Equivalence considerations for orally inhaled products for local action-ISAM/IPAC-RS European Workshop report

Phase I dose-escalation study to assess the safety, tolerability, pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics of an inhaled recombinant human ACE2

Background

APN01 is a soluble recombinant human angiotensin-converting enzyme 2 (rhACE2), a key player in the renin-aldosterone-angiotensin system (RAAS). In clinical studies, APN01 was administered intravenously only, so far. The aim of this study (ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT05065645) was to evaluate the safety, tolerability, pharmacokinetics (PK) and pharmacodynamics (PD) of inhaled APN01.

Methods

This was a phase I, double-blind, placebo-controlled, dose-escalation study. Inhalation was conducted via a nebuliser over 15 min in three single ascending dose (SAD) cohorts (n=24) and two multiple ascending dose (MAD) cohorts (n=16: every 12 h for 7 days). Doses in the SAD cohort were 1.25, 2.5 and 5 mg·mL-1; doses in the MAD cohort were 2.5 and 5 mg·mL-1. Safety (including adverse events (AEs), laboratory findings and lung function results), PK and PD data were assessed.

Results

In the SAD and MAD cohorts, treatment-related AEs were slightly more frequent in the active treatment group than in the placebo group. AEs were mild to moderate, with no dose-limiting toxicities. No clinically relevant changes in lung function and laboratory results were observed. The mean maximum observed plasma concentration (Cmax) values after single and multiple doses of 5 mg·mL-1 APN01 were 1.88 and 6.61 ng·mL-1, respectively. Among the PD variables, significance was found for ACE2 and angiotensin 1-5.

Conclusions

The application of aerosolised APN01 is safe and well tolerated after single and multiple doses. By achieving a high local concentration in the lungs and low systemic bioavailability, inhaled rhACE2 may present a therapeutic option in ACE2-related diseases.

Microstructural insight into inhalation powder blends through correlative multi-scale X-ray computed tomography

Dry powder inhalers (DPI) are important for topical drug delivery to the lungs, but characterising the pre-aerosolised powder microstructure is a key initial step in understanding the post-aerosolised blend performance. In this work, we characterise the pre-aerosolised 3D microstructure of an inhalation blend using correlative multi-scale X-ray Computed Tomography (XCT), identifying lactose and drug-rich phases at multiple length scales on the same sample. The drug-rich phase distribution across the sample is shown to be homogeneous on a bulk scale but heterogeneous on a particulate scale, with individual clusters containing different amounts of drug-rich phase, and different parts of a carrier particle coated with different amounts of drug-rich phase. Simple scalings of the drug-rich phase thickness with carrier particle size are used to derive the drug-proportion to carrier particle size relationship. This work opens new doors to micro-structural assessment of inhalation powders that could be invaluable for bioequivalence assessment of dry powder inhalers.

Advances and future perspectives in epithelial drug delivery

Epithelial surfaces protect exposed tissues in the body against intrusion of foreign materials, including xenobiotics, pollen and microbiota. The relative permeability of the various epithelia reflects their extent of exposure to the external environment and is in the ranking: intestinal≈ nasal ≥ bronchial ≥ tracheal > vaginal ≥ rectal > blood-perilymph barrier (otic), corneal > buccal > skin. Each epithelium also varies in their morphology, biochemistry, physiology, immunology and external fluid in line with their function. Each epithelium is also used as drug delivery sites to treat local conditions and, in some cases, for systemic delivery. The associated delivery systems have had to evolve to enable the delivery of larger drugs and biologicals, such as peptides, proteins, antibodies and biologicals and now include a range of physical, chemical, electrical, light, sound and other enhancement technologies. In addition, the quality-by-design approach to product regulation and the growth of generic products have also fostered advancement in epithelial drug delivery systems.

Radiolabeling Method for Lyophilizate for Dry Powder Inhalation Formulations

Human lung deposition data is non-mandatory for drug approval but very useful for the development of orally inhaled drug products. Lung deposition of inhaled drugs can be quantified by radionuclide imaging, for which one of the first considerations is the method used to radiolabel formulations. In this study, we report the development of a radiolabeling method for lyophilizate for dry powder inhalation (LDPI) formulations. TechneCoatTM is one method that can radiolabel drug particles without using solvents. In this method, particles are radiolabeled with a dispersion of 99mTc-labeled nanoparticles called TechnegasTM. Because a LDPI formulation is not comprised of particles but is a lyophilized cake aerosolized by air impact, the TechneCoat method cannot be used for the radiolabeling of LDPI formulations. We therefore modified the TechneCoat apparatus so that LDPI formulations were not aerosolized by the Technegas flow. Radiolabeling using a modified TechneCoat apparatus was validated with model LDPI formulations of interferon alpha (IFN). IFN of 99mTc-unlabeled, IFN of 99mTc-labeled, and 99mTc of 99mTc-labeled LDPI formulations showed similar behavior, and differences from IFN of 99mTc-unlabeled LDPI formulations were within ±15% in aerodynamic particle size distribution measurement. Our radiolabeling method for LDPI formulations may be useful for the quantification of drug deposition in human lungs.

Fine Particle Fraction: The Good and the Bad

Fine particle fraction (FPF) is defined in general terms as the fraction or percentage of the drug mass contained in an aerosol cloud that may be small enough to enter the lungs and exert a clinical effect. An aerodynamic diameter of 5 μm represents the approximate border between "fine" and "coarse" particles, but there is no universally agreed upon definition of FPF in terms of an aerodynamic particle size range. FPF alone does not adequately describe a heterodisperse aerodynamic particle size distribution, and it needs to be combined with another measure or measures indicating the width of the distribution. When determined using techniques specified in United States and European Pharmacopeias, FPF is measured by cascade impactors that have straight-sided ninety degree inlets through which air is drawn at a constant rate. It is not the purpose of in vitro tests to predict in vivo behavior, and FPF is primarily a measure of aerosol quality. Despite this, FPF broadly predicts the amount of drug from an inhaler device depositing in the lungs, but it systematically overestimates whole lung deposition and may not correctly predict the relative lung depositions for two inhalers of different types. The relationship between FPF and both drug pharmacokinetics and clinical response is incompletely understood at the present time, and more studies are needed to investigate these relationships. Modifications to impactor technologies, including inlets that mimic the human extrathoracic airways and the use of realistic breathing patterns, would be expected to improve the predictive power of in vitro tests for drug delivery in vivo.

