Focal epilepsy is the most common type of epilepsy in Korea, and anti-epileptic drugs (AEDs) are the main treatment option for patients. This study aimed to compare the efficacy and safety of AEDs for focal epilepsy through a meta-analysis. The AEDs prescribed in Korea as monotherapy and adjunctive treatment for patients with focal epilepsy were included for analysis. Relevant articles were searched for randomized clinical trials of AEDs and treatment outcomes were analyzed on the basis of the 50% responder rate, seizure-free rate, treatment withdrawal rate, and emergence rates of adverse events (AEs). The odds ratios (ORs) and their 95% confidence intervals (CI) of study outcome were calculated using combined data from multiple studies. A total of 47 studies were included in the meta-analysis. The seizurefree rate, treatment withdrawal rate, and AE rate were not significantly different among the AEDs recommended for monotherapy. Among the AEDs recommended for adjunctive treatment, topiramate and oxcarbazepine yielded the highest OR in comparison with placebo for each efficacy parameter: the 50% responder rate for topiramate = 6.42 (3.76–11.6) and the seizure-free rate for oxcarbazepine = 32.7 (6.05–899). The third-generation AEDs (brivaracetam and perampanel) yielded relatively better safety outcomes than other AEDs. In general, the 50% responder rate and treatment withdrawal rate tended to increase as the dose of the AEDs increased. The results from the current meta-analysis of the efficacy and safety data of various AEDs may provide insight into optimal pharmacotherapy for the treatment of focal epilepsy.

The causes and attributing factors of drug-induced liver injury (DILI) remain unclear as a result of exclusion-based diagnosis and low incidence. The aim of this study was to explore and evaluate potential drug-related causes and factors associated with DILI. Using electronic medical records (EMR) from the Seoul National University Bundang Hospital from 2003 to 2014, patients with DILI events were identified based on liver function test results. All patients with hepatic or biliary diseases were excluded. Patient characteristics, including demographics, clinical patterns, and severity of DILI were summarized and their associations were evaluated. Drugs frequently prescribed to patients exhibiting DILI within the month before their first DILI event compared to the total patient population were identified and the probabilities of hepatotoxicity associated with their use were assessed through examination of available reports. Among the 1,835 patients with laboratory test results, 1,023 were male and 1,053 were 65 years of age or older. Moderate DILI was dominant in older or male patients and cholestatic DILI tended to be more frequently identified in older patients of either sex. Cytarabine was the most frequently prescribed drug in DILI patients, followed by aprotinin and dopamine. Among the 30 most frequently prescribed drugs in DILI patients, 15 (50%) were identified as known hepatotoxic agents. In conclusion, this study evaluated differences in features of DILI among groups based on demographics and explored candidate drugs with possible associations with DILI, which has potential value reflecting real-world clinical practice.
Aprotinin ; Cytarabine ; Demography ; Diagnosis ; Dopamine ; Drug-Induced Liver Injury* ; Electronic Health Records* ; Humans ; Incidence ; Liver Function Tests ; Male ; Seoul

Because bioequivalence studies are performed using a crossover design, information on the intra-subject coefficient of variation (intra-CV) for pharmacokinetic measures is needed when determining the sample size. However, calculated intra-CVs based on bioequivalence results of identical generic drugs produce different estimates. In this study, we collected bioequivalence results using public resources from the Ministry of Food and Drug Safety (MFDS) and calculated the intra-CVs of various generics. For the generics with multiple bioequivalence results, pooled intra-CVs were calculated. The estimated intra-CVs of 142 bioequivalence studies were 14.7±8.2% for AUC and 21.7±8.8% for C(max). Intra-CVs of C(max) were larger than those of area under the concentration-time curve (AUC) in 129 studies (90.8%). For the 26 generics with multiple bioequivalence results, the coefficients of variation of intra-CVs between identical generics (mean±sd (min ~ max)) were 38.0±24.4% (1.9 ~ 105.3%) for AUC and 27.9±18.2 % (4.0 ~ 70.1%) for C(max). These results suggest that substantial variation exists among the bioequivalence results of identical generics. In this study, we presented the intra-CVs of various generics with their pooled intra-CVs. The estimated intra-CVs calculated in this study will provide useful information for planning future bioequivalence studies.
Area Under Curve ; Cross-Over Studies ; Drugs, Generic ; Sample Size* ; Therapeutic Equivalency*

The retraction has been agreed upon due to critical typographical errors throughout the contents from accidents at the manuscript editing step.

