Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37498474›Full record

ReviewThe AAPS journal2023

Biopharmaceutics Risk Assessment-Connecting Critical Bioavailability Attributes with In Vitro, In Vivo Properties and Physiologically Based Biopharmaceutics Modeling to Enable Generic Regulatory Submissions.

Tausif Ahmed, Sivacharan Kollipara, Rajkumar Boddu, Adithya Karthik Bhattiprolu

Abstract readReview
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in The AAPS journal, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 13 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
13citing 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

13 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors.

Tausif AhmedBiopharmaceutics Group, Global Clinical Management, Integrated Product Development Organization (IPDO), Dr. Reddy's Laboratories Ltd, Bachupally, Medchal Malkajgiri District, Hyderabad-500 090, Telangana, Hyderabad, India. tausifahmed@drreddys.com.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-6866-6691
Sivacharan KolliparaBiopharmaceutics Group, Global Clinical Management, Integrated Product Development Organization (IPDO), Dr. Reddy's Laboratories Ltd, Bachupally, Medchal Malkajgiri District, Hyderabad-500 090, Telangana, Hyderabad, India.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-7332-9021
Rajkumar BodduBiopharmaceutics Group, Global Clinical Management, Integrated Product Development Organization (IPDO), Dr. Reddy's Laboratories Ltd, Bachupally, Medchal Malkajgiri District, Hyderabad-500 090, Telangana, Hyderabad, India.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-8666-3643
Adithya Karthik BhattiproluBiopharmaceutics Group, Global Clinical Management, Integrated Product Development Organization (IPDO), Dr. Reddy's Laboratories Ltd, Bachupally, Medchal Malkajgiri District, Hyderabad-500 090, Telangana, Hyderabad, India.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-4618-6835

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Quality risk assessment following ICH Q9 principles is an important activity to ensure optimal clinical efficacy and safety of a drug product. Typically, risk assessment is focused on product performance wherein critical material attributes, formulation variables, and process parameters are evaluated from a manufacturing perspective. Extending ICH Q9 principles to biopharmaceutics risk assessment to identify factors that can impact in vivo performance is an upcoming area. This is evident by recent regulatory trends wherein a new term critical bioavailability attributes (CBA) has been coined to identify such factors. Although significant work has been performed for biopharmaceutics risk assessment for new molecules, there is a need for harmonized biopharmaceutics risk assessment workflow for generic submissions. In this manuscript, we attempted to provide a framework for performing biopharmaceutics risk assessment for generic regulatory submissions. A detailed workflow for performing biopharmaceutics risk assessment includes identification of initial CBA (iCBA), their confirmatory evaluation followed by definition of the control strategy. Tools for biopharmaceutics risk assessment, i.e., bio-discriminatory dissolution method and physiologically based biopharmaceutics modeling (PBBM) were discussed from a practical perspective. Furthermore, a case study for CBA evaluation using PBBM modeling for an extended-release product for regulatory submission has been described using the proposed workflow. Finally, future directions of integrating CBA evaluation, biopharmaceutics risk assessment to the FDA Knowledge Aided Structured Assessment (KASA) initiative, the necessity of risk assessment templates, and knowledge sharing between industry and academia are discussed. Overall, the work described in this manuscript can facilitate and provide guidance for biopharmaceutics risk assessment for generic submissions.

Indexed as

BiopharmaceuticsDrugs, GenericTherapeutic EquivalencyBiological AvailabilityGuidelines as TopicRisk AssessmentDrugs, GenericBiopharmaceutics risk assessmentCBADiscriminatory dissolution methodICH Q9KASAPBBM

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.