1
|
Elmer S, Reddy DS. Therapeutic Basis of Generic Substitution of Antiseizure Medications. J Pharmacol Exp Ther 2022; 381:188-196. [PMID: 35241634 PMCID: PMC9132097 DOI: 10.1124/jpet.121.000994] [Citation(s) in RCA: 4] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 10/27/2021] [Accepted: 02/25/2022] [Indexed: 11/22/2022] Open
Abstract
More than thirty antiseizure medications (ASMs) are available for treating epilepsy. ASMs differ in their potency and efficacy in controlling seizures by acting on diverse targets in the brain, often with variable pharmacokinetics. Moreover, nearly 30% of people with epilepsy have drug-resistant or intractable seizures. Generic substitution of ASMs is a complex issue. It is thought that frequent generic substitution in people with epilepsy may cause problems because the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) rules allow too much variability across products. The standard bioequivalence range (80% to 125%) appears too broad for many ASMs, especially those exhibiting little separation between therapeutic and toxic levels. Hence, sub-therapeutic concentration may lead to therapeutic failure with seizure recurrence, which could be life threatening. A supra-therapeutic level could result in adverse effects or compliance issues. There are reported issues with generic substitutions of phenytoin, topiramate, levetiracetam, carbamazepine, and lamotrigine. There is discussion in the epilepsy community about additional guidelines, including designation of generic ASMs as Narrow Therapeutic Index (NTI) drugs and how patient education plays a role in generic substitution. Overall, based on the published evidence on specific generic ASMs, FDA bioequivalence standards are not the cause of problems with generic ASM substitution. Rather, it is imperative that physicians and pharmacists provide adequate patient education on what to expect when switching to generic ASMs, including changes in medication shape and color. Another suggestion would be to consider that all ASMs be considered for inclusion in NTI class to prevent the clinical outcome issues associated with generic ASM switching. SIGNIFICANCE STATEMENT: There are critical aspects to consider when switching from a brand name antiseizure medication (ASM) when a generic becomes available or switching between generics. Generic ASMs are interchanged with little consideration of differences in therapeutic equivalence and other clinical factors. This article describes key issues on generic substitution of ASMs and highlights critical pharmacotherapeutic issues associated with generic ASMs.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Sarah Elmer
- Department of Neuroscience and Experimental Therapeutics, Texas A&M University Health Science Center College of Medicine, Bryan, Texas
| | - Doodipala Samba Reddy
- Department of Neuroscience and Experimental Therapeutics, Texas A&M University Health Science Center College of Medicine, Bryan, Texas
| |
Collapse
|
2
|
Effects of generic exchange of solid oral dosage forms in neurological disorders: a systematic review. Int J Clin Pharm 2020; 42:393-417. [PMID: 32274633 DOI: 10.1007/s11096-020-01023-2] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 10/09/2019] [Accepted: 03/30/2020] [Indexed: 10/24/2022]
Abstract
Background Generic drug exchange is common practice in most healthcare systems. While generics certainly contribute to economic savings, the altered drug formulation might be associated with potential therapeutic problems. Given the narrow therapeutic windows in neurologic indications, any detrimental effect on the therapy can lead to significant consequences. Aim of the review This review aims to investigate potential problems related to a switch from brand-name to generic or from generic to generic drug products in patients with neurologic diseases. Method The review was conducted following the PICO framework and the PRISMA guidelines. MEDLINE and Scopus databases were searched for articles published in English and German language between January 1, 1995 and October 17, 2018. Studies included in this review were randomized controlled studies, reviews, systematic reviews, overviews, cohort studies and case-control studies. Studies excluded were letters, comments, authors view, congress or seminar papers and studies with a focus on economic impact or costs. Results were synthesized qualitatively. The primary outcomes were pharmacokinetic parameters such as the area under the curve (AUC), the peak serum concentration (cmax) or the time at which cmax is observed (tmax). Results The search identified 67 studies with a great variety of endpoints and study designs. The leading indication was epilepsy. Two small RCTs were found on lamotrigine switch. Analysis of the other studies found no significant differences in pharmacokinetic parameters when switching to generic drugs. A more heterogeneous picture was revealed regarding hospitalizations, breakthrough seizures, failure of therapy, adherence and patient concerns. Conclusion While most reports were of poor quality, lamotrigine was the drug with the best available data. Summarizing the results of the available studies, pharmacokinetic parameters of antiepileptic drugs show low deviation. In contrast, data on clinical parameters are less consistent. Some studies found increased seizure frequencies and adverse-drug events, while others showed no complications. Adherence and patient satisfaction seemed to be impaired. In daily practice, generic exchange in epilepsy should be a carefully balanced decision, conducted with great caution. Further research is needed, especially regarding neurologic indications other than epilepsy.
