MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4413419348 · doi:10.1002/cpdd.1601

Pharmacokinetics and Pharmacodynamics of Faldaprevir Following Multiple Oral Rising Doses in Healthy Volunteers and Subjects with Gilbert's Syndrome

2025· article· en· W4413419348 on OpenAlexaff
Mabrouk Elgadi, Chan‐Loi Yong, Jan M. Wruck, Curtis Cooper, Anne‐Marie Quinson, Fenglei Huang

Bibliographic record

VenueClinical Pharmacology in Drug Development · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicDrug Transport and Resistance Mechanisms
Canadian institutionsOttawa Hospital
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTolerabilityMedicinePharmacokineticsPharmacodynamicsDosingPlaceboPharmacologyGastroenterologyAdverse effectInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Faldaprevir (FDV) is an investigational NS3/NS4A protease inhibitor for chronic hepatitis C. This study evaluated the safety, tolerability, and pharmacokinetics (PK) of FDV after multiple rising doses in healthy male volunteers and subjects with Gilbert syndrome (GS). In this randomized, double‐blind, placebo‐controlled study, healthy males received once‐daily oral FDV (20, 48, 120 mg [ n = 6 per group], 240 mg [ n = 5]), or placebo ( n = 7). A single dose was given on Day 1, followed by a 72‐h washout and 21 days of dosing from day 4. Separately, 9 GS subjects received open‐label FDV 240 mg daily for 28 days. PK was assessed after the first and last doses; safety was evaluated throughout. FDV showed greater than dose‐proportional increases in exposure (gMean C max,ss : 99–5360 ng/mL; AUC τ ,ss : 1740–50,100 h·ng/mL) and time‐dependent PK with a linearity index >1. Mean t 1/2 was 20–30 h; steady state was reached in 6–7 days with an accumulation ratio of 2.8–3.1. FDV exposure in GS subjects was similar but slightly lower. Total bilirubin increased dose‐dependently, with higher indirect bilirubin in GS subjects. FDV exhibited non‐linear, time‐dependent PK and was generally well tolerated up to 240 mg/day in subjects with or without GS.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.039
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.020
GPT teacher head0.355
Teacher spread0.335 · 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.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
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
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueClinical Pharmacology in Drug DevelopmentSame topicDrug Transport and Resistance MechanismsFrench-language works237,207