Generic substitution: A need for clarification

British Journal of Clinical Pharmacology

Volumn 71, Issue 6, 2011, Pages 966-967

  Peterson, Gregory M ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF TASMANIA   (Australia)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

GENERIC DRUG;

BIOEQUIVALENCE; DRUG ABSORPTION; DRUG FORMULATION; DRUG SUBSTITUTION; LETTER; PRIORITY JOURNAL;

COST-BENEFIT ANALYSIS; DRUG UTILIZATION; DRUGS, GENERIC; HUMANS; PATIENT SATISFACTION; THERAPEUTIC EQUIVALENCY;

EID: 79955846521     PISSN: 03065251     EISSN: 13652125     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1111/j.1365-2125.2010.03872.x     Document Type: Letter

References (9)

1. Duerden MG, Hughes DA. Generic and therapeutic substitutions in the UK: are they a good thing? Br J Clin Pharmacol 2010; 70: 335-41.
2. Sankar R, Glauser TA. Understanding therapeutic equivalence in epilepsy. CNS Spectr 2010; 15: 112-23.
3. Birkett DJ. Generics - equal or not? Aust Prescr 2003; 26: 85-7.
4. Pearce GA, McLachlan AJ, Ramzan I. Bioequivalence: how, why, and what does it really mean? J Pharm Pract Res 2004; 34: 195-200.
5. McLachlan AJ, Ramzan I, Milne RW. Frequently asked questions about generic medicines. Aust Prescr 2007; 30: 41-3.
6. Henney JE. From the Food and Drug Administration. Review of generic bioequivalence studies. JAMA 1999; 282: 1995.
7. Davit BM, Nwakama PE, Buehler GJ, Conner DP, Haidar SH, Patel DT, Yang Y, Yu LX, Woodcock J. Comparing generic and innovator drugs: a review of 12 years of bioequivalence data from the United States Food and Drug Administration. Ann Pharmacother 2009; 43: 1583-97.
8. McLachlan AJ. Generic medicines literacy - minimising the potential for patient confusion. Med J Aust 2010; 192: 368-9.
9. Ramzan I. Bioavailability, bioequivalence, generics and switching or substitution: Science, emotion and vested interests. J Pharm Pract Res 2010; 40: 90-1.