Comparable pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics of two epoetin alfa formulations Eporon® and Eprex® following a single subcutaneous administration in healthy male volunteers
Received 26 May 2017
Accepted for publication 7 September 2017
Published 27 October 2017 Volume 2017:11 Pages 3127—3135
Checked for plagiarism Yes
Review by Single anonymous peer review
Peer reviewer comments 2
Editor who approved publication: Dr Tuo Deng
Sumin Yoon,1 Su-jin Rhee,1 Sun Ju Heo,2 Tae Young Oh,2 Seo Hyun Yoon,1 Joo-Youn Cho,1 SeungHwan Lee,1,3 Kyung-Sang Yu1,3
1Department of Clinical Pharmacology and Therapeutics, Seoul National University College of Medicine and Hospital, Seoul, 2Dong-A ST Co. Ltd., Seoul, 3Clinical Trials Center, Seoul National University Hospital, Seoul, Republic of Korea
Purpose: This study aimed to assess and compare the pharmacokinetic (PK) and pharmacodynamic (PD) properties following a single subcutaneous injection of epoetin alfa (Eporon®) with those of the comparator (Eprex®) in healthy male subjects.
Subjects and methods: A randomized, double-blind, two-sequence, crossover study was conducted. Subjects were randomly assigned to receive a single dose, that is, 4,000 IU, of the test or comparator epoetin alfa. After 4 weeks, all subjects received the alternative formulation. The primary PK parameters, maximum observed concentration (Cmax) and area under the curve extrapolated to infinity (AUCinf), were calculated with the serum erythropoietin (EPO) concentrations from blood samples collected for 144 h after dosing. The reticulocyte, hematocrit, hemoglobin and red blood cell counts were measured up to 312 h as PD markers. The primary PD parameters, maximum observed effect (Emax) and area under the effect curve (AUEC), were obtained from the baseline-corrected reticulocyte count. The serum EPO concentration and the reticulocyte count were used to assess the concentration–response relationship. The tolerability and immunogenicity profiles were assessed together.
Results: Forty-two subjects completed the study. The mean EPO concentration–time profiles were comparable between the two formulations. The geometric mean ratios (90% CI) of the Cmax and AUCinf were 0.908 (0.843–0.978) and 1.049 (0.999–1.101), respectively, both of which were within the regulatory range of 0.80–1.25. Additionally, the PD and tolerability profiles were similar between the two formulations. The time-matched serum EPO concentration and PD markers presented a counterclockwise hysteresis, suggesting a time delay between the measured concentration and the response. Both formulations were well tolerated, and production of anti-drug antibodies was not observed.
Conclusion: The two epoetin alfa formulations had similar PK, PD and tolerability profiles. Furthermore, both formulations had a similar time-matched serum EPO concentration and erythropoietic response profile. Thus, the two formulations are expected to be used interchangeably in clinical settings.
Keywords: epoetin alfa, erythropoietin, anemia, pharmacokinetics, pharmacodynamics
This work is published and licensed by Dove Medical Press Limited. The full terms of this license are available at https://www.dovepress.com/terms.php and incorporate the Creative Commons Attribution - Non Commercial (unported, v3.0) License. By accessing the work you hereby accept the Terms. Non-commercial uses of the work are permitted without any further permission from Dove Medical Press Limited, provided the work is properly attributed. For permission for commercial use of this work, please see paragraphs 4.2 and 5 of our Terms.Download Article [PDF] View Full Text [HTML][Machine readable]