The largest database of trusted experimental protocols

56 protocols using phoenix winnonlin software

1

Pharmacokinetics of CC-486 with Drug Interactions

Check if the same lab product or an alternative is used in the 5 most similar protocols
Blood samples for CC-486 pharmacokinetic analyses were collected pre- and post-dose at .5, 1, 1.5, 2, 2.5, 3, 4, and 6 hours on day 1 of cycles 1 and 2. Plasma samples were analyzed using a validated proprietary HPLC/tandem mass spectrometric method. Pharmacokinetic parameters included maximum observed plasma concentration, time of maximum observed plasma concentration, area under the plasma concentration-time curve from zero to infinity, terminal elimination half-life, apparent total clearance, and apparent volume of distribution. Pharmacokinetic parameters were calculated using noncompartmental methods with Phoenix WinNonlin software (Pharsight Corp, Mountain View, CA). To evaluate potential drug–drug interactions, patients were alternately assigned to take their regular concomitant medications before the visit on day 1 of cycle 1 or 2 and to not to take their regular concomitant medications before the day 1 visit in the other cycle.
+ Open protocol
+ Expand
2

Pharmacokinetics of CC-486 with Drug Interactions

Check if the same lab product or an alternative is used in the 5 most similar protocols
Blood samples for CC-486 pharmacokinetic analyses were collected pre- and post-dose at .5, 1, 1.5, 2, 2.5, 3, 4, and 6 hours on day 1 of cycles 1 and 2. Plasma samples were analyzed using a validated proprietary HPLC/tandem mass spectrometric method. Pharmacokinetic parameters included maximum observed plasma concentration, time of maximum observed plasma concentration, area under the plasma concentration-time curve from zero to infinity, terminal elimination half-life, apparent total clearance, and apparent volume of distribution. Pharmacokinetic parameters were calculated using noncompartmental methods with Phoenix WinNonlin software (Pharsight Corp, Mountain View, CA). To evaluate potential drug–drug interactions, patients were alternately assigned to take their regular concomitant medications before the visit on day 1 of cycle 1 or 2 and to not to take their regular concomitant medications before the day 1 visit in the other cycle.
+ Open protocol
+ Expand
3

Pharmacokinetic Assessment of CC-486, Carboplatin, and nab-Paclitaxel

Check if the same lab product or an alternative is used in the 5 most similar protocols
CC-486 pharmacokinetic parameters are reported as its active moiety azacitidine. In part 1, blood samples for pharmacokinetic assessments were collected from patients in all arms predose and at specified intervals postdose (up to 8 hours for CC-486, up to 24 hours post-infusion for carboplatin, and up to 72 hours post-infusion for nab-paclitaxel). In arm A, blood samples were collected in cycles 1 and 2 on day 1 for CC-486 and cycle 1, days 8 and 9, cycle 2 days 1 and 2 for carboplatin. In arm B, blood samples were collected on cycle 1, days 1 and 8, for CC-486 and days 8 to 11 and 15 to 18 for nab-paclitaxel, and in cycle 1, day 1, for arm C. Validated proprietary, LC/MS-MS methods were used for quantitation of CC-486 (measured as azacitidine) and nab-paclitaxel levels in plasma. A validated proprietary, inductively coupled plasma mass spectrometric method (ICP-MS) was used for quantitation of CBDCA levels in plasma. CC-486 pharmacokinetic parameters assessed included time to maximum plasma concentration (Tmax), AUC, peak plasma concentration (Cmax), terminal half-life (t1/2), apparent total clearance (CL/F), and apparent volume of distribution (Vz/F). Pharmacokinetic parameters were calculated using noncompartmental methods with Phoenix WinNonlin software (Pharsight Corp.).
+ Open protocol
+ Expand
4

Population Pharmacokinetic Modeling

Check if the same lab product or an alternative is used in the 5 most similar protocols
The population-based PBPK software Simcyp® (Version 21, Certara UK Limited, Sheffield, UK) was used as the platform for PBPK analyses. Simulations were performed using the Simcyp® default virtual population models representing healthy subjects (“Sim-Healthy Volunteers” and “Sim-NEurCaucasian”), healthy pregnant subjects (“Sim-pregnancy”), and patients with cancer (“Sim-Cancer”). A modified pregnancy population model was also developed and used for simulations, as previously described.
In cases where clinical PK data were not directly reported in the reference, they were extracted using the WebPlotDigitizer (version 4.6, https://apps.automeris.io/wpd/ (accessed on 2 March 2023). In addition, the pharmacokinetic parameters were calculated via noncompartmental analysis using the Phoenix WinNonlin software (version 8.3, Pharsight Corp., Mountain View, CA, USA).
+ Open protocol
+ Expand
5

Pharmacodynamic Endpoints of Cell Counts

Check if the same lab product or an alternative is used in the 5 most similar protocols
PD endpoints included ANC and CD34+ cell count. Blood samples for ANC were collected at 0, 0.25, 0.5, 0.75, 1, 2, 3, 4, 6, 8, 12, 16, 24, 36, and 48 h postdose and on days 4, 5, 6, 7, 11, 15, and 22. On the other hand, blood samples for CD34+ cell count were collected at predose, 24 and 48 h postdose and on days 4, 5, 6, 7, 11, 15, and 22. The maximum serum concentration of ANC (ANCmax) and CD34+ cell count (CD34+max) and time to reach peak ANC (Tmax_ANC) and CD34+ cell count (Tmax_CD34+) were derived from the observed values. The mean area under the effect-time curve (AUEClast) was calculated as the area under the PD response curve from time zero to the last observed value using the linear trapezoidal rule. For each of ANC and CD34+ cell count, the derived parameters were calculated using the Phoenix WinNonlin software (Professional version 5.1; Pharsight Corporation).
+ Open protocol
+ Expand
6

