Physical, mechanical, and biological properties of collagen membranes for guided bone regeneration: a comparative in vitro study.

BACKGROUND: To provide a reference for clinical selection of collagen membranes by analyzing the properties of three kinds of collagen membranes widely used in clinics: Bio-Gide membrane from porcine dermis (PD), Heal-All membrane from bovine dermis (BD), and Lyoplant membrane from bovine pericardium (BP). METHODS: The barrier function of three kinds of collagen membranes were evaluated by testing the surface morphology, mechanical properties, hydrophilicity, and degradation rate of collagen membranes in collagenase and artificial saliva. In addition, the bioactivity of each collagen membrane as well as the proliferation and osteogenesis of MC3T3-E1 cells were evaluated. Mass spectrometry was also used to analyze the degradation products. RESULTS: The BP membrane had the highest tensile strength and Young's modulus as well as the largest water contact angle. The PD membrane exhibited the highest elongation at break, the smallest water contact angle, and the lowest degradation weight loss. The BD membrane had the highest degradation weight loss, the highest number of proteins in its degradation product, the strongest effect on the proliferation of MC3T3-E1 cells, and the highest expression level of osteogenic genes. CONCLUSIONS: The PD membrane is the best choice for shaping and maintenance time, while the BD membrane is good for osteogenesis, and the BP membrane is suitable for spatial maintenance. To meet the clinical requirements of guided bone regeneration, using two different kinds of collagen membranes concurrently to exert their respective advantages is an option worth considering.

Pharmacokinetics and safety of a new generic lurasidone: a phase I bioequivalence study in healthy Chinese subjects.

Latuda® is a novel antipsychotic drug for schizophrenia and bipolar depression. A bioequivalence trial was performed to investigate the bioequivalence of Latuda® and its generic drug lurasidone. Two independent trials were carried out, each involving 28 subjects. In the fasting trial, subjects were randomly assigned to two groups (1:1 ratio), receiving either 40 mg of generic lurasidone or Latuda®. After a 7-day washout period, subjects entered the second period with a crossover administration of 40 mg of generic lurasidone or Latuda®. The postprandial study design was similar to that of the fasting study. In the fasting study, the pharmacokinetic (PK) parameter values of generic lurasidone and Latuda® were as follows: the Cmax was 28.84 ± 19.34 ng/ml and 28.22 ± 21.19 ng/ml, respectively; the AUC0-t was 121.39 ± 58.47 h*ng/ml and 118.35 ± 52.24 h*ng/ml, respectively; and the AUC0-∞ was 129.63 ± 63.26 h*ng/ml and 126.59 ± 57.99 h*ng/ml, respectively. The primary pharmacokinetic parameter, Cmax, was assessed for equivalence using reference-scaled average bioequivalence (RSABE), while other parameters (AUC0-t, AUC0-∞) were evaluated using average bioequivalence (ABE). The results indicate that both Cmax and AUC meet the equivalence criteria. In the postprandial study, the PK values of generic lurasidone and Latuda® were as follows: the Cmax was 74.89 ± 32.06 ng/ml and 83.51 ± 33.52 ng/ml, respectively; the AUC0-t was 274.77 ± 103.05 h*ng/ml and 289.26 ± 95.25 h*ng/ml, respectively; and the AUC0-∞ was 302.44 ± 121.60 h*ng/ml and 316.32 ± 109.04 h*ng/ml, respectively. The primary pharmacokinetic parameters (Cmax, AUC0-t, AUC0-∞) were assessed for equivalence using ABE, and both met the equivalence criteria. In the study, lurasidone and Latuda® both exhibited acceptable safety and tolerability. The results displayed that lurasidone and Latuda® were bioequivalent and safe in healthy Chinese participants. Clinical Trial Registry: This trial is registered at chinadrugtrials.org.cn (no.: CTR20191717, date: 2019.08.29).

A randomized, open-label, two-cycle, two-crossover phase I clinical trial comparing the bioequivalence and safety of afatinib and Giotrif® in healthy Chinese subjects.

OBJECTIVE: Afatinib is an oral, irreversible ErbB family blocker. It binds covalently to the kinase domains of epidermal growth factor (EGFR), HER2 and HER4, resulting in irreversible inhibition of tyrosine kinase autophosphorylation. Our trial compared the bioequivalence and safety between afatinib produced by Chia Tai Tianqing Pharmaceutical Group Co., Ltd. and Giotrif® produced by Boehringer Ingelheim. METHODS: Healthy Chinese subjects (N = 36) were randomly divided into two groups at a ratio of 1:1. There was a single dose per period of afatinib and Giotrif®. The washout was set as 14 days. Plasma drug concentrations of afatinib and Giotrif® were analyzed by liquid chromatography-tandem mass spectrometry (LC-MS/MS). Statistical analysis of major pharmacokinetic (PK) parameters was conducted to assess drug bioequivalence. In addition, we evaluated the safety of the drugs throughout the trial. RESULTS: The geometric mean ratios (GMRs) of Cmax, AUC0-t, and AUC0-∞ for afatinib and Giotrif® were 102.80%, 101.83%, and 101.58%, respectively. The 90% confidence intervals (CIs) were all within 80%-125%, meeting the bioequivalence standards. In addition, both drugs showed a good safety profile during the trial. CONCLUSION: This study showed that afatinib was bioequivalent to Giotrif® in healthy Chinese subjects with well safety. CHINESE CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRY: This trial is registered at the Chinese Clinical Trial website ( http://www.chinadrugtrials.org.cn/index.html # CTR20171160).