Collapse
|
3
|
Atif M, Azeem M, Sarwar MR. Potential problems and recommendations regarding substitution of generic antiepileptic drugs: a systematic review of literature. SPRINGERPLUS 2016; 5:182. [PMID: 27026878 PMCID: PMC4766158 DOI: 10.1186/s40064-016-1824-2] [Citation(s) in RCA: 30] [Impact Index Per Article: 3.8] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 09/18/2015] [Accepted: 02/15/2016] [Indexed: 12/22/2022]
Abstract
Despite the availability of generic antiepileptic drugs (AEDs), still patients and neurologists hesitate to make a switch due to assorted reasons. The objectives of this review were to evaluate the risks associated with the generic substitution of AEDs. In this context, we also summarized the recommendations of various international societies to treat epileptic patients. We used a number of electronic databases to identify the relevant published studies which demonstrated the potential problems and recommendations regarding generic substitution of AEDs. Of 204 articles found initially, 153 were selected for additional review. Subsequently, 68 articles were finally selected. This review concluded that potential problems linked with the generic substitution of AEDs could be bioequivalence issues, failure of drug therapy, emergence of adverse events and increase in the frequency of seizures. The reasons could be the pharmacokinetics properties of AEDs and unique characteristics of some epilepsy patients. Consequently, the generic substitution of AEDs affects the successful treatment and quality of life of the patients. Various guidelines recommend the well-controlled epileptic patients to avoid switching from brand-to-generic products, generic-to-brand products or generic to some other generic products.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Muhammad Atif
- Department of Pharmacy, Faculty of Pharmacy and Alternative Medicine, The Islamia University of Bahawalpur, Bahawalpur, Punjab Pakistan
| | - Muhammad Azeem
- Department of Pharmacy, Faculty of Pharmacy and Alternative Medicine, The Islamia University of Bahawalpur, Bahawalpur, Punjab Pakistan
| | - Muhammad Rehan Sarwar
- Department of Pharmacy, Faculty of Pharmacy and Alternative Medicine, The Islamia University of Bahawalpur, Bahawalpur, Punjab Pakistan
| |
Collapse
|
4
|
Tsipotis E, Gupta NR, Raman G, Zintzaras E, Jaber BL. Bioavailability, Efficacy and Safety of Generic Immunosuppressive Drugs for Kidney Transplantation: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis. Am J Nephrol 2016; 44:206-18. [PMID: 27576318 PMCID: PMC6584577 DOI: 10.1159/000449020] [Citation(s) in RCA: 18] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 05/31/2016] [Accepted: 07/05/2016] [Indexed: 01/07/2023]
Abstract
BACKGROUND Concerns exist over the extrapolation of bioavailability studies of generic immunosuppressive drugs in healthy volunteers, regarding their efficacy and safety in kidney transplant recipients. We conducted a meta-analysis of trials examining the bioavailability of generic (test) immunosuppressive drugs relative to their brand (reference) counterparts in healthy volunteers, based on the US Food and Drug Administration requirements for approval of generics, and their efficacy and safety in kidney transplant recipients. METHODS Eligible studies were identified in PubMed, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, Scopus, ClinicalTrials.gov, and conference abstracts. RESULTS Twenty crossover trials of healthy volunteers (n = 641) and 6 parallel-arm randomized controlled trials of kidney transplant recipients (n = 594) were identified. The 90% CI of the pooled test-to-reference drug ratio for maximum or peak plasma concentration (Cmax) and area under the plasma concentration time-curve from time 0 to time of last determinable concentration (AUC(0-t)) fell within the required range (0.80-1.25) for cyclosporine (Cmax 0.91; 90% CI 0.86-0.95; and AUC(0-t) 0.97; 90% CI 0.94-1.00), tacrolimus (Cmax 1.17; 90% CI 1.09-1.24; and AUC(0-t) 1.00; 90% CI 0.97-1.03) and mycophenolate mofetil (Cmax 0.98; 90% CI 0.96-1.01; and AUC(0-t) 1.00; 90% CI 0.99-1.01). In subgroup analyses, some generic cyclosporine formulations did not meet criteria for bioequivalence. No significant differences were observed in the time to maximum plasma concentration and terminal plasma half-life between generic and brand drugs. In parallel-arm trials, generic cyclosporine was non-inferior to brand counterpart in terms of acute allograft rejection, infections, and death. CONCLUSIONS Not all generic immunosuppressive drugs have similar relative bioavailability to their brand name counterparts. Evidence on their efficacy and safety is inconclusive. Tighter regulatory requirement for approval of generic drugs with narrow therapeutic index is needed.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Evangelos Tsipotis
- Department of Medicine, Tufts University School of
Medicine, Boston, Mass., USA,Department of Medicine, Division of Nephrology, St.
