1 / 52

Assessment of Interchangeable Multisource Medicines BCS-Biowaivers

Assessment of Interchangeable Multisource Medicines BCS-Biowaivers . Dr. Henrike Potthast (h.potthast@bfarm.de). Training workshop: Assessment of Interchangeable Multisource Medicines, Kenya, August 2009. Basis for BCS-based Biowaiver Applications/Decisions.

liam
Télécharger la présentation

Assessment of Interchangeable Multisource Medicines BCS-Biowaivers

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript


  1. Assessment of Interchangeable Multisource Medicines • BCS-Biowaivers Dr. Henrike Potthast (h.potthast@bfarm.de) Training workshop: Assessment of Interchangeable Multisource Medicines, Kenya, August 2009

  2. Basis for BCS-based Biowaiver Applications/Decisions • WHO – Technical Report Series No. 937, May 2006 Annex 7: Multisource (generic) pharmaceutical products: guidelines on registration requirements to establish interchangeability Annex 8: Proposal to waive in vivo bioequivalence requirements for WHO Model List of Essential Medicines immediate release, solid oral dosage forms • FDA - Guidance for Industry: “Waiver of in vivo bio-equivalence studies for immediate release solid oral dosage forms containing certain active moieties/active ingredients based on a Biopharmaceutics Classification System” (2000) • EU-guidance:“Note for Guidance on the Investigation of Bioavailability andBioequivalence” CPMP/EWP/QWP/1401/98; paragraph 5.1

  3. Definitions BCS-based ‘Biowaiver’..... .....is defined as • in vitro instead of in vivo ‘bioequivalence’ testing • comparison of test and reference ....is not defined as no equivalence test

  4. Definitions acc. to the FDA guidance: ”BCS-based biowaivers are intended only for bioequivalence studies. They do not apply to food effect bioavailability studies or other pharmacokinetic studies.” (e.g., rel. bioavailability)

  5. Definitions • Bioavailability – rate and extent at which a drug substance... becomes available in the general system (product characteristic!) • Bioequivalence – equivalent bioavailability within pre-set acceptance ranges • Pharmaceutical equivalence Bioequivalence • Bioequivalence Therapeutic equivalence

  6. BCS-based biowaiver In vivo bioequivalence testing is generally required but ” Such studies may be exempted if the absence of differences in the in vivo performance can be justified by satisfactory in vitro data.” • for oral immediate release dosage forms with systemic action!

  7. BCS-based biowaiver Evaluation of drug substance and drug product Drug substance • pharmacodynamic/therapeutic aspects • physicochemical aspects Drug product • in vitro dissolution

  8. BCS-based biowaiver RISKassessment (see e.g. WHO guidance; sect. 9.2 and 5.1.(a)) • “critical use medicines” • “narrow therapeutic index drugs” • “documented evidence for BA or BE problems • “scientific evidence that API polymorphs, excipients or the manufacturing process affects BE”

  9. BCS-based biowaiver Biowaiver justification based on ”………criteria derived from the concepts underlying the Biopharmaceutics Classification System ......”

  10. BCS-based biowaiver Biopharmaceutics Classification System (BCS) dissolution drug product  drug substance in solution membrane transport drug substance in the system simplified mechanistic view of bioavailability

  11. Melting point Charge Solubility Size Shape Ionisa-tion H-bonding Charge Distribution Lipophilicity Amphiphilicity Fig.1: Physicochemical properties that affect absorption (after oral administration) [H. van de Waterbeemd/ Eur J Pharm Sci 7 (1998), 1-3]

  12. BCS-based biowaiver Pillars of the BCS SolubilityPermeabilityDissolution

  13. BCS-based biowaiver High solubility • the highest single unit dose is completely soluble in 250 ml or less of aqueous solution at pH 1 - 6.8 (37 °C) • generate a pH-solubility profile cave: possible stability problems have to be considered • Discussion on ‘intermediate solubility’, i.e., pH-dependent (high) solubility • Definition of low solubility?

  14. BCS-based biowaiver High permeability • EU guidance: ”Linear and complete absorption reduces the possibility of an IR dosage form influencing the bioavailability” • FDA guidance: absolute BA >90 % • WHO guidance: at least 85 % absorption in humans • Human data are preferred; in vitro data may be submitted if sufficiently justified and valid • Definition of low permeability?

