MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4401668772 · doi:10.5121/ijbb.2024.14306

Bioequivalence and Pharmacokinetic Evaluation of Ethambutol 400 Mg Film-Coated Tablet: A Single-Dose, Open-Label, Randomized, Two-Way Crossover Design Study

2024· article· en· W4401668772 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal on Bioinformatics & Biosciences · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCancer Treatment and Pharmacology
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBioequivalencePharmacokineticsCrossover studyEthambutolOpen labelPharmacologyMedicineChromatographyChemistryIsoniazidAdverse effect

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The objective of this study was to determine the bioequivalence of Ethambutol 400 mg Film-Coated Tablet produced by PT Kimia Farma Tbk compared to the WHOrecommended comparator product, Myambutol 400 mg Film-Coated Tablet produced by Pantheon Inc, Ontario, Canada for STI Pharma LLC, in healthy subjects. The study design used was a randomised two-way crossover design, single dose, open label, under fasting conditions. The number of subjects who completed the study was 29 of 32. Blood samples were collected 18 times. Ethambutol concentrations were determined by LCMS/MS method. Bioequivalence was determined by value of 90% confidence interval (CI) with α = 5.00% within the range of 80.00–125.00% for AUC and Cmax. The results of the statistical analysis for the bioequivalence study comparing the test drug to the comparator drug showed a geometric mean ratio (90% CI) of 103.67% (97.23-110.52%) for the area under the concentration-time curve (AUC0-t) and 91.53% (84.80-98.79%) for the maximum concentration (Cmax). Based on the result, the test drug is bioequivalent to the comparator drug.

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 score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.021

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0060.002
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0020.003
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 head0.158
GPT teacher head0.460
Teacher spread0.302 · 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

Citations0
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal on Bioinformatics & BiosciencesSame topicCancer Treatment and PharmacologyFrench-language works237,207