Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30536659›Full record

ArticleBritish journal of clinical pharmacology2019

Sex-by-formulation interaction in bioequivalence studies: the importance of formulations and experimental conditions.

Manuel Ibarra, Marta Vázquez, Pietro Fagiolino

Abstract readLetterComment
In one paragraph

Article in British journal of clinical pharmacology, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing 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

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors.

Manuel IbarraPharmaceutical Sciences Department - Faculty of Chemistry, Bioavailability and Bioequivalence Centre for Medicine Evaluation (CEBIOBE) - Universidad de la República, Uruguay.ORCID 0000-0002-0484-6367
Marta VázquezPharmaceutical Sciences Department - Faculty of Chemistry, Bioavailability and Bioequivalence Centre for Medicine Evaluation (CEBIOBE) - Universidad de la República, Uruguay.
Pietro FagiolinoPharmaceutical Sciences Department - Faculty of Chemistry, Bioavailability and Bioequivalence Centre for Medicine Evaluation (CEBIOBE) - Universidad de la República, Uruguay.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

In a recently published investigation, the authors argued against the likelihood of sex-based subject-by-formulation interactions in bioequivalence studies, i.e. male and female subjects exhibiting different discriminatory potential to detect bioavailability differences between formulations. The researchers performed a strong methodological study showing the increased probability of false-positive findings in exploratory subgroup analysis, a well-known and documented statistical issue. Indeed, the main limitation of assessing a sex-by-formulation interaction in average bioequivalence studies lies in the fact that these clinical trials are not designed for this purpose. In this commentary, we further discuss on why the impact of sex differences in gastrointestinal physiology over in vivo drug dissolution and absorption rate cannot remain hidden behind statistical limitations, particularly when average bioequivalence conclusions could be affected. Regulatory agencies should encourage and support these important issues related to biopharmaceutical quality of drug products in both sexes. In addition, a sex-based analysis of bioequivalence results will enhance the representativeness of conclusions and provide important information regarding formulation performance, thereby promoting the efficacy and safety of generic drugs and reducing consumer risk. The extrapolation of study conclusions from one sex to another is far away from being scientifically proven.

Indexed as

BenzoxazinesAlkynesBiological AvailabilityCyclopropanesFemaleHumansMaleTabletsTherapeutic EquivalencyAlkynesBenzoxazinesCyclopropanesefavirenzTablets

Identifiers

PMID30536659
PMCPMC6422648

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.