Performance of Multiple-Batch Approaches to Pharmacokinetic Bioequivalence Testing for Orally Inhaled Drug Products with Batch-to-Batch Variability

Batch-to-batch pharmacokinetic (PK) variability of orally inhaled drug products has been documented and can render single-batch PK bioequivalence (BE) studies unreliable; results from one batch may not be consistent with a repeated study using a different batch, yet the goal of PK BE is to deliver a product comparison that is interpretable beyond the specific batches used in the study. We characterized four multiple-batch PK BE approaches to improve outcome reliability without increasing the number of clinical study participants. Three approaches include multiple batches directly in the PK BE study with batch identity either excluded from the statistical model (“Superbatch”) or included as a fixed or random effect (“Fixed Batch Effect,” “Random Batch Effect”). A fourth approach uses a bio-predictive in vitro test to screen candidate batches, bringing the median batch of each product into the PK BE study (“Targeted Batch”). Three of these approaches (Fixed Batch Effect, Superbatch, Targeted Batch) continue the single-batch PK BE convention in which uncertainty in the Test/Reference ratio estimate due to batch sampling is omitted from the Test/Reference confidence interval. All three of these approaches provided higher power to correctly identify true bioequivalence than the standard single-batch approach with no increase in clinical burden. False equivalence (type I) error was inflated above the expected 5% level, but multiple batches controlled type I error better than a single batch. The Random Batch Effect approach restored 5% type I error, but had low power for small (e.g., <8) batch sample sizes using standard [0.8000, 1.2500] bioequivalence limits.

Batch Selection via In Vitro/In Vivo Correlation in Pharmacokinetic Bioequivalence Testing

Pharmacokinetic differences between manufacturing batches, well established for inhaled drug products, preclude control of patient risk in the customary two-way (single batch) pharmacokinetic bioequivalence crossover design if batches are randomly chosen. European regulators have recommended selecting a "typical" in vitro batch to represent each product in pharmacokinetic bioequivalence testing. We explored the feasibility of this approach to control patient risk (the "false equivalence", or Type I, error rate). The probability of achieving a Test/Reference 90% confidence interval within (0.80, 1.25) for a true (non-equivalent) value of 1.25 was simulated for a two-way crossover design using the median in vitro batch across a range of number of in vitro batches, in vitro/in vivo correlation (IVIVC) quality (correlation coefficient, r, of zero to one), and within-subject between-batch pharmacokinetic variability. Even under extremely optimistic conditions, e.g., r=0.95 and >100 batches per product screened in vitro, patient risk for typical between-batch variability levels remained at least threefold higher than the 5% regulatory expectation for the significance level (the false equivalence error rate) of the pharmacokinetic bioequivalence test. This elevated error rate in bioequivalence decision-making occurs because of incomplete confidence that the true product average has been identified, and, importantly, omission of this uncertainty from the bioequivalence confidence interval.

Pharmacokinetics of mometasone furoate delivered via two dry powder inhalers

BACKGROUND

QMF149 is an inhaled fixed-dose combination of indacaterol acetate and mometasone furoate (MF) delivered via Breezhaler®, under development for once-daily treatment of asthma. MF delivered via Twisthaler® is approved as Asmanex® Twisthaler® for the treatment of asthma. Bridging of MF delivered via Twisthaler® to MF delivered via Breezhaler® was undertaken as part of QMF149 development to enable dose comparisons between the devices. Pharmacokinetics (PK) of MF were characterized in two studies; a single dose PK study in healthy volunteers and a pharmacokinetic/pharmacodynamic (PK/PD) study in asthma patients.

OBJECTIVES

The PK study in healthy volunteers evaluated the PK of single doses of MF via Breezhaler® (50-400 μg) and compared systemic exposure of MF following administration via Breezhaler® and Twisthaler® 400 μg (2 inhalations of 200 μg). The study in patients with asthma characterized the MF PK profile following once-daily inhalation of MF via Breezhaler® and Twisthaler® devices for 4 weeks.

METHODS

In the open-label, single-dose, crossover study, healthy subjects sequentially received MF via Twisthaler® (400 μg, medium-dose inhaled corticosteroid [ICS]) and escalating doses via Breezhaler® (50, 100, 200, 400 μg). PK data were obtained up to 72 hours post-dose. In the double-blind, double-dummy, parallel-group study, asthma patients were randomised to receive either MF 80 μg (low-dose ICS) or 320 μg (high-dose ICS) via Breezhaler®, or 200 μg (low-dose ICS) or 800 μg (2 inhalations of 400 μg; high-dose ICS) via Twisthaler® once daily for 4 weeks. PK sampling was performed on Days 1 and 28 at pre-dose and up to 24 hours post-dose.

RESULTS

In the healthy volunteer PK study, 20 healthy subjects completed all treatments. Dose-normalised AUC_last of MF was 1.8-1.9-fold higher when delivered via Breezhaler® versus Twisthaler®. AUC and C_max of MF increased in a dose-proportional manner over the range of 50-400 μg via Breezhaler®. Results from this study guided dose selection of MF via Breezhaler® for the asthma study. In the asthma study, in a subset of 96 patients, mean systemic exposure (AUC_last and C_max) for MF 80 and 320 μg via Breezhaler® was comparable with MF 200 and 800 μg via Twisthaler®, respectively, on Day 28.

CONCLUSION

PK characterization in a healthy volunteer PK study and subsequently an asthma study enabled selection of 80 μg (low), 160 μg (medium), and 320 μg (high) delivered via Breezhaler® as MF doses comparable to the 200 μg, 400 μg and 800 μg doses delivered by Twisthaler®, respectively, as part of QMF149 formulation development.

A phase 1/1b study of PUR1900, an inhaled formulation of itraconazole, in healthy volunteers and asthmatics to study safety, tolerability and pharmacokinetics

AIMS

Oral itraconazole has variable pharmacokinetics and risks of adverse events associated with high plasma exposure. An inhalation formulation of itraconazole (PUR1900) is being developed to treat allergic bronchopulmonary aspergillosis, an allergic inflammatory disease occurring in asthmatics and patients with cystic fibrosis.

METHODS

A 3-part, open-label Phase 1 study was conducted to evaluate safety, tolerability and pharmacokinetics of PUR1900. Healthy volunteers (n = 5-6/cohort) received either single (Part 1) or multiple (Part 2) ascending doses of PUR1900 for up to 14 days. In Part 3 stable, adult asthmatics received a single dose of 20 mg PUR1900 or 200 mg of oral Sporanox (itraconazole oral solution) in a 2-period randomized cross-over design. Itraconazole plasma and sputum concentrations were evaluated.

RESULTS

None of the adverse events considered as at least possibly related to study treatment were moderate or severe, and none were classed as serious. The most common was the infrequent occurrence of mild cough. Itraconazole plasma exposure increased with increasing doses of PUR1900. After 14 days, PUR1900 resulted in plasma exposure (area under the concentration-time curve up to 24 h) 106- to 400-fold lower across doses tested (10-35 mg) than steady-state exposure reported for oral Sporanox 200 mg. In asthmatics, PUR1900 geometric mean maximum sputum concentrations were 70-fold higher and geometric mean plasma concentrations were 66-fold lower than with oral Sporanox.

CONCLUSION

PUR1900 was safe and well-tolerated under the study conditions. Compared to oral dosing, PUR1900 achieved higher lung and lower plasma exposure. The pharmacokinetic profile of PUR1900 suggests the potential to improve upon the efficacy and safety profile observed with oral itraconazole.