Because bioequivalence studies are performed using a crossover design, information on the intra-subject coefficient of variation (intra-CV) for pharmacokinetic measures is needed when determining the sample size. However, calculated intra-CVs based on bioequivalence results of identical generic drugs produce different estimates. In this study, we collected bioequivalence results using public resources from the Ministry of Food and Drug Safety (MFDS) and calculated the intra-CVs of various generics. For the generics with multiple bioequivalence results, pooled intra-CVs were calculated. The estimated intra-CVs of 142 bioequivalence studies were 14.7±8.2% for AUC and 21.7±8.8% for Cmax. Intra-CVs of Cmax were larger than those of area under the concentration-time curve (AUC) in 129 studies (90.8%). For the 26 generics with multiple bioequivalence results, the coefficients of variation of intra-CVs between identical generics (mean±sd (min ~ max)) were 38.0±24.4% (1.9 ~ 105.3%) for AUC and 27.9±18.2% (4.0 ~ 70.1%) for Cmax. These results suggest that substantial variation exists among the bioequivalence results of identical generics. In this study, we presented the intra-CVs of various generics with their pooled intra-CVs. The estimated intra-CVs calculated in this study will provide useful information for planning future bioequivalence studies. (This is republication of the article 'Transl Clin Pharmacol 2017;25:179-182' retracted from critical typographic errors. See the 'Retraction and Republication section of this issue for further information)
Area Under Curve ; Cross-Over Studies ; Drugs, Generic ; Sample Size ; Therapeutic Equivalency

Objectives: Digital therapeutics (DTx) are software-based therapeutic interventions based on clinical evidence. Randomized clinical trials (RCTs) are often the source of clinical evidence, similar to conventional drugs or medical devices. However, novel approaches such as the use of real-world data or digital biomarkers are also utilized. This article aimed to review how DTx products have been clinically evaluated. Methods: DTx products approved by the US Food and Drug Administration as of 2020 were reviewed and products with sufficient published information were selected. Pivotal clinical trials were analyzed according to the elements of the Consolidated Standards of Reporting Trials (CONSORT) guideline. Case reviews were presented for other clinical evaluation strategies, considering the small number of publications. Results: Most approved DTx products used RCTs for clinical evaluations. Similar to conventional RCTs, parallel-group designs with statistical hypothesis testing were adopted. However, DTx trials were often not blinded due to practical issues and involved various comparator groups. In addition, DTx products could be readily evaluated in home-based settings and delivered through the internet. Other evaluation approaches included retrospective analyses using insurance claims data or usage data, which enabled long-term evaluations of effectiveness. Digital biomarkers obtained from real-time and continuous log data were also used to improve the objectiveness of endpoints. Conclusions RCTs accounted for the majority of DTx evaluations. The designs of DTx trials were comparable to those of drug or device trials, but blinding and comparator elements were often different. Furthermore, the use of real-world data and digital biomarkers are also being tried.

For the treatment of hypertension, fixed-dose combinations (FDCs) of antihypertensive drugs can provide complementary benefits from improved compliance and cost-effectiveness compared with loose combinations of corresponding drugs. A new FDC of fimasartan/ amlodipine/hydrochlorothiazide 60/10/25 mg is undergoing clinical development. A randomized, open-label, single-dose, 3-period, 3-sequence, partially replicated crossover phase 1 study was conducted to compare the pharmacokinetics (PKs) between the FDC of fimasartan/amlodipine/hydrochlorothiazide 60/10/25 mg and a loose combination of a dual-combination FDC (fimasartan/amlodipine 60/10 mg) and hydrochlorothiazide 25 mg. Sixty healthy subjects were randomized, and 55 subjects completed the study. Serial blood samples were collected, and plasma concentrations of fimasartan, amlodipine and hydrochlorothiazide were measured to analyze PK parameters. The PK profiles of the FDC were similar to those of the loose combinations. The geometric mean ratios (GMRs) and 90% confidence intervals (CIs) of the FDC to loose combinations for the maximum plasma concentration (Cmax ) and area under the curve until the last measurable time point (AUClast ) were within the conventional bioequivalent range of 0.80 to 1.25. The GMRs and 90% CIs of fimasartan, amlodipine and hydrochlorothiazide were 1.0163 (0.8681–1.1898), 0.9595 (0.9256–0.9946), and 1.1294 (1.0791–1.1821) for Cmax and 1.0167 (0.9347–1.1059), 0.9575 (0.9317–0.9841), and 1.0561 (1.0170–1.0967) for AUClast , respectively. Both the FDC and loose combinations were well tolerated. In conclusion, the FDC of fimasartan/amlodipine/ hydrochlorothiazide 60/10/25 mg showed similar PK profiles to those of the corresponding loose combination, and both treatments were well tolerated.

