Literature DB >> 11523723

Measures of exposure versus measures of rate and extent of absorption.

M L Chen1, L Lesko, R L Williams.   

Abstract

Regulatory assessment of bioavailability and bioequivalence in the US frequently relies on measures of rate and extent of absorption. Rate of absorption is not only difficult to measure but also bears little clinical relevance. This paper proposes that measures of bioavailability and bioequivalence for drugs that achieve their therapeutic effects after entry into the systemic circulation are best expressed in terms of early [partial area under the concentration-time curve (AUC)], peak plasma or serum drug concentration and total AUC exposure for a plasma or serum concentration-time profile. With suitable documentation, these systemic exposure measures can be related to efficacy and tolerability outcomes. The early measure is recommended for an immediate release drug product where a better control of drug absorption is needed, for example to ensure rapid onset of a therapeutic effect or to avoid an adverse reaction from a fast input rate. The 3 systemic exposure measures for bioavailability and bioequivalence studies can provide critical links between product quality and clinical outcome and thereby reduce the current emphasis on rate of absorption.

Mesh:

Year:  2001        PMID: 11523723     DOI: 10.2165/00003088-200140080-00001

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Clin Pharmacokinet        ISSN: 0312-5963            Impact factor:   6.447


  40 in total

1.  Comparison of absorption rates in bioequivalence studies of immediate release drug formulations.

Authors:  R Schall; H G Luus
Journal:  Int J Clin Pharmacol Ther Toxicol       Date:  1992-05

2.  Truncated area under the curve as a measure of relative extent of bioavailability: evaluation using experimental data and Monte Carlo simulations.

Authors:  J Gaudreault; D Potvin; J Lavigne; R L Lalonde
Journal:  Pharm Res       Date:  1998-10       Impact factor: 4.200

3.  Absorption rate vs. exposure: which is more useful for bioequivalence testing?

Authors:  T N Tozer; F Y Bois; W W Hauck; M L Chen; R L Williams
Journal:  Pharm Res       Date:  1996-03       Impact factor: 4.200

4.  Antibiotic dosing--does one size fit all?

Authors:  J J Schentag
Journal:  JAMA       Date:  1998-01-14       Impact factor: 56.272

5.  Mean apical concentration and duration in the comparative bioavailability of slowly absorbed and eliminated drug preparations.

Authors:  P T Pollak; D J Freeman; S G Carruthers
Journal:  J Pharm Sci       Date:  1988-06       Impact factor: 3.534

6.  Evaluation of different indirect measures of rate of drug absorption in comparative pharmacokinetic studies.

Authors:  L F Lacey; O N Keene; C Duquesnoy; A Bye
Journal:  J Pharm Sci       Date:  1994-02       Impact factor: 3.534

7.  The cutoff time point of the partial area method for assessment of rate of absorption in bioequivalence studies.

Authors:  P Macheras; M Symillides; C Reppas
Journal:  Pharm Res       Date:  1994-06       Impact factor: 4.200

8.  Bioequivalence: performance of several measures of rate of absorption.

Authors:  F Y Bois; T N Tozer; W W Hauck; M L Chen; R Patnaik; R L Williams
Journal:  Pharm Res       Date:  1994-07       Impact factor: 4.200

9.  Numerical deconvolution by least squares: use of prescribed input functions.

Authors:  D J Cutler
Journal:  J Pharmacokinet Biopharm       Date:  1978-06

10.  Modeling toxicity and response in carboplatin-based combination chemotherapy.

Authors:  M J Egorin; L M Reyno; R M Canetta; D I Jodrell; K D Swenerton; J L Pater; J N Burroughs; M J Novak; R Sridhara
Journal:  Semin Oncol       Date:  1994-10       Impact factor: 4.929

View more
  23 in total

Review 1.  Bioavailability and bioequivalence: an FDA regulatory overview.

Authors:  M L Chen; V Shah; R Patnaik; W Adams; A Hussain; D Conner; M Mehta; H Malinowski; J Lazor; S M Huang; D Hare; L Lesko; D Sporn; R Williams
Journal:  Pharm Res       Date:  2001-12       Impact factor: 4.200

2.  Biometrical evaluation of bioequivalence trials using a bootstrap individual direct curve comparison method.

Authors:  E Zintzaras; P Bouka; A Kowald
Journal:  Eur J Drug Metab Pharmacokinet       Date:  2002 Jan-Mar       Impact factor: 2.441

3.  Estimation of Cmax and Tmax in populations after single and multiple drug administrations.

Authors:  Laszlo Tothfalusi; Laszlo Endrenyi
Journal:  J Pharmacokinet Pharmacodyn       Date:  2003-10       Impact factor: 2.745

Review 4.  Are intravenous injections of contrast media really less nephrotoxic than intra-arterial injections?

Authors:  Ulf Nyman; Torsten Almén; Bo Jacobsson; Peter Aspelin
Journal:  Eur Radiol       Date:  2012-02-04       Impact factor: 5.315

5.  When is a metric not a metric? Remarks on direct curve comparison in bioequivalence studies.

Authors:  Wojciech Jawień
Journal:  J Pharmacokinet Pharmacodyn       Date:  2009-06-21       Impact factor: 2.745

Review 6.  Using partial area for evaluation of bioavailability and bioequivalence.

Authors:  Mei-Ling Chen; Barbara Davit; Robert Lionberger; Zakaria Wahba; Hae-Young Ahn; Lawrence X Yu
Journal:  Pharm Res       Date:  2011-04-13       Impact factor: 4.200

7.  The Two Main Goals of Bioequivalence Studies.

Authors:  Laszlo Endrenyi; Henning H Blume; Laszlo Tothfalusi
Journal:  AAPS J       Date:  2017-02-02       Impact factor: 4.009

Review 8.  Metrics for the evaluation of bioequivalence of modified-release formulations.

Authors:  Laszlo Endrenyi; Laszlo Tothfalusi
Journal:  AAPS J       Date:  2012-08-22       Impact factor: 4.009

9.  Preventing contrast medium-induced acute kidney injury : Side-by-side comparison of Swedish-ESUR guidelines.

Authors:  Ulf Nyman; Joanna Ahlkvist; Peter Aspelin; Torkel Brismar; Anders Frid; Mikael Hellström; Per Liss; Gunnar Sterner; Peter Leander
Journal:  Eur Radiol       Date:  2018-08-21       Impact factor: 5.315

10.  Generic products of antiepileptic drugs: a perspective on bioequivalence, bioavailability, and formulation switches using Monte Carlo simulations.

Authors:  Vangelis Karalis; Panos Macheras; Meir Bialer
Journal:  CNS Drugs       Date:  2014-01       Impact factor: 5.749

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.