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.

Consideration about the maximum concentration confidence interval limits in the assessment of bioequivalence

Study on bioequivalence of cilostazol table in healthy volunteers

Use of Partial Area Under the Curve in Bioavailability or Bioequivalence Assessments: A Regulatory Perspective

Efficient model-based bioequivalence testing

Opinions and suggestions of bioequivalent studies on modified new drugs

Considerations on the repeated bioequivalence studies in control of the type I error

The Role of Partial Area Under the Curve and Maximum Concentrations in Assessing the Bioequivalence of Long-acting Injectable Formulation of Exenatide_A Sensitivity Analysis

Discussion on the problems and strategies in bioequivalence tests of drug preparations

A Two-Way Proposal for the Determination of Bioequivalence for Narrow Therapeutic Index Drugs in the European Union

Interchangeability between Generic and Reference Products: Limits of Average Bioequivalence Methodology

An Explanation of Why Dose-Corrected Area Under the Curve for Alternate Administration Routes Can Be Greater than for Intravenous Dosing

Checking distributional assumptions for pharmacokinetic summary statistics based on simulations with compartmental models

Power Analysis and Sample Size Determination for Crossover Trials with Application to Bioequivalence Assessment of Topical Ophthalmic Drugs Using Serial Sampling Pharmacokinetic Data

Exploring various measures of the area under the curve for the assessment of dose-proportionality and estimation of bioavailability

Bridging Continual Reassessment Method for Phase I Clinical Trials in Different Ethnic Populations

Comparative Analyses of Bioequivalence Assessment Methods for In Vitro Permeation Test Data

Consideration on the bioequivalence study of imatinib mesylate oral products

On modelling of bioavailability of drugs in terms of conservation laws

Comparison between two different bioequivalence designs with within-subject variation around 30％

Individual Bioequivalence Testing under 2×3 Designs

Bioeguivalent Study of Two Fluconazole Capsules in Human Plasma