Pharmacokinetics and Bioequivalence of Two Powders of Azithromycin for Suspension: A Nonblinded, Single-Dose, Randomized, Three-Way Crossover Study in Fed and Fasting States Among Healthy Chinese Volunteers.

Azithromycin, a macrolide antibiotic, is commonly used to treat mild-to-moderate bacterial infections. This research aimed to evaluate the pharmacokinetics (PK) properties and bioequivalence (BE) of two azithromycin (EQ 100 mg base/packet) powders for suspension in Chinese healthy participants in fed and fasting conditions. A total of 90 Chinese healthy participants were enrolled in this nonblinded, single-dose, randomized, semireplicate, three-period, three-sequence, crossover study. Of them, 42 and 40 were categorized to the fed and fasting conditions, respectively. The washout period between doses was 21 days. Blood specimens were harvested prior to administering the drug and 194 h following administration. The plasma levels of azithromycin were analyzed using a validated liquid chromatography-tandem mass spectrometry (LC-MS/MS) approach. PK parameters were measured using noncompartmental analysis. This research compared BE between the reference and test products using the average bioequivalence (ABE) or reference-scaled average bioequivalence (RSABE) method, considering the within-subject variability (SWR) of the reference preparation. Adverse events (AEs) were monitored to examine safety and tolerability. The RSABE method (SWR ≥ 0.294) was used to determine the BE of maximal plasma concentration (Cmax) in both fed and fasting conditions. In the ABE approach, (SWR < 0.294) was adopted to assess the BE of the area under the plasma concentration-time curve from time zero to the last measurable time point (AUC0-t) and determine the area under the plasma concentration time curve from time zero to time infinity (AUC0-inf). In the fasting condition, the point estimate of the test/reference ratio for Cmax was 1.08, with a 95% upper confidence bound of - 0.05 < 0.00. The geometric mean ratio (GMRs) for AUC0-t and AUC0-inf was 115.21% [90% confidence interval (CI) 107.25-123.27%] and 113.07% (90% CI 105.14-121.61%), respectively. In the fed condition, the point estimate of the test/reference ratio for Cmax was 0.94, with a 95% upper confidence bound of - 0.10 < 0.00. The GMR for AUC0-t and AUC0-inf was 99.51% (90% CI of 91.03-108.78%) and 99.43% (90% CI 91.73-107.78%), respectively. These data all satisfied the BE criteria for drugs with high variability. All AEs were transient and mild, and no severe AEs were observed. Our study indicated that the test and reference products of azithromycin (EQ 100 mg base/packet) powder for suspension were bioequivalent and safe in healthy Chinese participants, irrespective of the feeding condition. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION (CHINADRUGTRIALS.ORG.CN): CTR20232646, registered on 25 August 2023.

Shao J ，Liu X ，Lin J ，Chen J ，Xie X ... -  《-》

Pharmacokinetics and bioequivalence of ezetimibe tablet in healthy Chinese subjects under fasting and fed conditions.

Liu G ，Yan H ，Yuan B ，Li G ... -  《INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF CLINICAL PHARMACOLOGY AND THERAPEUTICS》

Pharmacokinetics and Bioequivalence of Two Formulations of Azithromycin Tablets: A Randomized, Single-Dose, Three-Period, Crossover Study in Healthy Chinese Volunteers Under Fasting and Fed Conditions.

Azithromycin is the first azalide antibiotic that is related to the macrolide family of antibiotics. Bioequivalence studies in China are initiated by the National Medical Products Administration (NMPA), which supports a generic consistency evaluation program for ensuring that generic products manufactured in China meet the required standards and provide equivalent therapeutic effects to their reference products. This study aimed to assess the bioequivalence of two azithromycin tablets under both fasting and fed conditions in healthy Chinese volunteers. This was a single-center, open-label, single-dose, randomized, three-way crossover trial with two independent groups (fasting group and fed group). A total of 72 healthy Chinese subjects (36 subjects in the fasting state and 36 subjects in the fed state) were enrolled and randomized to treatment. Blood samples were collected from 0 to 120 h after a single oral dose of a 250-mg generic azithromycin tablet (test, T) or branded azithromycin tablet (reference, R). The plasma concentrations of azithromycin were determined by high-performance liquid chromatography-tandem mass spectrometry (HPLC‒MS/MS). A non-compartmental analysis method was used to estimate the pharmacokinetic parameters. Adverse events were documented. In a fasting state, the bioequivalence of maximum plasma concentration (Cmax) was evaluated using the reference-scaled average bioequivalence (RSABE) approach (within-subject standard deviation, SWR > 0.294), and the bioequivalence of area under the concentration-time curve from time 0 to the time of the last measurable plasma concentration (AUC0-t) and area under the concentration-time curve from time 0 extrapolated to infinity (AUC0-∞) were evaluated by the average bioequivalence (ABE) method (SWR <  0.294). The geometric mean ratio (GMR) of T/R for Cmax was 106.49%, while the 95% upper confidence bound was <  0. The GMRs of AUC0-t and AUC0-∞ were 103.34% and 101.28%, and the 90% confidence intervals (CIs) of the test/reference were 95.90-111.35%/94.85-108.15%, respectively. In the fed state, the RSABE approach was applied to estimate the bioequivalence of Cmax (SWR >0.294), and the ABE approach was applied to estimate the bioequivalence of AUC0-t and AUC0-∞ (SWR <  0.294). The GMR for Cmax was 99.80%, while the 95% upper confidence bound value was <  0. The GMRs of AUC0-t and AUC0-∞ were 97.07% and 98.15%, and the 90% CIs of the T/R were 90.02-104.68% and 90.66-106.25%, respectively. All adverse events were mild and transient. The trial indicated that the test and the reference azithromycin tablets were bioequivalent and well tolerated in healthy Chinese volunteers under both fasting and fed conditions. Clinicaltrials, ChiCTR2300071630 (retrospectively registered in 19/05/2023).

