Objectives: The Bioavailability/Bioequivalence Unit (BA/BE Unit) of the Department of Pharmacology and Toxicology, College of Medicine, University of the Philippines Manila which has not been operational since 2012, is due for renewal of its accreditation. To date, there are only three Philippine Food and Drug Administration-accredited laboratories that perform bioequivalence studies in the Philippines. One of the prerequisites of registering specific generic medicines is the conduct of Bioequivalence (BE) studies which are performed to ensure that the generic drug is at par with the innovator drug. Thus, this study aimed to determine the feasibility of re-establishing the BA/BE Unit as a bioequivalence testing center. Methods: The feasibility study done is a qualitative descriptive analysis based on expansive literature review and performance of SWOT analysis within the BA/BE unit. Literatures were selected based on its assessed relevance to the study. The databases checked were PubMed and Google Scholar. The terms used were from the Medical Subject Heading (MeSH) including feasibility studies, therapeutic equivalency, and generic drugs. Literature review was performed on the factors affecting the four types of feasibility studies (market, technical, financial, and organizational). A SWOT analysis of the BA/BE Unit was done through the review of records and documents of previous BE studies and focus group discussion among the BA/BE Unit team members. Results: The BA/BE Unit conducted 24 bioequivalence studies from 2006-2009 and still receives inquiries from drug companies. It implements its QMS throughout the pre-analytical, analytical, and post-analytical stages of the workflow. Its organizational structure consists of qualified professionals with updated GCP and GLP certificates. Because of the adequately equipped facility, lower honoraria for government-employed personnel, and lower expenses for laboratories and in-patient admissions, the cost of conducting a bioequivalence study in the BA/BE Unit will be lower than in other BE centers. Conclusion Based on the SWOT analysis and market, technical, financial, and organizational considerations, reestablishing the BA/BE Unit as a bioequivalence testing center is feasible.
Feasibility Studies ; Therapeutic Equivalency ; Drugs, Generic

OBJECTIVE: The pharmacological effects of generic (GE) donepezil are the same as Aricept, its brand-name counterpart. However, little is known as to whether these two drugs provide the same quality of life (QOL). The study subjects were patients with Alzheimer's disease who were taking donepezil hydrochloride tablets, and were selected by visiting either the local pharmacies or the patients' homes. We chose the brand-name drug Aricept and its GE form donepezil to investigate, from a long-term caregiver's perspective, the influence of both drugs on the patients' QOL. METHODS: An EuroQol-5 Dimension (EQ-5D) was used to assess the QOL of patients with Alzheimer's disease, before and after various Aricept and/or donepezil regimens. Patients were divided into four groups: first time users of Aricept (n=43), first time users of GE donepezil (n=45), users refilling previous prescriptions of Aricept (n=51), and users switching from Aricept to GE donepezil (n=51). RESULTS: The average change in the EQ-5D utility indices rose significantly in the patients starting a new regimen of Aricept and its GE drug. The patients continuing an existing regimen of Aricept showed no significant differences, even after Aricept was switched to a GE drug. CONCLUSION: The QOL of patients starting a new regimen of Aricept and its GE drug improved. The QOL was maintained upon switching to the GE drug form.
Alzheimer Disease* ; Drugs, Generic ; Humans ; Pharmacies ; Prescriptions ; Quality of Life* ; Tablets

BACKGROUND: There is a scarcity of studies on the effects of government-mediated access pricing (GMAP) as another price regulation approach on drug availability.

OBJECTIVES: This study was done to compare changes in percent availability in drug stores from 2009 to 2011 of innovator drugs, competitor drugs and cheap generic drugs containing drug molecules affected by GMAP policies in the Philippines.

METHODS: Data from a random survey of 600 drug stores stratified by location and retail type, undertaken separately in 2009 and 2011 by IMS Health Philippines, were analyzed. Percent availability of the innovator brand, a competitor, and cheapest generic version for 11 selected drug molecules in said drug stores were compared for 2009 and 2011.