Comparing the bioequivalence and safety of liraglutide in healthy Chinese subjects: an open, single-dose, randomized, repeated, two-sequence, two-cycle phase I clinical trial.

BACKGROUND: Glucagon-like peptide-1 (GLP-1) is an endogenous incretin hormone. Liraglutide, a GLP-1 receptor agonist, can lower blood sugar by increasing insulin production and inhibiting the production of glucagon. This study researched the bioequivalence and safety of the test and reference drugs in healthy Chinese subjects. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: Subjects (N = 28) were randomly divided into group A and group B at a ratio of 1:1 for a two-cycle cross-over study. There was single dose per cycle with subcutaneous injection of the test and reference drugs, respectively. The washout was set at 14 days. Plasma drug concentrations were detected by specific liquid chromatography and tandem mass spectrometry (LC-MS/MS) assays. Statistical analysis of major pharmacokinetic (PK) parameters was conducted to assess drug bioequivalence. In addition, we evaluated the safety of the drugs throughout the trial. RESULTS: The geometric mean ratios (GMRs) of Cmax, AUC0-t, and AUC0-∞ for the test and reference drugs were 107.11%, 106.56%, 106.09%, respectively. The 90% confidence intervals (CIs) were all within 80%-125%, meeting the bioequivalence standards. In addition, both had good safety in this study. CONCLUSION: The study shows that the two drugs had similar bioequivalence and safety. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: DCTR: CTR20190914; ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT05029076.

Corrigendum: Pharmacokinetics, Immunogenicity and Safety Study for SHR-1309 Injection and Perjeta® in Healthy Chinese Male Volunteers.

[This corrects the article DOI: 10.3389/fphar.2021.660541.].

A randomized, double-blind, single-dose, two-way, parallel phase I clinical study comparing the pharmacokinetics and safety of adalimumab injecta and Humira® in healthy Chinese male volunteers.

BACKGROUND: Humira® is a fully humanized anti-tumor necrosis factor (TNF-α) monoclonal antibody that has been marketed and approved in the United States for the clinical treatment of rheumatoid arthritis (RA), ankylosing spondylitis, psoriasis and other immune-mediated diseases. This study compared the bioequivalence, immunogenicity and safety of adalimumab injecta (a biosimilar of Humira® produced by Chia Tai Tianqing Pharmaceutical Group Co., Ltd) and Humira® in healthy Chinese male subjects in a phase I clinical study. METHODS: Healthy Chinese male subjects (N = 164) were randomly given a subcutaneous injection of 40 mg adalimumab or Humira® at a 1:1 ratio. Plasma drug concentrations were detected by enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA), and primary pharmacokinetic (PK) parameters were statistically analyzed. To evaluate drug immunogenicity, anti-drug antibody (ADA) and neutralizing antibody (nAb) levels were detected. To evaluate the safety of the drugs, the subjects' physical indicators, such as multiple vital signs and routine blood tests, were continuously monitored. RESULTS: The similarity ratios of adalimumab and Humira® PK parameters were all within 80%-125%, meeting the bioequivalence standards. Drug-induced ADA and nAb levels were similar, and the drug safety in subjects was also similar. CONCLUSIONS: All study drugs showed similar bioequivalence, immunogenicity and safety. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: CTR20182070 (Chinese Clinical Trial Registry).

Pharmacokinetics and safety of the two oral cefaclor formulations in healthy chinese subjects in the fasting and postprandial states.

