Response to the case report by Mattar: Generic Imatinib (Imatib, Cipla) in a patient with chronic myeloid leukemia in chronic phase.

摘要

This is in response to the case report published in the January issue of this journal [1]. The published case report suggests that a difference between the clinical efficacies of the 2 Imatinib products could be due to the two products containing different polymorphs, the alpha crystalline and the beta crystalline forms. It is of grave concern that such a case report has been published which has inaccuracies and without ascertaining several facts. There are a number of points we would like to bring to your attention. First of all, a single case report does not provide any grounds for even making a claim about a difference between the efficacies of 2 products. Further, the duration of treatment is inadequate (only 12 weeks) which we believe is not sufficient to reach such a conclusion. Cipla's Imatinib Mesylate (Imatib) is an alpha polymorphic form, where as the polymorphic form in the marketed innovator product is a Beta form.