Evidence map›Paper›PMID 25999694›Full record

Trial reportDrug design, development and therapy2015

A pharmacokinetic comparison of two voriconazole formulations and the effect of CYP2C19 polymorphism on their pharmacokinetic profiles.

Hyewon Chung, Howard Lee, Hye Kyung Han, Hyungmi An, Kyoung Soo Lim, Yong Jin Lee, Joo-Youn Cho, Seo Hyun Yoon, In-Jin Jang, Kyung-Sang Yu

Open access · goldAbstract readComparative StudyRandomized Controlled Trial
In one paragraph

Trial report in Drug design, development and therapy, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 15 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
15citing papers in PubMed
1.0field-weighted citation impact, top 26% 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

15 citing papers in PubMed, 26 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Trial
  2. Trial
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. The frequency of majorPersonalized medicine · 2022
    Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Observational
  12. Review
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Review
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

10 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.

Hyewon ChungDepartment of Clinical Pharmacology and Therapeutics, Seoul National University College of Medicine, Seoul National University Hospital, Seoul, Republic of Korea.
Howard LeeDepartment of Clinical Pharmacology and Therapeutics, Seoul National University College of Medicine, Seoul National University Hospital, Seoul, Republic of Korea ; Department of Transdisciplinary Studies, Graduate School of Convergence Science and Technology, Seoul National University, Seoul, Republic of Korea.
Hye Kyung HanDepartment of Clinical Pharmacology and Therapeutics, Seoul National University College of Medicine, Seoul National University Hospital, Seoul, Republic of Korea.
Hyungmi AnDepartment of Clinical Pharmacology and Therapeutics, Seoul National University College of Medicine, Seoul National University Hospital, Seoul, Republic of Korea.
Kyoung Soo LimDepartment of Clinical Pharmacology and Therapeutics, Seoul National University College of Medicine, Seoul National University Hospital, Seoul, Republic of Korea ; Department of Clinical Pharmacology and Therapeutics, CHA University School of Medicine and CHA Bundang Medical Center, Seongnam, Republic of Korea.
Yong Jin LeeMedical and Regulatory Affairs Team, Samyang Biopharmaceuticals Corporation, Seoul, Republic of Korea.
Joo-Youn ChoDepartment of Clinical Pharmacology and Therapeutics, Seoul National University College of Medicine, Seoul National University Hospital, Seoul, Republic of Korea.
Seo Hyun YoonDepartment of Clinical Pharmacology and Therapeutics, Seoul National University College of Medicine, Seoul National University Hospital, Seoul, Republic of Korea.
In-Jin JangDepartment of Clinical Pharmacology and Therapeutics, Seoul National University College of Medicine, Seoul National University Hospital, Seoul, Republic of Korea.
Kyung-Sang YuDepartment of Clinical Pharmacology and Therapeutics, Seoul National University College of Medicine, Seoul National University Hospital, Seoul, Republic of Korea.
New Generation University College · ETSeoul National University Hospital · KR

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeSYP-1018 is a lyophilized polymeric nanoparticle formulation of voriconazole that is under development for intravenous dosing. This study compared the pharmacokinetic and tolerability profiles of SYP-1018 with those of Vfend(®), the marketed formulation of voriconazole. The effect of CYP2C19 polymorphism on the voriconazole pharmacokinetics was also evaluated.

methodsAn open-label, two-treatment, two-period, two-sequence crossover study was conducted in 52 healthy male volunteers, who randomly received a single intravenous infusion of either of the two voriconazole formulations at 200 mg. Blood samples were collected up to 24 hours after drug administration for pharmacokinetic analysis. The plasma concentrations of voriconazole were determined using liquid chromatography with tandem mass spectrometry, and the pharmacokinetic parameters were estimated using a noncompartmental method. CYP2C19 genotype was identified in 51 subjects.

resultsThe geometric mean ratio (90% confidence interval) of SYP-1018 to Vfend(®) was 0.99 (0.93-1.04) for the maximum plasma concentrations (Cmax) and 0.97 (0.92-1.01) for the area under the concentration-time curve (AUC) from dosing to the last quantifiable concentration (AUClast). Nineteen homozygous extensive metabolizers (EMs, *1/*1), 19 intermediate metabolizers (IMs, *1/*2 or *1/*3), and ten poor metabolizers (PMs, *2/*2, *2/*3, or *3/*3) were identified, and the pharmacokinetic comparability between SYP-1018 and Vfend(®) was also noted when analyzed separately by genotype. The systemic exposure to voriconazole was greatest in the PM group, followed by the IM, and then the EM groups. Furthermore, the intrasubject variability for Cmax and AUClast was greater in IMs and PMs than in EMs. No serious adverse event occurred, and both treatments were well tolerated.

conclusionSYP-1018 had comparable pharmacokinetic and tolerability profiles to Vfend(®) after a single intravenous infusion. CYP2C19 genotype affected not only the pharmacokinetics of voriconazole, but its intrasubject variability. SYP-1018 can be further developed as a clinically effective alternative to Vfend(®).

Indexed as

AdultAntifungal AgentsArea Under CurveChemistry, PharmaceuticalCross-Over StudiesCytochrome P-450 CYP2C19GenotypeHalf-LifeHealthy VolunteersHumansMaleMiddle AgedPolymorphism, GeneticTherapeutic EquivalencyVoriconazoleYoung AdultAntifungal AgentsCYP2C19 protein, humanCytochrome P-450 CYP2C19VoriconazoleCYP2C19pharmacogeneticspharmacokineticsvoriconazole

Identifiers

PMID25999694
PMCPMC4435089
OpenAlexW1762950170

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.