MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4381273483 · doi:10.21518/ms2023-052

Bioequivalence and immunogenicity of insulin LisPro biosimilar compared to reference drug

2023· article· en· W4381273483 on OpenAlexaff
Т. Л. Каронова, A. Т. Chernikova, Alexander Yur'evich Mayorov

Bibliographic record

VenueMeditsinskiy sovet = Medical Council · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldImmunology and Microbiology
TopicBiosimilars and Bioanalytical Methods
Canadian institutionsNational Defence Medical Centre
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBioequivalenceMedicinePharmacokineticsInsulin lisproInsulinCrossover studyImmunogenicityArea under the curveConfidence intervalPharmacodynamicsCmaxPharmacologyInternal medicineHypoglycemiaImmune systemImmunology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Introduction . Insulin therapy is the only treatment for type 1 DM and one of the options for intensifying the treatment for type 2 DM. The production of own insulin biosimilars will increase patients access to the providing drugs and can potentially reduce medical costs on healthcare for government. Aim . Compare the equivalence of pharmacokinetics (PK) and pharmacodynamics (PD), safety, efficacy, and immunogenicity between insulin biosimilar RinLis®, 100 IU/ml (LLC GEROPHARM, Russia) to original Humalog®, 100 IU/ml (Lilly France, France). Materials and methods . The clinical trial was conducted in two phases. Phase I – randomized double-blind, two-arm crossover study of PK and PD using hyperinsulinemic euglycemic clamp (HEC) method in 28 healthy volunteers (NCT03604575). During HEC regular blood sampling was performed to assess glucose and insulin concentrations. The glucose infusion rate (GIR) was adjusted based on glycemia measurement. These data were used to calculate the PD parameters: the total area under the GIR-time curve (AUC GIR ) and the maximum GIR over the observation period (GIR max ); PK parameters: the total area under the concentration – time curve (AUC ins. ) and the maximum insulin concentration over the HEC (С ins. max ). Phase II – randomized multicenter open-label comparative study in parallel groups with an assessment the frequency of an immune response after 26 weeks of therapy (NCT04023344). The comparability of the studied drugs was considered proven if 90% confidence intervals (CI) for the ratio of geometric means of FC and PD were in the range of 80–125%. Results . In the course of the study, it was revealed that RinLiz® and Humalog® insulin had comparable PK and PD profiles. The ratio of the geometric mean values of the AUC GIR and GIR max were in the range of 80–125% and amounted to 106 [95–118] % and 108 [97–121] %, respectively. The equivalence also was confirmed by the ratio of the geometric mean values of the AUC ins. and С ins. max , which amounted to 91 [86–97] % and 94 [91–97] %. In the second phase of the study after 26 weeks of therapy the frequency of immune response between two groups did not differ. Conclusion . The obtained data have demonstrated the bioequivalence and immunogenicity of RinLiz® insulin to the original Humalog® in terms of PK, PD and safety parameters.

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)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.007
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.320
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.007
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.001
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 head0.094
GPT teacher head0.316
Teacher spread0.222 · 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.

Study designNot applicable
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
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMeditsinskiy sovet = Medical CouncilSame topicBiosimilars and Bioanalytical MethodsFrench-language works237,207