美国和欧盟《口服吸入药物产品比较效力和安全性确定指南》之间的区别和相似之处的相关性。

IF 4.3 3区 医学 Q1 PHARMACOLOGY & PHARMACY
Gur Jai Pal Singh
{"title":"美国和欧盟《口服吸入药物产品比较效力和安全性确定指南》之间的区别和相似之处的相关性。","authors":"Gur Jai Pal Singh","doi":"10.1016/j.ejps.2024.106872","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><p>Approval of drug products for market registration warrants, among other data, evidence to support their safety and effectiveness in the target populations. The extent of investigations to provide the supporting evidence varies between the new innovator products and their follow-on versions generally referred to as Generic Drugs Products in the United States and Hybrids in the Europe. The new drug applications entail large data sets encompassing both nonclinical and clinical product developments. Safety and effectiveness in man is studied in sequentially phased clinical trials, including post marketing evaluations (Where applicable). However, for the generic/hybrid products the safety and effectiveness are established through determination of bioequivalence in head-to-head comparison between the originator and the follow-ons. Methods for documentation of bioequivalence for drug products that reach target site(s) through systemic circulation are aligned worldwide. However, establishing bioequivalence of orally inhaled drug products is complex as drug delivery to the local site(s) of action is independent of the systemic circulation. Documentation of bioequivalence gets further complicated due to the Drug-Device combination nature of these products. The guidelines for establishment of BE of locally acting orally inhaled drugs products vary among certain geographies. This article examines the scientific underpinning of distinctions and similarities between the US and EU guidelines.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":12018,"journal":{"name":"European Journal of Pharmaceutical Sciences","volume":"201 ","pages":"Article 106872"},"PeriodicalIF":4.3000,"publicationDate":"2024-08-06","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0928098724001842/pdfft?md5=74c03199e7ed5af2bd20fff39f13d123&pid=1-s2.0-S0928098724001842-main.pdf","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Relevance of distinctions and parallels between the US and EU guidelines for determination of comparative effectiveness and safety of the orally inhaled drug products\",\"authors\":\"Gur Jai Pal Singh\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.ejps.2024.106872\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><p>Approval of drug products for market registration warrants, among other data, evidence to support their safety and effectiveness in the target populations. The extent of investigations to provide the supporting evidence varies between the new innovator products and their follow-on versions generally referred to as Generic Drugs Products in the United States and Hybrids in the Europe. The new drug applications entail large data sets encompassing both nonclinical and clinical product developments. Safety and effectiveness in man is studied in sequentially phased clinical trials, including post marketing evaluations (Where applicable). However, for the generic/hybrid products the safety and effectiveness are established through determination of bioequivalence in head-to-head comparison between the originator and the follow-ons. Methods for documentation of bioequivalence for drug products that reach target site(s) through systemic circulation are aligned worldwide. However, establishing bioequivalence of orally inhaled drug products is complex as drug delivery to the local site(s) of action is independent of the systemic circulation. Documentation of bioequivalence gets further complicated due to the Drug-Device combination nature of these products. The guidelines for establishment of BE of locally acting orally inhaled drugs products vary among certain geographies. This article examines the scientific underpinning of distinctions and similarities between the US and EU guidelines.</p></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":12018,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"European Journal of Pharmaceutical Sciences\",\"volume\":\"201 \",\"pages\":\"Article 106872\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":4.3000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-08-06\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0928098724001842/pdfft?md5=74c03199e7ed5af2bd20fff39f13d123&pid=1-s2.0-S0928098724001842-main.pdf\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"European Journal of Pharmaceutical Sciences\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0928098724001842\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"PHARMACOLOGY & PHARMACY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"European Journal of Pharmaceutical Sciences","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0928098724001842","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"PHARMACOLOGY & PHARMACY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

批准药品在市场上注册,除其他数据外,还需要有证据证明其在目标人群中的安全性和有效性。为提供支持性证据而进行的调查程度因创新产品及其后续版本(在美国一般称为非专利药产品,在欧洲称为混合药产品)而异。新药申请需要大量数据集,包括非临床和临床产品开发。对人体安全性和有效性的研究是在按顺序分阶段进行的临床试验中进行的,包括上市后评估(如适用)。不过,对于非专利药/混合产品,其安全性和有效性是通过对原研药和后续药进行头对头比较来确定生物等效性的。通过全身循环到达目标部位的药物产品的生物等效性记录方法在全球范围内是一致的。然而,口服吸入药物产品的生物等效性的建立非常复杂,因为药物在局部作用部位的给药与全身循环无关。由于这些产品具有药物-设备组合的性质,因此生物等效性的记录变得更加复杂。在某些地区,建立局部作用口服吸入药物产品生物等效性的指南也不尽相同。本文探讨了美国和欧盟指南之间差异和相似之处的科学依据。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。

Relevance of distinctions and parallels between the US and EU guidelines for determination of comparative effectiveness and safety of the orally inhaled drug products

Relevance of distinctions and parallels between the US and EU guidelines for determination of comparative effectiveness and safety of the orally inhaled drug products

Approval of drug products for market registration warrants, among other data, evidence to support their safety and effectiveness in the target populations. The extent of investigations to provide the supporting evidence varies between the new innovator products and their follow-on versions generally referred to as Generic Drugs Products in the United States and Hybrids in the Europe. The new drug applications entail large data sets encompassing both nonclinical and clinical product developments. Safety and effectiveness in man is studied in sequentially phased clinical trials, including post marketing evaluations (Where applicable). However, for the generic/hybrid products the safety and effectiveness are established through determination of bioequivalence in head-to-head comparison between the originator and the follow-ons. Methods for documentation of bioequivalence for drug products that reach target site(s) through systemic circulation are aligned worldwide. However, establishing bioequivalence of orally inhaled drug products is complex as drug delivery to the local site(s) of action is independent of the systemic circulation. Documentation of bioequivalence gets further complicated due to the Drug-Device combination nature of these products. The guidelines for establishment of BE of locally acting orally inhaled drugs products vary among certain geographies. This article examines the scientific underpinning of distinctions and similarities between the US and EU guidelines.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
9.60
自引率
2.20%
发文量
248
审稿时长
50 days
期刊介绍: The journal publishes research articles, review articles and scientific commentaries on all aspects of the pharmaceutical sciences with emphasis on conceptual novelty and scientific quality. The Editors welcome articles in this multidisciplinary field, with a focus on topics relevant for drug discovery and development. More specifically, the Journal publishes reports on medicinal chemistry, pharmacology, drug absorption and metabolism, pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics, pharmaceutical and biomedical analysis, drug delivery (including gene delivery), drug targeting, pharmaceutical technology, pharmaceutical biotechnology and clinical drug evaluation. The journal will typically not give priority to manuscripts focusing primarily on organic synthesis, natural products, adaptation of analytical approaches, or discussions pertaining to drug policy making. Scientific commentaries and review articles are generally by invitation only or by consent of the Editors. Proceedings of scientific meetings may be published as special issues or supplements to the Journal.
×
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