A Healthy Participant Study to Evaluate the Bioequivalence of Form H and Form II Tablets of the Smallpox Antiviral Brincidofovir
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: Brincidofovir (BCV) is approved in the US and Canada for the treatment of human smallpox disease in adults and children, including neonates. In long-term storage, the commercially available BCV morphic Form II is slowly converted to a hydrated morphic Form H, which is more stable under ambient conditions. The purpose of this study (NCT05935917) was to compare the Bioequivalence (BE) of the morphic Forms II and H. Methods: This was a Phase 1, open-label, randomized, two-period crossover study completed in healthy adults randomized to receive either a single 100 mg BCV Form II or Form H tablet and followed for 14 days after each dose to assess Pharmacokinetics (PK) and safety. The primary PK endpoints for demonstration of BE were Cmax , AUClast , and AUCinf of BCV in plasma. BE was declared if the 90% Confidence Interval (CI) for the true ratio of test to reference geometric means fell entirely within the range of 0.80 to 1.25 for these endpoints. Results: Forty-four (44) healthy subjects were enrolled, received Form II and Form H treatments, and completed all study visits and safety assessments. For the primary endpoints AUCinf, AUClast , and Cmax, the 90% CIs of the geometric mean ratios for Cmax, AUCinf and AUClast for Form H and Form II fell within the predefined range, thereby demonstrating BE. No new safety signals were identified. Conclusion: Natural conversion of BCV from Form II to Form H over the shelf life does not change the safety or PK profile of BCV in healthy participants. Keywords Brincidofovir; BCV; Bioequivalence; Smallpox; Variola virus
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.010 | 0.002 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".