Trial reportPharmacology research & perspectives2023
A randomized, double-blind, single-dose study to assess bioequivalence of MB02 biosimilar after manufacturing iteration and reference bevacizumab.
Trial report in Pharmacology research & perspectives, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 3 citations in OpenAlex.
- A randomized, double-blind, single-dose study to assess bioequivalence of MB02 biosimilar after manufacturing iteration and reference bevacizumab.Pharmacology research & perspectives · 2023Trial
- In Silico and In Vitro Evaluation of Bevacizumab Biosimilar MB02 as an Antitumor Agent in Canine Mammary Carcinoma.Animals : an open access journal from MDPI · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
To investigate and compare the pharmacokinetic (PK) profiles of MB02 products, before and after optimizing the manufacturing process, and reference bevacizumab to establish bioequivalence between them. In this randomized, double-blind, single dose, parallel study, 114 healthy male volunteers were randomized 1:1:1 to receive a 1 mg/kg intravenous dose of MB02-SP, MB02-DM, or US-bevacizumab. The follow-up period was 100 days. PK similarity between them was determined using the standard bioequivalence criteria (0.80-1.25) for the area under the serum concentration-time curve from time 0 extrapolated to infinity and the maximum observed serum concentration. Study results showed that the PK profiles of bevacizumab were similar. Statistical analysis demonstrated that for each pairwise comparison there were no differences. The 90% CIs for the ratios of geometric least squares means were fully contained within the predefined similarity acceptance limits and ranged from 0.899 to 1.12 for area under the curve and from 0.887 to 1.11 for maximum concentration. A total of 159 adverse events were reported by 76 subjects who received the study drug. The majority (90.6%) of the reported adverse events were grade 1 in severity, with 9.4% as grade 2 in severity. None were considered as grade 3, 4, or 5. Treatment-induced anti-drug antibodies incidence was 21.6%, 33.3%, and 23.7% for the treatment of MB02-SP, MB02-DM, and US-bevacizumab, respectively. No subjects showed treatment-induced neutralizing anti-drug antibodies. This study demonstrates the PK, safety, and immunogenicity similarity and bioequivalence of MB02-SP, MB02-DM, and the reference product bevacizumab.
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.