Demonstrating bioequivalence of locally acting orally inhaled drug products (OIPs): Workshop summary report

Wallace P. Adams, Richard C. Ahrens, Mei Ling Chen, David Christopher, Badrul A. Chowdhury, Dale P. Conner, Richard Dalby, Kevin Fitzgerald, Leslie Hendeles, Anthony J. Hickey, Günther Hochhaus, Beth L Laube, Paul Lucas, Sau L. Lee, Svetlana Lyapustina, Bing Li, Dennis O'Connor, Neil Parikh, David A. Parkins, Prasad PeriGary R. Pitcairn, Michael Riebe, Partha Roy, Tushar Shah, Gur Jai Pal Singh, Sandra Suarez Sharp, Julie D. Suman, Marjolein Weda, Janet Woodcock, Lawrence Yu

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Abstract

This March 2009 Workshop Summary Report was sponsored by Product Quality Research Institute (PQRI) based on a proposal by the Inhalation and Nasal Technology Focus Group (INTFG) of the American Association of Pharmaceutical Scientists (AAPS). Participants from the pharmaceutical industry, academia and regulatory bodies from the United States, Europe, India, and Brazil attended the workshop with the objective of presenting, reviewing, and discussing recommendations for demonstrating bioequivalence (BE) that may be considered in the development of orally inhaled drug products and regulatory guidances for new drug applications (NDAs), abbreviated NDAs (ANDAs), and postapproval changes. The workshop addressed areas related to in vitro approaches to demonstrating BE, biomarker strategies, imaging techniques, in vivo approaches to establishing local delivery equivalence and device design similarity. The workshop presented material that provided a baseline for the current understanding of orally inhaled drug products (OIPs) and identified gaps in knowledge and consensus that, if answered, might allow the design of a robust, streamlined method for the BE assessment of locally acting inhalation drugs. These included the following: (1) cascade impactor (CI) studies are not a good 2predictor of the pulmonary dose; more detailed studies on in vitro/in vivo correlations (e.g., suitability of CI studies for assessing differences in the regional deposition) are needed; (2) there is a lack of consensus on the appropriate statistical methods for assessing in vitro results; (3) fully validated and standardized imaging methods, while capable of providing information on pulmonary dose and regional deposition, might not be applicable to the BE of inhaled products mainly due to the problems of having access to radiolabeled innovator product; (4) if alternatives to current methods for establishing local delivery BE of OIPs cannot be established, biomarkers (pharmacodynamic or clinical endpoints) with a sufficiently steep dose-response need to be identified and validated for all relevant drug classes; and (5) the utility of pharmacokinetic studies for evaluating "local pulmonary delivery" equivalence deserves more attention. A summary of action items for seminars and working groups to address these topics in the future is also presented.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)1-29
Number of pages29
JournalJournal of Aerosol Medicine and Pulmonary Drug Delivery
Volume23
Issue number1
DOIs
StatePublished - Feb 1 2010

Fingerprint

Therapeutic Equivalency
Education
Pharmaceutical Preparations
Lung
Biomarkers
Inhalation Administration
Equipment Design
Drug Industry
Focus Groups
Nose
Inhalation
Brazil
India
Pharmacokinetics
Technology
In Vitro Techniques

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Pulmonary and Respiratory Medicine
  • Pharmacology (medical)
  • Pharmaceutical Science

Cite this

Demonstrating bioequivalence of locally acting orally inhaled drug products (OIPs) : Workshop summary report. / Adams, Wallace P.; Ahrens, Richard C.; Chen, Mei Ling; Christopher, David; Chowdhury, Badrul A.; Conner, Dale P.; Dalby, Richard; Fitzgerald, Kevin; Hendeles, Leslie; Hickey, Anthony J.; Hochhaus, Günther; Laube, Beth L; Lucas, Paul; Lee, Sau L.; Lyapustina, Svetlana; Li, Bing; O'Connor, Dennis; Parikh, Neil; Parkins, David A.; Peri, Prasad; Pitcairn, Gary R.; Riebe, Michael; Roy, Partha; Shah, Tushar; Singh, Gur Jai Pal; Sharp, Sandra Suarez; Suman, Julie D.; Weda, Marjolein; Woodcock, Janet; Yu, Lawrence.