  15. BCS-based biowaiver

  16. BCS-based biowaiver ♦ „….if the fraction of the dose absorbed is the same, the human body should always do the same with the absorbed compound …Even in a disease state, this argument is still a valid statement.“ [Faassen et al. Clin Pharmacokinet 43 (2004)1117]  what does the product do to the drug substance?

  17. BCS-based biowaiver • When are in vitro results sufficient for bioequivalence evaluation? • When is in vitro instead of in vivo bioequivalence testing scientifically justified (or even more restrictive)? • Minimizing risk by means of ‘worst case’ investigation? • Which in vitro investigations may be sufficient?

  18. BCS-based biowaiver in vitro dissolution objectives • quality control • justification of minor variations • iviv-correlation (e.g. major variations; bridging) • additional to BE studies • proportionality based biowaiver • BCS based biowaiver • ….

  19. BCS-based biowaiver in vitro dissolution prerequisites • reasonable, stability-indicating, validated methods • discriminative methods • reproducible methods • biorelevant methods (?) ……one fits all?!

  20. BCS-based biowaiver in vitro dissolution and BCS concept • meet prerequisites • ensure risk minimization • justify absence of difference • biorelevant?!

  21. BCS-based biowaiver In vitro comparison of immediate release oral drug products (T and R) first option: very rapidly dissolving products • Not less than 85 % of labeled amount are dissolved within 15 min in each of three buffers (pH 1.2, pH 4.5 acetate buffer, pH 6.8 phosphate buffer) – no further profile comparison of T and R is required • reasonable, validated experimental conditions/methods are strongly recommended!

  22. BCS-based biowaiver In vitro comparison of immediate release oral drug products (T and R) second option: rapidly dissolving products • Not less than 85 % of labeled amount are dissolved within 30 min in each of three buffers (pH 1.2, pH 4.5 acetate buffer, pH 6.8 phosphate buffer) • reasonable, validated experimental conditions/methods are strongly recommended!

  23. BCS-based biowaiver Experimental conditions: • EU guidance – no specific information yet • US-FDA guidance – ‚USP‘-conditions • 50 rpm (paddle) or 100 rpm (basket); 900 ml; USP buffer; 37 °C • WHO – • 75 rpm (paddle) or 100 rpm (basket); 900 ml or less; USP buffer; 37 °C • all: no surfactants!

  24. BCS-based biowaiver In vitro comparison of immediate release oral drug products (T and R) • Proving similarity of dissolution profiles of T and R e.g., using f2-test, unless similarity is obvious (see e.g. WHO guidance sect. 9.2 or app. 2 of the current EU guidance; note prerequisites)

  25. BCS-based biowaiver f2-test • acceptance value based on 10 % difference between profiles • „identical“ profiles: f2 =100 „similar“ profiles: f2 between 50 and 100 • any other reasonable/justified test possible!

  26. BCS-based biowaiver • Requirement: either “very rapid” or “similar” in vitro dissolution • how similar is ‘similar’? • discussion of differences usually not appropriate

  27. BCS-based biowaiver BCS-based biowaiver in-vitro dissolution • no iviv correlation • no biorelevant conditions (except pH) • concept to justify absence of difference!

  28. BCS-based biowaiver • Evaluation of excipients(e.g., large amounts, possible interactions....; e.g. IsoniazidJ Pharm Sci 96 March 2007: “…permeability changes due to excipient interaction cannot be detected in vitro…”) • Evaluation of manufacturing processes in relation with critical physicochemical properties

  29. BCS-based biowaiver BCS-based Biowaiver for immediate release drug products containing eligible drug substances. No BCS-based biowaiver for: • locally applied, systemically acting products • non-oral immediate release forms with systemic action • modified release products • transdermal products

  30. BCS-based biowaiver Provided that ...... drug solubility is high, • permeability is limited, • excipients do not affect kinetics, • excipients do not interact ,.....

  31. BCS-based biowaiver ....then very rapid dissolution (at least >85% in 15 min) of test and reference may ensure similar product characteristics because... ....absorption process is probably independent from dissolution and not product related…  limited absorption kinetics due to poor drug permeability and/or gastric emptying • Biowaiver for BCS class III drugs (see WHO guidance)

  32. BCS-class III?! Fig. 1. Mean in vitro dissolution profiles of metformin for 500mg immediate-release tablet of Glucophage® or Glucofit® in 0.1N HCI (○,●) pH 4.6 (□,■) and pH 6.8 (∆,▲) buffer solution.

