Publications by authors named "Mohammed Bouhajib"

22 Publications

  • Page 1 of 1

The Pharmacokinetics of Fluticasone Furoate Given Intranasally in Healthy Subjects Using an Ultra-Sensitive Analytical Assay.

Drug Res (Stuttg) 2020 Jul 2;70(7):310-316. Epub 2020 Jun 2.

Scientific Affairs, Pharma Medica Research Inc, Mississauga, Canada.

Purpose: It has been previously shown that the complete pharmacokinetic profile, in particular the elimination phase, of intranasal fluticasone furoate has not been fully characterized due to the inability to quantify concentrations at low enough levels. This study was designed to evaluate the pharmacokinetic profile of intranasal FF using a validated, ultra-sensitive analytical method in healthy subjects.

Methods: This was an open-label, single-dose, two-period, one-treatment, crossover study. A dose of 880 µg fluticasone furoate was administered intra nasally. Blood samples for pharmacokinetic analysis were collected at 23 time points up to 36 h and analyzed for FF plasma levels using a lower limit of quantitation (LLOQ) of 0.1 pg/mL. Medical and adverse events (AE) were monitored throughout the study.

Results: Eighteen subjects were enrolled in and 17 completed the study. The results showed that all 17 subjects had measurable fluticasone furoate plasma concentrations at all time points with a clearly defined elimination phase, thus allowing estimation of AUC and t. Median T was 1.33 h (range=0.75-6.00), mean C was 13.05±7.59 pg/mL, mean AUC was 148.48±77.76 pg/mL*h, mean AUC was 279.07±187.81 pg/mL*h, and mean t was 31.67±29.23 h. In total 4 subjects (22.2%) experienced 4 AEs.

Conclusion: Using a lower LLOQ than what has been previously reported, a complete characterization of intranasal fluticasone furoate pharmacokinetics, including a clearly defined terminal elimination phase, was achieved. This method will allow for further investigations into the pharmacokinetics of fluticasone furoate.
View Article and Find Full Text PDF

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://dx.doi.org/10.1055/a-1170-3083DOI Listing
July 2020

A Pharmacokinetic Evaluation of Dabigatran Etexilate, Total Dabigatran, and Unconjugated Dabigatran Following the Administration of Dabigatran Etexilate Mesylate Capsules in Healthy Male and Female Subjects.

Drug Res (Stuttg) 2020 Jan 25;70(1):33-40. Epub 2019 Oct 25.

Pharma Medica Research Inc, Scientific Affairs, Mississauga, Canada.

Purpose: Due to bioanalytical limitations it was previously not possible to evaluate the pharmacokinetics of dabigatran etexilate. We have developed validated methods to assay dabigatran etexilate, unconjugated dabigatran, and total dabigatran that will allow for a complete investigation into the pharmacokinetics of dabigatran etexilate mesylate. This study was designed to evaluate the pharmacokinetics of these analytes in healthy subjects.

Methods: This was an open-label, single-dose, one-period, one-treatment study. A single oral dose of dabigatran etexilate mesylate capsule containing the equivalent of 150 mg dabigatran etexilate was administered to each subject. A total of 23 blood samples for pharmacokinetic analysis were collected and analyzed from each subject. Safety and tolerability were monitored throughout the study.

Results: Eighteen healthy subjects were enrolled, dosed, and completed the study. The dabigatran etexilate mean C was 6.9±5.63 ng/mL, the median T was 0.67 h (range=0.50-1.00 h), the mean AUCt was 5.32±4.82 ng/mL·h, the mean AUC was 5.36±4.83 pg/mL*h, and the mean t was 0.54±0.26 h. Only one subject experienced an adverse event.

Conclusion: Using validated bioanalytical methods, a complete characterization of dabigatran etexilate, total dabigatran, and unconjugated dabigatran pharmacokinetics was achieved. Advancements in the development of new more accurate, specific, and sensitive validated bioanalytical methods such as these enable for a complete understanding of the drug's pharmacokinetics and this, in turn, can have an impact on both the drug development and the evaluation of generic formulations.
View Article and Find Full Text PDF

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://dx.doi.org/10.1055/a-1025-0119DOI Listing
January 2020

An evaluation of the pharmacokinetics of tiotropium following a single-dose inhalation in healthy subjects using an ultra-sensitive bioanalytical method.

