4.5 Article

Pharmacokinetics and safety of dasatinib and its generic: a phase I bioequivalence study in healthy Chinese subjects

Journal

EXPERT OPINION ON INVESTIGATIONAL DRUGS
Volume 32, Issue 3, Pages 263-270

Publisher

TAYLOR & FRANCIS LTD
DOI: 10.1080/13543784.2023.2179481

Keywords

Bioequivalence; chronic myeloid leukemia; dasatinib; pharmacokinetics; safety

Ask authors/readers for more resources

This study aimed to demonstrate the bioequivalence of dasatinib tablets and dasatinib under fasting and fed conditions. The results showed that the pharmacokinetic parameters of the two drugs were similar and met the requirements for bioequivalence, indicating good safety profiles.
BackgroundDasatinib (Sprycel (R)) is a tyrosine kinase inhibitor for treating chronic myeloid leukemia and Philadelphia chromosome-positive acute lymphoblastic leukemia.Research design & methodsWe designed a clinical study to demonstrate that the dasatinib tablet (YiNiShu (R)) (Chia Tai Tianqing Pharmaceutical Group Co., Ltd) and Dasatinib (Bristol Myers Squibb) were bioequivalent under fasting and fed conditions. The whole study was structured into the fasting trial and the postprandial trial. Each period, subjects were given 50 mg dasatinib or its generic. The RSABE (reference scale average bioequivalence) and ABE (average bioequivalence) methods were employed to assess bioequivalence by pharmacokinetics (PK) parameters for a highly variable drug.Results32 and 24 eligible volunteers were enrolled in the fasting and postprandial trials, respectively. In the fasting trial, the RSABE method was performed, and point estimates of C-max, AUC(0-t), and AUC(0-infinity) met the bioequivalence criteria. In the postprandial trial, the ABE method was performed, and the 90% CI of the geometric mean ratio (GMR) for PK parameters met the requirements of bioequivalence standards.ConclusionThe results proved that the PK parameters of the two drugs were similar and bioequivalent, indicating that both drugs had a good safety profile.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.5
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available