  33. BCS-class III?! Fig. 2. Mean in vivo plasma conentration-time profiles of metformin in 12 healthy Chinese subjects after oral administration of a 500mg immediate-release tablet of Glucophage (○) or Glucofit (●). Fig. Fig. 2

  34. BCS-class III?! Fig. 1. Comparison of mean cimetidine released-time profiles obtained from dissolution testing of cimetidine tablets containing methacrylate copolymer and Tagamet® tablets in different media. Each value is the mean of six observations. Data for the Tagamet® tablet were obtained from dissolution testing in 0.01N hydrovhloric acid (HCI) and simulated intestinal fluid without pancreatin (SIFsp): (a) 0.01N HCI, pH 2; (b) phosphate buffer, pH 4.5; (c) SIFsp, pH 6.8; and (d) fasted-state simulated intestinal fluid, pH 6.5 pancreatin. Clin Pharmacokinet. Jantratid et al 2006

  35. BCS-class III?! Fig. 2.Comparison of mean plasma cimetidine concentration-time profiles obtained after administration of a singel oral dose of cimetidine tablets containing methacrylyte copolymer or Tagamet® tablets. Each point represents the mean plasma cimetidine concentration (standard error) from 12 subjects. Clin Pharmacokinet. Jantratid et al 2006

  36. BCS-based biowaiver ♦ biopharmaceutics assessment (with necessary underlying PK background!!) ≠ pure PK assessment ♦ differentiation between solubility (API) and dissolution (product performance) ♦ volume of dissolution medium (900 vs 500 ml) not relevant (no concerns regarding hydrodynamics; recent findings); sink conditions! ♦ in-vitro/in-vivo relationship rather than correlation!! ♦ slow absorption…intestinal transit about 3hs!!

  37. BCS-based biowaiver For drugs showing .... • ‘very’ high permeability • pH-dependent solubility within the physiologically relevant pH range .....an ‘intermediate solubility’ class is suggested [Polli et al. J Pharm Sci 93 (2004) 1375; see WHO guidance]

  38. BCS-based biowaiver “pH-dependent soluble, highly permeable, weak acidic, ionizable drug compounds may be handled like BCS class I drugs”(e.g. chpt 8 in: Drug Bioavailability, van de Waterbeemd, Lennernäs, Artursson (edts) 2003 Wiley-VCH) • in vitro dissolution requirements acc. to WHO guidance • at least 85% within 30 min at pH 6.8 and f2 testing for pH 1.2 and 4.5 profiles • but no biowaiver for weak basic drugs

  39. BCS-based biowaiver • meaningful literature data may be used for drug substance characteristics(and excipients) • product related data must always be actually generated for the particular product

  40. BCS-based biowaiver • BCS-based biowaiver are not just in-vitro dissolution, but in-vitro dissolution is meant to be an important part of BCS-based biowaiver applications

  41. BCS-based biowaiver • Current recommendation for TB drugs • no BCS-based biowaiver for RMP • ‘regular’ BCS-based biowaiver possible for levofloxacin and ofloxacin (“rapid dissolution”) • currently a BCS-based biowaiver is possible for isoniazid (cave: excipients!), ethambutol and pyrazinamide if the same “very rapid” dissolution (T and R) is demonstrated • see specific, currently published WHO guidance documents at: http://healthtech.who.int/pq/info_applicants/info_for_applicants_BE_studies.htm

  42. BCS-based biowaiverex.: Pyrazinamide [Dressman et al., 2008, unpubl.]

  43. BCS-based biowaiverex.: Pyrazinamide [Dressman et al., 2008, unpubl.]

  44. BCS-based biowaiverex.:Pyrazinamide [Dressman et al., 2008, unpubl.]

  45. BCS-based biowaiverex.: Isoniazid [Dressman et al., 2008, unpubl.]

  46. BCS-based biowaiverex.: Isoniazid [Dressman et al., 2008, unpubl.]

  47. BCS-based biowaiverex.: Isoniazid [Dressman et al., 2008, unpubl.]

  48. BCS-based biowaiverex.: Ethambutol [Dressman et al., 2008, unpubl.]

  49. BCS-based biowaiverex.: Ethambutol [Dressman et al., 2008, unpubl.]

  50. BCS-based biowaiverex.: Ethambutol [Dressman et al., 2008, unpubl.]

More Related