Conference report: Bio-International 2005

Journal of Pharmaceutical Sciences

Volumn 96, Issue 4, 2007, Pages 747-754

  Midha, Kamal K ^a,b   Shah, Vinod P ^c   Singh, Gur Jai Pal ^d,e   Patnaik, Rabi ^e  

^a UNIVERSITY OF SASKATCHEWAN   (Canada)

^b Pharmalytics Inc   (Canada)

^c International Pharmaceutical Federation (FIP) Scientific Secretary   (United States)

^d CENTER FOR DRUG EVALUATION AND RESEARCH   (United States)

^e Watson Laboratories   (United States)

Author keywords

Bioavailability; Bioequivalence; Biopharmaceutics classification system; Regulatory science; Transdermal

Indexed keywords

BETA ADRENERGIC RECEPTOR STIMULATING AGENT; CORTICOSTEROID; HORMONE;

BIOAVAILABILITY; BIOEQUIVALENCE; CONFERENCE PAPER; DRUG RESEARCH; FOOD AND DRUG ADMINISTRATION; MEDICAL LITERATURE; MEDICAL SOCIETY; METABOLITE; METERED DOSE INHALER; UNITED KINGDOM; WORLD HEALTH ORGANIZATION;

EID: 34247517850     PISSN: 00223549     EISSN: 15206017     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1002/jps.20786     Document Type: Conference Paper

References (37)

