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.

Generic pharmaceuticals, regulatory aspects, bioequivalence investigation, and perception

Bioequivalence of racemic drugs

Determining Equivalence for Generic Locally Acting Drug Products

COMPARISON BETWEEN GENERIC DRUGS AND BRAND NAME DRUGS FROM BIOEQUIVALENCE AND THERMOEQUIVALENCE PROSPECTIVE

The Implications of Regulatory Framework for Topical Semisolid Drug Products: From Critical Quality and Performance Attributes towards Establishing Bioequivalence

Assessment of the differences between generic and biosimilar drugs: A brief literature review

Bioequivalence, Drugs with Narrow Therapeutic Index and The Phenomenon of Biocreep: A Critical Analysis of the System for Generic Substitution

Knowledge and Perceptions of Generic Drugs: A Cross Sectional Study

A Bioequivalence Approach for Generic Narrow Therapeutic Index Drugs: Evaluation of the Reference-Scaled Approach and Variability Comparison Criterion

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

The New European Medicines Agency Guideline on the Investigation of Bioequivalence

Generic Drug Development and Current Scenario

Pharmacists' perceptions of generic drugs in China

Update on the advances and challenges in bioequivalence testing methods for complex topical generic products

Generics 2030: Where Are We Heading in 2030 for Generic Drug Science, Research, and Regulation?

Addressing the Regulatory and Scientific Challenges with Generic Orally Inhaled Drug Products

The bioequivalence study design recommendations for immediate-release solid oral dosage forms in the international pharmaceutical regulators programme participating regulators and organisations: differences and commonalities

Public Workshop Summary Report on Fiscal Year 2021 Generic Drug Regulatory Science Initiatives: Data Analysis and Model‐Based Bioequivalence

Attitude and Purchase Intention to Generic Drugs

A Regulatory Perspective on Biosimilar Medicines

[Generic medicinal products: if you know them, you do not avoid them]