Chen Y ，Ye L ，Mei J ，Tian M ，Xu M ，Jin Q ，Yu X ，Yang S ，Wang J ... -  《-》

Bioequivalence Analysis of Ondansetron Hydrochloride Tablets in Healthy Chinese Subjects: A Randomized, Open-Label, Two-Period Crossover Phase I Study.

Ondansetron is a highly selective 5-HT3 receptor antagonist that alleviates nausea and vomiting. Bioequivalence evaluation ensures that the efficacy of generic drugs is consistent with that of the original drug. The objective of this study was to evaluate the bioequivalence of ondansetron hydrochloride (HCl) tablets taken in single doses under fasting and postprandial conditions in healthy subjects. In this randomized, open-label, two-cycle, crossover phase I study, liquid chromatography‒tandem mass spectrometry (LC‒MS/MS) was used to determine the ondansetron concentration in dipotassium-ethylenediaminetetraacetate (K2-EDTA) plasma after the subjects received a single 8 mg of ondansetron and reference formulation. Twenty-six healthy subjects received one tablet of ondansetron under fasting conditions and 28 subjects received one under postprandial conditions. Bioequivalence was established if the 90% confidence interval (CI) was 80.00-125.00%. The pharmacokinetic parameters were calculated via WinNonLin 8.1 software and the bioequivalence data were evaluated via Phoenix WinNonlin 8.1 statistics software. The geometric mean ratio (GMR) of the maximum observed concentration (Cmax), the area under the plasma concentration‒time curve (AUC) from time zero to the last sampling time (AUC0-t), and the AUC from time zero to infinity (AUC0-∞) from the test/reference formulation under fasting conditions were 90.50, 90.43, and 90.25, respectively. The 90% CIs were 83.75-97.79, 82.64-98.95, and 82.25-99.03, respectively. The GMRs of Cmax, AUC0-t, and AUC0-∞ after a high-fat meal were 96.85, 93.57, and 93.77, respectively; the 90% CIs were 88.43-106.07, 87.35-100.24, and 87.35-100.68, respectively. The test and reference formulations of ondansetron HCl have bioequivalence for healthy adult subjects under fasting and postprandial conditions.

Jia C ，Zhao N ，Song H ，Hu Y ，Xu Y ，Guo C ，Bai W ，Dong Z ... -  《-》

RETRACTED: Hydroxychloroquine and azithromycin as a treatment of COVID-19: results of an open-label non-randomized clinical trial.

