Criteria to assess in vivo performance and bioequivalence of generic controlled-release formulations of carbamazepine

Epilepsia

Volumn 39, Issue 5, 1998, Pages 513-519

  Bialer, Meir ^a   Yacobi, Avi ^b   Moros, Daniel ^b,c   Levitt, Barrie ^b,d   Houle, Jean Marie ^e   Munsaka, Melvin S ^e  

^a HEBREW UNIVERSITY OF JERUSALEM   (Israel)

^b Taro Pharmaceutical   (United States)

^c MOUNT SINAI SCHOOL OF MEDICINE   (United States)

^d ALBERT EINSTEIN COLLEGE OF MEDICINE   (United States)

^e BioResearch Laboratories   (Canada)

Author keywords

Bioequivalence analysis; Carbamazepine; Controlled release formulations; In vivo performance; Interchangeability

Indexed keywords

CARBAMAZEPINE; TEGRETOL CR DIVITAB; UNCLASSIFIED DRUG; VALPROATE SEMISODIUM; VALPROIC ACID;

ADULT; AREA UNDER THE CURVE; ARTICLE; BIOEQUIVALENCE; CLINICAL ARTICLE; CLINICAL TRIAL; CONCENTRATION RESPONSE; CROSSOVER PROCEDURE; DOSE TIME EFFECT RELATION; DRUG ABSORPTION; DRUG FORMULATION; EPILEPSY; FEMALE; HUMAN; MALE; PRIORITY JOURNAL; RISK ASSESSMENT; SUSTAINED RELEASE PREPARATION;

ADOLESCENT; ADULT; ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE; ANTICONVULSANTS; AREA UNDER CURVE; CARBAMAZEPINE; CROSS-OVER STUDIES; DELAYED-ACTION PREPARATIONS; DRUGS, GENERIC; HUMANS; INTESTINAL ABSORPTION; MALE; MIDDLE AGED; THERAPEUTIC EQUIVALENCY;

EID: 0031898134     PISSN: 00139580     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1111/j.1528-1157.1998.tb01414.x     Document Type: Article

References (45)

