Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 7 de 7
Filter
Add more filters










Database
Language
Publication year range
1.
Nutrients ; 14(15)2022 Jul 26.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-35893907

ABSTRACT

Retrospective studies showed a relationship between vitamin D status and COVID-19 severity and mortality, with an inverse relation between SARS-CoV-2 positivity and circulating calcifediol levels. The objective of this pilot study was to investigate the effect of vitamin D supplementation on the length of hospital stay and clinical improvement in patients with vitamin D deficiency hospitalized with COVID-19. The study was randomized, double blind and placebo controlled. A total of 50 subjects were enrolled and received, in addition to the best available COVID therapy, either vitamin D (25,000 IU per day over 4 consecutive days, followed by 25,000 IU per week up to 6 weeks) or placebo. The length of hospital stay decreased significantly in the vitamin D group compared to the placebo group (4 days vs. 8 days; p = 0.003). At Day 7, a significantly lower percentage of patients were still hospitalized in the vitamin D group compared to the placebo group (19% vs. 54%; p = 0.0161), and none of the patients treated with vitamin D were hospitalized after 21 days compared to 14% of the patients treated with placebo. Vitamin D significantly reduced the duration of supplemental oxygen among the patients who needed it (4 days vs. 7 days in the placebo group; p = 0.012) and significantly improved the clinical recovery of the patients, as assessed by the WHO scale (p = 0.0048). In conclusion, this study demonstrated that the clinical outcome of COVID-19 patients requiring hospitalization was improved by administration of vitamin D.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Cholecalciferol/therapeutic use , Dietary Supplements , Double-Blind Method , Hospitalization , Humans , Pilot Projects , Retrospective Studies , SARS-CoV-2 , Vitamin D , Vitamins/therapeutic use
2.
Nutrients ; 10(6)2018 May 23.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-29882841

ABSTRACT

We aimed to determine whether a cumulative dose of vitamin D3 produces the same effects on the serum concentration of 25(OH)D3 if it is given daily or monthly. This is a monocentric, two-armed, randomized, interventional, open, and parallel study conducted from November 2016 to March 2017 in Belgium. We randomized 60 subjects with vitamin D deficiency to receive 2000 IU vitamin D3 daily or 50,000 IU monthly. The same cumulative dose of vitamin D3 was given to each treatment group (150,000 IU). The 25(OH)D3 serum concentrations from baseline to day 75 were 14.3 ± 3.7 to 27.8 ± 3.9 ng/mL in the monthly group and 14.1 ± 3.4 to 28.8 ± 5.4 ng/mL in the daily group. The mean change versus the baseline level was significantly different between the groups at day 2, 4, 7, and 14 and no longer different from day 25. One day after the intake of vitamin D3, as expected, serum 25(OH)D3 and 1,25(OH)2D3 increased significantly in the monthly group, whereas they did not change significantly in the daily group. The median time to reach the 20 ng/mL target concentration was significantly different in the two groups, in favor of the monthly regimen (1 day versus 14 days; p = 0.02). In conclusion, a monthly administration of 50,000 IU vitamin D3 provides an effective tool for a rapid normalization of 25(OH)D3 in deficient subjects. A daily administration of the same cumulative dose is similarly effective but takes two weeks longer to reach the desirable level of 20 ng/mL.


Subject(s)
Cholecalciferol/administration & dosage , Dietary Supplements , Vitamin D Deficiency/drug therapy , Adult , Belgium , Biomarkers/blood , Calcifediol/blood , Cholecalciferol/blood , Drug Administration Schedule , Female , Fibroblast Growth Factor-23 , Humans , Male , Middle Aged , Time Factors , Treatment Outcome , Up-Regulation , Vitamin D Deficiency/blood , Vitamin D Deficiency/diagnosis , Young Adult
3.
Nutrients ; 8(5)2016 May 20.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-27213447

ABSTRACT

Vitamin D3 is known to be liposoluble and its release could be a factor limiting the rate of absorption. It was presumed that the presence of fat could favor absorption of vitamin D3. However, as bioavailability is related not only to the active molecules but also to the formulations and excipients used, the optimization of the pharmaceutical form of vitamin D3 is also important. The objective of this study was to evaluate if there is a food effect on absorption when a high dose of vitamin D3 is completely solubilized in an oily solution. In the present cross-over study, 88 subjects were randomized and received a single dose of 50,000 IU of vitamin D3 in fasting state or with a standardized high-fat breakfast. Assessment of serum concentrations of 25 hydroxyvitamin D3 (25(OH)D3) was performed three, five, seven, 14, 30 and 60 days after supplementation. In fed and fast conditions, the 25(OH)D3 serum concentrations were significantly higher than the baseline value three days after administration and remained significantly higher during the first month. No significant difference between fasting vs. fed conditions was observed. It is therefore concluded that the vitamin D3 absorption from an oily solution was not influenced by the presence or absence of a meal.


