Evaluation of Truncated Areas in the Assessment of Bioequivalence of Immediate Release Formulations of Drugs with Long Half-Lives and of Cmax with Different Dissolution Rates
Tóm tắt
Purpose. To Evaluate truncated AUC in place of AUCt or extrapolated AUCinf, for drugs with long half-lives and to study the relationship between Cmax and in vitro dissolution rates.
Methods. Monte-Carlo simulations were conducted using actual mean plasma concentrations of five long half-life drug products. The simulations were based on a catenary pharmacokinetic system in which the drug disposition in the body was represented by a one-or two-compartment model, characterizing the observed mean profiles. The influence of dramatic changes in the in vitro dissolution rate constant ‘kd’, was simulated in scenarios consisting of 20 crossover trials with 24 subjects per trial, comparing a fast dissolving reference and a hypothetical, slow dissolving test formulation.
Results. The AUC's truncated after the completion of distribution phase were found surrogate to the AUCt or AUCinf measures. Except for Phenylbutazone, the Cmax measure was insensitive to the changes in the in vitro dissolution rate. The Cmax measure was found to be useful in the bioequivalence assessment since it reflected both the rate and extent of absorption. (Cmax/AUCt) measure was specific to absorption rate.
Conclusions. For the bioequivalence determination of long half-life drug products, (1) the use of truncated AUC's after completion of the distribution phase instead of AUCinf, appears feasible. (2) Cmax measure may be insensitive to input rate changes, if the absorption rate is not constrained by the input rate in relation to the distribution or elimination rate.(3) (Cmax/AUCt) may be more specific to ‘ka’ differences, but Cmax reflects differences in both rate and extent of absorption.
Tài liệu tham khảo
B. Alexanderson. Bioavailability of drugs with long elimination half-lives. Eur J. Clin. Pharmacol. 4:82–91 (1972).
L. Endrenyi et al. Truncated AUC evaluates effectively the bioequivalence of drugs with long half-lives. Int. J. Clin. Pharmacol. 35:142–150 (1997).
H. M. Abdou. Dissolution, Bioavailability and Bioequivalence, Mack Publishers, Easton, 1989.
L. Endrenyi, L. Tothfalusi, R. L. Lalonde, J. Gaudreault. Partial AUC is effective for assessing the bioequivalence of drugs with long half-lives. Clin. Pharmacol. Ther. 59:152 (1996).
Y. C. Tsang, J. Hems, J. Spino. Use of AUC0–72 in bioequivalence assesssment of drugs with long half-life. Pharm. Res. 13:S477 (1996).
M. N. Martinez and A. J. Jackson. Suitability of various non-infinity area under the plasma concentration time curve (AUC) estimates for use in bioequivalence determinations: relationship to AUC from zero to time infinity. Pharm. Res. 8:512–517 (1991).
I. J. McGilveray, S. V. Dighe, I. W. French, K. K. Midha, and J. P. Skelly (eds.). Bio-International 1989 Proceedings, Issues in the evaluation of bioavailability data, Toronto, 1989, pp. 152–155.
L. Z. Benet and R. L. Williams. Goodman and Gillman's The Pharmacological Basis of Therapeutics, Pergamon Press, New York, 1990, 8th Edition, 1650–1735.
United States Pharmacopia 23, pages 642, 1107, 1210, 1235, 1478.
SAS/STAT User's Guide, Release 6.03, SAS Institute, Cary, North Carolina, 1988, 705–709.
J. G. Wagner. Pharmacokinetics for the Pharmaceutical Scientists, Technomic Publishing Company, 1993, 1st edition, 36–39
ScientistR by MicromathR Inc., Salt Lake City, Utah, Version 1, 1994.
H. Akaike. IEEE Trans. Automat. Contr. 19:716–723 (1974).
®RiskR by Palisade Inc., Newfield, New-York, version 2.01, 1992.
SAS/STAT User's Guide, Release 6.03, SAS Institute, Cary, North Carolina, 1988, 549–640.
D. J. Schuirman. A comparison of the two one sided tests procedure and the power approach for assessing the equivalence of average bioavailability. J. Pharmacokin. Biopharm. 15:657–680 (1987).
F. Y. Bois et al. Bioequivalence: Performance of several measures of extent of absorption. Pharm. Res. 11:715–722 (1994).
F. Y. Bois et al. Bioequivalence: Performance of several measures of rate of absorption. Pharm. Res. 11:966–974 (1994).
P. Macheras, M. Symillides, and C. Reppas. The cutoff time point of the partial area method for assessment of absorption in bioequivalence studies. Pharm. Res. 11:831–834 (1994).
E. G. Lovering, I. J. McGilveray, I. McMillan, and W. J. Tostowaryk. Comparative bioavailabilities from truncated blood level curves. J. Pharm. Sci. 64(9):1521–1524 (1975).
K. K. Midha, J. W. Hubbard, M. Rawson, and L. Gayalas. The application of partial areas in assessment of rate and extent of absorption in bioequivalence studies of conventional release products: experimental evidence. Eur. J. Pharm. Sci. 2:351–363 (1994).
A. J. Romero et al. Use and limitations of the truncated area under the curve in bioequivalence testing. Clin. Res. Pract. and Drug Reg. Affairs. 8(2):123–151 (1990).
L. Endrenyi and L. Tothfalusi. Secondary metrics for the assessment of bioequivalence. J. Pharm. Sci. 86(3):401–402(1997)
T. N. Tozer et al. Absorption rate vs. exposure: which is more useful for bioequivalence testing? Pharm Res. 13(3):453–456 (1996).