OBJECTIVE: This study evaluated PHYLLPRO™, a standardized ethanol extract of P. amarus leaves for protection against oxidative stress and recovery from hangover symptoms.
MATERIAL AND METHODS: Ten days daily oral supplementation of 750 mg/day followed by intoxication was evaluated in a randomized placebo-controlled (containing only excipient), crossover study in 15 subjects (21-50 years old), for oxidative stress, liver damage, alleviating hangover symptoms (Hangover Severity Score: HSS) and mood improvement (Profile-of-Mood-Scores: POMS).
RESULTS: PHYLLPRO™ was able to remove blood alcohol in the active group while the placebo group still had 0.05% at 12 h post-intoxication (p 0.05) from baseline to hour 22 was reported in the placebo group using POMS. Significant anti-inflammatory group effect favouring the active group, by the upregulation of cytokines IL-8 (p = 0.0014) and IL-10 (p = 0.0492) and immunomodulatory effects via IL-12p70 (p = 0.0304) were observed. The incidence of adverse events was similar between groups indicating the safety of PHYLLPRO™.
DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSION: Preliminary findings of PHYLLPRO™ in managing hangover, inflammation and liver functions following intoxication, is demonstrated. Future studies on PHYLLPRO™ in protecting against oxidative stress and hangover in larger populations is warranted.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: This is a single-center, single-dose, open-label, randomized, 2-treatment, 2-sequence and 2- period crossover study with a washout period of 7 days. All 28 adult male subjects were required to fast for at least 10 hours prior to drug administration and they were given access to water ad libitum during this period. Thirty minutes prior to dosing, all subjects were served with a standardized high-fat and high-calorie breakfast with a total calorie of 1000 kcal which was in accordance to the EMA Guideline on the Investigation of Bioequivalence. Subsequently, subjects were administered either the test or reference preparation with 240mL of plain water in the first trial period. During the second trial period, they received the alternate preparation. Plasma levels of glibenclamide and metformin were analysed separately using two different high performance liquid chromatography methods.
RESULTS: The 90% confidence interval (CI) for the ratio of the AUC0-t, AUC0-∞, and Cmax of the test preparation over those of the reference preparation were 0.9693-1.0739, 0.9598- 1.0561 and 0.9220 - 1.0642 respectively. Throughout the study period, no serious drug reaction was observed. However, a total of 26 adverse events (AE)/side effects were reported, including 24 that were definitely related to the study drugs, namely giddiness (n=17), while diarrheoa (n=3), headache (n=2) and excessive hunger (n=2) were less commonly reported by the subjects.
CONCLUSION: It can be concluded that the test preparation is bioequivalent to the reference preparation.
METHOD: This is a single-center, single-dose, open-label, randomized, 2-treatment, 2-sequence and 2-period crossover study with a washout period of 7 days. Paracetamol/Orphenadrine tablets were administered after a 10-h fast. Blood samples for pharmacokinetic analysis were collected at scheduled time intervals prior to and up to 72 h after dosing. Blood samples were centrifuged, and separated plasma were kept frozen (- 15 °C to - 25 °C) until analysis. Plasma concentrations of orphenadrine and paracetamol were quantified using liquid-chromatography-tandem mass spectrometer using diphenhydramine as internal standard. The pharmacokinetic parameters AUC0-∞, AUC0-t and Cmax were determined using plasma concentration time profile for both preparations. Bioequivalence was assessed according to the ASEAN guideline acceptance criteria for bioequivalence which is the 90% confidence intervals of AUC0-∞, AUC0-t and Cmax ratio must be within the range of 80.00-125.00%.
RESULTS: There were 28 healthy subjects enrolled, and 27 subjects completed this trial. There were no significant differences observed between the AUC0-∞, AUC0-t and Cmax of both test and reference preparations in fasted condition. The 90% confidence intervals for the ratio of AUC0-t (100.92-111.27%), AUC0-∞ (96.94-108.08%) and Cmax (100.11-112.50%) for orphenadrine (n = 25); and AUC0-t (94.29-101.83%), AUC0-∞ (94.77-101.68%) and Cmax (87.12-101.20%) for paracetamol (n = 27) for test preparation over reference preparation were all within acceptable bioequivalence range of 80.00-125.00%.
CONCLUSION: The test preparation is bioequivalent to the reference preparation and can be used interchangeably.
TRIAL REGISTRATION: NMRR- 17-1266-36,001; registered and approved on 12 September 2017.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: In this trial, a total of 56 eligible subjects were randomly assigned to the fasting group and the postprandial group. The two groups were given 250 mg of the test and reference preparation, respectively. Liquid chromatography-tandem mass spectrometry (HPLC-MS/MS) was applied to determine the plasma concentration of cefalexin. PhoenixWinNonlin software (V7.0) was used to calculate the pharmacokinetic parameters of cefalexin using the non-compartmental model (NCA), and the bioequivalence and safety results were calculated by SAS (V9.4) software.
RESULTS: The main pharmacokinetic parameters of the test and reference preparations were as follows, the fasting group: Cmax 12.59 ± 2.65 μg/mL, 12.72 ± 2.28 μg/mL; AUC0-8h 20.43 ± 3.47 h×μg/mL, 20.66 ± 3.38 h×μg/mL; AUC0-∞ 20.77 ± 3.53 h×μg/mL, 21.02 ± 3.45 h×μg/mL; the postprandial group: Cmax 5.25 ± 0.94 μg/mL, 5.23 ± 0.80 μg/mL; AUC0-10h 16.92 ± 2.03 h×μg/mL, 17.09 ± 2.31 h×μg/mL; AUC0-∞ 17.33 ± 2.09 h×μg/mL, 17.67 ± 2.45 h×μg/mL.
CONCLUSION: The 90% confidence intervals of geometric mean ratios of test preparation and reference preparation were calculated, and the 90% confidence intervals of geometric mean ratios of Cmax, AUC0-10h, and AUC0-∞ were within the 80.00% ~ 125.00% range in both groups. Both Cmax and AUC met the pre-determined criteria for assuming bioequivalence. The test and reference products were bioequivalent after administration under fasting as well as under fed conditions in healthy Chinese subjects. This study may suggest that successful generic versions of cefalexin not only guarantee the market supply of such drugs but can also improve the safety and effectiveness and quality controllability of cefalexin through a new process and a new drug composition ratio.
METHODS: A within-subject, repeated-measures, crossover randomized controlled design was conducted among 25 participants (7 males and 18 females) with chronic nonspecific low back pain. All the participants received 3 different types of experimental interventions, which included LPST, the passive automated cycling intervention, and the control intervention randomly, with 48 hours between the sessions. The pressure pain threshold (PPT), hot-cold pain threshold, and pain intensity were estimated before and after the interventions.
RESULTS: Repeated-measures analysis of variance showed that LPST provided therapeutic effects as it improved the PPT beyond the placebo and control interventions (P < 0.01). The pain intensity under the LPST condition was significantly better than that under the passive automated cycling intervention and controlled intervention (P < 0.001). Heat pain threshold under the LPST condition also showed a significant trend of improvement beyond the control (P < 0.05), but no significant effects on cold pain threshold were evident.
CONCLUSIONS: Lumbopelvic stabilization training may provide therapeutic effects by inducing pain modulation through an improvement in the pain threshold and reduction in pain intensity. LPST may be considered as part of the management programs for treatment of chronic low back pain.