Drug Dev Ind Pharm 2019 Dec 24;45(12):1915-1920. Epub 2019 Oct 24.

Pharma Medica Research Inc, Mississauga, Canada.

The systemic bioavailability of tiotropium following administration via inhalation is known to be very low. A validated ultra-sensitive bioanalytical method with the lowest lower limit of quantitation (LLOQ) was developed and used to evaluate the complete pharmacokinetic profile of tiotropium. This was a pharmacokinetic study performed in 18 healthy subjects. Each subject was administered a dose of 18 mcg of tiotropium from a dry powder inhaler (DPI). The subjects' plasma tiotropium concentrations were assayed with LLOQ of 0.1 pg/mL. The results showed a mean of 4.98 ± 3.55 pg/mL, and a median () of 3.6 minutes (range: 1.8-12 minutes). The means for area under the concentration-time curve (AUC) from time zero hours to infinity (AUC) and AUC from time zero hours to the time of the last measurable tiotropium concentration (AUC) were 51.11 ± 27.4 pg*h/mL and 37.37 ± 23.38 pg*h/mL, respectively. The mean apparent elimination half-life () was 68.02 ± 24.55 hours. This calculated half-life is longer than what others have reported where a less sensitive LLOQ was used. The lower LLOQ enabled further insight into the pharmacokinetics of tiotropium that was not possible with other analytical methods. With this method, we were able to quantify tiotropium concentrations as early as one minute following drug administration and up to 144 hours after dosing. The application of this method will allow for studies to be designed properly and enable further investigations into the pharmacokinetics of tiotropium.
View Article and Find Full Text PDF

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/03639045.2019.1680993DOI Listing
December 2019

GCC Consolidated Feedback to ICH on the 2019 ICH M10 Bioanalytical Method Validation Draft Guideline.

Bioanalysis 2019 Sep 30;11(18s):1-228. Epub 2019 Sep 30.

WuXi Apptec, Shanghai, China.

The 13 GCC Closed Forum for Bioanalysis was held in New Orleans, Louisiana, USA on April 5, 2019. This GCC meeting was organized to discuss the contents of the 2019 ICH M10 Bioanalytical Method Validation Draft Guideline published in February 2019 and consolidate the feedback of the GCC members. In attendance were 63 senior-level participants from eight countries representing 44 bioanalytical CRO companies/sites. This event represented a unique opportunity for CRO bioanalytical experts to share their opinions and concerns regarding the ICH M10 Bioanalytical Method Validation Draft Guideline and to build unified comments to be provided to the ICH.
View Article and Find Full Text PDF

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://dx.doi.org/10.4155/bio-2019-0207DOI Listing
September 2019

12th GCC Closed Forum: critical reagents; oligonucleotides; CoA; method transfer; HRMS; flow cytometry; regulatory findings; stability and immunogenicity.

Bioanalysis 2019 Jun 19;11(12):1129-1138. Epub 2019 Jul 19.

WuXi Apptec, Plainsboro, NJ 08536, USA.

The 12th GCC Closed Forum was held in Philadelphia, PA, USA, on 9 April 2018. Representatives from international bioanalytical Contract Research Organizations were in attendance in order to discuss scientific and regulatory issues specific to bioanalysis. The issues discussed at the meeting included: critical reagents; oligonucleotides; certificates of analysis; method transfer; high resolution mass spectrometry; flow cytometry; recent regulatory findings and case studies involving stability and nonclinical immunogenicity. Conclusions and consensus from discussions of these topics are included in this article.
View Article and Find Full Text PDF

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://dx.doi.org/10.4155/bio-2019-0131DOI Listing
June 2019

Evaluation of the Pharmacokinetic Interaction Between Doravirine and Methadone.

Clin Pharmacol Drug Dev 2020 02 23;9(2):151-161. Epub 2019 May 23.

Merck & Co., Inc., Kenilworth, NJ, USA.

