Literature DB >> 1455906

Statistical aspects of bioequivalence--a review.

A W Pidgen1.   

Abstract

1. Over the past 20 years a number of statistical methods have been proposed for use in bioequivalence testing. This review examines these methods and reflects current thinking of regulatory authorities. 2. The standard bioequivalence study is conducted as a controlled, single-dose crossover design in a small number of healthy male adults. Blood and/or urine samples are taken at predetermined times for drug/metabolite assay from which pharmacokinetic parameters are derived and compared statistically. Sample size calculations should be determined by the error variance associated with the primary characteristic to be studied, the significance level, the power of the test and the deviation from the reference product compatible with safety and efficacy. 3. In general, bioequivalence is assessed using three parameters namely, Cmax, tmax and AUC. Urinary excretion data may also be used if the amount excreted unchanged is significant. These parameters are best obtained using a simple model-independent approach. 4. The parameters of Cmax and AUC should be logarithmically transformed prior to analysis. For tmax, parametric statistical procedures are not appropriate. 5. Classical hypothesis testing using the power approach is not applicable to the practical problem under consideration in bioequivalence trials. 6. Classical 90% confidence limits and the 2 one-sided t-test approach are operationally identical and are the methods of choice for assessing bioequivalence (Cmax and AUC). When tmax is an important parameter from the clinical point of view then the use of non-parametric confidence intervals is recommended.

Mesh:

Year:  1992        PMID: 1455906     DOI: 10.3109/00498259209053147

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Xenobiotica        ISSN: 0049-8254            Impact factor:   1.908


  6 in total

1.  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

2.  Evaluation of statistical power function for various diclofenac bioequivalence trials with different subject numbers.

Authors:  Jovan Popović; Momir Mikov; Ana Sabo; Vida Jakovljević
Journal:  Eur J Drug Metab Pharmacokinet       Date:  2009 Apr-Jun       Impact factor: 2.441

3.  Preliminary bioequivalence testing of two nicardipine HCl sustained-release formulations with in vitro/in vivo correlations.

Authors:  W Sorasuchart; J W Ayres
Journal:  Eur J Drug Metab Pharmacokinet       Date:  2001 Jan-Jun       Impact factor: 2.441

4.  Drug Interchangeability of Generic and Brand Products of Fixed Dose Combination Tablets of Sofosbuvir and Ledipasvir (400/90 mg): Employment of Reference Scaled Average Bioequivalence Study on Healthy Egyptian Volunteers.

Authors:  Ehab Rasmy Bendas; Mamdouh R Rezk; Kamal A Badr
Journal:  Clin Drug Investig       Date:  2018-05       Impact factor: 2.859

5.  Comparative open, randomized, cross-over bioequivalence study of two intravenous dexrazoxane formulations (Cardioxane and ICRF-187) in patients with advanced breast cancer, treated with 5-fluorouracil-doxorubicin-cyclophosphamide (FDC).

Authors:  H Rosing; W W ten Bokkel Huinink; R van Gijn; R F Rombouts; A Bult; J H Beijnen
Journal:  Eur J Drug Metab Pharmacokinet       Date:  1999 Jan-Mar       Impact factor: 2.569

6.  Biosimilars in rheumatology: what the clinician should know.

Authors:  Gilberto Castañeda-Hernández; Rodrigo González-Ramírez; Jonathan Kay; Morton A Scheinberg
Journal:  RMD Open       Date:  2015-05-23
  6 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.