In vitro-in vivo correlation of inhalable budesonide-loaded large porous particles for sustained treatment regimen of asthma

Large porous particles (LPPs) are well-known vehicles for drug delivery to the lungs. However, it remains uncertain whether or to which extent the in vitro drug release behavior of LPPs can be predictive of their in vivo performance (e.g., systemic exposure and therapeutic efficacy). With regard to this, three budesonide-loaded LPP formulations with identical composition but distinct in vitro drug release profiles were studied in vivo for their pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic behavior after delivery to rat lung, and finally, an in vitro/in vivo correlation (IVIVC) was established. All formulations reduced approximately 75% of the uptake by RAW264.7 macrophages compared with budesonide/lactose physical mixture and showed a drug release-dependent retention behavior in the lungs of rats. Likewise, the highest budesonide plasma concentration was measured for the formulation revealing the fastest in vitro drug release. After deconvolution of the plasma concentration/time profiles, the calculated in vivo drug release data were successfully utilized for a point-to-point IVIVC with the in vitro release profiles and the predictability of the developed IVIVC was acceptable. Finally, effective therapy was observed in an allergic asthma rat model for the sustained drug release formulations. Overall, the obtained in vitro results correlate well with the systemic drug exposure and the therapeutic performance of the investigated lung-delivered formulations, which can provide an experimental basis for IVIVC development in the pulmonary-controlled delivery system. STATEMENT OF SIGNIFICANCE: Large porous particles (LPPs) are well-known vehicles for drug delivery to the lungs. However, it remains uncertain whether or to which extent the in vitro drug release behavior of LPPs can be predicted by their in vivo performance (e.g., systemic exposure and therapeutic efficacy). With regard to this, three budesonide-loaded PLGA-based LPP formulations with identical composition but distinct in vitro drug release profiles were studied in vivo for their pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic behavior, and finally, an in vitro/in vivo correlation (IVIVC) was established. It was demonstrated that the influence of the in vitro drug release profile was obvious during lung retention, systemic exposure, and therapeutic efficacy measurements. An IVIVC (Level A) was successfully established for the budesonide-loaded LPPs delivered to the airspace of rats for the first time. Taken together, the present work will clearly support research and development activities in the field of controlled drug delivery to the lungs.

Deposition of Aerosolized Lucinactant in Nonhuman Primates

Background: Lucinactant for inhalation is an investigational noninvasive, aerosolized surfactant replacement therapy for treatment of preterm neonates with respiratory distress syndrome. Lucinactant for inhalation consists of lyophilized lucinactant and the Aerosurf^® Delivery System (ADS). The objective of this study was to characterize the total and regional pulmonary deposition of lucinactant delivered by the ADS in nonhuman primates (NHPs).

Methods: Lucinactant was radiolabeled by the addition of technetium-99m (^99mTc)-sulfur colloid. The radiolabeled aerosol was characterized and validated using a Mercer cascade impactor. An in vivo deposition study was performed in three cynomolgus macaques. Radiolabeled lucinactant was aerosolized using the ADS and delivered via nasal cannula under 5 cm H₂O nasal continuous positive airway pressure (nCPAP) for 5–9 minutes. A two-dimensional planar image was acquired immediately after aerosol administration, followed by a three-dimensional single-photon emission computed tomography (SPECT) image and a second planar image. The images were analyzed to determine the pulmonary (lungs) and extrapulmonary (nose + mouth, trachea, stomach) distribution. The SPECT data were used to determine regional deposition.

Results: The radiolabed lucinactant aerosol had a mass median aerodynamic diameter = 2.91 μm, geometric standard deviation (GSD) = 1.81, and an activity median aerodynamic diameter = 2.92 μm, GSD = 2.06. Aerosolized lucinactant was observed to deposit in the lungs (11.4%), nose + mouth (79.9%), trachea (7.3%), and stomach (1.4%). Analysis of the SPECT image demonstrated that the regional deposition within the lung was generally homogeneous. Aerosolized lucinactant was deposited in both the central (52.8% ± 1.2%) and peripheral (47.2% ± 1.2%) regions of the lungs.

Conclusion: Aerosolized lucinactant, delivered using the ADS via constant flow nCPAP, is deposited in all regions of the lungs demonstrating that surfactant can be aerosolized and delivered noninvasively to NHPs.

Cascade Impactor Equivalence Testing: Comparison of the Performance of the Modified Chi-Square Ratio Statistic (mCSRS) with the Original CSRS and EMA's Average Bioequivalence Approach

The performances of three statistical approaches for assessing in vitro equivalence was evaluated with a set of 55 scenarios of realistic test (T) and reference (R) cascade impactor (CI) profiles (originally employed by the Product Quality Research Institute to evaluate the chi-square ratio statistic: CSRS) by comparing the outcomes against experts' opinion (surrogate for the truth). The three methods were (A) a stepwise aerodynamic particle size distribution (APSD) equivalence test integrating population bioequivalence (PBE) testing of impactor-sized mass (ISM) with the CSRS (PBE-CSRS approach), previously suggested by the USFDA; (B) the combination of PBE testing of single actuation content and ISM with the newly suggested modified CSRS (PBE-mCSRS approach), a method employing reference variance scaling; and (C) EMA's average bioequivalence (ABE approach). Based on Monte-Carlo simulations, both PBE-CSRS and ABE approaches resulted in high misclassification rates, the former with highest false-pass rate and the latter with highest false-fail rate at both ≥ 50% and ≥ 80% classification threshold values (the % of simulations or experts necessary to judge a given scenario as equivalent). Based on DeLong's tests, the PBE-mCSRS approach showed significantly better overall agreement with experts' opinion compared to the other approaches. Comparison of CSRS with mCSRS (both without PBE) suggested that the more discriminatory characteristics of the mCSRS method is based on the integration of variance scaling into the mCSRS method. Contrary to the ABE approach, the application of PBE-mCSRS approach for assessing APSD profiles of three dry powder inhaler (DPI) formulations supported the pharmacokinetic bioequivalence assessment of these formulations.

Trial Design and Statistical Considerations on the Assessment of Pharmacodynamic Similarity

Pharmacodynamics (PD) similarity is an important component to support the claim of similarity between two drugs or devices. This article investigates the trial design and statistical considerations in the equivalence test of PD endpoints. Using bone resorption marker CTX as a case study, the relationship between the PD readouts and drug potency was explored to evaluate the sensitivity of the PD endpoint and guide equivalence margin selection. For PD data that have high baseline variability, one conventional similarity assessment method was to apply baseline-normalization followed by the standard bioequivalence (BE) test (Lancet Haematol. 4:e350-61, 2017, Ann Rheum Dis. 2017). This study showcased the drawbacks of the conventional method for PD data that were close to inhibition saturation, as the baseline-normalization significantly skewed the distribution of the PD data toward non-log-normal. In such cases, the standard BE test can produce an inflated type I error. Alternatively, ANCOVA, when applied to the un-normalized PD data with the baseline as a covariate, produced a satisfactory type I error with sufficient power. Therefore, ANCOVA was recommended for equivalence test of PD markers that has a saturated inhibition profile and high variability at baseline. Moreover, the relationship between PD readouts and drug potency was used to explore the sensitivity of the PD endpoint and it could help justify the equivalence margins, since the standard 80% to 125% BE margin often does not apply to PD. Finally, a decision tree was proposed to help guide the design of the PD equivalence study in the choice of PD endpoints and statistical methods.