Doravirine is a novel nonnucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitor indicated for the treatment of HIV type 1 infection. A subset of people living with HIV receives methadone for the treatment of opioid addiction. The current study (NCT02715700) was an open-label, multiple-dose, drug interaction study in participants on a methadone maintenance program to investigate potential drug-drug interactions between doravirine and methadone. Participants received a stable methadone maintenance dose of 20 to 180 mg once daily for 14 days prior to day 1 and remained on their maintenance dose over days 1 through 7. On days 2 through 6, an oral dose of doravirine 100 mg was coadministered. For doravirine and methadone pharmacokinetic analysis, blood samples were collected before dosing through 24 hours after dosing. Fourteen participants were enrolled; all participants completed the study. For R-methadone, geometric least squares mean ratios (90% confidence intervals) for dose-normalized area under the plasma concentration-time curve from time zero to 24 hours, plasma concentration at 24 hours, and maximum plasma concentration ([methadone + doravirine]/methadone alone) were 0.95 (0.90-1.01), 0.95 (0.88-1.03), and 0.98 (0.93-1.03), respectively. For doravirine, based on a comparison with historical data, modest decreases in area under the plasma concentration-time curve from time zero to 24 hours, plasma concentration at 24 hours, and maximum plasma concentration were observed after coadministration of doravirine and methadone; geometric least squares mean ratios ([methadone + doravirine]/doravirine alone [90% confidence intervals]) were 0.74 (0.61-0.90), 0.80 (0.63-1.03), and 0.76 (0.63-0.91), respectively. Coadministration of doravirine and methadone was generally well tolerated. No serious adverse events occurred, and there were no discontinuations. In conclusion, coadministration of methadone and doravirine did not have a clinically meaningful effect on the pharmacokinetic profile of either agent.
View Article and Find Full Text PDF

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/cpdd.699DOI Listing
February 2020

Single-Dose Pharmacokinetics of Amphetamine Extended-Release Oral Suspension in Healthy Adults.

J Atten Disord 2021 Apr 26;25(6):803-808. Epub 2019 Apr 26.

Tris Pharma, Inc., Monmouth Junction, NJ, USA.

This single-dose pivotal study evaluated the pharmacokinetics of amphetamine extended-release oral suspension (AMPH EROS) under fasted and fed conditions and the relative bioavailability of AMPH EROS and immediate-release mixed amphetamine salts (IR MAS) in adults. This open-label, randomized, three-period, three-treatment, six-sequence crossover study enrolled 30 healthy adult participants who were randomly assigned to receive either 1 dose of AMPH EROS 18.8 mg under fed or fasted conditions or 30 mg of IR MAS under fasted conditions. Participants crossed over with a 7-day washout period between each of the three periods. Plasma samples were measured for , AUC, AUC, AUC, and AUC for comparative bioavailability. The geometric mean ratios for , AUC, and AUC were within the 90% confidence limits [80.0%, 125.0%] for comparable bioavailability. There was no food effect for AMPH EROS. Both the AMPH EROS and IR MAS formulations were generally well tolerated with no serious adverse events reported. The bioavailability of a single dose of AMPH EROS was comparable to two 15 mg doses of IR MAS, given 4 hr apart, with no food effect or safety concerns observed.
View Article and Find Full Text PDF

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/1087054719841131DOI Listing
April 2021

Recommendations for classification of commercial LBA kits for biomarkers in drug development from the GCC for bioanalysis.

Bioanalysis 2019 Apr 17;11(7):645-653. Epub 2019 Apr 17.

WuXi Apptec, Plainsboro, NJ, USA.

Over the last decade, the use of biomarker data has become integral to drug development. Biomarkers are not only utilized for internal decision-making by sponsors; they are increasingly utilized to make critical decisions for drug safety and efficacy. As the regulatory agencies are routinely making decisions based on biomarker data, there has been significant scrutiny on the validation of biomarker methods. Contract research organizations regularly use commercially available immunoassay kits to validate biomarker methods. However, adaptation of such kits in a regulated environment presents significant challenges and was one of the key topics discussed during the 12th Global Contract Research Organization Council for Bioanalysis (GCC) meeting. This White Paper reports the GCC members' opinion on the challenges facing the industry and the GCC recommendations on the classification of commercial kits that can be a win-win for commercial kit vendors and end users.
View Article and Find Full Text PDF

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://dx.doi.org/10.4155/bio-2019-0072DOI Listing
April 2019

Evaluation of the Pharmacokinetics of Abiraterone Acetate and Abiraterone Following Single-Dose Administration of Abiraterone Acetate to Healthy Subjects.

