Bae, Jung Bin, Daniel E. Fürst, Edward Keystone, Jonathan Kay

Bibliographic record

VenueClinical and Translational Science · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldImmunology and Microbiology
TopicBiosimilars and Bioanalytical Methods
Canadian institutionsUniversity of TorontoMount Sinai Hospital
FundersCelltrion
KeywordsAdalimumabMedicinePharmacokineticsBiosimilarEquivalence (formal languages)European unionInternal medicineRandomized controlled trialPharmacologyGastroenterologyMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract This study aimed to demonstrate pharmacokinetic (PK) equivalence of a single dose of the proposed adalimumab biosimilar CT‐P17 to United States‐licensed adalimumab (US‐adalimumab) and European Union‐approved adalimumab (EU‐adalimumab). This double‐blind, parallel‐group, phase I trial (clinicaltrials.gov NCT03970824) was conducted at 10 hospitals (Republic of Korea), in which healthy subjects (1:1:1) were randomized to receive a single 40 mg (100 mg/ml) subcutaneous injection of CT‐P17, US‐adalimumab, or EU‐adalimumab. Primary end points were PK equivalence in terms of: area under the concentration–time curve from time zero to infinity (AUC 0–inf ); AUC from time zero to the last quantifiable concentration (AUC 0–last ); and maximum serum concentration (C max ). PK equivalence was concluded if 90% confidence intervals (CIs) for percent ratios of geometric least squares means (GLSMs) for pairwise comparisons were within the equivalence margin of 80–125%. Additional PK end points, safety, and immunogenicity were evaluated. Of the 312 subjects who were randomized (103 CT‐P17; 103 US‐adalimumab; 106 EU‐adalimumab), 308 subjects received study drug. AUC 0–inf , AUC 0–last , and C max were equivalent among CT‐P17, US‐adalimumab, and EU‐adalimumab, because 90% CIs for the ratios of GLSMs were within the 80–125% equivalence margin for each pairwise comparison. Secondary PK end points, safety, and immunogenicity were similar between treatment groups. In conclusion, PK equivalence for single‐dose administration of CT‐P17, EU‐adalimumab, and US‐adalimumab was demonstrated in healthy adults. Safety and immunogenicity profiles were comparable between treatment groups and consistent with previous reports for adalimumab biosimilars.

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)0.004
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: Randomized trial · Consensus signal: Randomized trial
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.023

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0030.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.001

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 head0.113
GPT teacher head0.461
Teacher spread0.348 · 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 designRandomized 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

Citations17
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueClinical and Translational ScienceSame topicBiosimilars and Bioanalytical MethodsFrench-language works237,207