Literature DB >> 25315411

In vitro dissolution similarity factor (f2) and in vivo bioequivalence criteria, how and when do they match? Using a BCS class II drug as a simulation example.

Feifan Xie1, Shan Ji1, Zeneng Cheng2.   

Abstract

The present study examined the agreement between in vitro dissolution f2 similarity and in vivo bioequivalence criteria for BCS class II drugs. Dissolution test profiles were generated using the First-order model with varied dissolution parameters around the standard values of a reference profile. The in vivo curves were derived from in vitro dissolution profiles with the drug's pharmacokinetics parameters by numerical convolution method. The Cmax, Tmax, AUC0-t and AUC0-∞ obtained from in vivo test and reference concentration-time curves were compared, and the CmaxR (Cmax ratio), TmaxDif (Tmax difference), AUC0-tR (AUC0-t ratio) and AUC0-∞R (AUC0-∞ ratio) were determined. The relationships between CmaxR, AUC0-tR, AUC0-∞R, f2 and the First-order model parameters demonstrated that the Similarity Region 1 enclosed by the f2 contour line labeled 50 was completely within the Bioequivalence Region enclosed by the contour lines labeled 0.80 and 1.20 of AUC0-tR, AUC0-∞R, and CmaxR, and the Similarity Region 2 enclosed by the f2 contour line labeled 35 was nearly overlapped with the Bioequivalence Region, but did not exactly match. The results indicate that the public standard for in vitro dissolution f2 similarity criterion (f2⩾50) is probably slightly conservative and may be widened to an appropriate lower critical value.
Copyright © 2014 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

Keywords:  Bioequivalence; Dissolution; First-order; Numerical convolution; Similarity factor; Simulation

Mesh:

Year:  2014        PMID: 25315411     DOI: 10.1016/j.ejps.2014.10.002

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Eur J Pharm Sci        ISSN: 0928-0987            Impact factor:   4.384


  4 in total

1.  Dissolution Similarity Requirements: How Similar or Dissimilar Are the Global Regulatory Expectations?

Authors:  Dorys Argelia Diaz; Stephen T Colgan; Connie S Langer; Nagesh T Bandi; Michael D Likar; Leslie Van Alstine
Journal:  AAPS J       Date:  2015-10-01       Impact factor: 4.009

2.  Surface density of polyarginine influence the size, zeta potential, cellular uptake and tissue distribution of the nanostructured lipid carrier.

Authors:  Mingshuang Sun; Zhihong Zhu; Huixin Wang; Cuiyan Han; Dandan Liu; Lei Tian; Xinggang Yang; Weisan Pan
Journal:  Drug Deliv       Date:  2017-11       Impact factor: 6.419

3.  Particle Agglomeration of Acid-Modified Tapioca Starches: Characterization and Use as Direct Compression Fillers in Tablets.

Authors:  Chaipat Siriwachirachai; Thaned Pongjanyakul
Journal:  Pharmaceutics       Date:  2022-06-12       Impact factor: 6.525

Review 4.  In Vitro Dissolution and in Silico Modeling Shortcuts in Bioequivalence Testing.

Authors:  Moawia M Al-Tabakha; Muaed J Alomar
Journal:  Pharmaceutics       Date:  2020-01-04       Impact factor: 6.321

  4 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.