Fetal tachycardia (FT) is a rare disorder and is associated with significant mortality of fetus. Digoxin is one of the antiarrhythmic agents used to treat FT via transplacental therapy. In this report, we describe a therapeutic drug monitoring (TDM) case of digoxin during the treatment of FT. A 40-year-old woman, gravida 2 para 1, hospitalized to control FT as the fetal heart rate (FHR) showed over 200 bpm on ultrasonography at 29 weeks of gestation. She did not have any medical or medication history and showed normal electrolytes level on clinical laboratory test results. For the treatment of FT loading and maintenance dose of intravenous digoxin (loading dose: 0.6 mg; maintenance dose: 0.3 mg every 8 hours) were administered. To monitor the efficacy and safety of the treatment, TDM was conducted with a target maternal serum trough digoxin concentration of 1.0 to 2.0 ng/mL, as well as ultrasonography and maternal electrocardiogram. The observed digoxin serum concentrations were 0.67, 0.83, and 1.05 ng/mL after 1, 2, and 5 days after the initiation of digoxin therapy, respectively. Although the serum digoxin concentrations reached the target range, the FHR did not improve. Therefore, digoxin was discontinued, and oral flecainide therapy was started. The FHR adjusted to the normal range within 2 days from changing treatment and remained stable. TDM of digoxin along with the monitoring of clinical responses can give valuable information for decision-making during the treatment FT.

An adaptive design is a clinical trial design that allows for modification of a structured plan in a clinical trial based on data accumulated during pre-planned interim analyses. This flexible approach to clinical trial design improves the success rate of clinical trials while reducing time, cost, and sample size compared to conventional methods. The purpose of this study is to identify the current status of adaptive design and present key considerations for planning an appropriate adaptive design based on specific circumstances. We searched for clinical trials conducted between January 2006 to July 2021 in the Clinical Trials Registry (ClinicalTrials.gov) using keywords specified in the Food and Drug Administration Adaptive Design Clinical Trial Guidelines. In order to analyze the adaptive designs used in selected cases, we classified the results according to the phase of the clinical trial, type of indication, and the specific adaptation method employed. A total of 267 clinical trials were identified on ClinicalTrials.gov. Among them, 236 clinical trials actually applied adaptive designs and were classified according to phase, indication types, and adaptation methods. Adaptive designs were most frequently used in phase 2 clinical trials and oncology research. The most commonly used adaptation method was the adaptive treatment selection design. In the case of coronavirus disease 2019, the most frequently used designs were adaptive platform design and seamless design. Through this study, we expect to provide valuable insights and considerations for the implementation of adaptive design clinical trials in different diseases and stages.

BACKGROUND: Zofenopril is a new Angiotensin Converting Enzyme (ACE) inhibitor for the treatment of the patients with hypertension and congestive heart failure. This study aimed to evaluate the pharmacokinetics (PKs)/pharmacodynamics (PDs) and tolerability of zofenopril in healthy Korean subjects. METHODS: A randomized, double blind, placebo-controlled, multiple dosing parallel group study with two dosage groups (zofenopril 30 mg or 60 mg) was conducted in healthy Korean male subjects. Each dosage group consisted of 10 subjects and they were randomly assigned to receive zofenopril or placebo with a ratio of 4:1. PK characteristics of zofenopril and its active metabolite, zofenoprilat, were evaluated after single or multiple dosing. Serum ACE activities and blood pressures were measured for PD evaluation. Adverse events, clinical laboratory tests, electrocardiograms, vital signs and physical examinations were performed for tolerability evaluation. RESULTS: The PK characteristics of zofenopril and zofenoprilat after single dose and multiple doses were similar to one another. The metabolic ratio of zofenoprilat to zofenopril after single dose and multiple doses were 12.4 and 14.9, respectively, in the 30 mg dosage group, and were 6.8 and 6.6, respectively, in the 60 mg dosage group. Complete serum ACE activity inhibition was observed within 1 hour in both doses but it was maintained longer in the 60 mg dosage group compared to the 30 mg dosage group. There were no clinically significant abnormalities in tolerability evaluations. CONCLUSION: The PK/PD characteristics of zofenopril and zofenoprilat after single or multiple administrations were explored. Zofenopril was well tolerated after multiple administrations in healthy Korean subjects.
Captopril ; Electrocardiography ; Heart Failure ; Humans ; Hypertension ; Male ; Peptidyl-Dipeptidase A ; Physical Examination ; Vital Signs