Jackson A J
Center for Drug Evaluation and Research, Division of Bioequivalence, Food and Drug Administration, Rockville, Maryland 20857, USA.
Pharm Res. 1998 Jul;15(7):1077-84. doi: 10.1023/a:1011990413450.
Two methods to confirm attainment of steady-state conditions in multiple-dose bioequivalence studies are described and evaluated: (1) the Cmin method and (2) the Area Below the Cmin plasma-concentration-versus-time-curve method (ABCM method).
Cmin Method-After repetitive drug administration to presumed steady-state, successive trough, or Cmin, values are evaluated to determine if they are equal. ABCM Method-The ABCM of successive doses from dose two to presumed steady-state [ABCM(ss)] are divided by the ABCM for the first dose, ABCM(t), to give ABCM(ss)/ ABCM(t)=R, which describes the increase in ABCM(n) with successive doses. The quantity, R, is then divided by an accumulation ratio to render the value independent of intra-subject clearance differences. Monte Carlo simulations were done to test the effects of data error and slow-clearing subpopulations on the method's performance. Data from multiple-dose bioequivalence studies were evaluated using confidence intervals for both methods to determine how well each predicted steady-state for immediate-release and controlled-release drug products.
RESULTS/CONCLUSIONS: The Cmin method more accurately predicted the attainment of steady-state conditions for immediate-release formulations compared to the ABCM method. Conversely, the ABCM procedure more accurately predicted the attainment of steady-state conditions for controlled-release formulations compared to the Cmin method. The simulation results were further supported by the experimental data.
描述并评估了在多剂量生物等效性研究中确认达到稳态条件的两种方法:(1)Cmin法和(2)Cmin血浆浓度-时间曲线下面积法(ABCM法)。
Cmin法——在假定达到稳态后重复给药,评估连续的谷浓度或Cmin值,以确定它们是否相等。ABCM法——将从第2剂到假定稳态的连续剂量的ABCM[ABCM(ss)]除以第1剂的ABCM,即ABCM(t),得到ABCM(ss)/ABCM(t)=R,它描述了ABCM(n)随连续剂量的增加情况。然后将R值除以蓄积比,以使该值不受受试者内清除率差异的影响。进行蒙特卡洛模拟,以测试数据误差和清除缓慢的亚群对该方法性能的影响。使用两种方法的置信区间评估多剂量生物等效性研究的数据,以确定每种方法对速释和控释药品预测稳态的准确性。
结果/结论:与ABCM法相比,Cmin法能更准确地预测速释制剂达到稳态条件的情况。相反,与Cmin法相比,ABCM程序能更准确地预测控释制剂达到稳态条件的情况。模拟结果得到了实验数据的进一步支持。