RESULTS: Of the 11 innovator drugs, 3 had significant reductions in percent availability in drugstores ranging from 9.7% to 39.0%. Among competitor drugs, 3 had reductions ranging from 37.4% to 81.7%. The availability of cheap generic versions of drug molecules in drug stores immensely increased in 2011 except for telmisartan.

CONCLUSION: GMAP could have adversely affected availability in drug stores of both innovator and competitor drugs. Cheaper generic drugs have become more available in the Philippines.

.telmisartan ; Mesh Scope Note For Drugs, Generic : Drugs Whose Drug Name Is Not Protected By A Trademark. They May Be Manufactured By Several Companies. ; Drugs, Generic ; Philippines ; Benzoates ; Benzimidazoles ; Pharmacies ; Costs And Cost Analysis ; Government ; Surveys And Questionnaires

Along with the enactment of a law separating the prescribing and dispensing of drugs in Korea in 2000, attempts at reducing medical expenses by generic substitution have been allowed since August 2001 so long as generic products are bioequivalent to the original products. In the pharmaceutical industry, the required development and investment to make generic products are much less in terms of time and money. Thus, the number of bioequivalence studies in Korea has increased. This has resulted in the need for bioequivalence recommendations (guidelines), taking into account the circumstances of the Korean pharmaceutical industry. In this paper, we provide procedures for making bioequivalence determinations for individual products acting on the circulatory system (30 drugs, 2011), the components of which are widely accepted for the development of generic products in Korea. These recommendations correspond with international guidelines, such as those of the US FDA and EMEA. For the 30 drugs that act on the circulatory system, we examined each in terms of subject selection (healthy volunteers vs. patients), dosage strength, dosage route, analytes to measure, and evaluation parameters, and prepared bioequivalence recommendations for individual products through an analysis of many published papers, US FDA and EMEA guidelines, and clinical trial websites. Based on the bioequivalence recommendations for individual products, we had several meetings in which KFDA officers (members of the New Drug Research team and the Office of Generic Drugs), three pharmacy professors with expertise in drug analysis and pharmacokinetics, and three professors of medicine with extensive experience in clinical trials participated to confirm and discuss the contents. Finally, the bioequivalence recommendations for individual products were provided on the KFDA website. The individual bioequivalence recommendations have been used by KFDA officers in drug evaluations and bioequivalency testing to improve consistency, clarity, and professionalism in the drug evaluation process. These recommendations will be useful for domestic pharmaceutical companies by shortening the time and cost associated with bioequivalence studies, especially in terms of standardized trial designs, dosage forms, and analytical methods.
Dosage Forms ; Drug Evaluation ; Drug Industry ; Drug Substitution ; Drugs, Generic ; Investments ; Jurisprudence ; Korea ; Pharmacy ; Therapeutic Equivalency

OBJECTIVE: Mirtax is a generic mirtazapine widely used since 2003. We conducted an open-label, uncontrolled 6-week study to evaluate the efficacy and safety of Mirtax for major depressive disorder (MDD). METHODS: Ninety three MDD patients with the diagnosis of MDD and 17-item Hamilton Depression Rating Scale (HDRS) score > or =14 were recruited. The HDRS, Montgomery-Asberg Depression Rating Scale (MADRS), and the Clinical Global Impressions-Severity Scale (CGI-S) were administered at baseline, 1, 2, 4 and 6 weeks. Response (> or =50% decrease in the HDRS or MADRS score), remission (absolute HDRS score < or =7 or MADRS score < or =10) and CGI-I score < or =2 were also calculated. Adverse event (AE) frequency and severity, weight, blood pressure, and pulse rate were checked to assess safety. RESULTS: The starting dosage was 11.5+/-6.4 mg/day, and the maintenance dosage was 23.1+/-9.4 mg/day. During 6 weeks, HDRS, MADRS and CGI-S scores decreased from 25.1+/-5.6 to 11.9+/-8.6 (mean change -13.1+/-8.3, p<0.001), from 30.2+/-6.3 to 13.73+/-10.40 (mean change -16.5+/-9.8, p<0.001), and from 5.0+/-0.8 to 2.5+/-1.3 (mean change -2.5+/-1.3, p<0.001), respectively. The percentages of responders, remitters by HDRS and patients with a CGI-I score < or =2 were 64.6%, 35.4% and 52.7%, respectively. Significant decreases in HDRS, MADRS and CGI-S scores were confirmed at week 1. The total rate of AEs was 32.3%; the most frequently reported AEs were sedation (4.3%) and constipation (4.3%). Weight was increased from 58.8+/-10.6 to 60.3+/-9.3 kg (mean change 0.7+/-1.7 kg, p=0.004). CONCLUSION: This study, as the first clinical trial of generic mirtazapine, demonstrated the efficacy and tolerability of Mirtax for MDD using a single treatment design.
Blood Pressure ; Constipation ; Depression ; Depressive Disorder, Major* ; Diagnosis ; Drugs, Generic ; Heart Rate ; Humans ; Prospective Studies*

