. 2022 Jan 20;61(4):465–479. doi: 10.1007/s40262-021-01090-2

Table 4.

Comparison of acetylsalicylic acid PK parameters

	Plain aspirin 325 mg [n = 35]	PL-ASA 325 mg [n = 37]	EC aspirin 325 mg [n = 36]	p value^a PL-ASA vs. EC aspirin	p value^a plain vs. EC aspirin	p value^a PL-ASA vs. plain
C_max, ng/mL Geometric LS	1442.47 (35)	1803.18 (37)	538.93 (29)	< 0.0001	< 0.0001	0.2538
AUC_0-_t, ng×h/mL Geometric LS	1963.7 (35)	2523.1 (37)	455.8 (29)	< 0.0001	< 0.0001	0.1375
T_max, h	1.1 ± 0.4 (35)	1.3 ± 0.6 (37)	3.5 ± 1.2 (29)	< 0.0001	< 0.0001	0.3275

Plain aspirin
325 mg
[n = 35]

PL-ASA
325 mg
[n = 37]

EC aspirin 325 mg
[n = 36]

p value^a
PL-ASA vs. EC aspirin

p value^a plain vs. EC aspirin

p value^a PL-ASA vs. plain

C_max, ng/mL Geometric LS

1442.47 (35)

1803.18 (37)

538.93 (29)

< 0.0001

0.2538

AUC_0-_t,

ng×h/mL Geometric LS

1963.7 (35)

2523.1 (37)

455.8 (29)

< 0.0001

0.1375

T_max, h

1.1 ± 0.4 (35)

1.3 ± 0.6 (37)

3.5 ± 1.2 (29)

< 0.0001

0.3275

Source: Bhatt et al. [10]

Data are expressed as mean (N) or mean ± SD (N)

AUC_0-t area under the curve from time zero to the time t of last measurable concentration, C_max peak plasma concentration, EC enteric-coated, LS least squares, PL-ASA phospholipid-aspirin complex, SD standard deviation, T_max time to maximum acetylsalicylic acid concentration

^aThe p values were assessed by using a mixed-effects model, with sequence, period, and treatment as fixed effects and patient as a random effect