Objectives To compare the safety, efficacy, and immunogenicity of MSB11022 (acetate-buffered formulation), an adalimumab biosimilar, with the reference product. Method AURIEL-RA study was a phase 3, multicenter, randomized, double-blind, parallel group trial (NCT03052322). Patients with moderately-to-severely active rheumatoid arthritis (RA) with an inadequate response to methotrexate were randomized 1:1 to MSB11022 or reference adalimumab. The primary endpoint was the incidence of treatment-emergent adverse events of special interest (AESIs) (predefined as hypersensitivity) up to week 52. The key secondary endpoint was ACR20 (≥ 20% improvement in American College of Rheumatology core set measurements from baseline) at week 12. Other efficacy endpoints, quality of life, immunogenicity, and pharmacokinetic parameters were evaluated up to week 52. Secondary safety endpoints were evaluated up to week 52 and at a 4-month safety follow-up. Results In total, 288 patients were randomized. The proportion of patients experiencing ≥ 1 treatment-emergent AESI up to week 52 was similar between trial arms: 6 patients (4.2%; 95% CI 1.56, 8.91) receiving MSB11022, and 8 patients (5.5%; 95% CI 2.41, 10.58) receiving reference adalimumab. No clinically meaningful differences in efficacy, quality of life, or immunogenicity were seen between treatment arms up to week 52. No notable difference in the incidence of treatment-emergent adverse events was observed between treatment arms up to the end of the follow-up period. Conclusions These results suggest MSB11022 and reference adalimumab are similar in patients with moderately-to-severely active rheumatoid arthritis in terms of safety, immunogenicity, and efficacy. AURIEL-RA provides evidence to support the similarity of MSB11022 and adalimumab. Key Points• Incidences of hypersensitivity events were similar for MSB11022 (modified buffer) and reference adalimumab.• There was no difference in local reactions between MSB11022 (modified buffer) and reference adalimumab.• AURIEL-RA confirms the equivalence in efficacy and immunogenicity of MSB11022 (modified buffer) and reference adalimumab.

Objective:The primary objective was to assess the warming sensation caused by flavor 316282 in a cold and cough product in the target population.Methods:A single-cohort, single-treatment arm, open-label study. Subjects received one 30-mL dose of syrup containing flavor 316282, paracetamol, phenylephrine hydrochloride, and guaifenesin and recorded onset and disappearance of any warming sensation in the mouth/throat. Subjects’ assessment of strength and appeal of the sensation, taste, texture, and acceptability of the product as a cold and cough remedy was investigated using questionnaires.Results:A total of 51 subjects were included; 47 (92.1%) experienced a warming sensation. The median duration of the warming sensation was 100 s (95% confidence interval = 82 s, 112 s). The majority of subjects rated the syrup as excellent, good, or fair for treatment of cough and cold symptoms (96.1%), taste (80.4%), and texture (98.0%). There were no safety concerns, and the syrup was well tolerated. Most subjects liked the warming sensation.Conclusions:Flavor 316282 in a cold and cough syrup is associated with a warming sensation. The syrup is well tolerated, safe, and palatable.

Objectives: The primary objective of this study was to compare the bioavailability of paracetamol, phenylephrine hydrochoride and guaifenesin in a new oral syrup with an established oral reference product. The secondary objective was to compare the safety of the new syrup and the reference product.Methods: This was a single-centre, open-label, randomized, reference-replicated, crossover study. Healthy adult volunteers received one dose of syrup and two separate doses of a reference oral liquid formulation in a randomized sequence over three study periods, with a washout interval of !7 days between study periods. Blood samples were taken regularly postdose and analysed for paracetamol, phenylephrine hydrochoride and guaifenesin concentrations; adverse events were recorded. Results: This study enrolled 45 subjects. For paracetamol and guaifenesin, the syrup and reference product were considered to be bioequivalent. Bioequivalence was not shown for phenylephrine hydrochoride. All adverse events were mild or moderate, most of which were considered formulation related. Conclusions: The syrup did not reach bioequivalence with the reference product, as bioequivalence could not be shown for phenylephrine hydrochoride. This may be due to differences in the excipients between the two products. Both the syrup and the reference product had a good safety profile and were well tolerated.

No abstract

Objective:The primary objective was to assess the warming sensation caused by IFF Flavour 316282 in a syrup used for short-term treatment by patients suffering from nasal congestion and mild to moderate body pain, headache, fever or sore throat associated with an upper respiratory tract infection.Methods:A single cohort, single treatment arm, open-label study. Subjects received one 30 mL dose of syrup containing IFF Flavour 316282, paracetamol and pseudoephedrine and recorded onset and disappearance of any warming sensation in the mouth/throat. Subjects’ assessments of strength and appeal of the sensation, taste, texture and acceptability of the product was investigated using questionnaires.Results:A total of 56 subjects were included; 53 (94.6%) experienced a warming sensation. The median duration of the warming sensation was 114 s (95% confidence interval: 87–120 s). All subjects rated the syrup as excellent, good or fair for treating their symptoms; 100% and 94.6% of subjects respectively described texture and taste as excellent, good or fair. There were no safety concerns, and the syrup was well tolerated. Most subjects liked the warming sensation.Conclusions:IFF Flavour 316282 in a syrup for treatment of upper respiratory tract infection symptoms is associated with a warming sensation. The syrup is well tolerated, safe and palatable.