A randomized, prospective double-blind comparison of the efficacy of generic propofol (sulphite additive) with Diprivan®

Olufolabi, Adeyemi J.; Gan, Tong J.; Lacassie, Héctor J.; White, William D.; Habib, Ashraf S.

doi:10.1017/s0265021505001961

Cited by 16 publications

(5 citation statements)

References 27 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Studies conducted in other countries comparing the pharmacodynamic effi cacy of Diprivan® and generic formulation of propofol show similar results [2][3][4] . However, the recovery time (BIS = 70) was 20% lower for Propovan® compared to Diprivan® (eight and 10 minutes, respectively).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 86%

Avaliação farmacodinâmica e análise físico-química de duas formulações de propofol usadas em infusão alvo-controlada

Simoni¹,

Miziara²,

Esteves³

et al. 2013

Rev. Bras. Anestesiol.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 86%

Avaliação farmacodinâmica e análise físico-química de duas formulações de propofol usadas em infusão alvo-controlada

Simoni¹,

Miziara²,

Esteves³

et al. 2013

Rev. Bras. Anestesiol.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Possible differences between brand-name and generic drugs delivered via injection have received less attention. 6 , 7 , 21 – 27 Generic and brand-name drugs contain the same active ingredients and exhibit similar pharmacokinetics. However, the drugs may differ in terms of safety and toxicity profiles because some of the inactive ingredients vary.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Cisplatin-induced hyponatremia in malignancy: comparison between brand-name and generic formulation

Ochi¹,

Yamane²,

Hotta³

et al. 2014

DDDT

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

IntroductionWidespread use of generic drugs is considered to be indispensable if reductions in total health care costs are to be achieved, but the market share of such drugs remains low. In general, generic drugs have the same active ingredients as brand-name drugs, but this is not always the case. Thus, toxicity profiles may vary when brand-name and generic drugs are compared. We retrospectively investigated the incidence of hyponatremia in patients receiving brand-name cisplatin (CDDP) and a generic counterpart thereof.MethodsWe reviewed the medical records of patients treated with brand-name CDDP (n=53) and a generic formulation (n=26), and compared the incidences of hyponatremia and renal toxicity. Toxicities were graded using the Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events, version 4.0. Differences between groups were evaluated using the Student’s t-test, and the odds ratio for hyponatremia was estimated via logistic regression analysis.ResultsSerum creatinine levels after chemotherapy increased significantly in both the brand-name and generic CDDP groups; no significant difference was evident between the two groups. Hyponatremia of grade 3 or above developed in 30.7% of the generic CDDP group compared to 15.1% of the brand-name CDDP group (P=0.011). Multivariate analysis showed that the use of generic CDDP increased the incidence of hyponatremia (odds ratio =5.661, 95% confidence interval =1.403–22.839; P=0.015).ConclusionOncologists should be aware that use of a generic CDDP might be associated with more hyponatremia than would use of brand-name CDDP.

show abstract

“…In an earlier study comparing the efficacy of generic propofol with Diprivan w , mean infusion rates of both formulations during induction and maintenance of anaesthesia were 5.4 (1.8) and 5.4 (1.2) mg kg 21 h 21 , respectively. 10 On the basis of this observation, a sample size of 138 patients per treatment arm was calculated to be sufficient to allow a detection of 15% difference in mean infusion rate with an 80% power at an a of 0.05.…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Effectiveness, safety, and pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic characteristics of microemulsion propofol in patients undergoing elective surgery under total intravenous anaesthesia

Jung

Choi

Cho

et al. 2010

British Journal of Anaesthesia

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

A randomized, prospective double-blind comparison of the efficacy of generic propofol (sulphite additive) with Diprivan®

Abstract: Diprivan and generic propofol have similar efficacy at a specified, bispectral index-defined, depth of anaesthesia.

Cited by 16 publications

References 27 publications

Avaliação farmacodinâmica e análise físico-química de duas formulações de propofol usadas em infusão alvo-controlada

Avaliação farmacodinâmica e análise físico-química de duas formulações de propofol usadas em infusão alvo-controlada

Cisplatin-induced hyponatremia in malignancy: comparison between brand-name and generic formulation

Effectiveness, safety, and pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic characteristics of microemulsion propofol in patients undergoing elective surgery under total intravenous anaesthesia

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About