Approval Probability
TA Base Rate
Adjusted LOA
ML Risk
Sinsunatovir · 1 trial · 1 indication
Participants were offered formulation for tasting where they had to swirl sample in their mouth for approximately 10 seconds, and then spit it out. Participant had to assess each sensory attribute on scale of 0 (good) to 100 (bad) after tasting formulation, lower score= better palatability. Following were sensory attributes: mouth feel (grittiness/stickiness or waxiness, 0= normal mouth feel,100=bad mouth feel);bitterness (degree of bitterness of the product, 0= not bitter at all,100= extremely bitter); sweetness(degree of sweet taste,0=sweet, 100= not sweet at all); sourness (degree of sour taste,0= not sour at all,100= extremely sour);saltiness(degree of salty taste,0=not salty at all,100= extremely salty); tongue/mouth burn(degree of tongue/mouth burn,0= no burn at all,100= extreme burn);overall liking (how much like or dislike product, 0= like, 100= dislike).Mean score for each sensory attributes based on palatability assessment questionnaire are reported in this outcome measure.
Participants were offered formulation for tasting where they had to swirl sample in their mouth for approximately 10 seconds, and then spit it out. Participant had to assess each sensory attribute on scale of 0 (good) to 100 (bad) after tasting formulation, lower score= better palatability. Following were sensory attributes: mouth feel (grittiness/stickiness or waxiness, 0= normal mouth feel,100=bad mouth feel);bitterness (degree of bitterness of the product, 0= not bitter at all,100= extremely bitter); sweetness(degree of sweet taste,0=sweet, 100= not sweet at all); sourness (degree of sour taste,0= not sour at all,100= extremely sour);saltiness(degree of salty taste,0=not salty at all,100= extremely salty); tongue/mouth burn(degree of tongue/mouth burn,0= no burn at all,100= extreme burn);overall liking (how much like or dislike product, 0= like, 100= dislike).Mean score for each sensory attributes based on palatability assessment questionnaire are reported in this outcome measure.
Participants were offered formulation for tasting where they had to swirl sample in their mouth for approximately 10 seconds, and then spit it out. Participant had to assess each sensory attribute on scale of 0 (good) to 100 (bad) after tasting formulation, lower score= better palatability. Following were sensory attributes: mouth feel (grittiness/stickiness or waxiness, 0= normal mouth feel,100=bad mouth feel);bitterness (degree of bitterness of the product, 0= not bitter at all,100= extremely bitter); sweetness(degree of sweet taste,0=sweet, 100= not sweet at all); sourness (degree of sour taste,0= not sour at all,100= extremely sour);saltiness(degree of salty taste,0=not salty at all,100= extremely salty); tongue/mouth burn(degree of tongue/mouth burn,0= no burn at all,100= extreme burn);overall liking (how much like or dislike product, 0= like, 100= dislike).Mean score for each sensory attributes based on palatability assessment questionnaire are reported in this outcome measure.
Participants were offered formulation for tasting where they had to swirl sample in their mouth for approximately 10 seconds, and then spit it out. Participant had to assess each sensory attribute on scale of 0 (good) to 100 (bad) after tasting formulation, lower score= better palatability. Following were sensory attributes: mouth feel (grittiness/stickiness or waxiness, 0= normal mouth feel,100=bad mouth feel);bitterness (degree of bitterness of the product, 0= not bitter at all,100= extremely bitter); sweetness(degree of sweet taste,0=sweet, 100= not sweet at all); sourness (degree of sour taste,0= not sour at all,100= extremely sour);saltiness(degree of salty taste,0=not salty at all,100= extremely salty); tongue/mouth burn(degree of tongue/mouth burn,0= no burn at all,100= extreme burn);overall liking (how much like or dislike product, 0= like, 100= dislike).Mean score for each sensory attributes based on palatability assessment questionnaire are reported in this outcome measure.
Participants were offered formulation for tasting where they had to swirl sample in their mouth for approximately 10 seconds, and then spit it out. Participant had to assess each sensory attribute on scale of 0 (good) to 100 (bad) after tasting formulation, lower score= better palatability. Following were sensory attributes: mouth feel (grittiness/stickiness or waxiness, 0= normal mouth feel,100=bad mouth feel);bitterness (degree of bitterness of the product, 0= not bitter at all,100= extremely bitter); sweetness(degree of sweet taste,0=sweet, 100= not sweet at all); sourness (degree of sour taste,0= not sour at all,100= extremely sour);saltiness(degree of salty taste,0=not salty at all,100= extremely salty); tongue/mouth burn(degree of tongue/mouth burn,0= no burn at all,100= extreme burn);overall liking (how much like or dislike product, 0= like, 100= dislike).Mean score for each sensory attributes based on palatability assessment questionnaire are reported in this outcome measure.
