Literature DB >> 17048119

Novel scaled bioequivalence limits with leveling-off properties.

John Kytariolos1, Vangelis Karalis, Panos Macheras, Mira Symillides.   

Abstract

PURPOSE: (1) To develop novel scaled bioequivalence (BE) limits with levelling-off properties based solely on variability considerations and (2) to evaluate their performance in comparison to the classic unscaled BE limits 0.80-1.25, the expanded BE limits 0.75-1.33 and the recently proposed Geometric Mean Ratio (GMR)-dependent scaled BE limits BELscW (Karalis et al., Eur. J. Pharm. Sci., 26:54-61, 2005).
MATERIALS AND METHODS: Two model functions were used to ensure the gradual change of the BE limits from a starting value towards a predefined plateau value. Plots of the new BE limits and extreme GMR values ensuring BE as a function of the coefficient of variation (CV) were constructed. Two-period crossover BE studies with 12, 24, or 36 subjects were simulated assuming CV values from 10 to 60%. Power curves were constructed by recording the percentage of accepted BE studies as the true GMR was raised from 1.00 to 1.50. The percentage of the true GMR within the simulated BE limits vs. true GMR was used to evaluate the estimation accuracy of the scaled methods.
RESULTS: Depending on the parameters' values of the model functions, the scaled BE limits exhibit different performance. Four new scaled BE limits, showing favourable performance for the evaluation of average BE are presented. At low variability levels two of the novel BE limits show similar performance to the 0.80-1.25 criterion, while the other two (as expected from their design) appear to be less permissive. At high CV values (30, 40%) all new BE limits exhibit much higher statistical power than the 0.80-1.25 criterion. They show almost identical behavior with the expanded 0.75-1.33 limits and appear to be less permissive than BELscW. Finally, the percentage of the true GMR within the simulated BE limits vs. true GMR shows a sharp decline. Due to the absence of the GMR factor in the model functions a more accurate estimation of the new scaled BE limits, compared to BELscW, is observed.
CONCLUSIONS: The new scaled BE limits appear to be highly effective at all levels of variation investigated and present satisfactory estimation accuracy.

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2006        PMID: 17048119     DOI: 10.1007/s11095-006-9107-1

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Pharm Res        ISSN: 0724-8741            Impact factor:   4.200


  12 in total

1.  Limits of 80%-125% for AUC and 70%-143% for Cmax. What is the impact on bioequivalence studies?

Authors:  W W Hauck; A Parekh; L J Lesko; M L Chen; R L Williams
Journal:  Int J Clin Pharmacol Ther       Date:  2001-08       Impact factor: 1.366

2.  Limits for the scaled average bioequivalence of highly variable drugs and drug products.

Authors:  Laszlo Tothfalusi; Laszlo Endrenyi
Journal:  Pharm Res       Date:  2003-03       Impact factor: 4.200

3.  Scaling or wider bioequivalence limits for highly variable drugs and for the special case of C(max).

Authors:  L Tothfalusi; L Endrenyi; K K Midha
Journal:  Int J Clin Pharmacol Ther       Date:  2003-05       Impact factor: 1.366

Review 4.  The bioequivalence of highly variable drugs and drug products.

Authors:  K K Midha; M J Rawson; J W Hubbard
Journal:  Int J Clin Pharmacol Ther       Date:  2005-10       Impact factor: 1.366

5.  Novel scaled average bioequivalence limits based on GMR and variability considerations.

Authors:  Vangelis Karalis; Mira Symillides; Panos Macheras
Journal:  Pharm Res       Date:  2004-10       Impact factor: 4.200

6.  Geometric mean ratio-dependent scaled bioequivalence limits with leveling-off properties.

Authors:  Vangelis Karalis; Panos Macheras; Mira Symillides
Journal:  Eur J Pharm Sci       Date:  2005-09       Impact factor: 4.384

7.  Bioequivalence: switchability and scaling.

Authors:  K K Midha; M J Rawson; J W Hubbard
Journal:  Eur J Pharm Sci       Date:  1998-04       Impact factor: 4.384

Review 8.  Evaluation of orally administered highly variable drugs and drug formulations.

Authors:  V P Shah; A Yacobi; W H Barr; L Z Benet; D Breimer; M R Dobrinska; L Endrenyi; W Fairweather; W Gillespie; M A Gonzalez; J Hooper; A Jackson; L J Lesko; K K Midha; P K Noonan; R Patnaik; R L Williams
Journal:  Pharm Res       Date:  1996-11       Impact factor: 4.200

9.  An approach for widening the bioequivalence acceptance limits in the case of highly variable drugs.

Authors:  A W Boddy; F C Snikeris; R O Kringle; G C Wei; J A Oppermann; K K Midha
Journal:  Pharm Res       Date:  1995-12       Impact factor: 4.200

10.  A comparison of the two one-sided tests procedure and the power approach for assessing the equivalence of average bioavailability.

Authors:  D J Schuirmann
Journal:  J Pharmacokinet Biopharm       Date:  1987-12
View more
  9 in total

1.  Bioequivalence of highly variable drugs: a comparison of the newly proposed regulatory approaches by FDA and EMA.

Authors:  Vangelis Karalis; Mira Symillides; Panos Macheras
Journal:  Pharm Res       Date:  2011-12-28       Impact factor: 4.200

Review 2.  Bioavailability and bioequivalence: focus on physiological factors and variability.

Authors:  Vangelis Karalis; Panos Macheras; Achiel Van Peer; Vinod P Shah
Journal:  Pharm Res       Date:  2008-06-13       Impact factor: 4.200

Review 3.  Evaluation of bioequivalence for highly variable drugs with scaled average bioequivalence.

Authors:  Laszlo Tothfalusi; Laszlo Endrenyi; Alfredo Garcia Arieta
Journal:  Clin Pharmacokinet       Date:  2009       Impact factor: 6.447

Review 4.  Bioequivalence for highly variable drugs: regulatory agreements, disagreements, and harmonization.

Authors:  Laszlo Endrenyi; Laszlo Tothfalusi
Journal:  J Pharmacokinet Pharmacodyn       Date:  2019-02-23       Impact factor: 2.745

5.  Panos Macheras: a pioneering scientist in pharmaceutical science.

Authors:  Laszlo Endrenyi; Robert R Bies
Journal:  J Pharmacokinet Pharmacodyn       Date:  2019-03-28       Impact factor: 2.745

6.  Improved ziprasidone formulations with enhanced bioavailability in the fasted state and a reduced food effect.

Authors:  Avinash G Thombre; Scott M Herbig; Jeffrey A Alderman
Journal:  Pharm Res       Date:  2011-06-15       Impact factor: 4.200

7.  Inflation of Type I Error in the Evaluation of Scaled Average Bioequivalence, and a Method for its Control.

Authors:  Detlew Labes; Helmut Schütz
Journal:  Pharm Res       Date:  2016-08-01       Impact factor: 4.200

8.  From drug delivery systems to drug release, dissolution, IVIVC, BCS, BDDCS, bioequivalence and biowaivers.

Authors:  Vangelis Karalis; Eleni Magklara; Vinod P Shah; Panos Macheras
Journal:  Pharm Res       Date:  2010-07-16       Impact factor: 4.200

9.  Mobility assessment of a rural population in the Netherlands using GPS measurements.

Authors:  Gijs Klous; Lidwien A M Smit; Floor Borlée; Roel A Coutinho; Mirjam E E Kretzschmar; Dick J J Heederik; Anke Huss
Journal:  Int J Health Geogr       Date:  2017-08-09       Impact factor: 3.918

  9 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.