PURPOSE: To compare the efficacy and safety of Sulosin D (PACIFICPHARMA, Korea) and Harnal D (ASTELLAS PHARMA KOREA, Korea) in treating patients with lower urinary tract symptoms associated with benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH). MATERIALS AND METHODS: This randomized, controlled, open-label, multicenter non-inferiority study was conducted at four sites in Korea. We randomly assigned 123 patients with an International Prostate Symptom Score (IPSS) > or =12 to receive either Sulosin D or Harnal D treatment for 8 weeks. The primary outcome was the mean change in IPSS from baseline to endpoint. Secondary outcomes were the mean change from baseline to endpoint in IPSS quality of life subscores, maximum uroflowmetry (Qmax), and post-voiding residuals (PVR). RESULTS: In all, 123 patients were randomly assigned (60 Sulosin D and 63 Harnal D). The changes in the total IPSS from baseline in the Sulosin D- and Harnal D-treated groups were -4.97 and -4.03, respectively. There were significant decreases compared with baseline in both groups. The mean difference (Sulosin D - Harnal D) was -0.91 (with a two-sided 90% confidence interval), inferring that Sulosin D was not inferior to Harnal D. The mean changes in the IPSS subscore, Qmax, and PVR from baseline were comparable between the groups (both p>0.05). During the treatment periods, the incidence of adverse events was 23.33% and 34.92% in the Sulosin D and Harnal D groups, respectively (p=0.1580). CONCLUSIONS: We demonstrate the non-inferiority of Sulosin D to Harnal D in patients with lower urinary tract symptoms associated with BPH.
Drugs, Generic ; Humans ; Incidence ; Korea ; Lower Urinary Tract Symptoms ; Prostate ; Prostatic Hyperplasia ; Quality of Life ; Sulfonamides

Because bioequivalence studies are performed using a crossover design, information on the intra-subject coefficient of variation (intra-CV) for pharmacokinetic measures is needed when determining the sample size. However, calculated intra-CVs based on bioequivalence results of identical generic drugs produce different estimates. In this study, we collected bioequivalence results using public resources from the Ministry of Food and Drug Safety (MFDS) and calculated the intra-CVs of various generics. For the generics with multiple bioequivalence results, pooled intra-CVs were calculated. The estimated intra-CVs of 142 bioequivalence studies were 14.7±8.2% for AUC and 21.7±8.8% for C(max). Intra-CVs of C(max) were larger than those of area under the concentration-time curve (AUC) in 129 studies (90.8%). For the 26 generics with multiple bioequivalence results, the coefficients of variation of intra-CVs between identical generics (mean±sd (min ~ max)) were 38.0±24.4% (1.9 ~ 105.3%) for AUC and 27.9±18.2 % (4.0 ~ 70.1%) for C(max). These results suggest that substantial variation exists among the bioequivalence results of identical generics. In this study, we presented the intra-CVs of various generics with their pooled intra-CVs. The estimated intra-CVs calculated in this study will provide useful information for planning future bioequivalence studies.
Area Under Curve ; Cross-Over Studies ; Drugs, Generic ; Sample Size* ; Therapeutic Equivalency*