Chloroquine and hydroxychloroquine have been found to be efficient on SARS-CoV-2, and reported to be efficient in Chinese COV-19 patients. We evaluate the effect of hydroxychloroquine on respiratory viral loads. French Confirmed COVID-19 patients were included in a single arm protocol from early March to March 16th, to receive 600mg of hydroxychloroquine daily and their viral load in nasopharyngeal swabs was tested daily in a hospital setting. Depending on their clinical presentation, azithromycin was added to the treatment. Untreated patients from another center and cases refusing the protocol were included as negative controls. Presence and absence of virus at Day6-post inclusion was considered the end point. Six patients were asymptomatic, 22 had upper respiratory tract infection symptoms and eight had lower respiratory tract infection symptoms. Twenty cases were treated in this study and showed a significant reduction of the viral carriage at D6-post inclusion compared to controls, and much lower average carrying duration than reported in the litterature for untreated patients. Azithromycin added to hydroxychloroquine was significantly more efficient for virus elimination. Despite its small sample size, our survey shows that hydroxychloroquine treatment is significantly associated with viral load reduction/disappearance in COVID-19 patients and its effect is reinforced by azithromycin. This article has been retracted: please see Elsevier Policy on Article Withdrawal (https://www.elsevier.com/locate/withdrawalpolicy). Concerns have been raised regarding this article, the substance of which relate to the articles' adherence to Elsevier's publishing ethics policies and the appropriate conduct of research involving human participants, as well as concerns raised by three of the authors themselves regarding the article's methodology and conclusions. Elsevier's Research Integrity and Publishing Ethics Team, in collaboration with the journal's co-owner, the International Society of Antimicrobial Chemotherapy (ISAC), and with guidance from an impartial field expert acting in the role of an independent Publishing Ethics Advisor, Dr. Jim Gray, Consultant Microbiologist at the Birmingham Children's and Women's Hospitals, U.K., conducted an investigation and determined that the below points constituted cause for retraction: • The journal has been unable to confirm whether any of the patients for this study were accrued before ethical approval had been obtained. The ethical approval dates for this article are stated as being 5th and 6th of March 2020 (ANSM and CPP respectively), while the article states that recruitment began in “early March”. The 17th author, Prof. Philippe Brouqui, has confirmed that the start date for patient accrual was 6th March 2020. The journal has not been able to establish whether all patients could have entered into the study in time for the data to have been analysed and included in the manuscript prior to its submission on the 20th March 2020, nor whether all patients were enrolled in the study upon admission as opposed to having been hospitalised for some time before starting the treatment described in the article. Additionally, the journal has not been able to establish whether there was equipoise between the study patients and the control patients. • The journal has not been able to establish whether the subjects in this study should have provided informed consent to receive azithromycin as part of the study. The journal has concluded that that there is reasonable cause to conclude that azithromycin was not considered standard care at the time of the study. The 17th author, Prof. Philippe Brouqui has attested that azithromycin treatment was not, at the time of the study, an experimental treatment but a possible treatment for, or preventative measure against, bacterial superinfections of viral pneumonia as described in section 2.4 of the article, and as such the treatment should be categorised as standard care that would not require informed consent. This does not fully address the journal's concerns around the use of azithromycin in the study. In section 3.1 of the article, it is stated that six patients received azithromycin to prevent (rather than treat) bacterial superinfection. All of these were amongst the patients who also received hydroxychloroquine (HCQ). None of the control patients are reported to have received azithromycin. This would indicate that only patients in the HCQ arm received azithromycin, all of whom were in one center. The recommendations for use of macrolides in France at the time the study was conducted indicate that azithromycin would not have been a logical agent to use as first-line prophylaxis against pneumonia due to the frequency of macrolide resistance amongst bacteria such as pneumococci. These two points suggest that azithromycin would not have been standard practice across southern France at the time the study was conducted and would have required informed consent. • Three of the authors of this article, Dr. Johan Courjon, Prof. Valérie Giordanengo, and Dr. Stéphane Honoré have contacted the journal to assert their opinion that they have concerns regarding the presentation and interpretation of results in this article and have stated they no longer wish to see their names associated with the article. • Author Prof. Valérie Giordanengo informed the journal that while the PCR tests administered in Nice were interpreted according to the recommendations of the national reference center, it is believed that those carried out in Marseille were not conducted using the same technique or not interpreted according to the same recommendations, which in her opinion would have resulted in a bias in the analysis of the data. This raises concerns as to whether the study was partially conducted counter to national guidelines at that time. The 17th author, Prof. Philippe Brouqui has attested that the PCR methodology was explained in reference 17 of the article. However, the article referred to by reference 17 describes several diagnostic approaches that were used (one PCR targeting the envelope protein only; another targeting the spike protein; and three commercially produced systems by QuantiNova, Biofire, and FTD). This reference does not clarify how the results were interpreted. It has also been noted during investigation of these concerns that only 76% (19/25) of patients were viral culture positive, resulting in uncertainty in the interpretation of PCR reports as has been raised by Prof. Giordanengo. As part of the investigation, the corresponding author was contacted and asked to provide an explanation for the above concerns. No response has been received within the deadline provided by the journal. Responses were received by the 3rd and 17th authors, Prof. Philippe Parola and Prof. Philippe Brouqui, respectively, and were reviewed as part of the investigation. These two authors, in addition to 1st author Dr. Philippe Gautret, 13th author Prof. Philippe Colson, and 15th author Prof. Bernard La Scola, disagreed with the retraction and dispute the grounds for it. Having followed due process and concluded the aforementioned investigation and based on the recommendation of Dr. Jim Gray acting in his capacity as independent Publishing Ethics Advisor, the co-owners of the journal (Elsevier and ISAC) have therefore taken the decision to retract the article.

Gautret P ，Lagier JC ，Parola P ，Hoang VT ，Meddeb L ，Mailhe M ，Doudier B ，Courjon J ，Giordanengo V ，Vieira VE ，Tissot Dupont H ，Honoré S ，Colson P ，Chabrière E ，La Scola B ，Rolain JM ，Brouqui P ，Raoult D ... -  《-》