MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4293367557 · doi:10.1002/cpdd.1153

Bioequivalence and Relative Bioavailability Studies to Assess a New Acalabrutinib Formulation That Enables Coadministration With Proton‐Pump Inhibitors

2022· article· en· W4293367557 on OpenAlexaff
Shringi Sharma, Xavier Pépin, Haran Burri, Lianqing Zheng, Nataliya Kuptsova‐Clarkson, Anouk de Jong, Ting Yu, Holly L. MacArthur, Michał Majewski, John C. Byrd, Richard R. Furman, Joseph A. Ware, James Mann, David A. Ramies, Veerendra Munugalavadla, Louise Sheridan, Helen Tomkinson

Bibliographic record

VenueClinical Pharmacology in Drug Development · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicChronic Lymphocytic Leukemia Research
Canadian institutionsAstraZeneca (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBioavailabilityPharmacokineticsMedicinePharmacologyTolerabilityBioequivalenceChemistryAdverse effect

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Acalabrutinib is a Bruton tyrosine kinase (BTK) inhibitor approved to treat adults with chronic lymphocytic leukemia, small lymphocytic lymphoma, or previously treated mantle cell lymphoma. As the bioavailability of the acalabrutinib capsule (AC) depends on gastric pH for solubility and is impaired by acid‐suppressing therapies, coadministration with proton‐pump inhibitors (PPIs) is not recommended. Three studies in healthy subjects (N = 30, N = 66, N = 20) evaluated the pharmacokinetics (PKs), pharmacodynamics (PDs), safety, and tolerability of acalabrutinib maleate tablet (AT) formulated with pH‐independent release. Subjects were administered AT or AC (orally, fasted state), AT in a fed state, or AT in the presence of a PPI, and AT or AC via nasogastric (NG) route. Acalabrutinib exposures (geometric mean [% coefficient of variation, CV]) were comparable for AT versus AC (AUCinf 567.8 ng h/mL [36.9] vs 572.2 ng h/mL [38.2], Cmax 537.2 ng/mL [42.6] vs 535.7 ng/mL [58.4], respectively); similar results were observed for acalabrutinib's active metabolite (ACP‐5862) and for AT‐NG versus AC‐NG. The geometric mean Cmax for acalabrutinib was lower when AT was administered in the fed versus the fasted state (Cmax 255.6 ng/mL [%CV, 46.5] vs 504.9 ng/mL [49.9]); AUCs were similar. For AT + PPI, geometric mean Cmax was lower (371.9 ng/mL [%CV, 81.4] vs 504.9 ng/mL [49.9]) and AUCinf was higher (AUCinf 694.1 ng h/mL [39.7] vs 559.5 ng h/mL [34.6]) than AT alone. AT and AC were similar in BTK occupancy. Most adverse events were mild with no new safety concerns. Acalabrutinib formulations were comparable and AT could be coadministered with PPIs, food, or via NG tube without affecting the PKs or PDs.

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 score0.015

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.240
GPT teacher head0.481
Teacher spread0.241 · 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

Citations26
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueClinical Pharmacology in Drug DevelopmentSame topicChronic Lymphocytic Leukemia ResearchFrench-language works237,207