Clin Drug Investig 2019 Mar;39(3):309-317

Pharma Medica Research Inc., 6100 Belgrave Road, Mississauga, ON, L5R 0B7, Canada.

Background And Objective: Following oral administration of abiraterone acetate, the parent compound abiraterone acetate is rapidly metabolized to abiraterone. To our knowledge, bioanalytical methods to date have not been able to detect the parent compound in human plasma, and bioassay was only performed on the metabolite. A highly sensitive bioanalytical method was developed and validated to measure plasma concentrations of the parent compound. In this study, both analytes were assayed and used to evaluate the full pharmacokinetic profile of abiraterone acetate tablets.

Methods: This was an open-label, single-dose, one-period, one-treatment, pharmacokinetic study performed in 18 healthy subjects. Each subject was administered four tablets (corresponding to a total dose of 1000 mg) of abiraterone acetate. Blood samples for pharmacokinetic analysis were collected up to 60 h post-dose. Subjects' plasma concentrations for abiraterone acetate were assayed using highly sensitive validated bioanalytical methods with a lower limit of quantitation (LLOQ) of 0.5 pg/ml for abiraterone acetate and 0.1 ng/ml for abiraterone. Safety assessments were performed throughout the study.

Results: The pharmacokinetic results for abiraterone acetate showed a mean for the maximum plasma concentration (C) of 54.67 ± 68.30 pg/ml, and a median time to maximum concentrations (t) of 5.53 h (range 2.67-35.00 h). The means for area under the concentration-time curve (AUC) from time 0 h to infinity (AUC) and AUC from time zero h to the time of the last measurable abiraterone acetate concentrations (AUC) were 386.13 ± 266.80 pg·h/ml and 460.07 ± 378.78 pg·h/ml, respectively. The apparent elimination half-life (t) showed a mean of 8.98 ± 3.92 h. None of the adverse events that affected three subjects (16.7%) were related to the study drug.

Conclusion: The ability to detect the low plasma abiraterone acetate concentrations, in addition to abiraterone, resulted in a complete characterization of the pharmacokinetics of abiraterone acetate that was not possible with other analytical methods that only measured the metabolite. The development of new bioanalytical methods such as these will allow for a more thorough understanding of the pharmacokinetics of abiraterone acetate, and this, in turn, can have an impact on both future examinations into abiraterone acetate pharmacokinetic behaviour and the evaluation of its generic formulations.
View Article and Find Full Text PDF

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s40261-019-00752-1DOI Listing
March 2019

11th GCC Closed Forum: cumulative stability; matrix stability; immunogenicity assays; laboratory manuals; biosimilars; chiral methods; hybrid LBA/LCMS assays; fit-for-purpose validation; China Food and Drug Administration bioanalytical method validation.

Bioanalysis 2018 Apr 27;10(7):433-444. Epub 2018 Apr 27.

Worldwide Clinical Trials, Austin, TX, USA.

The 11th Global CRO Council Closed Forum was held in Universal City, CA, USA on 3 April 2017. Representatives from international CRO members offering bioanalytical services were in attendance in order to discuss scientific and regulatory issues specific to bioanalysis. The second CRO-Pharma Scientific Interchange Meeting was held on 7 April 2017, which included Pharma representatives' sharing perspectives on the topics discussed earlier in the week with the CRO members. The issues discussed at the meetings included cumulative stability evaluations, matrix stability evaluations, the 2016 US FDA Immunogenicity Guidance and recent and unexpected FDA Form 483s on immunogenicity assays, the bioanalytical laboratory's role in writing PK sample collection instructions, biosimilars, CRO perspectives on the use of chiral versus achiral methods, hybrid LBA/LCMS assays, applications of fit-for-purpose validation and, at the Global CRO Council Closed Forum only, the status and trend of current regulated bioanalytical practice in China under CFDA's new BMV policy. Conclusions from discussions of these topics at both meetings are included in this report.
View Article and Find Full Text PDF

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://dx.doi.org/10.4155/bio-2018-0014DOI Listing
April 2018

The 10th GCC Closed Forum: rejected data, GCP in bioanalysis, extract stability, BAV, processed batch acceptance, matrix stability, critical reagents, ELN and data integrity and counteracting fraud.