Participants were offered formulation for tasting where they had to swirl sample in their mouth for approximately 10 seconds, and then spit it out. Participant had to assess each sensory attribute on scale of 0 (good) to 100 (bad) after tasting formulation, lower score= better palatability. Following were sensory attributes: mouth feel (grittiness/stickiness or waxiness, 0= normal mouth feel,100=bad mouth feel);bitterness (degree of bitterness of the product, 0= not bitter at all,100= extremely bitter); sweetness(degree of sweet taste,0=sweet, 100= not sweet at all); sourness (degree of sour taste,0= not sour at all,100= extremely sour);saltiness(degree of salty taste,0=not salty at all,100= extremely salty); tongue/mouth burn(degree of tongue/mouth burn,0= no burn at all,100= extreme burn);overall liking (how much like or dislike product, 0= like, 100= dislike).Mean score for each sensory attributes based on palatability assessment questionnaire are reported in this outcome measure.
Participants were offered formulation for tasting where they had to swirl sample in their mouth for approximately 10 seconds, and then spit it out. Participant had to assess each sensory attribute on scale of 0 (good) to 100 (bad) after tasting formulation, lower score= better palatability. Following were sensory attributes: mouth feel (grittiness/stickiness or waxiness, 0= normal mouth feel,100=bad mouth feel);bitterness (degree of bitterness of the product, 0= not bitter at all,100= extremely bitter); sweetness(degree of sweet taste,0=sweet, 100= not sweet at all); sourness (degree of sour taste,0= not sour at all,100= extremely sour);saltiness(degree of salty taste,0=not salty at all,100= extremely salty); tongue/mouth burn(degree of tongue/mouth burn,0= no burn at all,100= extreme burn);overall liking (how much like or dislike product, 0= like, 100= dislike).Mean score for each sensory attributes based on palatability assessment questionnaire are reported in this outcome measure.
Participants were offered formulation for tasting where they had to swirl sample in their mouth for approximately 10 seconds, and then spit it out. Participant had to assess each sensory attribute on scale of 0 (good) to 100 (bad) after tasting formulation, lower score= better palatability. Following were sensory attributes: mouth feel (grittiness/stickiness or waxiness, 0= normal mouth feel,100=bad mouth feel);bitterness (degree of bitterness of the product, 0= not bitter at all,100= extremely bitter); sweetness(degree of sweet taste,0=sweet, 100= not sweet at all); sourness (degree of sour taste,0= not sour at all,100= extremely sour);saltiness(degree of salty taste,0=not salty at all,100= extremely salty); tongue/mouth burn(degree of tongue/mouth burn,0= no burn at all,100= extreme burn);overall liking (how much like or dislike product, 0= like, 100= dislike).Mean score for each sensory attributes based on palatability assessment questionnaire are reported in this outcome measure.
| Arm | Type | Description |
|---|---|---|
| Treatment A | EXPERIMENTAL | - |
| Treatment B | EXPERIMENTAL | - |
| Treatment C | OTHER | Comparator |
| Treatment D | EXPERIMENTAL | - |
| Treatment E | EXPERIMENTAL | - |
| Treatment F | EXPERIMENTAL | - |
| Name | Type | Description |
|---|---|---|
| Sinsunatovir | DRUG | Single dose, to be spit out after tasting |
| Bitrex | OTHER | Single dose, to be spit out after tasting |
Inclusion Criteria: * Male and female participants aged 18 years or older (or the minimum age of consent in accordance with local regulations) at screening who are overtly healthy as determined by medical evaluation including medical history, physical examination, laboratory tests, blood pressure, ...
Sinsunatovir is an investigational small molecule being developed by Pfizer, Inc. (PFE). It is currently in Phase 1 clinical development. The drug is being studied for use in healthy participants, and it has completed one clinical trial.
Sinsunatovir is being studied for use in healthy participants. It is currently in Phase 1 clinical development. The drug is an investigational small molecule, and its safety and tolerability are being evaluated in early-stage trials.
Sinsunatovir is being developed by Pfizer, Inc., a biopharmaceutical company traded on the New York Stock Exchange under the ticker symbol PFE. The drug is currently in Phase 1 clinical development.
Sinsunatovir is in Phase 1 clinical development. It is an investigational drug and has not been approved by regulatory authorities. One Phase 1 trial has been completed, and the drug is being studied in healthy participants.
Sinsunatovir has been studied in one completed clinical trial, NCT06003829. This Phase 1 study, titled "A Study to Learn About the Tastes of Different Suspensions With the Study Medicine (PF-07923568) in Healthy Adult Participants," enrolled 12 healthy adults in Belgium.
Yes, Sinsunatovir is also known as PF-07923568. In clinical trial NCT06003829, the study medicine is referred to as PF-07923568, which is the same drug as Sinsunatovir.