In: Journal of Aerosol Medicine and Pulmonary Drug Delivery, Vol. 23, No. 1, 01.02.2010, p. 1-29.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Adams, WP, Ahrens, RC, Chen, ML, Christopher, D, Chowdhury, BA, Conner, DP, Dalby, R, Fitzgerald, K, Hendeles, L, Hickey, AJ, Hochhaus, G, Laube, BL, Lucas, P, Lee, SL, Lyapustina, S, Li, B, O'Connor, D, Parikh, N, Parkins, DA, Peri, P, Pitcairn, GR, Riebe, M, Roy, P, Shah, T, Singh, GJP, Sharp, SS, Suman, JD, Weda, M, Woodcock, J & Yu, L 2010, 'Demonstrating bioequivalence of locally acting orally inhaled drug products (OIPs): Workshop summary report', Journal of Aerosol Medicine and Pulmonary Drug Delivery, vol. 23, no. 1, pp. 1-29. https://doi.org/10.1089/jamp.2009.0803
Adams, Wallace P. ; Ahrens, Richard C. ; Chen, Mei Ling ; Christopher, David ; Chowdhury, Badrul A. ; Conner, Dale P. ; Dalby, Richard ; Fitzgerald, Kevin ; Hendeles, Leslie ; Hickey, Anthony J. ; Hochhaus, Günther ; Laube, Beth L ; Lucas, Paul ; Lee, Sau L. ; Lyapustina, Svetlana ; Li, Bing ; O'Connor, Dennis ; Parikh, Neil ; Parkins, David A. ; Peri, Prasad ; Pitcairn, Gary R. ; Riebe, Michael ; Roy, Partha ; Shah, Tushar ; Singh, Gur Jai Pal ; Sharp, Sandra Suarez ; Suman, Julie D. ; Weda, Marjolein ; Woodcock, Janet ; Yu, Lawrence. / Demonstrating bioequivalence of locally acting orally inhaled drug products (OIPs) : Workshop summary report. In: Journal of Aerosol Medicine and Pulmonary Drug Delivery. 2010 ; Vol. 23, No. 1. pp. 1-29.
@article{27a5c2fbc8fc41c18b4743a7f660db18,
title = "Demonstrating bioequivalence of locally acting orally inhaled drug products (OIPs): Workshop summary report",
abstract = "This March 2009 Workshop Summary Report was sponsored by Product Quality Research Institute (PQRI) based on a proposal by the Inhalation and Nasal Technology Focus Group (INTFG) of the American Association of Pharmaceutical Scientists (AAPS). Participants from the pharmaceutical industry, academia and regulatory bodies from the United States, Europe, India, and Brazil attended the workshop with the objective of presenting, reviewing, and discussing recommendations for demonstrating bioequivalence (BE) that may be considered in the development of orally inhaled drug products and regulatory guidances for new drug applications (NDAs), abbreviated NDAs (ANDAs), and postapproval changes. The workshop addressed areas related to in vitro approaches to demonstrating BE, biomarker strategies, imaging techniques, in vivo approaches to establishing local delivery equivalence and device design similarity. The workshop presented material that provided a baseline for the current understanding of orally inhaled drug products (OIPs) and identified gaps in knowledge and consensus that, if answered, might allow the design of a robust, streamlined method for the BE assessment of locally acting inhalation drugs. These included the following: (1) cascade impactor (CI) studies are not a good 2predictor of the pulmonary dose; more detailed studies on in vitro/in vivo correlations (e.g., suitability of CI studies for assessing differences in the regional deposition) are needed; (2) there is a lack of consensus on the appropriate statistical methods for assessing in vitro results; (3) fully validated and standardized imaging methods, while capable of providing information on pulmonary dose and regional deposition, might not be applicable to the BE of inhaled products mainly due to the problems of having access to radiolabeled innovator product; (4) if alternatives to current methods for establishing local delivery BE of OIPs cannot be established, biomarkers (pharmacodynamic or clinical endpoints) with a sufficiently steep dose-response need to be identified and validated for all relevant drug classes; and (5) the utility of pharmacokinetic studies for evaluating {"}local pulmonary delivery{"} equivalence deserves more attention. A summary of action items for seminars and working groups to address these topics in the future is also presented.",
author = "Adams, {Wallace P.} and Ahrens, {Richard C.} and Chen, {Mei Ling} and David Christopher and Chowdhury, {Badrul A.} and Conner, {Dale P.} and Richard Dalby and Kevin Fitzgerald and Leslie Hendeles and Hickey, {Anthony J.} and G{\"u}nther Hochhaus and Laube, {Beth L} and Paul Lucas and Lee, {Sau L.} and Svetlana Lyapustina and Bing Li and Dennis O'Connor and Neil Parikh and Parkins, {David A.} and Prasad Peri and Pitcairn, {Gary R.} and Michael Riebe and Partha Roy and Tushar Shah and Singh, {Gur Jai Pal} and Sharp, {Sandra Suarez} and Suman, {Julie D.} and Marjolein Weda and Janet Woodcock and Lawrence Yu",
year = "2010",
month = "2",
day = "1",
doi = "10.1089/jamp.2009.0803",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "23",
pages = "1--29",
journal = "Journal of Aerosol Medicine and Pulmonary Drug Delivery",
issn = "1941-2711",
publisher = "Mary Ann Liebert Inc.",
number = "1",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Demonstrating bioequivalence of locally acting orally inhaled drug products (OIPs)

T2 - Workshop summary report

AU - Adams, Wallace P.

AU - Ahrens, Richard C.

AU - Chen, Mei Ling

AU - Christopher, David

AU - Chowdhury, Badrul A.

AU - Conner, Dale P.

AU - Dalby, Richard

AU - Fitzgerald, Kevin

AU - Hendeles, Leslie

AU - Hickey, Anthony J.