We conducted a phase I bioequivalence trial in healthy Chinese subjects in the fasting and postprandial states. The goal of this trial was to compare the pharmacokinetics and safety of the test preparation Cefaclor granule (Disha Pharmaceutical Group Co., Ltd.) and the reference preparation Cefaclor suspension (Ceclor®, Eli Lilly and Company). In this trial, 24 subjects were selected in the fasting and postprandial states, respectively. Enrolled subjects randomly accepted a single dose of 0.125 g Cefaclor granule or Cefaclor suspension. The washout period was set as 2 days. Blood samples were collected within 8 h after administration in the fasting state and within 10 h after administration in the postprandial state. Plasma concentrations were determined by Liquid chromatography-tandem mass spectrometry (LC-MS/MS). Pharmacokinetic parameters (AUC, Cmax) were used to evaluate bioequivalence of the two drugs. In the fasting trial, the geometric mean ratios (90% confidence intervals CIs) for Cmax, AUC0-t, and AUC0-∞ were 93.01% (85.96%-100.63%), 97.92% (96.49%-99.38%) and 97.95% (96.52%-99.41%), respectively. The GMR (90% CIs) for Cmax, AUC0-t, and AUC0-∞ in postprandial state were 89.27% (81.97%-97.22%), 97.31% (95.98%-98.65%) and 97.31% (95.93%-98.71%), respectively. The 90% CIs of AUC and Cmax in the fasting and postprandial states were within the 80-125% bioequivalence range. Therefore, Cefaclor granule and Cefaclor suspension were bioequivalent and displayed similar safety profiles. Furthermore, food intake affected the pharmacokinetic parameters of both drugs.

A randomized, double-blind, single-dose, single-center, parallel phase I clinical study comparing the pharmacokinetics, immunogenicity, safety, and tolerance of pertuzumab injection and Perjeta® in healthy Chinese male subjects.

BACKGROUND: Perjeta® is a recombinant, humanized monoclonal antibody that has been marketed and approved for the targeted therapy of human epidermal growth factor receptor (HER2) positive breast cancer in the United States. This study compared the bioequivalence, immunogenicity, and safety of pertuzumab injection (a biosimilar of Perjeta® produced by Chia Tai Tianqing Pharmaceutical Group Co., Ltd) and Perjeta® (produced by Roche Pharma AG) in healthy Chinese males. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: Healthy Chinese male subjects (N = 87) were randomly given intravenous injection of 5 mg/kg pertuzumab or Perjeta® at a 1:1 ratio. Plasma drug concentrations were detected by enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay, and primary pharmacokinetic parameters were statistically analyzed. We detected the levels of anti-drug antibody (ADA) and neutralizing antibody (nAb) to evaluate drug immunogenicity and safety of the drugs throughout the study. RESULTS: The geometric mean ratios of AUC0-t, Cmax, and AUC0-∞ for pertuzumab and Perjeta® were 100.42%, 96.71%, and 101.47%, respectively. The 90% CIs were all within 80%-125%, meeting the bioequivalence standards. The levels of ADA and nAb were similar. In addition, both had good safety in the study. CONCLUSION: The study shows that pertuzumab injection and Perjeta® had similar bioequivalence, immunogenicity, and safety.

A randomized, crossover, phase I clinical study to evaluate bioequivalence and safety of tofacitinib and Xeljanz® in Chinese healthy subjects.

OBJECTIVE: Tofacitinib is an oral Janus kinase (JAK) inhibitor that has been marketed and approved in the USA for the clinical treatment of rheumatoid arthritis, psoriasis and other inflammatory and autoimmune diseases. A phase I clinical trial was conducted to compare the bioequivalence and safety of tofacitinib (Chia Tai Tianqing Pharmaceutical Group Co., Ltd.) and Xeljanz® (Pfizer Inc.) in healthy Chinese subjects, providing basis for the clinical application of tofacitinib. METHODS: Healthy Chinese subjects (N = 32) were randomly assigned to two groups at a 1:1 ratio. Subjects orally took 5 mg tofacitinib or Xeljanz® per cycle in random sequence. Blood samples were collected at 15 sampling points per cycle, and plasma drug concentrations of tofacitinib or Xeljanz® were analyzed by liquid chromatography-tandem mass spectrometry (LC-MS/MS) and statistical analysis for the pharmacokinetic (PK) parameters. Subjects' physical indicators were monitored during the whole process to evaluate drug safety. RESULTS: The adjusted geometric mean ratios (GMRs) of the peak concentration (Cmax), area under the curve (AUC) from time zero to the last measurable concentration (AUC0-t) and AUC from time zero to observed infinity (AUC0-∞) were all within the range of 80-125%. The other PK parameter values were similar. The above values were all meeting the bioequivalence criteria with well safety. CONCLUSION: The pharmacokinetic parameters and safety profile of tofacitinib were similar to those of Xeljanz® in healthy Chinese subjects. Therefore, tofacitinib can be considered bioequivalent to Xeljanz®, and the findings of this trial will promote the clinical application of tofacitinib.

A randomized, open-label, single-dose, two-cycle crossover study to evaluate the bioequivalence and safety of lenvatinib and Lenvima® in Chinese healthy subjects.

