Esperanza González-Rojano1, Francisco Abad-Santos1, Dolores Ochoa1, Manuel Román1, Julio Marcotegui2, Covadonga Álvarez3, John Gordon4, Alfredo García-Arieta5. 1. Clinical Pharmacology Service, Hospital Universitario de la Princesa, Instituto Teófilo Hernando, Universidad Autónoma de Madrid (UAM), Instituto de Investigación Sanitaria la Princesa, Madrid, Spain. 2. Department of Anaesthesiology, Reanimation and Pain Treatment, Hospital Clínico San Carlos, Madrid, Spain. 3. Pharmaceutical Technology, Facultad de Farmacia, Universidad Complutense de Madrid, Spain. 4. Division of Biopharmaceutics Evaluation, Bureau of Pharmaceutical Sciences, Therapeutic Products Directorate, Health Canada, Ottawa, Canada. 5. Service on Pharmacokinetics and Generics, Division of Pharmacology and Clinical Evaluation, Department of Human Use Medicines, Spanish Agency for Medicines and Health Care Products, Madrid, Spain.
Abstract
AIMS: The existence of a sex-by-formulation interaction in bioequivalence studies implies that the bioequivalence results (i.e., the test/reference ratio of the pharmacokinetic parameters) obtained in one sex are not similar to those obtained in the other sex. Therefore, results obtained in studies including only males would not be representative of the results that would have been obtained in females and vice versa. Recently, a sex-by-formulation interaction has been reported in a study for efavirenz tablets. The purpose of this paper is to investigate whether a sex-by-formulation interaction is actually observed in the bioequivalence studies conducted with efavirenz tablets. METHODS: The existence of sex-by-formulation interaction was investigated in the two studies conducted in our centre, where the same test and reference products were investigated in a pilot study with 12 subjects and a pivotal study with 36 subjects. RESULTS: In the pilot study, the point estimates for the test/reference ratio of geometrics means of Cmax in females and males were more than 20% different (95.42% vs.79.38%, i.e., 120.21%), but in a subsequent pivotal study the difference was less than 2% (111.14% vs. 109.98%, i.e., 101.66%). CONCLUSIONS: A sex-by-formulation interaction is suggested in the study with a small sample size, but it disappears when the study is repeated with a larger sample size. In conclusion, the analysis of subgroups should be conducted with caution when the size of the subgroups is not powered to show bioequivalence. There seems to be no reason to require bioequivalence studies for efavirenz in both sexes.
AIMS: The existence of a sex-by-formulation interaction in bioequivalence studies implies that the bioequivalence results (i.e., the test/reference ratio of the pharmacokinetic parameters) obtained in one sex are not similar to those obtained in the other sex. Therefore, results obtained in studies including only males would not be representative of the results that would have been obtained in females and vice versa. Recently, a sex-by-formulation interaction has been reported in a study for efavirenz tablets. The purpose of this paper is to investigate whether a sex-by-formulation interaction is actually observed in the bioequivalence studies conducted with efavirenz tablets. METHODS: The existence of sex-by-formulation interaction was investigated in the two studies conducted in our centre, where the same test and reference products were investigated in a pilot study with 12 subjects and a pivotal study with 36 subjects. RESULTS: In the pilot study, the point estimates for the test/reference ratio of geometrics means of Cmax in females and males were more than 20% different (95.42% vs.79.38%, i.e., 120.21%), but in a subsequent pivotal study the difference was less than 2% (111.14% vs. 109.98%, i.e., 101.66%). CONCLUSIONS: A sex-by-formulation interaction is suggested in the study with a small sample size, but it disappears when the study is repeated with a larger sample size. In conclusion, the analysis of subgroups should be conducted with caution when the size of the subgroups is not powered to show bioequivalence. There seems to be no reason to require bioequivalence studies for efavirenz in both sexes.
Authors: Sara T Brookes; Elise Whitely; Matthias Egger; George Davey Smith; Paul A Mulheran; Tim J Peters Journal: J Clin Epidemiol Date: 2004-03 Impact factor: 6.437