Bioanalysis 2017 Apr 24;9(7):505-516. Epub 2017 Mar 24.

WuXi Apptec, Plainsboro, NJ, USA.

The 10th Global CRO Council (GCC) Closed Forum was held in Orlando, FL, USA on 18 April 2016. In attendance were decision makers from international CRO member companies offering bioanalytical services. The objective of this meeting was for GCC members to meet and discuss scientific and regulatory issues specific to bioanalysis. The issues discussed at this closed forum included reporting data from failed method validation runs, GCP for clinical sample bioanalysis, extracted sample stability, biomarker assay validation, processed batch acceptance criteria, electronic laboratory notebooks and data integrity, Health Canada's Notice regarding replicates in matrix stability evaluations, critical reagents and regulatory approaches to counteract fraud. In order to obtain the pharma perspectives on some of these topics, the first joint CRO-Pharma Scientific Interchange Meeting was held on 12 November 2016, in Denver, Colorado, USA. The five topics discussed at this Interchange meeting were reporting data from failed method validation runs, GCP for clinical sample bioanalysis, extracted sample stability, processed batch acceptance criteria and electronic laboratory notebooks and data integrity. The conclusions from the discussions of these topics at both meetings are included in this report.
View Article and Find Full Text PDF

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://dx.doi.org/10.4155/bio-2017-5000DOI Listing
April 2017

9th GCC closed forum: CAPA in regulated bioanalysis; method robustness, biosimilars, preclinical method validation, endogenous biomarkers, whole blood stability, regulatory audit experiences and electronic laboratory notebooks.

Bioanalysis 2016 Mar 26;8(6):487-95. Epub 2016 Feb 26.

WuXi/XBL, 107 Morgan Lane, Plainsboro, NJ, USA.

The 9th GCCClosed Forum was held just prior to the 2015 Workshop on Recent Issues in Bioanalysis (WRIB) in Miami, FL, USA on 13 April 2015. In attendance were 58 senior-level participants, from eight countries, representing 38 CRO companies offering bioanalytical services. The objective of this meeting was for CRO bioanalytical representatives to meet and discuss scientific and regulatory issues specific to bioanalysis. The issues selected at this year's closed forum include CAPA, biosimilars, preclinical method validation, endogenous biomarkers, whole blood stability, and ELNs. A summary of the industry's best practices and the conclusions from the discussion of these topics is included in this meeting report.
View Article and Find Full Text PDF

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://dx.doi.org/10.4155/bio.16.16DOI Listing
March 2016

8th GCC: consolidated feedback to US FDA on the 2013 draft FDA guidance on bioanalytical method validation.

Bioanalysis 2014 ;6(22):2957-63

Covance Laboratories, Chantilly, VA, USA.

The 8th GCC Closed Forum for Bioanalysis was held in Baltimore, MD, USA on 5 December 2013, immediately following the 2013 AAPS Workshop (Crystal City V): Quantitative Bioanalytical Methods Validation and Implementation--The 2013 Revised FDA Guidance. This GCC meeting was organized to discuss the contents of the draft revised FDA Guidance on bioanalytical method validation that was published in September 2013 and consolidate the feedback of the GCC members. In attendance were 63 senior-level participants, from seven countries, representing 46 bioanalytical CRO companies/sites. This event represented a unique opportunity for CRO bioanalytical experts to share their opinions and concerns regarding the draft FDA Guidance, and to build unified comments to be provided to the FDA.
View Article and Find Full Text PDF

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://dx.doi.org/10.4155/bio.14.287DOI Listing
July 2015

Recommendations on incurred sample stability (ISS) by GCC.

Bioanalysis 2014 Sep;6(18):2385-90

Quintiles Bioanalytical & ADME Labs, Ithaca, NY, USA.

