Department of Clinical Medicine, University of Insubria, Varese, Italy.
Pharmacotherapy. 2011 Apr;31(4):386-93. doi: 10.1592/phco.31.4.386.
The use of generic drugs has become increasingly common in clinical practice. However, for drugs with a narrow therapeutic index, such as warfarin, there may be some concern regarding the definition of bioequivalence. Clinical studies that compared brand name and generic warfarin products provided conflicting results. Therefore, we performed a systematic review of the literature to better assess the characteristics of each generic warfarin product. Several sources were searched, including MEDLINE and EMBASE, electronic records of meetings' abstracts, and reference lists of included articles. Articles were considered relevant if they were original studies, enrolled patients receiving oral anticoagulant treatment, and compared any approved generic warfarin with brand name warfarin in at least one clinical, laboratory, or management outcome. Eleven studies, with a total of more than 40,000 patients, were included; five were randomized controlled trials, and six were observational studies. In three crossover trials evaluating the mean difference of the international normalized ratio (INR) after switching to the alternate formulation of warfarin, no statistically significant difference was found between patients randomly assigned to receive brand name or generic warfarin. The two other randomized trials found no significant differences in the magnitude or number of dosage changes between patients switched to brand name or generic warfarin. The results of the observational studies are more conflicting, suggesting different features for different generic warfarin products. In these observational studies, the time in the therapeutic range and the number of thromboembolic and hemorrhagic complications were similar in studies that compared the anticoagulation control before and after the switch to a generic warfarin product. In one observational study, however, a change in therapeutic INR control after the switch to generic warfarin was reported at the individual patient level. The results of our systematic review suggest that generic warfarin products may be as safe and effective as brand name products and that patients may be safely treated with these products. However, closer monitoring may be reasonable when switching brands, as variations in individual INR response may be seen.
在临床实践中,通用药物的使用变得越来越普遍。然而,对于治疗指数较窄的药物,如华法林,人们可能会对生物等效性的定义产生一些担忧。比较品牌名称和通用华法林产品的临床研究结果相互矛盾。因此,我们对文献进行了系统评价,以更好地评估每种通用华法林产品的特点。检索了多个来源,包括 MEDLINE 和 EMBASE、会议摘要的电子记录以及纳入文章的参考文献列表。如果文章是原始研究、纳入接受口服抗凝治疗的患者、并比较至少一种临床、实验室或管理结果中任何一种批准的通用华法林与品牌华法林,则认为其相关。共纳入 11 项研究,总计超过 40,000 名患者;其中 5 项为随机对照试验,6 项为观察性研究。在 3 项评估患者换用华法林替代制剂后国际标准化比值(INR)均值差异的交叉试验中,随机分配接受品牌华法林或通用华法林的患者之间未发现统计学差异。另外两项随机试验发现,换用品牌华法林或通用华法林的患者在剂量调整幅度或数量方面无显著差异。观察性研究的结果更为矛盾,表明不同的通用华法林产品具有不同的特点。在这些观察性研究中,与换用通用华法林产品前后的抗凝控制进行比较的研究中,治疗范围内的时间和血栓栓塞及出血并发症的数量相似。然而,在一项观察性研究中,报告了换用通用华法林后个别患者的治疗 INR 控制发生变化。系统评价的结果表明,通用华法林产品可能与品牌产品一样安全有效,患者可以安全地使用这些产品。然而,在换用时可能需要更密切的监测,因为可能会看到个体 INR 反应的变化。