1. Conner DP, Davit B. 2005. Bioequivalence and drug product assessment, in vivo. In: Shargel L, Kanfer I, editors. Generic drug product development: Solid oral dosage forms. New York: Marcel Dekker, pp 227-255.
2. Shah VP, Flynn GL, Yacobi A, Maibach HI, Bon C, Fleischer NM, Franz TJ, Kaplan SA, Kawamoto J, Lesko LJ, Marty JP, Pershing LK, Schaefer H, Sequeira JA, Shrivastava SP, Wilkins J, Williams RL. 1998. Bioequivalence of topical dermatological dosage forms. Methods of evaluation of bioequivalence. Pharm Res 15:167-171.
3. Benfeldt B, Growth G. 1998. Feasibility of measuring lipophilic or protein-bound drugs in the dermis by in vivo microdialysis after topical or systemic drug administration. Acta Derm Venereol 78:274-278.
4. Shah VP. 2001. Progress in methodologies for evaluating bioequivalence of topical formulations. Am J Clin Dermatol 2:275-280.
5. Pershing LK, Nelson JL, Corlett JL, Shrivastava SP, Hare DB, Shah VP. 2003. Assessment of dermatopharmacokinetic approach in bioequivalence determination of topical tretinoin gel products. J Am Acad Dermatol 48:740-751.
6. Alberti I, Kalia YN, Naik A, Bonny JD, Guy RH. 2001. Assessment and prediction of the cutaneous bioavailability of topical terbinafine in vivo. Pharm Res 18:1472-1475.
7. Alberti I, Kalia YN, Naik A, Bonny JD, Guy RH. 2001. Effect of ethanol and isopropyl myristate on the availability of topical terbinafine in human stratum corneum, in vivo. Int J Pharm 219:11-19.
8. Weigmann HJ, Lademann J, Schaefer H, Sterry W. 1999. Determination of the horny layer profile by spectroscopy in the visible range as a prerequisite to quantify percutaneous absorption. Skin Pharmacol Appl Skin Physiol 12:34-45.
9. Shah VP. 2005. IV-IVC for topically applied preparations-a critical evaluation. Eur J Pharm Biopharm 60:309-314.
10. [21Code of Federal Regulation. 320.22(b) (3)]
11. Singh GJP. 2006. Evaluation of comparative performance of multisource locally acting inhalation aerosols and nasal sprays - An FDA Perspective. Am Pharm Rev (in press).
12. Singh GJP, Adams WP. 2005. US regulatory and scientific considerations for approval of generic locally acting orally inhaled and nasal drug products. In: Dalby RN, Byron P, Peart J, Suman JD, editors. Respiratory drug delivery. A regulatory and analytical symposium. Richmond, VA: Virginia Commonwealth University, pp 115-125.
13. Guidance for the in-vivo bioequivalence studies of metaproterenol sulfate and albuterol inhalation aerosols (metered dose inhalers). 1989. Division of Bioequivalence, Food and Drug Administration, Rockville, Maryland.
14. Interim guidance for documentation of in vivo bioequivalence of albuterol inhalation aerosols (metered dose inhalers). 1994. Office of generic drugs, US food and drug administration, Rockville, Maryland.
15. Pauwels RA, Lofdahl CG, Postma DS, Tatterfield AE, O'Byrne P, Barnes PJ, Ullman A. 1997. Effect of inhaled formoterol and budesonide on exacerbation of asthma. Fermoterol and Corticosteroid Establishing Therapy (FACET) International Study Group. New Engl J Med 337:1405-1411.
16. Guidance for Industry (Draft): Bioavailability and bioequivalence studies for nasal aerosols and nasal sprays for local action. 2003. Center for drug evaluation and research, US food and drug administration, Rockville, Maryland, www.fda.gov/cder/guidance/5383DFT.
17. Ahrens RC, Teresi ME, Han S-H, Donne D, Vanden Burgt JA, Lux CR. 2001. Asthma stability after oral prednisone-A clinical model for comparing inhaled corticosteroid potency. Am J Respir Crit Care Med 164:1138-1145.
18. Ahrens RC, Hendeles L, Teresi ME, Lux CR, Vanden Burgt JA, Hart KA, Ekholm BP. 2003. Relative potency of beclomethasone dipropionate (BDP) delivered by HFA-MDI, and fluticasone propionate (FP) delivered by Diskus. Eur Respir J 22:1576.
19. Smith IJ, Parry-Billing M. 2003. The inhalers of the future? A review of dry powder devices on the market. Pulmon Pharmacol Therap 16:79-95.
20. Crompton G. 1982. Problems patients have using pressurized aerosol inhalers. Eur J Respir Dis 119:101-104.
21. Larsen J, Hahn M, Elkholm B, Wick K. 1994. Evaluation of conventional press-and-breath metered-dose inhaler techniques in 501 patients. J Asthma 31:193-199.
22. Dunbar CA, Hickey AJ, Holzner P. 1998. Dispersion and characterization of pharmaceutical dry powder aerosols. KONA 16:7-14.
23. Guidance for Industry (Draft): Metered dose inhaler (MDI) and dry powder inhaler (DPI) drug products: CMC, manufacturing and control documentation. 1998. Center for drug evaluation and research, US Food and Drug Administration, Rockville, Maryland.
24. Blume HH, Midha KK. 1993. Bio-International 1992, Conference on bioavailability, bioequivalence, and pharmacokinetics studies. J Pharm Sci 82:1186-1189.
25. Midha KK, Rawson MJ, Hubbard JW. 2005. The bioequivalence of highly variable drugs and drug products. Int J Clin Pharmcol Ther 43:485-598.
26. Tothfalusi L, Endrenyi L, Midha KK, Rawson MJ, Hubbard JW. 2001. Evaluation of bioequivalence of highly variable drugs. Pharm Res 18:728-733.
27. max. Int J Clin Pharmacol Therap 41:217-225.
28. Tothfalusi L, Endrenyi L. 2003. Limits for scaled average bioequivalence of highly variable drugs and drug products. Pharm Res 20:382-389.
29. Chen ML, Jackson AJ. 1991. The role of metabolite in bioequivalency assessment. I. Linear pharmacokinetics without first-pass effect. Pharm Res 8:25-32.
30. Tucker GT, Rostami A, Jackson PR. 1993. Metabolite measurement in bioequivalence studies: Theoretical considerations. In: Midha KK, Blume H, editors. Bio-International: Bioavailability, Bioequivalence and Pharmacokinetics. International Conference of FIP. "Bio-International '92" held in Bad Homburg, Germany, May 20-23, 1992. Stuttgart: Medpharm Scientific Publishers, pp 163-170.
31. Jackson AJ. 2000. The role of metabolites in bioequivalency assessment. III. Highly variable drugs with linear kinetics and first-pass effect. Pharm Res 17:1432-1436.
32. Midha KK, Rawson MJ, Hubbard JW. 2004. Commentary: The role of metabolites in bioequivalence. Pharm Res 21:1331-1334.
33. Gibaldi M, Boyes RN, Feldman S. 1971. Influence of first-pass effect on availability of drugs on oral administration. J Pharm Sci 60:1338-1340.
34. Amidon GL, Lennernas H, Shah VP, Crison JR. 1995. A theoretical basis for a biopharmaceutic drug classification. The correlation of in vitro drug product dissolution and in vivo bioavailability. Pharm Res 12:413-420.
35. Guidance for Industry: Waiver of in vivo bioavailability and bioequivalence studies for immediate-release dosage forms based on biopharmaceutics classification system. 2000. Center for drug evaluation and research, US Food and Drug Administration, Rockville, Maryland.
36. Wu C-Y, Benet LZ. 2005. Predicting drug disposition via application of BCS. Transport/absorption/elimination interplay and development of a biopharmaceutics drug disposition classification system. Pharm Res 22:11-23.
37. WHO Working Document QAS/04.093. 2005.