Particle size and gastrointestinal absorption influence tiotropium pharmacokinetics: a pilot bioequivalence study of PUR0200 and Spiriva HandiHaler

AIMS

Plasma pharmacokinetics permit the assessment of efficacy and safety of inhaled drugs, and possibly their bioequivalence to other inhaled products. Correlating drug product attributes to lung deposited dose is important to achieving equivalence. PUR0200 is a spray-dried formulation of tiotropium that enables more efficient lung delivery than Spiriva^® HandiHaler^® (HH). The ratio of tiotropium lung-to-oral deposition in PUR0200 was varied to investigate the impact of particle size on tiotropium pharmacokinetics, and the contribution of oral absorption to tiotropium exposure was assessed using charcoal block.

METHODS

A seven-period, single-dose, crossover study was performed in healthy subjects. PUR0200 formulations differing in dose and aerodynamic particle size were administered in five periods and Spiriva HH in two periods. In one period, Spiriva HH gastrointestinal absorption was blocked with oral charcoal. Tiotropium plasma concentrations were assessed over 8 h after inhalation.

RESULTS

PUR0200 pharmacokinetics were influenced by aerodynamic particle size and the ratio of lung-to-oral deposition, with impactor sized mass (ISM) correlating most strongly with exposure. Formulation PUR0217a (3 μg tiotropium) lung deposition was similar to Spiriva HH (18 μg) with and without charcoal block, but total PUR0200 exposure was lower without charcoal. The C_max and AUC_0-0.5h of Spiriva HH with and without charcoal block were bioequivalent; however, Spiriva HH AUC_0-8h was lower when gastrointestinal absorption was inhibited with oral charcoal administration.

CONCLUSIONS

Pharmacokinetic bioequivalence indicative of lung deposition and efficacy can be achieved by matching the reference product ISM. Due to reduced oral deposition and more efficient lung delivery, PUR0200 results in a lower AUC_0-t than Spiriva HH due to reduced absorption of drug from the gastrointestinal tract.

A review of the in vitro and in vivo valved holding chamber (VHC) literature with a focus on the AeroChamber Plus Flow-Vu Anti-static VHC

Valved holding chambers (VHCs) reduce the need for inhalation-actuation coordination with pressurized metered dose inhalers (pMDIs), reduce oropharyngeal drug deposition and may improve lung deposition and clinical outcomes compared to pMDIs used alone. While VHCs are thus widely advocated for use in vulnerable patient groups within clinical and regulatory guidelines, there is less consensus as to whether the performance differences between different VHCs have clinical implications. This review evaluates the VHC literature, in particular the data pertaining to large- versus small-volume chambers, aerosol performance with a VHC adjunct versus a pMDI alone, charge dissipative/conducting versus non-conducting VHCs, and facemasks, to ascertain whether potentially meaningful differences between VHCs exist. Inconsistencies in the literature are examined and explained, and relationships between in vitro and in vivo data are discussed. A particular focus of this review is the AeroChamber Plus® Flow-Vu® Anti-static VHC, the most recent iteration of the AeroChamber VHC family.

Bioequivalence Evaluations of Generic Dry Powder Inhaler Drug Products: Similarities and Differences Between Japan, USA, and the European Union

In Japan, the development of generic oral dry powder inhaler (DPI) drug products for marketing approval has recently increased. The Pharmaceuticals and Medical Devices Agency (PMDA) considers the required data for each drug product in the consultation meeting. However, guidelines for DPI drug products have been published by the US Food and Drug Administration and the European Medicines Agency. Recently, the basic principles of bioequivalence evaluations of generic DPI drug products were published in March 2016 by the Ministry of Health, Labour and Welfare. The document mainly outlines the current understanding regarding the bioequivalence evaluations of generic DPI drug products based on knowledge from PMDA consultation meetings. In this review, we compared the bioequivalence evaluations of DPI drug products among Japan, USA, and the European Union and discuss future development of generic DPI drug products in Japan.

Considerations in establishing bioequivalence of inhaled compounds

INTRODUCTION

Generic inhalers are often perceived as inferior to their branded counterparts; however, they are safe and effective if they can meet the regulatory requirements. The approach to assess bioequivalence (BE) in oral dosage form products is not sufficient to address the complexities of inhalational products (e.g., patient-device interface); hence, more considerations are needed and caution should be applied in determining BE of inhaled compounds.

AREAS COVERED

This review outlines the evaluation process for generic inhalers, explores the regulatory approaches in BE assessment, and highlights the considerations and challenges in the current in vitro and in vivo approaches (lung deposition, pharmacokinetic, pharmacodynamic/clinical studies, and patient-device interface) for establishing BE of inhaled compounds.

EXPERT OPINION

The ultimate goals in this field are to establish uniformity in the regulatory approaches to speed the drug submission process in different regions, clear physicians' misconception of generic inhalers, and have meaningful clinical endpoints such as improvement in patient quality of life when compared to placebo and brand name drugs. As inhalational drugs become more common for other indications such as antibiotics, the technologies developed for inhaled compounds in the treatment of chronic pulmonary diseases may be extrapolated to these other agents.

Comparison of systemic pharmacodynamic effects of two combination pressurized metered dose inhalers that deliver salmeterol and fluticasone propionate

AIM

The aim of this study was to test the systemic pharmacodynamic effects of the salmeterol component of two pressurized metered dose inhalers that delivered a combination of salmeterol and fluticasone propionate (SM/FP).

METHODS

This was a six-way crossover study in 43 adult subjects, using a single blind design (subject blinded to product and clinical assessor blinded for all measurements). Each subject received single doses of two, six, and twelve inhalations from test and reference products that delivered SM/FP as 25/125 mcg per inhalation. Heart rate, QTcB, and plasma potassium and glucose were monitored over 6 h.

RESULTS

Safety equivalence was shown by relative potency analysis for primary endpoints of maximum heart rate and maximum QTcB, since the 90% confidence intervals for both endpoints were within the acceptance limit of (0.67, 1.50). There were six secondary analyses for relative potency and equivalence was met for five of these endpoints. There were also 18 pairwise comparisons performed at each dose level. No statistical differences (95% confidence intervals included zero) among these pairwise comparisons were seen at the two-inhalation dose (therapeutic dose) or the six-inhalation dose. At the supratherapeutic dose of twelve inhalations, the test product was either comparable to or statistically less than that of the reference product for all comparisons. Overall, the results demonstrated comparable systemic safety. No differences were seen between the products in reported adverse events.