Pharmacokinetics of Eflapegrastim and Pegfilgrastim

Check if the same lab product or an alternative is used in the 5 most similar protocols
Blood samples were obtained to determine serum eflapegrastim and pegfilgrastim concentrations at 0, 0.25, 0.5, 0.75, 1, 2, 3, 4, 6, 8, 12, 16, 24, 36, and 48 h and on days 4, 5, 6, 7, 11, 15, and 22. Individual PK parameters of eflapegrastim and pegfilgrastim were obtained by noncompartmental methods using the Phoenix WinNonlin software (Professional version 5.1; Pharsight Corporation, Mountain View, CA, USA). The maximum serum concentration (Cmax) and time to reach Cmax (Tmax) were acquired directly from the observed values. AUC from time zero to the last observed concentration (AUClast) was calculated using the linear trapezoidal method. The terminal elimination half‐life (t½) was ln(2) divided by the apparent terminal elimination rate constant (λz), which was estimated by linear regression of the terminal linear portion of the log concentration versus time curve. The AUC from time zero to infinity (AUC) was the sum of AUClast and Clast/λz, where Clast was the last observed concentration. The apparent clearance (CL/F) was the dose divided by AUC.
+ Open protocol
+ Expand
7

Plasma PK Study of Compounds 32 and 33

Check if the same lab product or an alternative is used in the 5 most similar protocols
Test compound was administered to Sprague-Dawley jugular canulated rats (Charles River) by either oral gavage or IV injection followed by blood sampling from the jugular vein at designated time points (performed under IACUC protocol number 2145-01 (UW, Seattle)). The oral dose was administered to each rat at 20 mg/kg for compound 32 and 5 mg/kg for compound 33 at time = 0 in a 1 mL volume of dosing solution (7% Tween 80, 3% EtOH, 5% DMSO, 0.9% saline.) IV injections were administered at 5 mg/kg from time = 0 to 3 minutes in a 1 mL volume of dosing solution, and blood was sampled at the same time points via the jugular vein. Experiments were performed with groups of 2 rats each for the oral and IV dosing. Plasma was separated and extracted with acetonitrile and quantified by LC/MS analysis. PK calculations were performed using Phoenix WinNonlin software (Pharsight).
+ Open protocol
+ Expand
8

Pharmacokinetics of Meloxicam in Pigeons

Check if the same lab product or an alternative is used in the 5 most similar protocols
The concentration-time data of meloxicam in each pigeon were analyzed using a noncompartmental method in Phoenix WinNonLin software (Version 8.1; Pharsight, Cary, NC), and the resulting pharmacokinetic parameters were obtained. To calculate the first-order rate constant associated with the terminal phase (λz), linear regression was used, and from this, the terminal half-life (t1/2λz) was determined as ln2/λz. The area under the concentration-time curve (AUC) and the first moment curve (AUMC) were both calculated using the linear trapezoidal rule with extrapolation to time infinity (Chen et al., 2023 (link)). The mean residence time (MRT) was obtained by dividing AUMC0–∞ by AUC0–∞. The initial concentration (C0) after IV administration was estimated using the back extrapolation method. Total body clearance (Cl) was calculated as the ratio of intravenous dose to AUC (Yang et al., 2019 ), while the volume of distribution (VZ) was determined as VZ = Dose/AUC/λz, where Dose represented the intravenous dose. The volume of distribution at steady-state (VSS) was calculated as VSS = MRTIV × Cl. After administration via PO and IM routes, the peak concentration (Cmax) and time to reach it (Tmax) were observed. While the mean absorption time (MAT) was determined as MRTPO/IM minus MRTIV (Bello et al., 2022 ). Bioavailability (F) was calculated as the ratio of extravascular AUC to the IV AUC.
+ Open protocol
+ Expand
9

Oral and Intravenous Pharmacokinetics in Rats

Check if the same lab product or an alternative is used in the 5 most similar protocols
Pharmacokinetic (PK) studies were performed in female rats by oral (5 mg/kg) or intravenous (1 mg/kg) administration of the compound at ChemPartner (Shanghai, China). Blood samples were collected at serial time points from 5 min to 24 h. The circulating concentrations of the compound in plasma samples were analyzed by HPLC. PK parameters were determined with Phoenix WinNonlin software (Pharsight Corporation, Sunnyvale, CA, United States) using a non-compartmental model.
+ Open protocol
+ Expand
10

PBPK Modeling of Apixaban PK in Healthy and Impaired Populations

Check if the same lab product or an alternative is used in the 5 most similar protocols
The population-based PBPK simulator PK-Sim® software version 11.1 (Open Systems Pharmacology Suite) was utilized to construct whole-body PBPK models of apixaban in healthy adults, healthy elderly, and elderly populations with hepatic and renal impairment. The mean concentration versus time data points were extracted using version 4.2 of the open-source WebPlotDigitizer® software. The non-compartmental model analysis software Phoenix WinNonlin® software version 8.3.5.340 (Pharsight, Mountain View, CA, USA) was used to calculate PK parameters.
+ Open protocol
+ Expand

About PubCompare

Our mission is to provide scientists with the largest repository of trustworthy protocols and intelligent analytical tools, thereby offering them extensive information to design robust protocols aimed at minimizing the risk of failures.

We believe that the most crucial aspect is to grant scientists access to a wide range of reliable sources and new useful tools that surpass human capabilities.

However, we trust in allowing scientists to determine how to construct their own protocols based on this information, as they are the experts in their field.

Ready to get started?

Sign up for free.
Registration takes 20 seconds.
Available from any computer
No download required

Sign up now

Revolutionizing how scientists
search and build protocols!