Copia de una carta remitida por el Secretario de Estado de la Santa Sede al obispo Mateo Múgica.

Fecha: 30-3-1939 (>1970 copia) / Unidad de instalación: Carpeta 45 - Expediente 2-6 / Nº de pág.: 1 (mecanografiada)

Randomised, crossover clinical trial, in healthy volunteers, to compare the systemic availability of two topical intranasal budesonide formulations

Background: Budesonide has a long history as intranasal drug, with many marketed products. Efforts should be made to demonstrate the therapeutic equivalence and safety comparability between them. Given that systemic availability significantly varies from formulations, the clinical comparability of diverse products comes to be of clinical interest and a regulatory requirement. The aim of the present study was to compare the systemic availability, pharmacodynamic effect, and safety of two intranasal budesonide formulations for the treatment of rhinitis. Methods: Eighteen healthy volunteers participated in this randomised, controlled, crossover, clinical trial. On two separated days, subjects received a single dose of 512 mu g budesonide (4 puffs per nostril) from each of the assayed devices (Budesonida nasal 64 (R), Aldo-Union, Spain and Rhinocort 64 (R), AstraZeneca, Spain). Budesonide availability was determined by the measurement of budesonide plasma concentration. The pharmacodynamic effect on the hypothalamic-adrenal axis was evaluated as both plasma and urine cortisol levels. Adverse events were tabulated and described. Budesonide availability between formulations was compared by the calculation of 90% CI intervals of the ratios of the main pharmacokinetic parameters describing budesonide bioavailability. Plasma cortisol concentration-time curves were compared by means of a GLM for Repeated Measures. Urine cortisol excretion between formulations was compared through the Wilcoxon's test. Results: All the enroled volunteers successfully completed the study. Pharmacokinetic parameters were comparable in terms of AUC(t) (2.6 +/- 1.5 vs 2.2 +/- 0.7), AUCi (2.9 +/- 1.5 vs 2.4 +/- 0.7), t(max) (0.4 +/- 0.1 vs 0.4 +/- 0.2), C(max)/AUC(i) (0.3 +/- 0.1 vs 0.3 +/- 0.0), and MRT (5.0 +/- 1.4 vs 4.5 +/- 0.6), but not in the case of C(max) (0.9 +/- 0.3 vs 0.7 +/- 0.2) and t(1/2) (3.7 +/- 1.8 vs 2.9 +/- 0.4). The pharmacodynamic effects, measured as the effect over plasma and urine cortisol, were also comparables between both formulations. No severe adverse events were reported and tolerance was comparable between formulations. Conclusion: The systemic availability of intranasal budesonide was comparable for both formulations in terms of most pharmacokinetic parameters. The pharmacodynamic effect on hypothalamic-pituitary-adrenal axis was also similar. Side effects were scarce and equivalent between the two products. This methodology to compare different budesonide-containing devices is reliable and easy to perform, and should be recommended for similar products intented to be marketed or already on the market.

I edo adikzio baten anatomia

[EN] This paper is devoted to i, the Basque dative case marker. In part I, the paper aims at presenting a general approach the locus of syntactic variation within Universal Grammar (sections 1.1 to 1.3). After an excursus on the use of minorized languages in science (1.4), a discussion on parameters is provided. In (1.5), the notion of macroparameter from the 80’s is critically discussed mainly but not along the lines of Newmeyer (2005). The last section (1.6)supports to focus on microparameters, along the lines of Kayne (2000, 2005), as the right way to properly understand and explain variation. Part II provides an analysis of the main properties of Basque datives (sections 2.1 and 2.2). Sections 2.3 and 2.4 are devoted to the nature of Basque inflectional morpheme (k)i, interpreted asan applicative morpheme which ‘applies’ dative object arguments to the structure. Finally, microcomparative analyses on Basque Differential Object Marking and Dative Displacement are presented in sections (2.6) and (2.7) respectively.