Elizabeth’s Medical Center, Tufts University School of Medicine, Boston,
Mass., USA
| | - Navin R. Gupta
- Department of Medicine, Tufts University School of
Medicine, Boston, Mass., USA
| | - Gowri Raman
- Center for Clinical Evidence Synthesis, The Institute for
Clinical Research and Health Policy Studies, Tufts Medical Center, Tufts University
School of Medicine, Boston, Mass., USA
| | - Elias Zintzaras
- Center for Clinical Evidence Synthesis, The Institute for
Clinical Research and Health Policy Studies, Tufts Medical Center, Tufts University
School of Medicine, Boston, Mass., USA,Department of Biomathematics, Evidence-Based Medicine Unit,
University of Thessaly School of Medicine, Larissa, Greece
| | - Bertrand L. Jaber
- Department of Medicine, Tufts University School of
Medicine, Boston, Mass., USA,Department of Medicine, Division of Nephrology, St.
Elizabeth’s Medical Center, Tufts University School of Medicine, Boston,
Mass., USA
| |
Collapse
|
5
|
Jankovic SM, Ignjatovic Ristic D. Is bioavailability altered in generic versus brand anticonvulsants? Expert Opin Drug Metab Toxicol 2014; 11:329-32. [DOI: 10.1517/17425255.2015.989211] [Citation(s) in RCA: 8] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.8] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/05/2022]
|
6
|
Yamada M, Welty TE. Generic Substitution of Antiepileptic Drugs: A Systematic Review of Prospective and Retrospective Studies. Ann Pharmacother 2011; 45:1406-15. [DOI: 10.1345/aph.1q349] [Citation(s) in RCA: 41] [Impact Index Per Article: 3.2] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/27/2022] Open
Abstract
Objective: To systematically review the literature on generic antiepileptic drugs (AEDs), evaluate the efficacy and safety of generic AED substitution, and perform pharmacokinetic (PK) analysis using the American Academy of Neurology (AAN) scheme to classify evidence. Data Sources: PubMed and Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature searches from January 1, 1980, to October 15, 2010, were performed using the search terms anticonvulsant, antiepileptic drug, carbamazepine, divalproex, ethosuximide, gabapentin, lamotrigine, levetiracetam, oxcarbazepine, phénobarbital, Phenytoin, primidone, topiramate, valproate, valproic acid, and zonisamide; bioavailability, bioequivalence, bioequivalency, bioequivalent, and substitution; and generic. Study Selection and Data Extraction: Retrospective and prospective controlled studies of generic substitution of AEDs were included in the review. Non-English-language articles and uncontrolled clinical studies were excluded, Published articles were categorized using the AAN criteria for systematic reviews. Data Synthesis: We identified 156 articles. Of these, 20 met our inclusion criteria; 7 were retrospective studies, 6 were prospective studies in patients with epilepsy, and 7 were prospective studies in healthy subjects. All articles were rated Class I to Class III, using AAN criteria. The retrospective studies were categorized as Class III and showed a significant relationship between generic substitution and increased use of health care resources because of seizures or AED toxicity. Prospective studies were categorized as Class I, II, and III. Prospective studies in patients showed no differences between brand and generic drugs in PK parameters of bioequivalence. Three prospective studies in healthy subjects reported significant differences in maximum drug concentrations. Comparison of brand and generic drugs revealed no significant difference in seizure frequency; however, some prospective studies showed significant differences in PK parameters, primarily those not used for bioequivalence determinations. Conclusions: There is inconsistency between retrospective and prospective studies of generic AED substitution. The highest levels of evidence indicate that there should not be a problem with generic substitution, although some patients are more prone to problems with the generic products. Some evidence suggests that switches between multiple generic AED products in certain individuals may be problematic.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Mikiko Yamada
- Department of Pharmacy Practice, School of Pharmacy, University of Kansas, Kansas City, KS
| | - Timothy E Welty
- Department of Pharmacy Practice, School of Pharmacy, University of Kansas
| |
Collapse
|
7
|
Minton GC, Miller AD, Bookstaver PB, Love BL. Topiramate: safety and efficacy of its use in the prevention and treatment of migraine. J Cent Nerv Syst Dis 2011; 3:155-68. [PMID: 23861645 PMCID: PMC3663617 DOI: 10.4137/jcnsd.s4365] [Citation(s) in RCA: 19] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 01/11/2023] Open
Abstract
Migraine headaches are typically episodic in nature and may affect nearly 10% of the population. In addition to treatment, prevention of subsequent episodes or progression to a chronic migraine state is an important therapeutic area. Topiramate is a centrally acting medication approved for both the prevention of seizures and migraine headache. At this time, the exact mechanism of how topiramate assists in migraine prevention is unknown. Several large randomized, controlled trials have aided in establishing topiramate's role in migraine prevention. Despite a favorable pharmacokinetic and adverse effect profile established in clinical trials, several additional studies, case reports and toxicology reports have demonstrated topiramate as a cause of cognitive and behavioural changes. The use of topiramate in migraine prevention can improve a patient's quality of life and is a cost-effective option for migraine prevention.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Ginger C Minton
- South Carolina College of Pharmacy, University of South Carolina Campus, Columbia, SC, USA
| | | | | | | |
Collapse
|