Evidence map›Paper›PMID 22242645›Full record

Trial reportBritish journal of clinical pharmacology2012

Bioequivalence of two omega-3 fatty acid ethyl ester formulations: a case of clinical pharmacology of dietary supplements.

Claudio Galli, Franco M Maggi, Patrizia Risé, Cesare R Sirtori

Open access · bronzeAbstract readRandomized Controlled Trial
In one paragraph

Trial report in British journal of clinical pharmacology, 2012. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing papers in PubMed
2.3field-weighted citation impact, top 13% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

4 citing papers in PubMed, 18 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Review
  3. Review
  4. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Claudio GalliDepartment of Pharmacological Sciences, Università di Milano, Milan, Italy.
Franco M Maggi
Patrizia Risé
Cesare R Sirtori
University of Milan · IT

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

what is already known about this subject• Omega-3 fatty acids are dietary components, present in the body with variable blood concentrations. • Bioavailability evaluations of ethyl ester preparations are hampered by the difficulty in achieving similar concentrations of eicosapentaenoic acid (EPA) and docosahexaenoic acid (DHA) in the preparations being compared. This may require questionable corrections for baseline concentrations. • If repeated doses are given, this may lead to errors because of variable dietary fish intake. If a single dose is selected, this needs to be large, since omega-3 LC-PUFA are present in many compartments. WHAT THIS STUDY ADDS: • We selected subjects with uniform omega-3 background concentrations, to obtain comparable results at the end of treatment. • Testing bioequivalence of two formulations with different EPA : DHA ratios led to single dose intakes of 12 g, which were well tolerated. • In spite of clear differences in EPA : DHA ratios between the two preparations, plasma ratios did not differ and bioequivalence could be well ascertained.

aimTo evaluate the bioequivalence of two omega-3 long chain polyunsaturated fatty acid (n-3 LC-PUFA) ethyl ester preparations, previously shown not to be bioequivalent in healthy subjects, with the objective of providing a guideline for future work in this area.

methodA randomized double-blind crossover protocol was chosen. Volunteers with the lowest blood concentrations of n-3 LC-PUFA were selected. They received the ethyl esters in a single high dose (12 g) and eicosapentaenoic acid (EPA) and docosahexaenoic acid (DHA) blood concentrations were analyzed after fingerprick collection at intervals up to 24 h.

resultsDifferently from a prior study, the pharmacokinetic analysis indicated a satisfactory bioequivalence: for the AUC(0,24 h) 90% CI of the ratio between the two formulations were in the range for bioequivalence (for EPA 0.98, 1.04 and for DHA 0.99, 1.04) and the same was true for C(max) and t(max) (90% CI were 0.95, 1.14 and 1.10, 1.25 for EPA and 0.88, 1.02 and 0.84, 1.24 for DHA).

conclusionThis study shows that, in order to obtain reliable bioequivalence data of products present in the daily diet, certain conditions should be met. Subjects should have low, homogeneous baseline concentrations and not be exposed to food items containing the product under evaluation, e.g. fish. Finally, as in the case of omega-3 fatty acids, selected doses should be high, eventually with appropriate conditions of intake.

Indexed as

Dietary SupplementsAdministration, OralAdultArea Under CurveDocosahexaenoic AcidsDose-Response Relationship, DrugDouble-Blind MethodEicosapentaenoic AcidHumansMaleTherapeutic EquivalencyDocosahexaenoic AcidsEicosapentaenoic Acid

Identifiers

PMID22242645
PMCPMC3394129
OpenAlexW2112676654

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.