首页> 外文期刊>European journal of clinical pharmacology >Statistical approaches to indirectly compare bioequivalence between generics: A comparison of methodologies employing artemether/lumefantrine 20/120 mg tablets as prequalified by WHO
【24h】

Statistical approaches to indirectly compare bioequivalence between generics: A comparison of methodologies employing artemether/lumefantrine 20/120 mg tablets as prequalified by WHO

机译:间接比较仿制药之间生物等效性的统计方法:采用经世卫组织预先鉴定的蒿甲醚/氟美特林20/120 mg片剂的方法学比较

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
           

摘要

Purpose The objective of this study was to compare different methods of adjusted indirect comparisons that can be used to investigate the relative bioavailability of different generic products. To achieve this goal, generic artemether/lumefantrine 20/120 mg tablets that have been prequalified by the World Health Organization (WHO) were selected as model products for study. Methods Data from three bioequivalence studies conducted independently that compared three generics with the same reference product were used to indirectly determine the relative bioavailability between the generics themselves. Results The different methods of indirect comparison examined in this study provide consistent results. Methods based on the assumption of a large sample size give slightly narrower 90 % confidence intervals. Therefore, the use of methods based on the t test is recommended. Given the precision of the area under the time-concentration curve (AUC) data, it is possible to conclude that the extent of exposure of artemether and lumefantrine is bioequivalent between the different generics studied. However, given the precision of the drug peak concentration (Cmax) data, it is not possible to demonstrate equivalence within the conventional acceptance range for all comparisons; it is possible to conclude bioequivalence within the widened acceptance range 75-133 %. Conclusions From a clinical viewpoint, not only are these prequalified generics bioequivalent and interchangeable with the reference product (Coartem, Novartis), but also the existing indirect evidence makes it possible to conclude that these WHO prequalified products are bioequivalent between themselves with respect to the AUC. The lack of the necessary precision to demonstrate bioequivalence between generics with respect to the Cmax within the conventional acceptance range does not preclude considering them as interchangeable, if necessary, since Cmax is considered to be of less clinical relevance for the relevant therapy.
机译:目的这项研究的目的是比较经过调整的间接比较的不同方法,这些方法可用于调查不同仿制产品的相对生物利用度。为了实现这一目标,已选择经过世界卫生组织(WHO)资格预审的通用蒿甲醚/荧光黄素20/120 mg片剂作为模型产品进行研究。方法来自三个独立进行的生物等效性研究的数据将三个仿制药与同一参考产品进行比较,从而间接确定了仿制药之间的相对生物利用度。结果本研究中检验的不同间接比较方法提供了一致的结果。基于大样本量假设的方法给出的置信区间略窄于90%。因此,建议使用基于t检验的方法。给定时间-浓度曲线(AUC)数据下面积的精确度,可以得出结论,在研究的不同仿制药之间,蒿甲醚和麻黄素的暴露程度是生物等效的。但是,考虑到药物峰浓度(Cmax)数据的精确度,不可能在所有比较的常规接受范围内证明其等效性。可以得出在75-133%扩大的接受范围内的生物等效性。结论从临床角度来看,这些经过资格预审的仿制药不仅与参考产品(Coartem,诺华)具有生物等效性和互换性,而且现有的间接证据也使得可以得出以下结论:就WHO而言,这些经过WHO鉴定的仿制药之间具有生物等效性。在常规接受范围内缺乏必要的精度来证明仿制药之间相对于Cmax的生物等效性并不能排除认为它们是可互换的,如果有必要的话,因为Cmax被认为与相关疗法的临床相关性较小。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号