CONCLUSION

The safety equivalence of the systemic pharmacodynamic effects of the SM component of the test and reference SM/FP products was demonstrated.

Regulatory Approaches and Considerations in Establishing Bioequivalence of Inhaled Compounds

To be considered bioequivalent to their branded counterparts, generic drugs must meet the standards for bioequivalence (BE) described by the regulatory agencies. While BE of generic inhalational drugs can be evaluated using a similar approach as that for oral dosage from products or drugs that are delivered systemically, the approach is insufficient to address the complexities of inhalational products (e.g., localized site of action, device-patient interface). Therefore, more considerations are needed and caution should be applied when evaluating BE of inhaled compounds. The purpose of this review is to highlight the considerations and challenges in establishing BE of inhaled compounds by (1) outlining the current regulatory approaches (from Health Canada, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration, and the European Medicines Agency) to assess BE for subsequent entry inhaled products (SEIPs) and (2) reviewing the literature pertaining to testing considerations of SEIPs to establish BE.

Pharmacokinetics of tiotropium administered by Respimat® in asthma patients: Analysis of pooled data from Phase II and III clinical trials

Tiotropium is a long-acting inhaled antimuscarinic bronchodilator that has recently received marketing authorization for the indication of asthma with dose delivery via the Respimat^® inhaler, in addition to its widely established role in the management of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). This report presents a combined analysis of tiotropium plasma and urine pharmacokinetics at steady state from 8 Phase II/III clinical trials in asthma and delineates the effects of patient characteristics on systemic exposure based on the parameters fe_0-24,ss (fraction of dose excreted unchanged in urine over 24 h post-dose at steady-state) and dose-normalized AUC_tau,ss and C_max,ss. Pharmacokinetics were also compared between asthma and COPD, incorporating data from 3 COPD Phase II/III clinical trials. Tiotropium pharmacokinetics in asthma were dose-proportional up to 5 μg dosed once daily. The following factors showed no statistically significant effects on tiotropium systemic exposure in asthma based on analysis of geometric mean ratios and 90% confidence intervals: age, asthma severity, lung function, reversibility testing, allergy status, smoking history, geographical region, and posology (5 μg once daily or 2.5 μg twice daily via Respimat^®). Asian patients showed a moderately but significantly higher systemic exposure compared to White or Black patients. However, no differences in safety by race were observed. Total systemic exposure (AUC_tau,ss) was similar between asthma and COPD, but C_max,ss was 52% lower in asthma patients compared to COPD. It is concluded that in asthma, patient characteristics have no relevant effect on tiotropium systemic exposure. Since systemic exposure to inhaled drugs is an indicator of safety, the lower C_max,ss compared to COPD is not considered a concern for tiotropium therapy of asthma.

Between-Batch Pharmacokinetic Variability Inflates Type I Error Rate in Conventional Bioequivalence Trials: A Randomized Advair Diskus Clinical Trial

We previously demonstrated pharmacokinetic differences among manufacturing batches of a US Food and Drug Administration (FDA)-approved dry powder inhalation product (Advair Diskus 100/50) large enough to establish between-batch bio-inequivalence. Here, we provide independent confirmation of pharmacokinetic bio-inequivalence among Advair Diskus 100/50 batches, and quantify residual and between-batch variance component magnitudes. These variance estimates are used to consider the type I error rate of the FDA's current two-way crossover design recommendation. When between-batch pharmacokinetic variability is substantial, the conventional two-way crossover design cannot accomplish the objectives of FDA's statistical bioequivalence test (i.e., cannot accurately estimate the test/reference ratio and associated confidence interval). The two-way crossover, which ignores between-batch pharmacokinetic variability, yields an artificially narrow confidence interval on the product comparison. The unavoidable consequence is type I error rate inflation, to ∼25%, when between-batch pharmacokinetic variability is nonzero. This risk of a false bioequivalence conclusion is substantially higher than asserted by regulators as acceptable consumer risk (5%).

Equivalent bronchodilation with budesonide/formoterol combination via Easyhaler and Turbuhaler in patients with asthma

BACKGROUND

Therapeutic equivalence of Budesonide/formoterol Easyhaler compared to Symbicort Turbuhaler has been previously demonstrated with in vitro and pharmacokinetic studies. This study was performed to confirm equivalent bronchodilator efficacy of the products in asthmatic patients.

METHODS

A randomised, single-dose, 4-period crossover study was carried out in a double-blind, double-dummy manner in 11 study sites. The studied doses were 320/9 μg and 1280/36 μg of budesonide/formoterol delivered by Easyhaler and Turbuhaler. Spirometry was performed before and 10 min, 20 min and 1, 2, 3, 4, 6, 8, 10 and 12 h after administration of the study treatments. The primary efficacy endpoint was average 12-h forced expiratory volume in 1 s (FEV₁). The secondary efficacy endpoints were maximum FEV₁ and FEV₁ at 12 h post-dose.

RESULTS

72 asthma patients with reversible airway obstruction were randomised to receive study treatments. 53 patients completed all study periods according to the protocol and had sufficient data available to calculate the primary endpoint. They were included in the per-protocol analyses. The assay sensitivity of the study was shown as the common slope of average 12-h FEV₁ between doses was 0.063 (95% CI 0.032-0.093) and showed statistical significance (p < 0.001). In equivalence testing, the difference in average 12-h FEV₁ between the treatments (Easyhaler-Turbuhaler) was 0.013 l at the lower dose and -0.028 l at the higher dose, and their 95% confidence intervals (CIs) (-0.047 to 0.073 and -0.087 to 0.032, respectively) fell within the range of a clinically non-relevant difference. The results of the secondary efficacy endpoints were in line with the results of the primary endpoint. All treatments were well tolerated.

CONCLUSIONS

The results confirm equivalent bronchodilator efficacy of Budesonide/formoterol Easyhaler compared to Symbicort Turbuhaler.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

This trial was registered on ClinicalTrials.gov, Identifier: NCT02308098.

Patient Focus and Regulatory Considerations for Inhalation Device Design: Report from the 2015 IPAC-RS/ISAM Workshop

This article reports on discussions at the 2015 workshop cosponsored by the International Pharmaceutical Aerosol Consortium on Regulation and Science (IPAC-RS) and the International Society for Aerosols in Medicine (ISAM), entitled "Regulatory and Patient Considerations for Inhalation Device Design, Development and Use." Key topics addressed at the workshop and presented here include patient-focused device design for orally inhaled products (OIPs), instructions for use (IFU), human factors, regulatory considerations in the United States and Europe, development of generic inhalers, quality-by-design, and change management of OIP devices. Workshop participants also identified several areas for further consideration and emphasized the need for increased focus on the patient to create therapeutic products (inclusive of device design, IFU, education, training) that support adherence with an individual patient's treatment regimen. Advances in patient-centric product development will require engagement and collaboration by industry, regulators, patients, physicians, and other stakeholders. The article includes summaries of presented talks as well as of panel and audience discussions.