AU - Hochhaus, Günther

AU - Laube, Beth L

AU - Lucas, Paul

AU - Lee, Sau L.

AU - Lyapustina, Svetlana

AU - Li, Bing

AU - O'Connor, Dennis

AU - Parikh, Neil

AU - Parkins, David A.

AU - Peri, Prasad

AU - Pitcairn, Gary R.

AU - Riebe, Michael

AU - Roy, Partha

AU - Shah, Tushar

AU - Singh, Gur Jai Pal

AU - Sharp, Sandra Suarez

AU - Suman, Julie D.

AU - Weda, Marjolein

AU - Woodcock, Janet

AU - Yu, Lawrence

PY - 2010/2/1

Y1 - 2010/2/1

N2 - This March 2009 Workshop Summary Report was sponsored by Product Quality Research Institute (PQRI) based on a proposal by the Inhalation and Nasal Technology Focus Group (INTFG) of the American Association of Pharmaceutical Scientists (AAPS). Participants from the pharmaceutical industry, academia and regulatory bodies from the United States, Europe, India, and Brazil attended the workshop with the objective of presenting, reviewing, and discussing recommendations for demonstrating bioequivalence (BE) that may be considered in the development of orally inhaled drug products and regulatory guidances for new drug applications (NDAs), abbreviated NDAs (ANDAs), and postapproval changes. The workshop addressed areas related to in vitro approaches to demonstrating BE, biomarker strategies, imaging techniques, in vivo approaches to establishing local delivery equivalence and device design similarity. The workshop presented material that provided a baseline for the current understanding of orally inhaled drug products (OIPs) and identified gaps in knowledge and consensus that, if answered, might allow the design of a robust, streamlined method for the BE assessment of locally acting inhalation drugs. These included the following: (1) cascade impactor (CI) studies are not a good 2predictor of the pulmonary dose; more detailed studies on in vitro/in vivo correlations (e.g., suitability of CI studies for assessing differences in the regional deposition) are needed; (2) there is a lack of consensus on the appropriate statistical methods for assessing in vitro results; (3) fully validated and standardized imaging methods, while capable of providing information on pulmonary dose and regional deposition, might not be applicable to the BE of inhaled products mainly due to the problems of having access to radiolabeled innovator product; (4) if alternatives to current methods for establishing local delivery BE of OIPs cannot be established, biomarkers (pharmacodynamic or clinical endpoints) with a sufficiently steep dose-response need to be identified and validated for all relevant drug classes; and (5) the utility of pharmacokinetic studies for evaluating "local pulmonary delivery" equivalence deserves more attention. A summary of action items for seminars and working groups to address these topics in the future is also presented.

AB - This March 2009 Workshop Summary Report was sponsored by Product Quality Research Institute (PQRI) based on a proposal by the Inhalation and Nasal Technology Focus Group (INTFG) of the American Association of Pharmaceutical Scientists (AAPS). Participants from the pharmaceutical industry, academia and regulatory bodies from the United States, Europe, India, and Brazil attended the workshop with the objective of presenting, reviewing, and discussing recommendations for demonstrating bioequivalence (BE) that may be considered in the development of orally inhaled drug products and regulatory guidances for new drug applications (NDAs), abbreviated NDAs (ANDAs), and postapproval changes. The workshop addressed areas related to in vitro approaches to demonstrating BE, biomarker strategies, imaging techniques, in vivo approaches to establishing local delivery equivalence and device design similarity. The workshop presented material that provided a baseline for the current understanding of orally inhaled drug products (OIPs) and identified gaps in knowledge and consensus that, if answered, might allow the design of a robust, streamlined method for the BE assessment of locally acting inhalation drugs. These included the following: (1) cascade impactor (CI) studies are not a good 2predictor of the pulmonary dose; more detailed studies on in vitro/in vivo correlations (e.g., suitability of CI studies for assessing differences in the regional deposition) are needed; (2) there is a lack of consensus on the appropriate statistical methods for assessing in vitro results; (3) fully validated and standardized imaging methods, while capable of providing information on pulmonary dose and regional deposition, might not be applicable to the BE of inhaled products mainly due to the problems of having access to radiolabeled innovator product; (4) if alternatives to current methods for establishing local delivery BE of OIPs cannot be established, biomarkers (pharmacodynamic or clinical endpoints) with a sufficiently steep dose-response need to be identified and validated for all relevant drug classes; and (5) the utility of pharmacokinetic studies for evaluating "local pulmonary delivery" equivalence deserves more attention. A summary of action items for seminars and working groups to address these topics in the future is also presented.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=76649105779&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=76649105779&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1089/jamp.2009.0803

DO - 10.1089/jamp.2009.0803

M3 - Article

C2 - 20131983

AN - SCOPUS:76649105779

VL - 23

SP - 1

EP - 29

JO - Journal of Aerosol Medicine and Pulmonary Drug Delivery

JF - Journal of Aerosol Medicine and Pulmonary Drug Delivery

SN - 1941-2711

IS - 1

ER -