ArticleEuropean journal of clinical pharmacology1994
The pharmacokinetics of recombinant human erythropoietin after subcutaneous injection at different sites.
Article in European journal of clinical pharmacology, 1994. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 15 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
15 citing papers in PubMed, 49 citations in OpenAlex.
- Comparison of two recombinant erythropoietin formulations in patients with anemia due to end-stage renal disease on hemodialysis: a parallel, randomized, double blind study.BMC nephrology · 2005Trial
- Comparison of pharmacokinetics, safety and tolerability of secukinumab administered subcutaneously using different delivery systems in healthy volunteers and in psoriasis patients.British journal of clinical pharmacology · 2020Article
- Proteolysis and Oxidation of Therapeutic Proteins After Intradermal or Subcutaneous Administration.Journal of pharmaceutical sciences · 2020Review
- Understanding Inter-Individual Variability in Monoclonal Antibody Disposition.Antibodies (Basel, Switzerland) · 2019Review
- The Effect of Recombinant Human Erythropoietin on Bacterial Growth: A Dual-Edged Sword.Kidney diseases (Basel, Switzerland) · 2019Review
- Challenges and Opportunities for the Subcutaneous Delivery of Therapeutic Proteins.Journal of pharmaceutical sciences · 2018Review
- The impact of tumor receptor heterogeneity on the response to anti-angiogenic cancer treatment.Integrative biology : quantitative biosciences from nano to macro · 2018Article
- A Bottom-Up Whole-Body Physiologically Based Pharmacokinetic Model to Mechanistically Predict Tissue Distribution and the Rate of Subcutaneous Absorption of Therapeutic Proteins.The AAPS journal · 2016Article
- Pharmacokinetics of darbepoetin alfa after single, intravenous or subcutaneous administration in Japanese pediatric patients with chronic kidney disease.Clinical and experimental nephrology · 2014Article
- Clinical pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics of erythropoiesis-stimulating agents.Clinical pharmacokinetics · 2013Review
- Mechanistic determinants of biotherapeutics absorption following SC administration.The AAPS journal · 2012Review
- The absorption of darbepoetin alfa occurs predominantly via the lymphatics following subcutaneous administration to sheep.Pharmaceutical research · 2006Article
- Epoetin Beta: a review of its clinical use in the treatment of anaemia in patients with cancer.Drugs · 2004Review
- Pharmacokinetics/pharmacodynamics of recombinant human erythropoietins in doping control.Sports medicine (Auckland, N.Z.) · 2003Review
- Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The pharmacokinetics of recombinant human erythropoietin (RhEPO) were investigated after subcutaneous (s.c.) injection in the thigh and in the abdominal wall. Eleven healthy subjects, age 24.4 years (median), were studied. Each subject received two s.c. injections of 100 U.kg-1 RhEPO dissolved in 1 ml water: one injection in the thigh and another in the abdomen. Serum erythropoietin was measured regularly by radioimmunoassay until 144 h after each injection. The mean residence time was significantly longer after injection in the thigh than in the abdomen (32.7 vs 26.2 h). The estimated half-life of absorption was significantly longer after injection in the thigh than after abdominal application (14.9 vs 12.3 h). The estimated half-life of elimination was not significantly different (4.4 vs 4.8 h). The relative difference in the area under the curve between injection in the abdomen and the thigh in the same subject ranged from -36% to +68% but there was no significant difference in bioavailability. The peak concentration was not significantly different and appeared at around 10 h (Cmax thigh, 175 U.l-1 vs Cmax abdomen, 216 U.l-1). A twin-peak configuration of the concentration vs time curve with a significant second peak at 24 h was found after injection in the thigh but not after abdominal injection. In conclusion, the mean residence time was longer after administration in the thigh, probably due to delayed absorption, but bioavailability was not significantly different. Following injection in the thigh the concentration curve had two peaks. The differences may be due to regional variations in lymph flow and to physical activity.(ABSTRACT TRUNCATED AT 250 WORDS)
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.