3 research outputs found

    Bioequivalence study of generic nirmatrelvir in healthy volunteers

    Get PDF
    Nirmatrelvir is an antiviral drug that, in combination with ritonavir, is an effective agent for the etiotropic therapy of patients with mild to moderate COVID-19.The aim of the study was to evaluate bioequivalence of the generic drug nirmatrelvir Аrpaxel in combination with ritonavir and the original drug Paxlovid, which is a combination of nirmatrelvir/ritonavir, in a single dose administration to healthy volunteers.Materials and methods. This research was an open-label, randomized, two-period crossover bioequivalence study. It included 2 periods, in each of which the volunteers received either a test drug (nirmatrelvir at the dose of 300 mg) in combination with ritonavir (100 mg), or a reference drug (a combination of nirmatrelvir 300 mg and ritonavir 100 mg), given as a single dose. A wash-out period between each of the administrations was 7 days. The blood sampling to determine the concentration of nirmatrelvir was carried out in the range from 0 to 36 h in each of the study periods. A nirmatrelvir concentration was determined by a validated HPLC-MS/MS method with a lower quantitation limit of 10 ng/mL. Bioequivalence was assessed by comparing 90% confidence intervals (CIs) for the ratio of geometric means of AUC(0–16) and Cmax of the test drug and reference drugs with the established equivalence limits of 80.00–125.00%.Results. In the study were included 68 healthy volunteers, 67 participants of which were included in the bioequivalence population. The pharmacokinetic parameters of the drugs were comparable to each other. The 90% confidence interval for the ratio of the geometric mean of the maximum drug concentration in the blood plasma and the area under the pharmacokinetic curve «concentration-time» from zero to the last blood draw within 36 hours of nirmatrelvir was 87.26–100.83 and 93.27–103.74%, which meets the criteria for assessing bioequivalence. The test drugs were well tolerated by the volunteers. The incidence of adverse events was similar for the test and reference drugs. No serious adverse events were recorded during the entire study.Conclusion. As a result of this study, bioequivalence of the test and reference drugs has been established

    Apixaban versus warfarin in patients with atrial fibrillation

    No full text
    BACKGROUND: Vitamin K antagonists are highly effective in preventing stroke in patients with atrial fibrillation but have several limitations. Apixaban is a novel oral direct factor Xa inhibitor that has been shown to reduce the risk of stroke in a similar population in comparison with aspirin. METHODS: In this randomized, double-blind trial, we compared apixaban (at a dose of 5 mg twice daily) with warfarin (target international normalized ratio, 2.0 to 3.0) in 18,201 patients with atrial fibrillation and at least one additional risk factor for stroke. The primary outcome was ischemic or hemorrhagic stroke or systemic embolism. The trial was designed to test for noninferiority, with key secondary objectives of testing for superiority with respect to the primary outcome and to the rates of major bleeding and death from any cause. RESULTS: The median duration of follow-up was 1.8 years. The rate of the primary outcome was 1.27% per year in the apixaban group, as compared with 1.60% per year in the warfarin group (hazard ratio with apixaban, 0.79; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.66 to 0.95; P<0.001 for noninferiority; P = 0.01 for superiority). The rate of major bleeding was 2.13% per year in the apixaban group, as compared with 3.09% per year in the warfarin group (hazard ratio, 0.69; 95% CI, 0.60 to 0.80; P<0.001), and the rates of death from any cause were 3.52% and 3.94%, respectively (hazard ratio, 0.89; 95% CI, 0.80 to 0.99; P = 0.047). The rate of hemorrhagic stroke was 0.24% per year in the apixaban group, as compared with 0.47% per year in the warfarin group (hazard ratio, 0.51; 95% CI, 0.35 to 0.75; P<0.001), and the rate of ischemic or uncertain type of stroke was 0.97% per year in the apixaban group and 1.05% per year in the warfarin group (hazard ratio, 0.92; 95% CI, 0.74 to 1.13; P = 0.42). CONCLUSIONS: In patients with atrial fibrillation, apixaban was superior to warfarin in preventing stroke or systemic embolism, caused less bleeding, and resulted in lower mortality. Copyright © 2011 Massachusetts Medical Society. All rights reserved

    Apixaban compared with warfarin in patients with atrial fibrillation and previous stroke or transient ischaemic attack: A subgroup analysis of the ARISTOTLE trial

    No full text
    Background: In the ARISTOTLE trial, the rate of stroke or systemic embolism was reduced by apixaban compared with warfarin in patients with atrial fibrillation (AF). Patients with AF and previous stroke or transient ischaemic attack (TIA) have a high risk of stroke. We therefore aimed to assess the efficacy and safety of apixaban compared with warfarin in prespecified subgroups of patients with and without previous stroke or TIA. Methods: Between Dec 19, 2006, and April 2, 2010, patients were enrolled in the ARISTOTLE trial at 1034 clinical sites in 39 countries. 18 201 patients with AF or atrial flutter were randomly assigned to receive apixaban 5 mg twice daily or warfarin (target international normalised ratio 2·0-3·0). The median duration of follow-up was 1·8 years (IQR 1·4-2·3). The primary efficacy outcome was stroke or systemic embolism, analysed by intention to treat. The primary safety outcome was major bleeding in the on-treatment population. All participants, investigators, and sponsors were masked to treatment assignments. In this subgroup analysis, we estimated event rates and used Cox models to compare outcomes in patients with and without previous stroke or TIA. The ARISTOTLE trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NTC00412984. Findings: Of the trial population, 3436 (19%) had a previous stroke or TIA. In the subgroup of patients with previous stroke or TIA, the rate of stroke or systemic embolism was 2·46 per 100 patient-years of follow-up in the apixaban group and 3·24 in the warfarin group (hazard ratio [HR] 0·76, 95% CI 0·56 to 1·03); in the subgroup of patients without previous stroke or TIA, the rate of stroke or systemic embolism was 1·01 per 100 patient-years of follow-up with apixaban and 1·23 with warfarin (HR 0·82, 95% CI 0·65 to 1·03; p for interaction=0·71). The absolute reduction in the rate of stroke and systemic embolism with apixaban versus warfarin was 0·77 per 100 patient-years of follow-up (95% CI -0·08 to 1·63) in patients with and 0·22 (-0·03 to 0·47) in those without previous stroke or TIA. The difference in major bleeding with apixaban compared with warfarin was 1·07 per 100 patient-years (95% CI 0·09-2·04) in patients with and 0·93 (0·54-1·32) in those without previous stroke or TIA. Interpretation: The effects of apixaban versus warfarin were consistent in patients with AF with and without previous stroke or TIA. Owing to the higher risk of these outcomes in patients with previous stroke or TIA, the absolute benefits of apixaban might be greater in this population. Funding: Bristol-Myers Squibb and Pfizer. © 2012 Elsevier Ltd
    corecore