BACKGROUND: Lenvatinib is a tyrosine kinase receptor inhibitor that inhibits vascular and endothelial growth factor receptor kinase activity. This study evaluated the bioequivalence and safety of lenvatinib with Lenvima® . RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: The fasting and postprandial groups were two independent trials. Subjects were randomly divided into two sequences at a ratio of 1:1 for two-cycle crossover administration. Subjects took 10 mg lenvatinib or Lenvima® once per cycle. The wash-out period was 14 days. Detected the plasma drug concentrations and assessed the bioequivalence of two drugs. Besides, we evaluated the safety of the drugs throughout the trial. RESULTS: In the fasting state, the GMRs of Cmax, AUC0-t, and AUC0-∞ were 99.89%, 102.98% and 103.19%, respectively. The 90% CIs were all within 80%-125%. In the postprandial state, the GMRs of Cmax, AUC0-t, and AUC0-∞ were 98.96%, 94.25% and 95.27%, respectively. The 90% CIs were all within 80%-125%. All results met the bioequivalence criteria. Both drugs had good safety and tolerance in this trial. CONCLUSION: This study showed that lenvatinib and Lenvima® had similar bioequivalence and safety in healthy Chinese subjects under fasting and postprandial conditions. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: This trial is registered at the Chinese Clinical Trial website (http://www.chinadrugtrials.org.cn/index.html # CTR20191172).

The Toxic Effects of Ethylene Glycol Tetraacetate Acid, Ferrum Lek and Methanol on the Glutathione System: correction Options.

Objectives: The purpose of this study was to measure the level of lipid peroxidation and investigate the response of the glutathione system to toxic doses of ethylene glycol tetraacetate acid (EGTA), Ferrum Lek, methanol, and Depakine (valproate sodium). Methods: This study focused on analyzing the toxic effects of EGTA, Ferrum Lek and methanol on lipid peroxidation processes and glutathione levels in animals. The study involved 375 outbred adult mice, of both sexes, weighing 28-31 g, and 100 outbred rats, weighing 180-200 g. Results: After 14 days of valproate sodium/ademethionine treatment, the GR (glutathione reductase) activity in experimental animals continued to be higher than in controls. Using EGTA enhanced glutathione reductase and glutathione S transferase activities in the liver and kidney. The activity of glutathione peroxidase, however, increased only in the kidney (2.1-fold, p ≤ 0.001), while in the liver, a 31% drop was observed (p ≤ 0.05). The 15-mg and 30-mg doses of Ferrum Lek caused the liver level of thiobarbituric acid reactive substances to grow 3- and 3.5-fold, respectively (p ≤ 0.001). Conclusion: The results of the study indicate that poisoning affected practically all components of the glutathione system. The oxidative stress was likely to result from an increased generation of reactive oxygen species against the background of inhibited antioxidant protection.

Pharmacokinetics, Immunogenicity and Safety Study for SHR-1309 Injection and Perjeta® in Healthy Chinese Male Volunteers.

Objectives: Pertuzumab is a monoclonal antibody for the treatment of breast cancer. The aim of this study was to compare the pharmacokinetics, immunogenicity and safety of the test preparation SHR-1309 injecta and the reference preparation Perjeta® in healthy Chinese male subjects. Methods: In this randomized, double-blind, single dose, two-way, parallel bioequivalence trial, a total of 80 qualified Chinese male subjects were selected and randomly divided into two groups. Each subject was intravenously injected with SHR-1309 or Perjeta®. Blood samples were collected at 21 different time points for pharmacokinetic analysis. In addition, immunogenicity was assessed at five different time points. The safety of the medication was monitored throughout the whole trial. Results: Cmax and AUC0-t were the primary pharmacokinetic parameters. Under a 90% confidence interval, their geometric mean ratios were 98.30 and 88.41% for SHR-1309 injection and Perjeta®, respectively. The geometric mean ratio of secondary pharmacokinetic parameters AUC0-∞ was 88.58%. These evaluation indexes are in the standard range of 80-125%, so SHR-1309 can be considered bioequivalent to Perjeta®. After 1,680 h (day 70) of administration, the two groups had 12 and 13 subjects who produced antidrug antibody (ADA), respectively. The occurrence time and proportion of ADA in SHR-1309 and Perjeta® were similar between subjects, and they had similar immunogenicity. During the entire trial period, there were 71 drug-related adverse reactions in 29 subjects who received SHR-1309 and 61 drug-related adverse reactions in 32 subjects who received Perjeta®. The incidence of adverse reactions between the two drugs was similar. Conclusion: The pharmacokinetic parameters, immunogenicity and safety of the biosimilar SHR-1309 injection produced by Shanghai Hengrui Pharmaceutical Co. Ltd. were similar to the original drug Perjeta® produced by Roche Pharma AG. The two drugs met the bioequivalence evaluation criteria. Therefore, SHR-1309 is bioequivalent to Perjeta®. Clinical trial registration: CTR20200,738.