In Vivo Bioequivalence and In Vitro Similarity Factor (f2) for Dissolution Profile Comparisons of Extended Release Formulations: How and When Do They Match?

ABSTRACTPurposeTo investigate how likely two extended release formulations are to be bioequivalent when they demonstrate f2 similarity.MethodDissolution profiles were simulated using the Weibull model and varying model parameters around those of a reference profile. The f2 values were calculated for the comparisons of each simulation with the reference profile. The in vivo inputs obtained from an in vitro-in vivo correlation model were convolved with a unit impulse response function. The AUC, Cmax, and Tmax from each simulated in vivo concentration profile were compared to the reference profile. The AUCR (AUC ratio) and CmaxR (Cmax ratio) were determined. The consistency between f2 and bioequivalence was investigated.ResultsThe relationships between AUCR, CmaxR, f2 and the Weibull model parameters demonstrate that the bioequivalence regions enclosed by the contour lines of 80% and 125% of AUCR and CmaxR were generally close to the regions enclosed by the f2 = 50 contour line, but did not exactly match, especially when Dmax and B deviated from the reference values.ConclusionsWhen f2 is used for in vitro dissolution profile comparison, the completeness of the dissolution profiles should not differ more than 10%, and the shapes of the dissolution profiles should not be significantly different.

[1]  J. Dressman,et al.  Forecasting the Oral Absorption Behavior of Poorly Soluble Weak Bases Using Solubility and Dissolution Studies in Biorelevant Media , 2002, Pharmaceutical Research.

[2]  Yi Tsong,et al.  In Vitro Dissolution Profile Comparison—Statistics and Analysis of the Similarity Factor, f2 , 1998, Pharmaceutical Research.

[3]  D P Vaughan,et al.  Mathematical basis of point-area deconvolution method for determining in vivo input functions. , 1978, Journal of pharmaceutical sciences.

[4]  Michael Levin Waiver of In Vivo Bioavailability and Bioequivalence Studies for Immediate-Release Solid Oral Dosage Forms Based on a Biopharmaceutics Classification System , 2001 .

[5]  J. Devane,et al.  Review of methodologies for the comparison of dissolution profile data. , 1997, Advances in experimental medicine and biology.

[6]  F. Langenbucher Handling of computational in vitro/in vivo correlation problems by Microsoft Excel II. Distribution functions and moments. , 2003, European journal of pharmaceutics and biopharmaceutics : official journal of Arbeitsgemeinschaft fur Pharmazeutische Verfahrenstechnik e.V.

[7]  Filippos Kesisoglou,et al.  Forecasting in vivo oral absorption and food effect of micronized and nanosized aprepitant formulations in humans. , 2010, European journal of pharmaceutics and biopharmaceutics : official journal of Arbeitsgemeinschaft fur Pharmazeutische Verfahrenstechnik e.V.

[8]  J. W. Moore,et al.  Mathematical comparison of dissolution profiles , 1996 .

[9]  Jennifer B Dressman,et al.  Application of biorelevant dissolution tests to the prediction of in vivo performance of diclofenac sodium from an oral modified-release pellet dosage form. , 2009, European journal of pharmaceutical sciences : official journal of the European Federation for Pharmaceutical Sciences.

[10]  Jennifer B Dressman,et al.  Designing biorelevant dissolution tests for lipid formulations: case example--lipid suspension of RZ-50. , 2008, European journal of pharmaceutics and biopharmaceutics : official journal of Arbeitsgemeinschaft fur Pharmazeutische Verfahrenstechnik e.V.

[11]  Vinod P. Shah,et al.  FDA Guidance for Industry 1 Extended Release Solid Oral Dosage forms: Development, Evaluation, and Application of In Vitro/In Vivo Correlations , 1997 .

[12]  F. Langenbucher Handling of computational in vitro/in vivo correlation problems by Microsoft Excel: III. Convolution and deconvolution. , 2003, European journal of pharmaceutics and biopharmaceutics : official journal of Arbeitsgemeinschaft fur Pharmazeutische Verfahrenstechnik e.V.

[13]  J. Polli,et al.  Methods to compare dissolution profiles and a rationale for wide dissolution specifications for metoprolol tartrate tablets. , 1997, Journal of pharmaceutical sciences.

[14]  Michael Levin,et al.  Supac-Mr: Modified Release Solid Oral Dosage Forms‚ÄîScale-Up and Postapproval Changes: Chemistry, Manufacturing, and Controls; In Vitro Dissolution Testing and In Vivo Bioequivalence Documentation , 2001 .

[15]  Christos Reppas,et al.  Biorelevant Dissolution Testing to Predict the Plasma Profile of Lipophilic Drugs After Oral Administration , 2001, Pharmaceutical Research.

[16]  P. Costa,et al.  Modeling and comparison of dissolution profiles. , 2001, European journal of pharmaceutical sciences : official journal of the European Federation for Pharmaceutical Sciences.