Study on the bioequivalence of Palbociclib capsules in human / 中国药房

OBJECTIVE To evaluate the bioequivalence of a single oral administration of two palbociclib preparations in healthy subjects under fasting and fed conditions. METHODS Twenty-four healthy subjects （fasting test） and twenty healthy subjects （fed test） were enrolled and divided into two groups. A single-center， open-label， single-dose， two-formulation， two- period， two-sequence and crossover trial was designed. The subjects in the two groups were given the test preparation （domestic Palbociclib capsules） or the reference preparation （original Palbociclib capsules） orally under fasting or fed conditions respectively followed by a 14-day washout period. The blood samples were collected at different time points before and after treatment. After pretreatment， the mass concentration of palbociclib in vivo was determined by high-performance liquid chromatography-tandem mass spectrometry with palbociclib-d8 as the internal standard. SAS V9.4 software was used to calculate the pharmacokinetic parameters and evaluate the bioequivalence. RESULTS Under fasting condition， the cmax of the test preparation and the reference preparation were （71.4±18.1） and （73.8±19.0） ng/mL； AUC0－t were （1 754±412） and （1 793±448） h·ng/mL； AUC0－∞ were （1 851±456） and （1 887±478） h·ng/mL， respectively. Under fed condition， the cmax of the test preparation and the reference preparation were （78.4±18.3） and （81.9±21.7） ng/mL； AUC0－t were （1 905±375） and （1 932±318） h·ng/mL； AUC0－∞ were （2 027±411） and （2 050±342） h·ng/mL， respectively. The 90%CI of the geometric mean ratio of the above parameters was within the acceptable range （80.00%-125.00%）. Under fasting and fed conditions， there were 20 and 16 adverse events in 9 and 8 subjects， respectively， but no serious adverse event was observed. CONCLUSIONS Under the fasting and fed conditions， the test preparation and the reference preparation of Pibociclib capsules are bioequivalent and have comparable safety.

Comparison of the efficacy and level of adherence for morning versus evening versus before bedtime administration of simvastatin in hypercholesterolemic patients

@#Background: Simvastatin is usually taken in the evening due to the circadian rhythm of hepatic cholesterol biosynthesis. The degree of reduction of low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) and the level of adherence to different administration time remained unknown in the Malaysian population. This study aims to investigate the effect of simvastatin on the percentage changes of lipid profile and the level of adherence to when simvastatin was instructed to be taken at different timing. Methods: Nine primary care health clinics across Malaysia participated in this study. 147 statin-naive subjects were selected through convenient sampling and randomised into one of the three arms (after breakfast, after dinner or before bedtime). Differences on percentage reduction of LDL-C from baseline and level of adherence among the three groups at week-16 were compared. The main outcomes measured in this study were the percentage change of lipid parameters and the percentage of high-adherence (MMAS=8) at week-16. Results: 59.2% of the patients were male. The mean age of the study population was 53.93± 10.85 years. Most of the patients were Malays (69.4%); followed by Indians (22.4%) and Chinese (8.2%). LDL-C decreased from 4.26 (Standard Deviation, SD1.01) to 2.36 (SD0.69)mmol/L at week-16 for patients taking simvastatin before bedtime; an absolute reduction of 44.95%.The differences of LDL-C percentage reduction between three arms were significantly different (p<0.001). The greatest LDL-C reduction was observed when simvastatin was taken before bedtime and revealed 56.2% patients with high-adherence at week-16. Conclusion: Simvastatin showed superior LDL-reduction and higher level of adherence when being instructed to be taken before bedtime

Gefitinib at different administration time in radiosensitizing lung adenocarcinoma cells in vitro / 中华放射肿瘤学杂志

Objective To investigate the radiosensitizing effects of gefitinib at different administration time. Methods Gefitinib was administered to A549 lung cancer cells in three different ways (method 1, 24 h before irradiation ;method 2, upon irradiation and method 3, 24 h after irradiation). Cell-surviving rates were evaluated by the colony-forming assays. Cell apoptnsis and cell-cycle distributions were detected by the flow cytometry (FCM). Protein expression of p21, Cdc25c, Bcl-2, Bax, Rad51 and phosphorylated DNA - PKcs (phnspho - DNA - PK) were measured with the Western blot analysis. Results The sensitizing effect ratio (ratio of D_0 value) was 2.23, 1.51 and 1.30 with method 1, 2 and 3, respectively. A higher apoptosis rate and more G_2/M phase arrest were observed with method 1 when compare with method 2 or 3. With the similar tendency, the protein level of p21, Cdc25c, Bcl-2, Bax, RadSl and phospho-DNA-PK changed distinctly. Conclusions Radiosensitizing effects are obtained in all three methods, with gefitinib delivered before irradiation being the best.