1. For and against generic prescribing. Drug Ther Bull 1987;25:93-5.
2. Physicians' Desk Reference. 51st ed. Montevelle, NJ: Medical Economics Company, 1997:870-1.
3. Therapeutics and Technology Assessment Subcommittee of the American Academy of Neurology. Assessment: generic substitution for antiepileptic medication. Neurology 1990;40:1641-3.
4. Nuwer MR, Browne TR, Dodson WE, et al. Generic substitutions for antiepileptic drugs. Neurology 1990;40:1647-51.
5. Young D. PDA policy on generic anticonvulsants. Script 1989; 1469:28.
6. Chappell B. Implications of switching anti-epileptic drugs. Presenter 1994;5:37-9.
7. Crawford P, Hall WW, Chappell B, Collings J, Stewart A. Generic prescribing for epilepsy; is it safe? Seizure 1996;5:1-5.
8. Oles KS, Penry JK, Smith LD, Anderson RL, Dean JC, Riela AR. Therapeutic bioequivalency study of brand name versus generic carbamazepine. Neurology 1992;42:1147-52.
9. Hartley R, Aleksandrowicz J, Ng PC, McLain B, Bowmer CJ, Forsythe WI. Breakthrough seizures with generic carbamazepine: a consequence of poorer bioavailability? Br J Clin Pract 1990;44: 270-3.
10. Sachdeo RC, Belendiuk G. Generic versus branded carbamazepine. Lancet 1987:1:1432.
11. Sachdeo RC, Chokroverty S, Belendiuk G. Risk of switching from brand name to generic drug in seizure disorder. Epilepsia 1987; 28:581.
12. Gilman JT, Alvarez LA, Duchowny M. Carbamazepine toxicity resulting from generic substitution, Neurology 1993;43:2696-7.
13. Richens A. Impact of generic substitution of antiepileptic drugs on the treatment of Epilepsy. CNS Drugs 1997;8:124-33.
14. Neuvonen PJ. Bioavailability and central side effects of different carbamazepine tablets, Int J Clin Pharmacol Toxicol 1985;23:226- 32.
15. Canger R, Altamura AC, Belvedere O, et al. Conventional vs controlled-release carbamazepine: a muliicentrc, double-blind, cross- over study. Acta Neural Scand 1990:82:9-13.
16. Kaski M, Heinonen E, Sivenius J, Touminen J, Anttila M. Treatment of epilepsy in mentally retarded patients with a slow-release carbumazepine preparation. J Ment Defic Res 1991:35:231-9.
17. Dhalla Z, Bruni J, Sutton J. A comparison of the efficacy and tolerability of controlled-release carbamazepine with conventional carbamazepine. Can J Neurol Sci 1991;18:66-8.
18. Bialer M. Pharmacokinetic evaluation of sustained release formulation of antiepileptic drugs, Clin Pharmacokinet 1992;22:11-21.
19. Pieters MSM, Jennekens-Schinkel A, Stijnen Th, et al. Carbamazepine (CBZ) controlled release compared with conventional CBZ: a controlled study of attention and vigilance in children with epilepsy. Epilepsia 1992;33:1137-14.
20. Bonneton J, Iliadis A, Genton P, Dravet C, Viallat D, Mesdjian E. Steady state pharmacokinetics of conventional versus controlled- release carbamazepine in patients with epilepsy. Epilepsy Res 1993;14:257-63.
21. The Tegretol Oros Osmotic Release Delivery System Study Group. Double-blind crossover comparison of Tegretol-XR and Tegretol in patients with epilepsy. Neurology 1995;45:1703-7.
22. Bialer M, Cloyd JC. Drug formulations and routes of administration. In: Levy RH, Mattson RH, Meldrum BS, eds. Antiepileptic drugs. 4th ed. New York: Raven Press, 1995:161-78.
23. Theodore WH, Narang PK, Holmes MD, Reeves P, Nice FJ. Carbamazepine and its epoxide: relation of plasma levels to toxicity and seizure control. Ann Neural 1989;25:194-6.
24. Riva R, Contin M, Albani F, et al. Lateral gaze nystagmus in carbamazepine treated epileptic patients: correlation with total and free plasma concentrations of parent drug and its 10,11-epoxide metabolite. Ther Drug Monit 1985;187:277-82.
25. Tomson T. Interdosage fluctuations in plasma carbamazepine concentration determine intermittent side effects. Arch Neurol 1986; 41:830-4.
26. Bialer M, Levy RH, Perucca E. Does carbamazepine have a narrow therapeutic plasma concentration range? Ther Drug Monit 1998;20:56-9.
27. Steinijans VW, Hauschke D, Jonkman JHG. Controversies in bioequivalence studies. Clin Pharmacokinet 1992;22:247-53.
28. Ahr G, Shaefer HG. Design and pharmacokinetic characteristics of controlled/modified release products. In: Blume H, Gundert-Remy U, Möller H, eds. Controlled/modified release products. Stuttgart: Wissenschaftliche Verlagsgesellschaft, 1991:85-98.
29. Steinijans VW, Pharmacokinetic characterization of controlled release formulations. Eur J Drug Metab Pharmacokinet 1991;15: 173-81.
30. Schulz H-U, Steinijans VW. Striving for standards in bioequivalence assessment: a review. Int J Clin Pharmacol Ther Toxicol 1991;29:293-8.
31. Steinijans VW. Hauchke D. Statistical analysis of bioequivalence studies, Int J Clin Pharmacol Ther Toxicol 1992;30(suppl 1):S45- 50.
32. Jackson AJ, Chen M-L. Application of moment analysis in assessing rates of absorption for bioequivalency studies. J Pharm Sci 1987;76:6-9.
33. Schall R, Luus HG. Comparison of absorption rates in bioequivalence studies of immediate release drug formulations. Int J Clin Pharmacol Ther Toxicol 1992;30:153-9.
34. Endrenyi L, Fritsch S, Van W. C(max)/AUC is a clearer measure than C(max) for absorption rates in investigation of bioequivalence. Int J Clin Pharmacol Ther Toxicol 1991;29:394-9.
35. Endrenyi L, Van W. Variation of C(max) and C(max)/AUC in investigations of bioequivalence. Int J Clin Pharmacol Ther Toxicol 1993;31:184-9.
36. Endrenyi L, Tothfalusi L. Secondary metrics for the assessments of bioequivalence. J Pharm Sci 1997;88:401-2.
37. Pollack PT, Freeman DJ, Carruthers SGJ. Mean apical concentration and duration in the comparative bioavailability of slowly absorbed and eliminated drug preparations. J Pharm Sci 1988;77: 477-80.
38. Hauschke D, Steinijans VW, Diletti E. A distribution free procedure for statistical analysis of bioequivalence studies. Int J Clin Pharmacol Ther Toxicol 1990;28:72-8.
39. Gibaldi M, Perrier D. Pharmacokinetics, 2nd ed. New York: Marcel Dekker, 1982.
40. Shapiro SS, Wilk MB. An analysis of variance test for normality. Biometrika 1965;52:591-611.
41. Studies on bioavailability and bioequivalence: APV guideline, international views of politics and science with contributions on development, manufacture, marketing, distribution and therapeutic use of drugs. APV: Mainz 1987;30:131-6.
42. SAS for personal computers, Ref 6.08, Cary, NC.
43. Midha KK, Hubbard JW, Rawson M, Gavalas L. The application of partial areas in assessment of rate and extent of absorption. Eur J Pharm Sci 1994;2:351-63.
44. max/AUC: a commentary. Pharm Res 1997;14:967-8.
45. Rostami-Hadjegan A. Jackson PR. Tucker, GTJ. Sensitivity of indirect metrics for assessing "rate" in bioequivalence: moving the "goalposts" or changing the "game." J Pharm Sci 1994;83: 1552-4.