Bioequivalence assessment of generic products an innovative South African approach
- Walker, Roderick B, Kanfer, Isadore, Skinner, Michael F
- Authors: Walker, Roderick B , Kanfer, Isadore , Skinner, Michael F
- Date: 2006
- Subjects: To be catalogued
- Language: English
- Type: text , article
- Identifier: http://hdl.handle.net/10962/184256 , vital:44194 , xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1080/10601330500534014"
- Description: Concurrent with the implementation of new legislation mandating Generic Substitution in South Africa, a new set of guidelines for bioavailability and bioequivalence have been published. Since one of the main objectives of the new legislation in South Africa relating to Generic Substitution is to ensure that medicines of high quality, safety, and efficacy are made more accessible and more affordable to the wider public, the need to speed up approval of such multi-source products has become a regulatory priority. In order to facilitate this process, various bioequivalence issues have been addressed including important issues such as the acceptance criteria and associated bioequivalence intervals, use of a foreign reference product and the issue of assessing highly variable drugs (HVDs). In addition, dispensations have been made with respect to food effect assessment and variability relating to genetic polymorphism in drug metabolism (genotyping/phenotyping). Furthermore, the use of “old” biostudies submitted in support of an application is subject to expiry date. Acceptance of appropriate data requires that specific criteria such as Cmax and AUC, in addition to the usual considerations, also meet the limits specified by the particular registration authority of the country where such products are intended to be marketed. Generally, these limits require that the 90% confidence interval (CI) for AUC and Cmax test/reference ratios lies within the acceptance interval of 0.80–1.25 calculated using log-transformed data. While such acceptance criteria are, in general, ubiquitous, some differences in acceptance criteria do exist between various countries. The new guidelines for bioavailability/bioequivalence studies developed by the South African regulatory authority, the Medicines Control Council (MCC), makes provision for highly variable drugs and the use of a non-South African reference product. The MCC requires that the acceptance criterion for Cmax ratios be set at 0.75–1.33 while maintaining AUC ratios at 0.80–1.25 using a 90% CI. Furthermore, provision is made to apply scaling based on average bioequivalence assessment and, as an interim measure, consideration has also been given to the use of a foreign reference product provided that equivalence between that product and the innovator product currently available on the South African market can be shown using in vitro testing.
- Full Text:
- Date Issued: 2006
- Authors: Walker, Roderick B , Kanfer, Isadore , Skinner, Michael F
- Date: 2006
- Subjects: To be catalogued
- Language: English
- Type: text , article
- Identifier: http://hdl.handle.net/10962/184256 , vital:44194 , xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1080/10601330500534014"
- Description: Concurrent with the implementation of new legislation mandating Generic Substitution in South Africa, a new set of guidelines for bioavailability and bioequivalence have been published. Since one of the main objectives of the new legislation in South Africa relating to Generic Substitution is to ensure that medicines of high quality, safety, and efficacy are made more accessible and more affordable to the wider public, the need to speed up approval of such multi-source products has become a regulatory priority. In order to facilitate this process, various bioequivalence issues have been addressed including important issues such as the acceptance criteria and associated bioequivalence intervals, use of a foreign reference product and the issue of assessing highly variable drugs (HVDs). In addition, dispensations have been made with respect to food effect assessment and variability relating to genetic polymorphism in drug metabolism (genotyping/phenotyping). Furthermore, the use of “old” biostudies submitted in support of an application is subject to expiry date. Acceptance of appropriate data requires that specific criteria such as Cmax and AUC, in addition to the usual considerations, also meet the limits specified by the particular registration authority of the country where such products are intended to be marketed. Generally, these limits require that the 90% confidence interval (CI) for AUC and Cmax test/reference ratios lies within the acceptance interval of 0.80–1.25 calculated using log-transformed data. While such acceptance criteria are, in general, ubiquitous, some differences in acceptance criteria do exist between various countries. The new guidelines for bioavailability/bioequivalence studies developed by the South African regulatory authority, the Medicines Control Council (MCC), makes provision for highly variable drugs and the use of a non-South African reference product. The MCC requires that the acceptance criterion for Cmax ratios be set at 0.75–1.33 while maintaining AUC ratios at 0.80–1.25 using a 90% CI. Furthermore, provision is made to apply scaling based on average bioequivalence assessment and, as an interim measure, consideration has also been given to the use of a foreign reference product provided that equivalence between that product and the innovator product currently available on the South African market can be shown using in vitro testing.
- Full Text:
- Date Issued: 2006
Generic substitution: the use of medicinal products containing different salts and implications for safety and efficacy
- Verbeeck, R K, Kanfer, Isadore, Walker, Roderick B
- Authors: Verbeeck, R K , Kanfer, Isadore , Walker, Roderick B
- Date: 2006
- Language: English
- Type: text , Article
- Identifier: vital:6445 , http://hdl.handle.net/10962/d1006632
- Description: In their quest to gain early entry of new generic products into the market prior to patent expiration, one of the strategies pursued by generic drug product manufacturers is to incorporate different salts of an approved active pharmaceutical ingredient (API) in a brand company's marketed dosage form and subject such dosage forms to bioequivalence assessment. These initiatives present challenges to regulatory authorities where the decision to approve bioequivalent products containing such pharmaceutical alternatives must be considered in the light of safety and efficacy, and more particularly, with respect to their substitutability. This article describes the various issues and contentions associated with the concept of pharmaceutical alternatives, specifically with respect to the uses of different salts and the implications for safety, efficacy and generic substitution.
- Full Text:
- Date Issued: 2006
- Authors: Verbeeck, R K , Kanfer, Isadore , Walker, Roderick B
- Date: 2006
- Language: English
- Type: text , Article
- Identifier: vital:6445 , http://hdl.handle.net/10962/d1006632
- Description: In their quest to gain early entry of new generic products into the market prior to patent expiration, one of the strategies pursued by generic drug product manufacturers is to incorporate different salts of an approved active pharmaceutical ingredient (API) in a brand company's marketed dosage form and subject such dosage forms to bioequivalence assessment. These initiatives present challenges to regulatory authorities where the decision to approve bioequivalent products containing such pharmaceutical alternatives must be considered in the light of safety and efficacy, and more particularly, with respect to their substitutability. This article describes the various issues and contentions associated with the concept of pharmaceutical alternatives, specifically with respect to the uses of different salts and the implications for safety, efficacy and generic substitution.
- Full Text:
- Date Issued: 2006
- «
- ‹
- 1
- ›
- »