↓ Skip to main content

New levothyroxine formulation meeting 95–105% specification over the whole shelf-life: results from two pharmacokinetic trials

Overview of attention for article published in Current Medical Research & Opinion, October 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 5% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (95th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (93rd percentile)

Mentioned by

news
5 news outlets
blogs
1 blog
twitter
9 X users
facebook
1 Facebook page

Citations

dimensions_citation
36 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
20 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
New levothyroxine formulation meeting 95–105% specification over the whole shelf-life: results from two pharmacokinetic trials
Published in
Current Medical Research & Opinion, October 2016
DOI 10.1080/03007995.2016.1246434
Pubmed ID
Authors

Ulrike Gottwald-Hostalek, Wolfgang Uhl, Peter Wolna, George J. Kahaly

Abstract

Small levothyroxine (L-T4) dose changes can lead to significant clinical effects. To ensure thyroid hormone levels are safely maintained, authorities are increasingly adopting stricter potency specifications for L-T4, the most stringent of these being 95-105% of the labeled dose over the whole shelf-life. Levothyroxine sodium (Euthyrox®, Eutirox®, Lévothyrox®) has been reformulated, and two studies performed to ensure bioequivalence to the currently marketed formulation and dosage form proportionality of the new formulation. The bioequivalence study was open-label, randomized, single-dose, two-period, two-sequence crossover comparing the highest dosage strengths of the currently marketed and the new L-T4 formulation at a total dose of 600 µg. The dosage form proportionality study was open-label, randomized, three-period, six-sequence crossover, comparing 50 µg, 100 µg, and 200 µg L-T4 tablets, at a total dose of 600 µg. Blood samples were taken at predefined time intervals. Primary outcomes were area under curve (AUC) and maximum concentration (Cmax) of thyroxine (T4) in plasma. In the bioequivalence study, comparing the T4 profiles for the new and current formulation of L-T4, the geometric least square mean ratio of the baseline-adjusted AUC0-72,adj was 99.3% (90% confidence interval [CI]: 95.6-103.2) and the Cmax,adj was 101.7% (90% CI: 98.8-104.6). Bioequivalence was established as the 90% CI lie within the predefined 0.9-1.11 limits. In the dosage form proportionality study, pairwise comparisons ranged from 99.3-104.8%, and all 95% CI were within the predefined CI range (0.8-1.25): The three dose strengths were dosage form proportional. The new formulation of L-T4 meets the most stringent potency specification guidelines, has been demonstrated to be bioequivalent to the current formulation and to show dosage form proportionality. The new formulation will enable patients to receive a dose fine-tuned to their medical needs, contributing to improved safety in the use of L-T4.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 9 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 20 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 20 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 5 25%
Student > Bachelor 4 20%
Researcher 3 15%
Other 2 10%
Unspecified 1 5%
Other 2 10%
Unknown 3 15%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 6 30%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 3 15%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 2 10%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 1 5%
Unspecified 1 5%
Other 2 10%
Unknown 5 25%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 59. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 23 August 2019.
All research outputs
#721,767
of 25,374,647 outputs
Outputs from Current Medical Research & Opinion
#69
of 3,664 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#13,938
of 323,799 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Current Medical Research & Opinion
#4
of 64 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,374,647 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 97th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 3,664 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 8.1. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 98% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 323,799 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 95% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 64 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 93% of its contemporaries.