Pharmacokinetic properties and bioequivalence of orally inhaled salbutamol in healthy Chinese volunteers

CONTEXT

Salbutamol is a short-acting β2-adrenergic receptor agonist that has been used for many years for relief of bronchospasm. However, studies on the pharmacokinetic profile of orally inhaled salbutamol doses used in clinical practice have not yet been reported in Chinese subjects.

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this study was to compare the pharmacokinetics and evaluate the bioequivalence of two orally inhaled salbutamol formulations.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A single-dose randomized fasting two-period, two-treatment and two-sequence crossover open-label bioequivalence study was conducted in 24 healthy Chinese adult male volunteers, with a 1-week washout period between treatments. Plasma concentrations of salbutamol were determined using liquid chromatography coupled to tandem mass spectrometry. Pharmacokinetic parameters, including AUC0-0.33 h, AUC0-24 h and Cmax were calculated and the 90% confidence intervals of the ratio (test/reference) pharmacokinetic parameters were obtained by analysis of variance on logarithmically transformed data.

RESULTS

The mean (SD) pharmacokinetic parameters of the reference drug were AUC0-0.33 h, 227.2 (89.9) pg·h/ml; AUC0-24 h, 2551.9 (1008.0) pg·h/ml; Cmax, 801.3 (307.3) pg/ml and t1/2, 5.14(1.36) h. Those of the test drug were AUC0-0.33 h, 244.0 (104.4) pg·h/ml; AUC0-24 h, 2664.4 (1081.8) pg·h/ml; Cmax, 873.7 (374.4) pg/ml, t1/2, 5.29 (1.23) h. The median value for Tmax was 0.25 h for both formulations. The 90% confidence intervals for the AUC0-0.33 h, AUC0-24 h and Cmax were in the range of 0.892-1.208, 0.876-1.195 and 0.911-1.203, respectively.

CONCLUSION

This single-dose study found that the test and reference products met the regulatory criteria for bioequivalence of China in healthy Chinese volunteers.

Equivalent Lung Dose and Systemic Exposure of Budesonide/Formoterol Combination via Easyhaler and Turbuhaler

BACKGROUND

Easyhaler(®) device-metered dry powder inhaler containing budesonide and formoterol fumarate dihydrate (hereafter formoterol) for the treatment of asthma and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease has been developed. The current approvals of the product in Europe were based on several pharmacokinetic (PK) bioequivalence (BE) studies, and in vitro-in vivo correlation (IVIVC) modeling.

METHODS

Four PK studies were performed to compare the lung deposition and total systemic exposure of budesonide and formoterol after administration of budesonide/formoterol Easyhaler and the reference product, Symbicort Turbuhaler. The products were administered concomitantly with oral charcoal (lung deposition) and in two of the studies also without charcoal (total systemic exposure). Demonstration of BE for lung deposition (surrogate marker for efficacy) and non-inferiority for systemic exposure (surrogate marker for safety) were considered a proof of therapeutic equivalence. In addition, IVIVC models were constructed to predict study outcomes with different reference product fine particle doses (FPDs).

RESULTS

In the first pivotal study, the exposure and lung dose via Easyhaler were higher compared to the reference product (mean comparison estimates between 1.07 and 1.28) as the FPDs of the reference product batch were low. In the following studies, reference product batches with higher FPDs were utilized. In the second pivotal study, non-inferiority of Easyhaler compared to Turbuhaler was shown in safety and BE in efficacy for all other parameters except the formoterol AUCt. In the fourth study where two reference batches were compared to each other and Easyhaler, budesonide/formoterol Easyhaler was bioequivalent with one reference batch but not with the other having the highest FPDs amongst the 28 reference batches studied. In the IVIVC based study outcome predictions, the test product was bioequivalent with great proportion of the reference batches. For the test product and the median FPD reference product BE was predicted.

CONCLUSIONS

Equivalence regarding both safety and efficacy between budesonide/formoterol Easyhaler and Symbicort Turbuhaler was shown based on totality of evidence from the PK studies and IVIVC analyses, and therefore, therapeutic equivalence between the products can be concluded. The results of the PK studies are likely dependent on the variability of FPDs of the reference product batches.

A European perspective on orally inhaled products: in vitro requirements for a biowaiver

This article describes the European Union stepwise approach used for the development and assessment of second-entry orally inhaled products. This approach is similar to the approach used for systemically acting products. In some cases, in vitro data can be used to show equivalence without performing in vivo studies (e.g., solutions for nebulization in the case of inhalation products, and oral solutions or Biopharmaceutics Classification System-based biowaivers in the case of systemically acting drugs). If equivalence cannot be shown in the first step, the Applicant can show equivalence in a second step by means of conventional pharmacokinetic bioequivalence studies to assess directly systemic exposure and lung deposition indirectly. The dose absorbed from the lungs should be distinguished from the dose absorbed from the gastrointestinal tract. Then the fraction of dose absorbed (area under the curve) represents the dose that reached the site of action, and the peak exposure gives information on the pattern of deposition within the lungs. This information is more discriminative than any pharmacodynamic or clinical endpoint, because these have flat dose-response curves. If equivalence is not shown with pharmacokinetic data, the Applicant can decide to show equivalence by means of pharmacodynamic or clinical trials, but assay sensitivity must be demonstrated within the study and relative potency should be estimated. This article focuses on the in vitro requirements applicable in the European Union for a waiver of in vivo studies and for waiving studies with all drug product strengths or pharmacokinetic studies in patients. The reasons why in the European Union in vitro data alone can be used to show equivalence are discussed, and some examples are given.

Asthma and COPD: Interchangeable use of inhalers. A document of Italian Society of Allergy, Asthma and Clinical Immmunology (SIAAIC) & Italian Society of Respiratory Medicine (SIMeR)

Prescription cost-containment measures are increasing in many European countries and, as more inhaler devices become available, there may be pressure to switch patients from reference inhaled medication to cheaper generic inhaled drugs. Indeed, in some countries, such a substitution is mandated by current regulations, and patients who do not accept the substitution have to pay the difference in cost. Generic inhaled drugs are therapeutically equivalent to original branded options but may differ in their formulation and inhalation device. This new situation raises questions about the potential impact of switching from branded to generic inhaled medications in patients with asthma or chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD), with or without their consent, in countries where this is permitted. Acquisition cost savings from a substitution could be offset by costs related to deterioration in asthma control or worsening in COPD outcomes if the patient is unable or unwilling to use the inhaler device properly. Non-adherence to therapy and incorrect inhaler usage are recognised as major factors in uncontrolled asthma and worsening of COPD outcomes. Switching patients to a different inhaler device may exacerbate these problems, particularly in patients who disagree to switch. Where switching is permitted or mandatory, it is crucial that the reason for switching has been properly explained to the patient and adequate instruction for operating correctly the inhaler have clearly been provided.