Capsules ; China ; Drugs, Generic ; Humans ; Imatinib Mesylate ; Leukemia, Myeloid, Chronic-Phase

Because bioequivalence studies are performed using a crossover design, information on the intra-subject coefficient of variation (intra-CV) for pharmacokinetic measures is needed when determining the sample size. However, calculated intra-CVs based on bioequivalence results of identical generic drugs produce different estimates. In this study, we collected bioequivalence results using public resources from the Ministry of Food and Drug Safety (MFDS) and calculated the intra-CVs of various generics. For the generics with multiple bioequivalence results, pooled intra-CVs were calculated. The estimated intra-CVs of 142 bioequivalence studies were 14.7±8.2% for AUC and 21.7±8.8% for Cmax. Intra-CVs of Cmax were larger than those of area under the concentration-time curve (AUC) in 129 studies (90.8%). For the 26 generics with multiple bioequivalence results, the coefficients of variation of intra-CVs between identical generics (mean±sd (min ~ max)) were 38.0±24.4% (1.9 ~ 105.3%) for AUC and 27.9±18.2% (4.0 ~ 70.1%) for Cmax. These results suggest that substantial variation exists among the bioequivalence results of identical generics. In this study, we presented the intra-CVs of various generics with their pooled intra-CVs. The estimated intra-CVs calculated in this study will provide useful information for planning future bioequivalence studies. (This is republication of the article 'Transl Clin Pharmacol 2017;25:179-182' retracted from critical typographic errors. See the 'Retraction and Republication section of this issue for further information)
Area Under Curve ; Cross-Over Studies ; Drugs, Generic ; Sample Size ; Therapeutic Equivalency

BACKGROUND: Generic drugs are bioequivalent to their brand-name counterparts; however, concerns still exist regarding the effectiveness and safety of generic drugs because of small sample sizes and short follow-up time in most studies. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the long-term antihypertensive efficacy, cost-effectiveness and cardiovascular outcomes of generic drugs compared with brand-name drugs. METHODS: In a multicenter, community-based study including 7955 hypertensive patients who were prospectively followed up for an average of 2.5 years, we used the propensity-score-matching method to match the patients using brand-name drugs to those using generic drugs in a ratio of 1:2, 2176 patients using brand-name drugs and 4352 patients using generic drugs. RESULTS: There were no significant differences between generic drugs and brand-name drugs in blood pressure (BP)-lowering efficacy, BP control rate, and cardiovascular outcomes including coronary heart disease and stroke. The adjusted mean (95% confidence interval [CI]) of systolic BP (SBP)-lowering was -7.9 mmHg (95% CI, -9.9 to -5.9) in the brand-name drug group and -7.1 mmHg (95% CI, -9.1 to -5.1) in the generic drug group after adjusting for age, sex, body mass index, number of antihypertensive drugs and traditionally cardiovascular risk factors. Among patients aged <60 years, brand-name drugs had a higher BP control rate (47% vs. 41%; P = 0.02) and a greater effect in lowering SBP compared with generic drugs, with the between-group difference of 1.5 mmHg (95% CI, 0.2-2.8; P = 0.03). BP control rate was higher in male patients using brand-name drugs compared with those using generic drugs (46% vs. 40%; P = 0.01). Generic drugs treatment yielded an average annual incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of $315.4 per patient per mmHg decrease in SBP compared with brand-name drugs treatment. CONCLUSIONS Our data suggested that generic drugs are suitable and cost-effective in improving hypertension management and facilitating public health benefits, especially in low- and middle-income areas.
Aged ; Antihypertensive Agents/therapeutic use* ; Blood Pressure ; China ; Drugs, Generic/therapeutic use* ; Humans ; Male ; Prospective Studies