BACKGROUND: Arbidol is licensed in Russia and China for prophylaxis and treatment of influenza A and B. This study was to assess the pharmacokinetics of single and multiple doses of arbidol in healthy Chinese volunteers. METHODS: This was a single-center, open-label, two-phase study conducted in 12 subjects. In single-dose phase, subjects were randomized to receive single doses of 0.2, 0.4 and 0.8 g of arbidol in a crossover design with a 7-day washout period between administration. In the multiple-dose phase, subjects received 0.2 g 3 times a day for 7 days. Serial blood samples were collected at predefined time points. Plasma concentrations were determined with a validated HPLC method. Safety assessments were conducted throughout the study. RESULTS: After administration of single doses of 0.2, 0.4 and 0.8 g, geometric mean estimates for arbidol Cmax were 0.70, 1.24, and 2.16 mg/l and the mean of AUClast were 3.27, 5.81 and 12.72 mg×h/l, respectively. The AUClast and Cmax showed dose proportionality. After administration of multiple doses, the mean of Cmax,ss of arbidol was 0.41 mg/l and the mean accumulation ratio is ~ 1.12. Compared with single-dose phase, arbidol exhibited lower Cmax and prolonged plasma concentration profiles. CONCLUSIONS: In healthy Chinese subjects, single dosing of arbidol resulted in linear plasma pharmacokinetics. Arbidol exhibited little accumulation with repeated administration. Compared with single doses, multiple oral doses showed somewhat different pharmacokinetics and tissue distribution patterns. Sex did not appear to affect the pharmacokinetic properties of arbidol.
RCT Entities:
BACKGROUND:Arbidol is licensed in Russia and China for prophylaxis and treatment of influenza A and B. This study was to assess the pharmacokinetics of single and multiple doses of arbidol in healthy Chinese volunteers. METHODS: This was a single-center, open-label, two-phase study conducted in 12 subjects. In single-dose phase, subjects were randomized to receive single doses of 0.2, 0.4 and 0.8 g of arbidol in a crossover design with a 7-day washout period between administration. In the multiple-dose phase, subjects received 0.2 g 3 times a day for 7 days. Serial blood samples were collected at predefined time points. Plasma concentrations were determined with a validated HPLC method. Safety assessments were conducted throughout the study. RESULTS: After administration of single doses of 0.2, 0.4 and 0.8 g, geometric mean estimates for arbidol Cmax were 0.70, 1.24, and 2.16 mg/l and the mean of AUClast were 3.27, 5.81 and 12.72 mg×h/l, respectively. The AUClast and Cmax showed dose proportionality. After administration of multiple doses, the mean of Cmax,ss of arbidol was 0.41 mg/l and the mean accumulation ratio is ~ 1.12. Compared with single-dose phase, arbidol exhibited lower Cmax and prolonged plasma concentration profiles. CONCLUSIONS: In healthy Chinese subjects, single dosing of arbidol resulted in linear plasma pharmacokinetics. Arbidol exhibited little accumulation with repeated administration. Compared with single doses, multiple oral doses showed somewhat different pharmacokinetics and tissue distribution patterns. Sex did not appear to affect the pharmacokinetic properties of arbidol.
Authors: Martin W Nicholson; Ching-Ying Huang; Jyun-Yuan Wang; Chien-Yu Ting; Yu-Che Cheng; Darien Z H Chan; Yi-Chan Lee; Ching-Chuan Hsu; Yu-Hung Hsu; Cindy M C Chang; Marvin L Hsieh; Yuan-Yuan Cheng; Yi-Ling Lin; Chien-Hsiun Chen; Ying-Ta Wu; Timothy A Hacker; Joseph C Wu; Timothy J Kamp; Patrick C H Hsieh Journal: Pharmaceuticals (Basel) Date: 2022-06-20
Authors: C E Hulseberg; L Fénéant; K M Szymańska-de Wijs; N P Kessler; E A Nelson; C J Shoemaker; C S Schmaljohn; S J Polyak; J M White Journal: J Virol Date: 2019-04-03 Impact factor: 5.103
Authors: Anastasiya S Sokolova; Olga I Yarovaya; Darya V Baranova; Anastasia V Galochkina; Anna A Shtro; Marina V Kireeva; Sophia S Borisevich; Yuriy V Gatilov; Vladimir V Zarubaev; Nariman F Salakhutdinov Journal: Arch Virol Date: 2021-05-13 Impact factor: 2.574
Authors: Markus Zeitlinger; Birgit C P Koch; Roger Bruggemann; Pieter De Cock; Timothy Felton; Maya Hites; Jennifer Le; Sonia Luque; Alasdair P MacGowan; Deborah J E Marriott; Anouk E Muller; Kristina Nadrah; David L Paterson; Joseph F Standing; João P Telles; Michael Wölfl-Duchek; Michael Thy; Jason A Roberts Journal: Clin Pharmacokinet Date: 2020-10 Impact factor: 6.447
Authors: Hanjun Zhao; Kelvin K W To; Hoiyan Lam; Xinxin Zhou; Jasper Fuk-Woo Chan; Zheng Peng; Andrew C Y Lee; Jianpiao Cai; Wan-Mui Chan; Jonathan Daniel Ip; Chris Chung-Sing Chan; Man Lung Yeung; Anna Jinxia Zhang; Allen Wing Ho Chu; Shibo Jiang; Kwok-Yung Yuen Journal: Nat Commun Date: 2021-03-09 Impact factor: 14.919
Authors: Shawn Herring; Jessica M Oda; Jessica Wagoner; Delaney Kirchmeier; Aidan O'Connor; Elizabeth A Nelson; Qinfeng Huang; Yuying Liang; Lisa Evans DeWald; Lisa M Johansen; Pamela J Glass; Gene G Olinger; Aleksandr Ianevski; Tero Aittokallio; Mary F Paine; Susan L Fink; Judith M White; Stephen J Polyak Journal: Antimicrob Agents Chemother Date: 2021-03-18 Impact factor: 5.191
Authors: Susan L Fink; Lucia Vojtech; Jessica Wagoner; Natalie S J Slivinski; Konner J Jackson; Ruofan Wang; Sudip Khadka; Priya Luthra; Christopher F Basler; Stephen J Polyak Journal: Sci Rep Date: 2018-06-12 Impact factor: 4.379