A Systematic Analysis of the Sensitivity of Plasma Pharmacokinetics to Detect Differences in the Pulmonary Performance of Inhaled Fluticasone Propionate Products Using a Model-Based Simulation Approach

The role of plasma pharmacokinetics (PK) for assessing bioequivalence at the target site, the lung, for orally inhaled drugs remains unclear. A validated semi-mechanistic model, considering the presence of mucociliary clearance in central lung regions, was expanded for quantifying the sensitivity of PK studies in detecting differences in the pulmonary performance (total lung deposition, central-to-peripheral lung deposition ratio, and pulmonary dissolution characteristics) between test (T) and reference (R) inhaled fluticasone propionate (FP) products. PK bioequivalence trials for inhaled FP were simulated based on this PK model for a varying number of subjects and T products. The statistical power to conclude bioequivalence when T and R products are identical was demonstrated to be 90% for approximately 50 subjects. Furthermore, the simulations demonstrated that PK metrics (area under the concentration time curve (AUC) and C max) are capable of detecting differences between T and R formulations of inhaled FP products when the products differ by more than 20%, 30%, and 25% for total lung deposition, central-to-peripheral lung deposition ratio, and pulmonary dissolution characteristics, respectively. These results were derived using a rather conservative risk assessment approach with an error rate of <10%. The simulations thus indicated that PK studies might be a viable alternative to clinical studies comparing pulmonary efficacy biomarkers for slowly dissolving inhaled drugs. PK trials for pulmonary efficacy equivalence testing should be complemented by in vitro studies to avoid false positive bioequivalence assessments that are theoretically possible for some specific scenarios. Moreover, a user-friendly web application for simulating such PK equivalence trials with inhaled FP is provided.

Regulatory Considerations for Approval of Generic Inhalation Drug Products in the US, EU, Brazil, China, and India

This article describes regulatory approaches for approval of "generic" orally inhaled drug products (OIDPs) in the United States, European Union, Brazil, China and India. While registration of a generic OIDP in any given market may require some documentation of the formulation and device similarity to the "original" product as well as comparative testing of in vitro characteristics and in vivo performance, the specific documentation approaches, tests and acceptance criteria vary by the country. This divergence is due to several factors, including unique cultural, historical, legal and economic circumstances of each region; the diverse healthcare and regulatory systems; the different definitions of key terms such as "generic" and "reference" drug; the acknowledged absence of in vitro in vivo correlations for OIDPs; and the scientific and statistical issues related to OIDP testing (such as how best to account for the batch-to-batch variability of the Reference product, whether to use average bioequivalence or population bioequivalence in the statistical analysis of results, whether to use healthy volunteers or patients for pharmacokinetic studies, and which pharmacodynamic or clinical end-points should be used). As a result of this discrepancy, there are ample opportunities for the regulatory and scientific communities around the world to collaborate in developing more consistent, better aligned, science-based approaches. Moving in that direction will require both further research and further open discussion of the pros and cons of various approaches.

In Vitro Testing for Orally Inhaled Products: Developments in Science-Based Regulatory Approaches

This article is part of a series of reports from the "Orlando Inhalation Conference-Approaches in International Regulation" which was held in March 2014, and coorganized by the University of Florida and the International Pharmaceutical Aerosol Consortium on Regulation and Science (IPAC-RS). The goal of the conference was to foster the exchange of ideas and knowledge across the global scientific and regulatory community in order to identify and help move towards strategies for internationally harmonized, science-based regulatory approaches for the development and marketing approval of inhalation medicines, including innovator and second entry products. This article provides an integrated perspective of case studies and discussion related to in vitro testing of orally inhaled products, including in vitro-in vivo correlations and requirements for in vitro data and statistical analysis that support quality or bioequivalence for regulatory applications.

In Vitro, Pharmacokinetic, Pharmacodynamic, and Safety Comparisons of Single and Combined Administration of Tiotropium and Salmeterol in COPD Patients Using Different Dry Powder Inhalers

In vitro Andersen cascade impactor-sized mass (ISM) and aerodynamic fine particle mass (FPM) <5 μm for tiotropium and salmeterol combined in a novel inhalation powder formulation containing 7.5 μg tiotropium/25 μg salmeterol (TSHH) were similar (within ±15%) to reference products containing 18 μg of tiotropium (Spiriva® HandiHaler®) (TioHH) and 50 μg of salmeterol (Serevent® Diskus®) (SalD). The pharmacokinetics (PK), pharmacodynamics, safety, and tolerability of the novel fixed-dose TSHH formulation administered once daily was compared with the single-agent therapies TioHH (once daily [qd]) and SalD (twice daily [bid]) and with the jointly administered combination of TioHH (qd) plus SalD (bid) in a randomized, 22-week, open-label, four-way crossover study in 50 patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). For tiotropium, TSHH and TioHH were bioequivalent based on mean steady-state plasma area under the plasma concentration-time curves (AUC), while the urinary excretion amount was higher for TSHH and not bioequivalent to TioHH. Tiotropium peak plasma concentrations at steady state (C max,ss) were 40% higher with TSHH. For salmeterol, substantial differences were observed in plasma AUCs and Cmax,ss. No significant differences in 8-h forced expiratory volume in 1 s or forced vital capacity were detected for the TSHH (qd) against the combination of TioHH (qd) with SalD (bid). Maintenance therapy with tiotropium plus salmeterol as TSHH or as the jointly administered reference products is superior to either agent alone, safe, and well tolerated in COPD patients. In vitro results were not predictive of clinical PK findings for both tiotropium and salmeterol for the TSHH dry powder inhaler product.

Application of the modified chi-square ratio statistic in a stepwise procedure for cascade impactor equivalence testing

Equivalence testing of aerodynamic particle size distribution (APSD) through multi-stage cascade impactors (CIs) is important for establishing bioequivalence of orally inhaled drug products. Recent work demonstrated that the median of the modified chi-square ratio statistic (MmCSRS) is a promising metric for APSD equivalence testing of test (T) and reference (R) products as it can be applied to a reduced number of CI sites that are more relevant for lung deposition. This metric is also less sensitive to the increased variability often observed for low-deposition sites. A method to establish critical values for the MmCSRS is described here. This method considers the variability of the R product by employing a reference variance scaling approach that allows definition of critical values as a function of the observed variability of the R product. A stepwise CI equivalence test is proposed that integrates the MmCSRS as a method for comparing the relative shapes of CI profiles and incorporates statistical tests for assessing equivalence of single actuation content and impactor sized mass. This stepwise CI equivalence test was applied to 55 published CI profile scenarios, which were classified as equivalent or inequivalent by members of the Product Quality Research Institute working group (PQRI WG). The results of the stepwise CI equivalence test using a 25% difference in MmCSRS as an acceptance criterion provided the best matching with those of the PQRI WG as decisions of both methods agreed in 75% of the 55 CI profile scenarios.

