Literature DB >> 34465979

Multivariate Assessment for Bioequivalence Based on the Correlation of Random Effect.

Hyungmi An1, Dongseong Shin2,3.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND AND
OBJECTIVE: Bioequivalence tests are fundamental step in assessing the equivalence in bioavailability between a test and reference product. In practice, two separate linear mixed models (LMMs) with random subject effects, which have an area under the concentration-time curve (AUC) and the peak concentration (Cmax) as the responses, have become the gold standard for evaluating bioequivalence. Recently, Lee et al developed a multivariate hierarchical generalized linear model (HGLM) for several responses that modeled correlations among multivariate responses via correlated random effects. The objective of this study was to apply this multivariate analysis to the bioequivalence test in practice and to compare the performance of multivariate HGLM and separate LMMs.
METHODS: Three pharmacokinetic datasets, fixed-dose combination (naproxen and esomeprazole), tramadol and fimasartan data were analyzed. We compared the 90% confidence interval (CI) for the geometric mean ratio (GMR) of a test product to a reference product using the multivariate HGLM and two conventional separate LMMs.
RESULTS: We found that the 90% CIs for the GMRs of both AUC and Cmax from the multivariate HGLM were narrower than those from the separate LMMs: (0.843, 1.152) vs (0.825, 1.177) for Cmax of esomeprazole in fixed-dose combination data; (0.805, 0.931) vs (0.797, 0.941) for Cmax in tramadol data; (0.801, 1.501) vs (0.762, 1.578) for Cmax and (1.163, 1.332) vs (1.009, 1.341) for AUC in fimasartan data, consistent with the random subject effects from two separate LMMs being highly correlated in the three datasets (correlation coefficient r = 0.883; r = 0.966; r = 0.832).
CONCLUSION: This multivariate HGLM had good performance in the bioequivalence test with multiple endpoints. This method would provide a more reasonable option to reduce the 90% CI by adding correlation parameters and thus an advantage especially in evaluating the bioequivalence of highly variable drugs with broad 90% CIs.
© 2021 An and Shin.

Entities:  

Keywords:  H-likelihood; bioequivalence test; correlated multiple responses; multivariate HGLM; multivariate random effects model

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2021        PMID: 34465979      PMCID: PMC8396372          DOI: 10.2147/DDDT.S318576

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Drug Des Devel Ther        ISSN: 1177-8881            Impact factor:   4.162


  20 in total

1.  Assessment of equivalence on multiple endpoints.

Authors:  H Quan; J Bolognese; W Yuan
Journal:  Stat Med       Date:  2001-11-15       Impact factor: 2.373

2.  Bayesian modeling of multivariate average bioequivalence.

Authors:  Pulak Ghosh; Mithat Gönen
Journal:  Stat Med       Date:  2008-06-15       Impact factor: 2.373

Review 3.  Variability and impact on design of bioequivalence studies.

Authors:  Achiel Van Peer
Journal:  Basic Clin Pharmacol Toxicol       Date:  2009-11-11       Impact factor: 4.080

4.  Evaluation of bioequivalence of highly variable drugs using clinical trial simulations. II: Comparison of single and multiple-dose trials using AUC and Cmax.

Authors:  A A el-Tahtawy; T N Tozer; F Harrison; L Lesko; R Williams
Journal:  Pharm Res       Date:  1998-01       Impact factor: 4.200

5.  The multivariate assessment of bioequivalence.

Authors:  V M Chinchilli; R K Elswick
Journal:  J Biopharm Stat       Date:  1997-03       Impact factor: 1.051

6.  Power analyses of moment analysis parameter in bioequivalence tests.

Authors:  N Kaniwa; H Ogata; N Aoyagi; Y Takeda; M Uchiyama
Journal:  J Pharm Sci       Date:  1989-12       Impact factor: 3.534

7.  Pharmacokinetics and relative bioavailability of a fixed-dose combination of enteric-coated naproxen and non-enteric-coated esomeprazole magnesium.

Authors:  Laurene Wang-Smith; John Fort; Ying Zhang; Mark Sostek
Journal:  J Clin Pharmacol       Date:  2011-05-31       Impact factor: 3.126

8.  Pharmacokinetic interaction of fimasartan, a new angiotensin II receptor antagonist, with amlodipine in healthy volunteers.

Authors:  SoJeong Yi; Tae-Eun Kim; Seo Hyun Yoon; Joo-Youn Cho; Sang-Goo Shin; In-Jin Jang; Kyung-Sang Yu
Journal:  J Cardiovasc Pharmacol       Date:  2011-06       Impact factor: 3.105

9.  Comparative bioequivalence studies of tramadol hydrochloride sustained-release 200 mg tablets.

Authors:  Suhas S Khandave; Satish V Sawant; Santosh S Joshi; Yatish K Bansal; Sonal S Kadam
Journal:  Drug Des Devel Ther       Date:  2010-11-25       Impact factor: 4.162

10.  Pharmacokinetic interaction between fimasartan and atorvastatin in healthy male volunteers.

Authors:  Yewon Choi; SeungHwan Lee; In-Jin Jang; Kyung-Sang Yu
Journal:  Drug Des Devel Ther       Date:  2018-07-24       Impact factor: 4.162

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.