日本外用皮肤病仿制药生物等效性评价规定。

IF 2.4 4区 医学 Q3 PHARMACOLOGY & PHARMACY
Miho Kasuga, Kimika Kuwana, Ryosuke Kuribayashi
{"title":"日本外用皮肤病仿制药生物等效性评价规定。","authors":"Miho Kasuga, Kimika Kuwana, Ryosuke Kuribayashi","doi":"10.1007/s13318-025-00952-5","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background and objective: </strong>In Japan, the \"Guideline for Bioequivalence (BE) Studies of Generic Products for Topical Use\" was issued in 2003 to present the basic principles for BE evaluation methods for generic topical dermatological drug products. However, a detailed analysis of trends in BE evaluation methods in Japan has not yet been reported. In addition, a detailed comparison of the BE evaluation methods used at the Pharmaceuticals and Medical Devices Agency (PMDA), the US Food and Drug Administration (US FDA), and the European Medicines Agency (EMA) has also not been performed.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We surveyed BE evaluation methods for generic topical dermatological drug products in Japan based on the PMDA website from 2000 to 2023. We also compiled the latest guideline information for the PMDA, US FDA, and EMA.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Before the guideline was issued from 2000 to 2003, most generic topical dermatological drug products were evaluated using pharmacological tests in animals. After the guideline was issued in 2003, dermato-pharmacokinetic studies have become the main method for BE evaluation other than antiseptics in Japan. The greatest difference between the US FDA and EMA versus current Japanese regulations was the introduction of a biowaiver approach based on Q1/Q2 and Q3 similarities and in vitro test equivalence.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>This finding confirmed that the publication of the guideline significantly influenced the BE evaluation methods for topical dermatological drug products in Japan. Furthermore, Japan may consider a biowaiver approach based on Q1/Q2 and Q3 similarity and in vitro test equivalence.</p>","PeriodicalId":11939,"journal":{"name":"European Journal of Drug Metabolism and Pharmacokinetics","volume":" ","pages":"353-361"},"PeriodicalIF":2.4000,"publicationDate":"2025-07-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Regulation for the Bioequivalence Evaluation of Generic Topical Dermatological Drug Products in Japan.\",\"authors\":\"Miho Kasuga, Kimika Kuwana, Ryosuke Kuribayashi\",\"doi\":\"10.1007/s13318-025-00952-5\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background and objective: </strong>In Japan, the \\\"Guideline for Bioequivalence (BE) Studies of Generic Products for Topical Use\\\" was issued in 2003 to present the basic principles for BE evaluation methods for generic topical dermatological drug products. However, a detailed analysis of trends in BE evaluation methods in Japan has not yet been reported. In addition, a detailed comparison of the BE evaluation methods used at the Pharmaceuticals and Medical Devices Agency (PMDA), the US Food and Drug Administration (US FDA), and the European Medicines Agency (EMA) has also not been performed.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We surveyed BE evaluation methods for generic topical dermatological drug products in Japan based on the PMDA website from 2000 to 2023. We also compiled the latest guideline information for the PMDA, US FDA, and EMA.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Before the guideline was issued from 2000 to 2003, most generic topical dermatological drug products were evaluated using pharmacological tests in animals. After the guideline was issued in 2003, dermato-pharmacokinetic studies have become the main method for BE evaluation other than antiseptics in Japan. The greatest difference between the US FDA and EMA versus current Japanese regulations was the introduction of a biowaiver approach based on Q1/Q2 and Q3 similarities and in vitro test equivalence.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>This finding confirmed that the publication of the guideline significantly influenced the BE evaluation methods for topical dermatological drug products in Japan. Furthermore, Japan may consider a biowaiver approach based on Q1/Q2 and Q3 similarity and in vitro test equivalence.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":11939,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"European Journal of Drug Metabolism and Pharmacokinetics\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"353-361\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.4000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-07-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"European Journal of Drug Metabolism and Pharmacokinetics\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1007/s13318-025-00952-5\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2025/6/9 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"PHARMACOLOGY & PHARMACY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"European Journal of Drug Metabolism and Pharmacokinetics","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s13318-025-00952-5","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2025/6/9 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"PHARMACOLOGY & PHARMACY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景与目的:日本于2003年颁布了《外用仿制药生物等效性研究指南》,提出了皮肤外用仿制药生物等效性评价方法的基本原则。然而,关于日本BE评价方法发展趋势的详细分析尚未见报道。此外,还没有对药品和医疗器械管理局(PMDA)、美国食品和药物管理局(FDA)和欧洲药品管理局(EMA)使用的BE评估方法进行详细比较。方法:基于PMDA网站,对2000 - 2023年日本外用皮肤科仿制药的BE评价方法进行调查。我们还为PMDA、美国FDA和EMA编制了最新的指南信息。结果:在该指南于2000年至2003年发布之前,大多数非专利皮肤局部用药产品都是通过动物药理试验进行评估的。该指南于2003年发布后,皮肤药代动力学研究已成为日本除防腐剂以外的主要BE评价方法。美国FDA和EMA与当前日本法规的最大区别是引入了基于Q1/Q2和Q3相似性和体外测试等效性的生物豁免方法。结论:这一发现证实了该指南的发布显著影响了日本皮肤外用药品的BE评价方法。此外,日本可能会考虑基于Q1/Q2和Q3相似性和体外测试等效性的生物豁免方法。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Regulation for the Bioequivalence Evaluation of Generic Topical Dermatological Drug Products in Japan.

Background and objective: In Japan, the "Guideline for Bioequivalence (BE) Studies of Generic Products for Topical Use" was issued in 2003 to present the basic principles for BE evaluation methods for generic topical dermatological drug products. However, a detailed analysis of trends in BE evaluation methods in Japan has not yet been reported. In addition, a detailed comparison of the BE evaluation methods used at the Pharmaceuticals and Medical Devices Agency (PMDA), the US Food and Drug Administration (US FDA), and the European Medicines Agency (EMA) has also not been performed.

Methods: We surveyed BE evaluation methods for generic topical dermatological drug products in Japan based on the PMDA website from 2000 to 2023. We also compiled the latest guideline information for the PMDA, US FDA, and EMA.

Results: Before the guideline was issued from 2000 to 2003, most generic topical dermatological drug products were evaluated using pharmacological tests in animals. After the guideline was issued in 2003, dermato-pharmacokinetic studies have become the main method for BE evaluation other than antiseptics in Japan. The greatest difference between the US FDA and EMA versus current Japanese regulations was the introduction of a biowaiver approach based on Q1/Q2 and Q3 similarities and in vitro test equivalence.

Conclusion: This finding confirmed that the publication of the guideline significantly influenced the BE evaluation methods for topical dermatological drug products in Japan. Furthermore, Japan may consider a biowaiver approach based on Q1/Q2 and Q3 similarity and in vitro test equivalence.

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
3.70
自引率
0.00%
发文量
64
审稿时长
>12 weeks
期刊介绍: Hepatology International is a peer-reviewed journal featuring articles written by clinicians, clinical researchers and basic scientists is dedicated to research and patient care issues in hepatology. This journal focuses mainly on new and emerging diagnostic and treatment options, protocols and molecular and cellular basis of disease pathogenesis, new technologies, in liver and biliary sciences. Hepatology International publishes original research articles related to clinical care and basic research; review articles; consensus guidelines for diagnosis and treatment; invited editorials, and controversies in contemporary issues. The journal does not publish case reports.
×
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:604180095
Book学术官方微信