Office of Bioequivalence, Office of Generic Drugs, Center for Drug Evaluation and Research, Food and Drug Administration, Silver Spring, Maryland, USA.
AAPS J. 2015 May;17(3):546-57. doi: 10.1208/s12248-015-9733-9. Epub 2015 Mar 11.
International regulatory agencies have developed recommendations and guidances for bioequivalence approaches of orally inhaled drug products (OIDPs) for local action. The objective of this article is to discuss the similarities and differences among these approaches used by international regulatory authorities when applications of generic and/or subsequent entry locally acting OIDPs are evaluated. We focused on four jurisdictions that currently have published related guidances for generic and/or subsequent entry OIDPs. They are Therapeutic Goods Administration (TGA) in Australia, Health Canada (HC) in Canada, European Medicines Association (EMA) of European Union (EU), and the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) in the United States of America (USA). The comparisons of these bioequivalence (BE) recommendations are based on selection of reference products, formulation and inhaler device comparisons, and in vitro tests and in vivo studies, including pharmacokinetic (PK), pharmacodynamics (PD), and clinical studies. For the in vivo studies, the study design, choices of dose, subject inclusion/ exclusion criteria, study period, study endpoint, and equivalence criteria are elaborated in details. The bioequivalence on multiple-strength products and waiver options are also discussed.
国际监管机构已经为局部作用的吸入式药物产品(OIDP)的生物等效性方法制定了建议和指南。本文的目的是讨论在评估通用和/或后续进入局部作用 OIDP 的申请时,国际监管机构使用的这些方法的异同。我们专注于四个目前已经发布了有关通用和/或后续进入 OIDP 的指南的司法管辖区:澳大利亚的治疗用品管理局(TGA)、加拿大的加拿大卫生部(HC)、欧盟的欧洲药品管理局(EMA)和美利坚合众国的食品和药物管理局(FDA)。这些生物等效性(BE)建议的比较是基于参考产品的选择、配方和吸入器设备的比较以及体外试验和体内研究,包括药代动力学(PK)、药效学(PD)和临床研究。对于体内研究,详细阐述了研究设计、剂量选择、受试者纳入/排除标准、研究期限、研究终点和等效性标准。还讨论了多强度产品的生物等效性和豁免选择。