Literature DB >> 17891552

Bioequivalence approaches for highly variable drugs and drug products.

Sam H Haidar1, Barbara Davit, Mei-Ling Chen, Dale Conner, LaiMing Lee, Qian H Li, Robert Lionberger, Fairouz Makhlouf, Devvrat Patel, Donald J Schuirmann, Lawrence X Yu.   

Abstract

Over the past decade, concerns have been expressed increasingly regarding the difficulty for highly variable drugs and drug products (%CV greater than 30) to meet the standard bioequivalence (BE) criteria using a reasonable number of study subjects. The topic has been discussed on numerous occasions at national and international meetings. Despite the lack of a universally accepted solution for the issue, regulatory agencies generally agree that an adjustment of the traditional BE limits for these drugs or products may be warranted to alleviate the resource burden of studying relatively large numbers of subjects in bioequivalence trials. This report summarizes a careful examination of all the statistical methods available and extensive simulations for BE assessment of highly variable drugs/products. Herein, the authors present an approach of scaling an average BE criterion to the within-subject variability of the reference product in a crossover BE study, together with a point-estimate constraint imposed on the geometric mean ratio between the test and reference products. The use of a reference-scaling approach involves the determination of variability of the reference product, which requires replication of the reference treatment in each individual. A partial replicated-treatment design with this new data analysis methodology will thus provide a more efficient design for BE studies with highly variable drugs and drug products.

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2007        PMID: 17891552     DOI: 10.1007/s11095-007-9434-x

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


  7 in total

1.  Non-traditional study designs to demonstrate average bioequivalence for highly variable drug products.

Authors:  S D Patterson; N M Zariffa; T H Montague; K Howland
Journal:  Eur J Clin Pharmacol       Date:  2001-11       Impact factor: 2.953

2.  Evaluation of the bioequivalence of highly-variable drugs and drug products.

Authors:  L Tothfalusi; L Endrenyi; K K Midha; M J Rawson; J W Hubbard
Journal:  Pharm Res       Date:  2001-06       Impact factor: 4.200

3.  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

4.  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

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.  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

7.  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
  7 in total
  51 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.  Challenges and opportunities in achieving bioequivalence for fixed-dose combination products.

Authors:  Amitava Mitra; Yunhui Wu
Journal:  AAPS J       Date:  2012-06-09       Impact factor: 4.009

3.  Analytical Similarity Assessment in Biosimilar Studies.

Authors:  Shein-Chung Chow; Fuyu Song; He Bai
Journal:  AAPS J       Date:  2016-02-12       Impact factor: 4.009

4.  An Exact Procedure for the Evaluation of Reference-Scaled Average Bioequivalence.

Authors:  Laszlo Tothfalusi; Laszlo Endrenyi
Journal:  AAPS J       Date:  2016-01-29       Impact factor: 4.009

5.  Use of partial AUC to demonstrate bioequivalence of Zolpidem Tartrate Extended Release formulations.

Authors:  Robert A Lionberger; Andre S Raw; Stephanie H Kim; Xinyuan Zhang; Lawrence X Yu
Journal:  Pharm Res       Date:  2012-01-26       Impact factor: 4.200

Review 6.  Pharmacokinetic variability of long-acting stimulants in the treatment of children and adults with attention-deficit hyperactivity disorder.

Authors:  James C Ermer; Ben A Adeyi; Michael L Pucci
Journal:  CNS Drugs       Date:  2010-12       Impact factor: 5.749

7.  Evaluation of a scaling approach for the bioequivalence of highly variable drugs.

Authors:  Sam H Haidar; Fairouz Makhlouf; Donald J Schuirmann; Terry Hyslop; Barbara Davit; Dale Conner; Lawrence X Yu
Journal:  AAPS J       Date:  2008-08-26       Impact factor: 4.009

8.  Biopharmaceutic planning in pediatric drug development.

Authors:  Vivek S Purohit
Journal:  AAPS J       Date:  2012-05-05       Impact factor: 4.009

Review 9.  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

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.