Trial reportEuropean journal of drug metabolism and pharmacokinetics2024
Model-Based Bioequivalence Analysis to Assess and Predict the Relative Bioavailability of Valproic Acid Formulations.
Trial report in European journal of drug metabolism and pharmacokinetics, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- A QSP Model of Valproic Acid Toxicity in Pediatric and Adult Populations: Implications for Formulation Selection and L-Carnitine Supplementation.CPT: pharmacometrics & systems pharmacology · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND
objectiveModel-based bioequivalence (MBBE) encompasses the use of nonlinear mixed effect models supporting the estimation of pharmacokinetic endpoints to assess the relative bioavailability between multi-source drug products. This application emerges as a valuable alternative to the standard non-compartmental analysis (NCA) in bioequivalence (BE) studies in which dense sampling is not possible. In this work, we aimed to assess the application of MBBE compared to traditional methods in evaluating the relative bioavailability of two formulations with different drug release properties. Additionally, we sought to predict the performance of a modified-release formulation in a multiple-dose scenario, leveraging data from a single-dose study.
methodsMBBE analysis was implemented to estimate the BE endpoints (90% CI for the Test/Reference geometric mean ratio, T/R GMR) in area under the concentration-time curve (AUC) and maximum concentration (Cmax) using data from a single-dose, 2-period, 2-sequence BE study performed in 14 healthy subjects between a locally developed valproic acid extended-release formulation (Test) and the brand-name delayed-release formulation (Reference).
resultsResults were compared with the standard approach, revealing that MBBE analysis achieved higher discrimination between formulations for Cmax, addressing limitations of the experimental sampling design and highlighting an advantage for this model-based analysis even when rich data are available. Additionally, the bioequivalence outcome under the multiple-dose scenario was predicted through a simulation-based study for both total and unbound valproic acid concentrations, considering the impact of valproic acid saturable binding on BE conclusions.
conclusionsThe MBBE analysis was superior to the NCA approach in detecting product-related differences, overcoming limitations in the study experimental design. Predictions for the multiple-dose scenario preclude that the extended-release properties of the Test formulation would persist at steady state, resulting in lower peak-to-trough fluctuation and bioequivalent performance in terms of the extent of drug absorption. Overall, these results should discourage unnecessary experimentation in healthy subjects.
Indexed as
Identifiers
38874900What 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.