Trial reportClinical and translational science2022
The pharmacokinetic, safety, and tolerability profiles of eslicarbazepine acetate are comparable between Korean and White subjects.
Trial report in Clinical and translational science, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
5 citing papers in PubMed, 6 citations in OpenAlex.
- Long-term effects of adjunctive eslicarbazepine acetate in adult Asian patients with refractory focal seizures: Post hoc analysis of a phase III trial.Clinical and translational science · 2024Trial
- The pharmacokinetic, safety, and tolerability profiles of eslicarbazepine acetate are comparable between Korean and White subjects.Clinical and translational science · 2022Trial
- Determination of Antiepileptics in Biological Samples-A Review.Molecules (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024Review
- Pharmacokinetic drug-drug interactions of JBPOS0101 mediated by cytochrome P450 3A4 and UDP-glucuronosyltransferases.Clinical and translational science · 2024Article
- A real-world pharmacovigilance analysis of eslicarbazepine acetate using the FDA adverse events reporting system (FAERS) database from 2013 (Q4) to 2024 (Q1).Frontiers in pharmacology · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Eslicarbazepine acetate (ESL) is a prodrug antiseizure medication for the treatment of focal seizures. ESL shows a well-established pharmacokinetic (PK)-pharmacodynamic relationship and has similar extrinsic epilepsy-related factors across ethnicities. This study evaluated and compared ESL safety, tolerability, and PK characteristics between Korean and White subjects. A randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, single- and multiple-dose escalation study was conducted in healthy Korean and White adults. Participants randomly received a single dose and multiple oral doses of ESL (400-1600 mg) or placebo once daily for 11 days at a ratio of 8:2. Serial blood samples were collected to determine the plasma concentration of ESL and its metabolites (eslicarbazepine, [R-licarbazepine and oxcarbazepine). Safety and tolerability were assessed throughout the study. A total of 29 Korean and 20 White subjects completed the study. The PK profiles of the metabolites of ESL were similar between Korean and White subjects. The geometric mean ratio (90% confidence interval) of Korean to White subjects for the area under the concentration-time curve within a dosing interval of eslicarbazepine was 1.06 (0.97-1.17) and 0.96 (0.87-1.06) after multiple oral doses of 400 and 1600 mg ESL, respectively. Other PK parameters were also similar between the two ethnic groups. ESL was well-tolerated in healthy Korean and White subjects, and its PK characteristics were similar between the two ethnic groups. The results of this study support to use the same dosage regimen of ESL in both White and Korean patients with seizures.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.