The topic of incurred sample stability (ISS) has generated considerable discussion within the bioanalytical community in recent years. The subject was an integral part of the seventh annual Workshop on Recent Issues in Bioanalysis (WRIB) held in Long Beach, CA, USA, in April 2013, and at the Global CRO Council for Bioanalysis (GCC) meeting preceding it. Discussion at both events focused on the use of incurred samples for ISS purposes in light of results from a recent GCC survey completed by member companies. This paper reports the consensus resulting from these discussions and serves as a useful reference for depicting ISS issues and concerns, summarizing the GCC survey results and providing helpful recommendations on ISS in the context of bioanalytical method development and application.
View Article and Find Full Text PDF

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://dx.doi.org/10.4155/bio.14.155DOI Listing
September 2014

Recommendations on bioanalytical method stability implications of co-administered and co-formulated drugs by Global CRO Council for Bioanalysis (GCC).

Bioanalysis 2012 Sep;4(17):2117-26

Advion Bioanalytical Laboratories, Quintiles, NY, USA.

An open letter written by the Global CRO Council for Bioanalysis (GCC) describing the GCC survey results on stability data from co-administered and co-formulated drugs was sent to multiple regulatory authorities on 14 December 2011. This letter and further discussions at different GCC meetings led to subsequent recommendations on this topic of widespread interest within the bioanalytical community over the past 2 years.
View Article and Find Full Text PDF

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://dx.doi.org/10.4155/bio.12.192DOI Listing
September 2012

4th Global CRO Council for Bioanalysis: coadministered drugs stability, EMA/US FDA guidelines, 483s and carryover.

Bioanalysis 2012 Apr;4(7):763-8

The Global CRO Council for Bioanalysis (GCC) was formed in September 2010. Since then, the representatives of the member companies come together periodically to openly discuss bioanalysis and the regulatory challenges unique to the outsourcing industry. The 4th GCC Closed Forum brought together experts from bioanalytical CROs to share and discuss recent issues in regulated bioanalysis, such as the impact of coadministered drugs on stability, some differences between European Medicines Agency and US FDA bioanalytical guidance documents and lessons learned following recent Untitled Letters. Recent 483s and agency findings, as well as issues on method carryover, were also part of the topics discussed.
View Article and Find Full Text PDF

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://dx.doi.org/10.4155/bio.12.48DOI Listing
April 2012

The pharmacokinetics and cardiovascular effects of high-dose articaine with 1:100,000 and 1:200,000 epinephrine.

J Am Dent Assoc 2006 Nov;137(11):1562-71

Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery and Pharmacology, School of Dental Medicine, University of Pennsylvania, 240 South 40th St., Philadelphia, PA 19104-6003, USA.

Objectives: The authors conducted a randomized, double-blind, two-way crossover clinical trial to compare the pharmacokinetics and cardiovascular effects of 11.9 milliliters of 4 percent articaine hydrochloride (HCl) plus 1:100,000 epinephrine (A100) with those of 11.9 mL of 4 percent articaine HCl plus 1:200,000 epinephrine (A200).

Methods: During two testing sessions, the authors administered injections of A100 and A200 over a seven-minute period (in one-cartridge doses unless otherwise noted): maxillary right first molar infiltration, maxillary left first molar infiltration, maxillary right first premolar infiltration, maxillary left first premolar infiltration, right inferior alveolar injection, left inferior alveolar injection, right long buccal infiltration (one-half cartridge) and left long buccal infiltration (one-half cartridge). They analyzed venous blood samples for articaine levels. They used noninvasive acoustic tonometry to measure a variety of cardiovascular parameters over a two-hour period.

Results: Plasma concentration curves of articaine over time were similar for both solutions, with peak concentrations and times to maximum concentration being 2,037 nanograms per milliliter and 22 minutes for A100 and 2,145 ng/mL and 22 minutes for A200. At the 10-minute point, the mean systolic blood pressure and heart rate were significantly elevated (P < .05) with A100 versus A200.

Conclusions: Maximum dose recommendations for the A100 solution also can be applied to the A200 solution. A200 produces less cardiovascular stimulation than does A100.

Clinical Implications: A200 is as safe as A100, and may be preferable to A100 in patients with cardiovascular disease and in those taking drugs that reportedly enhance the systemic effects of epinephrine.
View Article and Find Full Text PDF

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://dx.doi.org/10.14219/jada.archive.2006.0092DOI Listing
November 2006