» Articles » PMID: 18446515

Highly Variable Drugs: Observations from Bioequivalence Data Submitted to the FDA for New Generic Drug Applications

Overview
Journal AAPS J
Specialty Pharmacology
Date 2008 May 1
PMID 18446515
Citations 36
Authors
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
Abstract

Introduction: It is widely believed that acceptable bioequivalence studies of drugs with high within-subject pharmacokinetic variability must enroll higher numbers of subjects than studies of drugs with lower variability. We studied the scope of this issue within US generic drug regulatory submissions.

Materials And Methods: We collected data from all in vivo bioequivalence studies reviewed at FDA's Office of Generic Drugs (OGD) from 2003-2005. We used the ANOVA root mean square error (RMSE) from bioequivalence statistical analyses to estimate within-subject variability. A drug was considered highly variable if its RMSE for C (max) and/or AUC was > or =0.3. To identify factors contributing to high variability, we evaluated drug substance pharmacokinetic characteristics and drug product dissolution performance.

Results And Discussion: In 2003-2005, the OGD reviewed 1,010 acceptable bioequivalence studies of 180 different drugs, of which 31% (57/180) were highly variable. Of these highly variable drugs, 51%, 10%, and 39% were either consistently, borderline, or inconsistently highly variable, respectively. We observed that most of the consistent and borderline highly variable drugs underwent extensive first pass metabolism. Drug product dissolution variability was high for about half of the inconsistently highly variable drugs. We could not identify factors causing variability for the other half. Studies of highly variable drugs generally used more subjects than studies of lower variability drugs.

Conclusion: About 60% of the highly variable drugs we surveyed were highly variable due to drug substance pharmacokinetic characteristics. For about 20% of the highly variable drugs, it appeared that formulation performance contributed to the high variability.

Citing Articles

Short-Wave Infrared Hyperspectral Image-Based Quality Grading of Dried Laver ( spp.).

Lee J, Bae Y, Kwon G, Sohn S, Lee H, Kim H Foods. 2025; 14(3).

PMID: 39942090 PMC: 11817384. DOI: 10.3390/foods14030497.


Effects of a cannabidiol/terpene formulation on sleep in individuals with insomnia: a double-blind, placebo-controlled, randomized, crossover study.

Wang M, Faust M, Abbott S, Patel V, Chang E, Clark J J Clin Sleep Med. 2024; 21(1):69-80.

PMID: 39167421 PMC: 11701282. DOI: 10.5664/jcsm.11324.


Advancing Virtual Bioequivalence for Orally Administered Drug Products: Methodology, Real-World Applications and Future Outlook.

Kollipara S, Martins F, Jereb R, Krajcar D, Ahmed T Pharmaceuticals (Basel). 2024; 17(7).

PMID: 39065727 PMC: 11279853. DOI: 10.3390/ph17070876.


Evaluation of Pharmacokinetics of a BCS Class III Drug with Two Different Study Designs: Tenofovir Alafenamide Monofumarate Film-coated Tablet.

Arisoy M, Saydam M, Dolaksiz Y, Demirbas O, Talay C, Saglam O AAPS PharmSciTech. 2024; 25(5):123.

PMID: 38816624 DOI: 10.1208/s12249-024-02835-5.


Integration of Biorelevant Pediatric Dissolution Methodology into PBPK Modeling to Predict In Vivo Performance and Bioequivalence of Generic Drugs in Pediatric Populations: a Carbamazepine Case Study.

Pawar G, Wu F, Zhao L, Fang L, Burckart G, Feng K AAPS J. 2023; 25(4):67.

PMID: 37386339 DOI: 10.1208/s12248-023-00826-1.


References
1.
Tothfalusi L, Endrenyi L . Limits for the scaled average bioequivalence of highly variable drugs and drug products. Pharm Res. 2003; 20(3):382-9. DOI: 10.1023/a:1022695819135. View

2.
Midha K, Rawson M, Hubbard J . The bioequivalence of highly variable drugs and drug products. Int J Clin Pharmacol Ther. 2005; 43(10):485-98. DOI: 10.5414/cpp43485. View

3.
Haidar S, Davit B, Chen M, Conner D, Lee L, Li Q . Bioequivalence approaches for highly variable drugs and drug products. Pharm Res. 2007; 25(1):237-41. DOI: 10.1007/s11095-007-9434-x. View

4.
Tozer T, Harrison F, Lesko L, Williams R . Evaluation of bioequivalence of highly variable drugs using clinical trial simulations. II: Comparison of single and multiple-dose trials using AUC and Cmax. Pharm Res. 1998; 15(1):98-104. DOI: 10.1023/a:1011961006297. View