Bioanalytical approaches, bioavailability assessment, and bioequivalence study for waiver drugs: In vivo and in vitro perspective

M. Faiyazuddin, Sarfaraz Ahmad, G. Mustafa, F. Ahmad, F. Shakeel
{"title":"Bioanalytical approaches, bioavailability assessment, and bioequivalence study for waiver drugs: In vivo and in vitro perspective","authors":"M. Faiyazuddin, Sarfaraz Ahmad, G. Mustafa, F. Ahmad, F. Shakeel","doi":"10.3109/10601331003698517","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Evidence of differences in bioavailability from different oral formulations of the same therapeutic agents had become obvious by the early 1960s. The consequent 40 years have produced the body of scientific belief, debate, and policy on the subject of bioequivalence. The motivating force behind many of these events has been the continued interest of the food and drug administration (FDA) to improve the manner in which these studies are conducted, the quality of the data generated from such studies, and the methods by which they are evaluated. Bioanalytical data used to support regulatory submission needs to be accurate and reproducible. In order to have confidence in the reliability of the data, it is important that the analytical method used to generate it is well characterized and fully validated. However, bioavailability assessment (BA) and bioequivalence (BE) studies are necessary in filing of the data towards the drug approval. This review article describes the methods for assessing bioavailability and bioequivalence; and bioanalytical approaches of pharmaceuticals in vivo and in vitro and also a waiver of BA/BE studies based on the biopharmaceutical classification (BCS) system.","PeriodicalId":10446,"journal":{"name":"Clinical Research and Regulatory Affairs","volume":"28 1","pages":"32 - 41"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2010-05-18","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"3","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Clinical Research and Regulatory Affairs","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3109/10601331003698517","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 3

Abstract

Evidence of differences in bioavailability from different oral formulations of the same therapeutic agents had become obvious by the early 1960s. The consequent 40 years have produced the body of scientific belief, debate, and policy on the subject of bioequivalence. The motivating force behind many of these events has been the continued interest of the food and drug administration (FDA) to improve the manner in which these studies are conducted, the quality of the data generated from such studies, and the methods by which they are evaluated. Bioanalytical data used to support regulatory submission needs to be accurate and reproducible. In order to have confidence in the reliability of the data, it is important that the analytical method used to generate it is well characterized and fully validated. However, bioavailability assessment (BA) and bioequivalence (BE) studies are necessary in filing of the data towards the drug approval. This review article describes the methods for assessing bioavailability and bioequivalence; and bioanalytical approaches of pharmaceuticals in vivo and in vitro and also a waiver of BA/BE studies based on the biopharmaceutical classification (BCS) system.
豁免药物的生物分析方法、生物利用度评估和生物等效性研究:体内和体外视角
同一治疗剂的不同口服制剂的生物利用度差异的证据在20世纪60年代初已经变得明显。在随后的40年里,关于生物等效性的科学信仰、辩论和政策产生了大量的成果。许多此类事件背后的推动力一直是食品和药物管理局(FDA)对改进这些研究的进行方式、研究数据的质量以及评估方法的持续兴趣。用于支持监管提交的生物分析数据需要准确和可重复。为了对数据的可靠性有信心,重要的是用于生成数据的分析方法要有很好的特征和充分的验证。然而,生物利用度评估(BA)和生物等效性(BE)研究是向药物批准提交数据的必要条件。本文综述了生物利用度和生物等效性的评价方法;以及体内和体外药物的生物分析方法,以及基于生物制药分类(BCS)系统的BA/BE研究的豁免。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信