Subject(s)
Calcifediol/blood , Cholecalciferol/administration & dosage , Dietary Fats/administration & dosage , Dietary Supplements , Food-Drug Interactions , Adult , Belgium , Biological Availability , Biomarkers/blood , Breakfast , Cholecalciferol/blood , Cholecalciferol/pharmacokinetics , Cross-Over Studies , Dietary Fats/metabolism , Female , Gastrointestinal Absorption , Humans , Male , Middle Aged , Postprandial Period , Young Adult
4.
Expert Rev Respir Med ; 10(2): 113-25, 2016 Feb.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-26677916

ABSTRACT

Fixed dose combinations (FDC) of inhaled corticosteroid (ICS) and long-acting beta agonist (LABA) are well established in asthma treatment. The budesonide/salmeterol (B/S) FDC is now about to reach the market. It is provided as powder in hard capsules of two strengths: 120/20µg and 240/20µg when expressed as delivered doses, equivalent to 150/25µg and 300/25µg when expressed as nominal doses. Its development involved 9 pharmacokinetic (320 subjects), 3 phase II (123 subjects) and 4 phase III (1206 patients with different asthma severity) studies. Delivery is effectuated via low resistance inhaler device, Axahaler®, generating also fine particles targeting the small airways. B/S safety, assessed in 1401 subjects, did not outline novel concerns specific for this FDC. In conclusion, the B/S dry powder FDC can be used for asthma treatment in adults not adequately controlled on ICS alone, or to maintain control of ICS/LABA treated patients, in whom switching to alternative FDC is indicated.


Subject(s)
Adrenergic beta-2 Receptor Agonists/administration & dosage , Asthma/drug therapy , Budesonide/administration & dosage , Glucocorticoids/administration & dosage , Salmeterol Xinafoate/administration & dosage , Adrenergic beta-2 Receptor Agonists/pharmacokinetics , Budesonide/pharmacokinetics , Clinical Trials as Topic , Drug Combinations , Drug Evaluation, Preclinical , Glucocorticoids/pharmacokinetics , Humans , Nebulizers and Vaporizers , Salmeterol Xinafoate/pharmacokinetics
5.
Nutrients ; 7(7): 5413-22, 2015 Jul 03.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-26151178

ABSTRACT

Many people worldwide are vitamin D (VTD) deficient or insufficient, and there is still no consensus on the dose of VTD that should be administered to achieve a 25(OH)D concentration of 20 or 30 ng/mL. In this study, we aimed to determine an adapted supplementation of VTD able to quickly and safely increase the vitamin D status of healthy adults with low 25(OH)D. One hundred and fifty (150) subjects were randomized into three groups, each to receive, orally, a loading dose of 50,000, 100,000 or 200,000 IU of VTD3 at Week 0, followed by 25,000, 50,000 or 100,000 IU at Week 4 and Week 8. Whereas 25(OH)D baseline values were not different between groups (p = 0.42), a significant increase was observed at Week 12 (p < 0.0001) with a mean change from baseline of 7.72 ± 5.08, 13.3 ± 5.88 and 20.12 ± 7.79 ng/mL. A plateau was reached after eight weeks. No related adverse event was recorded. This study demonstrated a linear dose-response relationship with an increase in 25(OH)D levels proportional to the dose administered. In conclusion, a loading dose of 200,000 IU VTD3 followed by a monthly dose of 100,000 IU is the best dosing schedule to quickly and safely correct the VTD status.


Subject(s)
Cholecalciferol/administration & dosage , Vitamin D Deficiency/drug therapy , Vitamin D/analogs & derivatives , Vitamins/administration & dosage , Adolescent , Adult , Dietary Supplements , Dose-Response Relationship, Drug , Double-Blind Method , Drug Administration Schedule , Female , Humans , Male , Middle Aged , Vitamin D/blood , Vitamin D Deficiency/blood , Young Adult
6.
J Pharm Pharm Sci ; 18(1): 61-7, 2015.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-25877442

ABSTRACT

PURPOSE: The therapeutic equivalence of multiple registered fenofibrate formulations, several of which are suprabioavailable and therefore marketed at lower dosage strengths than their reference products, is based on the results of bioequivalence studies. Most of these formulations show a higher bioavailability when taken with a high-fat meal. The relative bioavailability of two of these formulations, the 200 mg Lidose hard capsules and the 145 mg nanoparticle tablets, was assessed when taken with a high-fat meal. METHODS: In this single dose, 2-way, randomized, crossover study, 24 healthy subjects received a 200 mg fenofibrate Lidose hard capsule (Test) and a 145 mg nanoparticle tablet (Reference) under high-fat fed conditions. Plasma concentrations of fenofibric acid were measured up to 72 hours by using a validated LC-MS/MS method. RESULTS: The geometric mean ratios (Test/Reference) and the 90% confidence intervals for AUC0-t and Cmax were 1.37 (131.58 - 142.88) and 1.38 (124.60 - 152.93), respectively. The median (range) Tmax- values of fenofibric acid were 4.5 h (3.0 - 8.0 h) and 3.25 h (1.0 - 6.5 h) after administration of the Lidose hard capsule and the nanoparticle tablet, respectively. CONCLUSION: Under high-fat fed conditions the extent of fenofibrate absorption was 37% higher for the 200 mg Lidose hard capsule compared to the 145 mg nanoparticle tablet, which is exactly as expected based on a mg-to-mg weight basis. The results of the present study underline the importance of assessing bioequivalence of fenofibrate formulations under identical fed conditions, and preferentially after a high-fat meal as this condition represents the worst-case scenario. Furthermore, the results of this study demonstrate that the 145 mg nanoparticle tablet is not bioequivalent to the 200 mg Lidose hard capsule when administered under high-fat meal conditions.


