Evidence map›Paper›PMID 27334605›Full record

ArticleInternational ophthalmology2017

Evaluation of physical properties and dose equivalency of generic versus branded latanoprost formulations.

Dewang Angmo, Meenakshi Wadhwani, Thirumurthy Velpandian, Ankita Kotnal, Ramanjit Sihota, Tanuj Dada

Erratum issuedAbstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in International ophthalmology, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Cited by 6 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

6 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Trial
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors.

Dewang AngmoGlaucoma Research Facility and Clinical Services, Dr Rajendra Prasad Centre for Ophthalmic Sciences, All India Institute of Medical Sciences, New Delhi, 110029, India.
Meenakshi WadhwaniGlaucoma Research Facility and Clinical Services, Dr Rajendra Prasad Centre for Ophthalmic Sciences, All India Institute of Medical Sciences, New Delhi, 110029, India.
Thirumurthy VelpandianOcular Pharmacology, Dr Rajendra Prasad Centre for Ophthalmic Sciences, All India Institute of Medical Sciences, New Delhi, 110029, India.
Ankita KotnalOcular Pharmacology, Dr Rajendra Prasad Centre for Ophthalmic Sciences, All India Institute of Medical Sciences, New Delhi, 110029, India.
Ramanjit SihotaGlaucoma Research Facility and Clinical Services, Dr Rajendra Prasad Centre for Ophthalmic Sciences, All India Institute of Medical Sciences, New Delhi, 110029, India.
Tanuj DadaGlaucoma Research Facility and Clinical Services, Dr Rajendra Prasad Centre for Ophthalmic Sciences, All India Institute of Medical Sciences, New Delhi, 110029, India. tanujdada@gmail.com.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The purpose of this study was to comparatively evaluate the pharmaceutical characteristics of various marketed generic formulations of prostaglandin analogue latanoprost in the Indian market. Three generics of latanoprost and one branded (Xalatan) formulation (five vials each) were obtained from authorized agents from the respective commercial sourcing having the same batch number. These formulations were coded, and the labels were removed. At a standardized room temperature of 25 °C, the concentration, osmolarity, drop size, pH, and total drops per vial were determined for Xalatan and all the generics of latanoprost. The concentration of various brands varied between 50.49 ± 0.36 and 58.90 ± 0.52 µg/ml as compared to the standard labeled concentration of 50 µg/ml on the latanoprost vials. The concentration of drugs in individual drop varied from 1.30 ± 0.05 to 1.78 ± 0.04 µg/drop. The volume of drug formulation per bottle varied from 2.4 ± 0.12 to 2.6 ± 0.09 ml/bottle. The number of drops per bottle varied from minimum of 88.60 ± 0.10 drops to maximum of 102.0 ± 4.3 drops across all the formulations, while the drop size varied from 25.72 ± 2.70 to 29.97 ± 1.38 µl. The osmolarity of 2/4 drugs was within 300 mOs M (±10 %). The specific gravity varied between 0.98 ± 0.01 and 1.007 ± 0.01, while pH was between 7.05 ± 0.004 and 7.13 ± 0.005. Two of the generic brands were outside the United States pharmacopoeia limits (±10%) for ophthalmic formulation, with concentration exceeding the limits by 3 % (p = 0.151) and 8 % (p = 0.008), respectively. This pilot study highlights that there are significant variations in the drug concentrations and physical properties of generic latanoprost formulations. Although none of the brands had concentrations below the recommended level, two of the brands had concentrations exceeding the limits by 3 and 8 %, respectively.

Indexed as

Drugs, GenericAntihypertensive AgentsChemistry, PharmaceuticalDrug StabilityGlaucomaHumansIntraocular PressureLatanoprostOcular HypertensionOphthalmic SolutionsPilot ProjectsProstaglandins F, SyntheticAntihypertensive AgentsDrugs, GenericLatanoprostOphthalmic SolutionsProstaglandins F, SyntheticBranded drugsGeneric drugsLatanoprostProstaglandin analogues

Identifiers

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.