ReviewEuropean journal of drug metabolism and pharmacokinetics2022
Interchangeability between Generic and Reference Products: Limits of Average Bioequivalence Methodology.
Review in European journal of drug metabolism and pharmacokinetics, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
6 citing papers in PubMed.
- Narrow Therapeutic Index Drugs: Regulatory Frameworks, Bioequivalence, and Model-Informed Precision Dosing.Pharmaceutics · 2026Review
- Reverse Engineering of Branded Mesalamine Prolonged Release Granules for Synthesis of QTPP and FMEA: A Systematic Approach for Oral Complex Generic Product Development.AAPS PharmSciTech · 2026Article
- Sleep Medicine-What's in a Name?Journal of sleep research · 2025Review
- Within-subject pharmacokinetic variability has a strong influence on individual exposure ratios in bioequivalence studies, hence on drug formulation interchangeability.European journal of clinical pharmacology · 2023Article
- Response to Comment on "Interchangeability Between Generic and Reference Products: Limits of Average Bioequivalence Methodology".European journal of drug metabolism and pharmacokinetics · 2023Article
- Comment on "Interchangeability between Generic and Reference Products: Limits of Average Bioequivalence Methodology".European journal of drug metabolism and pharmacokinetics · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
- Commented on by
Authors and funding
1 author.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Marketing authorisation of generic drugs is based on a demonstration of the "average" bioequivalence (ABE), with acceptance limits of 0.8-1.25 for the 90% confidence interval (CI) of the ratio (generic versus reference) of geometric means of exposure (whole blood, serum or plasma drug concentration). However, when interchangeability of reference by one generic is considered during treatment of a given patient, such methodology cannot guarantee the lack of therapeutic impact especially for drugs with narrow therapeutic index. This review article describes the basis and limits of ABE methodology, and the adaptations that have been proposed by regulatory agencies. For highly variable drugs, given their large therapeutic margin, regulatory agencies even allow widening of the bioequivalence acceptance limits. For drugs with a narrow therapeutic index, the average bioequivalence methodology has been amended differently by regulatory agencies. The European Medicine Agency only requires the narrowing of the ABE acceptance limits to the 0.9-1.10 range. The US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) has proposed to narrow the ABE acceptance limits according to the reference within-subject variance. The FDA requires a fully replicate cross-over study (with four periods) which allows one to compare the within-subject variance between generic and reference drug, and to detect any subject-by-formulation interaction. Indeed, any within-subject variance difference or subject by formulation interaction is an obstacle to interchangeability at the individual level. These amendments for the ABE do not fundamentally change the fact that individual ratios of exposure (generic/reference) will vary to a larger extent than the ratio of their means. For these reasons, since true individual bioequivalence studies cannot be performed for practical reasons and statistical issues, one can suggest that, in addition to the usual average bioequivalence criteria, the limits of the 95% confidence interval of the individual generic/reference exposure ratios could be used to allow interchangeability during treatment (at least for narrow therapeutic index drugs). Limit values of such CI for interchangeability acceptance should be scaled to the therapeutic margin of the reference drug. Regulatory agencies could conduct calculations based on real datasets of bioequivalence studies to determine if such criteria could be acceptable to allow interchangeability.
Indexed as
Identifiers
35986193What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.