Evaluation of comparative performance of orally inhaled drug products in view of the classical bioequivalence paradigms: an analysis of the current scientific and regulatory dilemmas of inhaler evaluation

Since the early 1960s, there has been a continuous evolution in scientific understanding regarding bioequivalence (BE) of oral dosage forms, intermittently punctuated by some breakthrough research findings and conceptual advances. The accumulated knowledge from this body of research has been translated into a sophisticated risk management framework of regulations and guidelines supported by an extensive set of tools and decision rules. This has permitted us to arrive at a state that now allows, in the majority of cases, not only the unrestricted substitution of a generic product for the innovator version, but also unquestioned substitution between different generic manufacturers. This framework has been successfully extended or adapted to go beyond oral dosage forms to include, for example, topical semisolid applications and nasal sprays. In the case of orally inhaled locally acting drug products (OIP), a similar level of success has yet to be realized. For OIP's, the risk management toolbox is incompletely outfitted due to missing science, knowledge, and experience in some key areas. This article presents a gap analysis of the situation highlighting unresolved residual risks. Assessment of the residual risks by US and EU medicines authorities has interestingly led to different regulatory positions with respect to BE for this class of drug products in these two regions. A parallel comparison with the history for BE of oral dosage forms shows that resolution for inhaled products will come eventually with the final outcome and timeframe, depending as much on science as it does on economics and the degree to which legislators intervene.

Pharmacokinetic study for the establishment of bioequivalence of two inhalation treatments containing budesonide plus formoterol

OBJECTIVES

The aim of this study was to compare lung deposition and assess the bioequivalence of two formulations containing budesonide and formoterol and being delivered via Elpenhaler and Turbuhaler, respectively. A pharmacokinetic (PK) study was conducted.

METHODS

An open, randomized, two-sequence, two-period, crossover, single-dose study in 100 asthmatic patients under fasting conditions was performed. Wash out period was 6 days. Equivalence in lung deposition was assessed after a single inhalation of each treatment with concomitant oral administration of activated charcoal (40 g) to prevent gastrointestinal absorption of the drugs. Several PK parameters were estimated, the area under the drug concentration in plasma versus time curve (AUC0-t ) and the maximum drug concentration in plasma (Cmax ) being the primary response variables. Equivalent lung deposition was concluded if the 90% confidence interval (CI) for the Elpenhaler/Turbuhaler geometric mean ratio of AUC0-t and Cmax , for both drug substances fell within the regulatory limits (0.80-1.25).

KEY FINDINGS

Acceptance criteria were met. Equivalent lung deposition can be concluded. No statistically significant differences between treatments in the incidence of adverse events were found.

CONCLUSIONS

The formulations are bioequivalent regarding both rate and extent of absorption. The treatments were also well tolerated by the participating subjects.

Considerations for Designing In Vitro Bioequivalence (IVBE) Studies for Pressurized Metered Dose Inhalers (pMDIs) with Spacer or Valved Holding Chamber (S/VHC) Add-on Devices

BACKGROUND

The choice of analytical test methods and associated statistical considerations are considered for the laboratory testing of pressurized metered dose inhaler-spacer/valved holding chamber (pMDI-S/VHC) combinations for in vitro bioequivalence (IVBE).

METHODS

Four scenarios are presented for comparing TEST ("second entry" or "generic") versus REF ("innovator"): (1) innovator and second entry product pMDI alone without any S/VHC (baseline comparison); (2) innovator and second entry pMDI product with the same S/VHC; (3) innovator pMDI product with existing S/VHC and second entry product with a different S/VHC; and (4) introduction of a second, different S/VHC to be used with a given innovator pMDI product. The following aspects should be reviewed in the preparatory stage of designing experiments to establish IVBE: (a) the inclusion of delayed inhalation; (b) the utilization of age-appropriate flow rates; and (c) the use of anatomically appropriate face models for evaluation of devices with a facemask. Statistical considerations that fit in with such experimental methods include: selection of pMDI batches and S/VHC lots; choice of sample size and acceptance criteria; bracketing or worst case approaches; and balanced/paired designs. A stepwise approach for selection of impactor stage groupings is presented, and an approach to determine realistic acceptance criteria based on REF product characteristics is suggested.

RESULTS

An example of an efficient statistical design of experiment is provided for each scenario, together with alternate approaches for calculation of confidence intervals for the mean TEST/REF relationship. It is important to appreciate that the optimal design depends on balancing numerous considerations and will thus likely differ from case to case; hence, the designs presented here should be seen as illustrations rather than the only option available. More effective approaches may be found that suit a particular case at hand.

CONCLUSIONS

The information provided will assist in developing correlations in support of IVBE for these add-on devices.

Switching from branded to generic inhaled medications: potential impact on asthma and COPD

Pressure on healthcare budgets is increasing, while at the same time patent protection for many branded inhaled medications has expired, leading to the development and growing availability of generic inhaled medicines. Generic inhaled drugs are therapeutically equivalent to original branded options but may differ in their formulation and inhalation device. This new situation raises questions about the potential impact of switching from branded to generic drug/inhaler combination products in patients with asthma or COPD, with or without their consent, in countries where this is permitted. Inhalation devices, particularly dry powder inhalers, vary markedly in their design, method of operation and drug delivery to the lungs. Current guidelines stress the importance of training patients how to use their inhalers but offer little or no guidance on how this should be achieved. Non-adherence to therapy and incorrect inhaler usage are recognised as major factors in poorly or uncontrolled asthma and COPD and switching patients to a different inhaler device may exacerbate these problems, particularly in patients who disagree to switch. Where switching is permitted or mandatory, adequate patient instruction and follow-up monitoring should be provided routinely.

A sensitivity analysis of the modified chi-square ratio statistic for equivalence testing of aerodynamic particle size distribution

Demonstration of equivalence in aerodynamic particle size distribution (APSD) is one key component for establishing bioequivalence of orally inhaled drug products. We previously proposed a modified version of the Chi-square ratio statistic (mCSRS) for APSD equivalence testing and demonstrated that the median of the distribution of the mCSRS (MmCSRS) is a robust metric when test (T) and reference (R) cascade impactor (CI) profiles are identical. Here, we systematically evaluate the behavior of the MmCSRS when T and R CI profiles differ from each other in their mean deposition and variability on a single and multiple sites. All CI profiles were generated by Monte-Carlo simulations based upon modified actual CI data. Twenty thousand sets of 30 T and 30 R CI profiles were simulated for each scenario, and the behavior of the MmCSRS was correlated to metrics that characterize the difference between T and R product in mean deposition and variability. The two key findings were, first, that the MmCSRS is more sensitive to difference between T and R CI profiles on high deposition sites, and second, that a cut-off value for APSD equivalence testing based on the MmCSRS needs to be scaled on the variability of the R product. The former is considered as beneficial for equivalence testing of CI profiles as it decreases the likelihood of failing identical CI profiles by chance, in part, due to increasing analytical variability associated with lower deposition sites. The latter is expected to be important for consistently being able to discriminate equivalent from inequivalent CI profiles.