Subject(s)
Dietary Fats/administration & dosage , Fenofibrate/analogs & derivatives , Hypolipidemic Agents/pharmacokinetics , Nanoparticles , Adolescent , Adult , Area Under Curve , Biological Availability , Capsules , Chromatography, Liquid/methods , Cross-Over Studies , Female , Fenofibrate/administration & dosage , Fenofibrate/pharmacokinetics , Humans , Hypolipidemic Agents/administration & dosage , Male , Tablets , Tandem Mass Spectrometry/methods , Therapeutic Equivalency , Young Adult
7.
Clin Drug Investig ; 32(4): 281-91, 2012 Apr 01.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-22350498

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Fenofibrate can be prescribed concomitantly with an HMG-CoA reductase inhibitor (statin) to improve achievement of lipid goals in patients with atherogenic mixed hyperlipidaemia. However, some safety concerns, particularly an increased risk of myopathy, have been reported when these drugs are taken together. OBJECTIVE: The aim of this analysis was to assess the general safety and tolerability of a fenofibrate/pravastatin (FF/PRA) 160 mg/40 mg fixed-dose combination (FDC) capsule based on a pooled database of phase III clinical trials in patients with mixed hyperlipidaemia. METHODS: Safety data were pooled from five phase III studies (four double-blind with an uncontrolled extension and one open) of ≥12 to 64 weeks' duration. Adverse event (AE) profiles of FF/PRA 160 mg/40 mg (n=645 in the double-blind cohort) were evaluated relative to comparators (statins, n=519 or fenofibrate, n=122). Absolute incidence rates were calculated in both the double-blind cohort and the all-studies cohort (FF/PRA 160 mg/40 mg, n=1566) for all AEs, drug-related AEs, serious AEs, discontinuations due to AEs, AEs of specific interest including abnormal laboratory data, and deaths. RESULTS: The frequency and/or intensity of overall AEs, drug-related AEs, serious AEs and discontinuations due to AEs were not significantly increased for the FDC (36.0%, 12.3%, 1.7% and 5.1%, respectively) versus the statin (28.7%, 8.9%, 0.8% and 2.7%, respectively) and fenofibrate (59.0%, 21.3%, 0% and 4.9%, respectively) monotherapies. No deaths were reported during the course of treatment in clinical trials. Nevertheless, three deaths were reported more than 30 days after the patients completed the study; none of these deaths were assessed as being related to FF/PRA 160 mg/40 mg treatment. Among the AEs of special interest, no myopathy or rhabdomyolysis were reported; no patients were considered to have experienced a drug-induced liver injury; no case of pancreatitis occurred in the double-blind cohort and four patients reported pancreatitis in the all-studies cohort, two of them being study-treatment related; no case of pulmonary embolism was reported in the double-blind cohort and two patients presented with pulmonary embolism, unrelated to the study drug, in the all-studies cohort; there were more cases of decreased creatinine clearance in the FF/PRA 160 mg/40 mg group (1.7%) than in the statin group (0.6%). CONCLUSION: Within the limitations of this database (notably low percentage of very elderly patients, limited sample size of patients with mild renal insufficiency, and mode of selection in the clinical trials), no particular safety concern was raised with FF/PRA 160 mg/40 mg in the double-blind cohort as compared with statin and fenofibrate monotherapies. The acceptable long-term safety profile of FF/PRA 160 mg/40 mg was confirmed with a low frequency of AEs of interest, comparable to that observed in the 12-week double-blind cohort. Emergent effects possibly related to FF/PRA 160 mg/40 mg were mainly those attributable to fenofibrate (decrease in creatinine clearance and pancreatitis).


Subject(s)
Fenofibrate/adverse effects , Hyperlipidemias/drug therapy , Hypolipidemic Agents/adverse effects , Pravastatin/adverse effects , Adult , Aged , Clinical Trials, Phase III as Topic , Databases, Factual , Double-Blind Method , Drug Combinations , Female , Fenofibrate/administration & dosage , Fenofibrate/therapeutic use , Humans , Hydroxymethylglutaryl-CoA Reductase Inhibitors/administration & dosage , Hydroxymethylglutaryl-CoA Reductase Inhibitors/adverse effects , Hydroxymethylglutaryl-CoA Reductase Inhibitors/therapeutic use , Hypolipidemic Agents/administration & dosage , Hypolipidemic Agents/therapeutic use , Male , Middle Aged , Pravastatin/administration & dosage , Pravastatin/therapeutic use , Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic , Time Factors
SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL
...