Related Experiment Video
Updated: Feb 4, 2026

Use of Rabbit Eyes in Pharmacokinetic Studies of Intraocular Drugs
Published on: July 23, 2016
Comparison between prefilled syringe and autoinjector devices on patient-reported experiences and pharmacokinetics in
Virginia L Stauffer1, Ryan Sides1, Michel Lanteri-Minet2,3
1Lilly Research Laboratories, Eli Lilly and Company, Indianapolis, IN, USA, stauffer_virginia@lilly.com.
Purpose:
The aim of this study was to compare the usability and patient-rated experiences of an autoinjector with a prefilled syringe in patients with migraine, who self-administered galcanezumab, and to compare pharmacokinetic parameters between these devices.
Materials And Methods:
Patient-rated experiences with an investigational autoinjector and a prefilled syringe were compared in an open-label, 12-month study of once-monthly injections of galcanezumab 120 or 240 mg (NCT02614287). Patient-rated ease of usability was assessed with the Subcutaneous Administration Assessment Questionnaire (SQAAQ) and compared between devices. Positive responses on the SQAAQ were rated as "agree or strongly agree" to 12 statements. Tolerability was assessed by the frequency of injection-site-related adverse events (AEs) by device and injection location. In a separate study, galcanezumab pharmacokinetics in healthy subjects was compared between the devices (NCT02836613).
Results:
In the open-label clinical trial, 179 patients used both the prefilled syringe and autoinjector at least once. The majority of patients (91%-97%) had positive responses on the SQAAQ to the use of autoinjector across the items assessed. There were 23 injection-site-related AEs with the first self-administered injection with the prefilled syringe (N=7) or autoinjector (N=16; P=0.061), with the most common AE for either device being injection-site pain. There were no significant between-device differences in injection-site-related AEs. For pharmacokinetics, the 90% CI for the ratio (autoinjector/prefilled syringe) of geometric least-square means for the galcanezumab area under the curve (AUC) concentration and maximum concentration (Cmax) was between 0.8 and 1.25, indicating no statistically significant difference in the galcanezumab concentrations regardless of the device used.
Conclusion:
The ease of usability with either device was comparable, and there were no significant differences in tolerability between the prefilled syringe and autoinjector with the first self-administration; however, the analysis was not powered to detect a clinically significant difference. Galcanezumab pharmacokinetics were comparable between devices.
More Related Videos
09:53Labeling of Breast Cancer Patient-derived Xenografts with Traceable Reporters for Tumor Growth and Metastasis Studies
Published on: November 30, 2016
11:26Home-Based Transcranial Direct Current Stimulation Device Development: An Updated Protocol Used at Home in Healthy Subjects and Fibromyalgia Patients
Published on: July 14, 2018
Related Concept Videos
Pharmacokinetic Models: Comparison and Selection Criterion
Physiological models take a detailed approach by considering specific molecular processes. They can predict drug distribution, metabolism, and elimination changes, providing a comprehensive understanding of how drugs interact with the body.
Pharmacokinetics in Pediatric Patients: Drug Excretion
Pharmacokinetics in Pediatric Patients: Drug Distribution
Pharmacokinetics in Pediatric Patients: Drug Metabolism
Pharmacokinetics in Geriatric Patients: Effect of Age on Drug Absorption
Pharmacokinetics in Geriatric Patients: Effect of Age on Drug Distribution