4.4 Review

Generic Medicinal Products in Immunosuppressive Therapy-Should It be a Challenge for Therapeutic Drug Monitoring?

Journal

THERAPEUTIC DRUG MONITORING
Volume 45, Issue 2, Pages 173-190

Publisher

LIPPINCOTT WILLIAMS & WILKINS
DOI: 10.1097/FTD.0000000000001041

Keywords

generics; bioequivalence; immunosuppressants; TDM

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Immunosuppressants with narrow therapeutic indices (NTIDs), such as cyclosporine, tacrolimus, everolimus, and sirolimus, raise concerns about the introduction of generics into the drug market and the need for bioequivalence testing. Different regulatory agencies have different acceptance criteria for bioequivalence, with the European Union and Canada adopting specific ranges for the area under the curve (AUC) while the US FDA uses classic acceptance criteria. This study discusses the need for a global consensus on bioequivalence testing for NTIDs and highlights the importance of careful drug switching and therapeutic drug monitoring in patients.
Immunosuppressants have a narrow therapeutic index (NTIDs). Indisputably cyclosporine, tacrolimus, everolimus, and sirolimus have NTIDs, and only in the case of mycophenolic acid, a scientific discussion has not been yet concluded. Their specificities highlight the implications for generics introduced into the drug market, more precisely, with bioequivalence testing. In the European Union, the European Medicines Agency (EMA) released the Guideline on the Investigation of Bioequivalence. The bioequivalence (BE) of the generic (tested, T) versus original (reference, R) product should be confirmed by obtaining a 90% confidence interval (CI) for the T:R ratio of each of the 2 decisive pharmacokinetic parameters, namely, the area under the curve (AUC) between 90.00% and 111.11%. A similar approach (90.00%-112.00%) for AUC was adopted by the Canadian Agency for Drugs and Technologies in Health (CADTH) for NTIDs; however, the US Food and Drug Administration is still based on classic acceptance criteria: 90% CI between 80.00% and 125.00% but with special requirements of BE testing. A discussion about long-expected global consensus was performed in this study based on the literature concerning BE testing in the case of NTIDs. The narrow acceptance criteria reduce the potential mean difference in bioavailability between generic and original products by a few percent. To identify this problem, special attention has been paid to switching drugs (generic-generic, original-generic) and therapeutic drug monitoring after conversion (TDM). There is no global consensus on the acceptance criteria for the BE of generic drugs; therefore, consensus and harmonization are strictly necessary. This study presents a review of the generic drug market and its classification by manufacturers, drug agencies, and dates of marketing authorization. Guidelines for TDM optimization (during switching/conversion) have been proposed. Physicians and clinical pharmacists should pay special attention to switching immunosuppressive drugs between original versus generic formulations, and generic versus generic formulations. Patients and their families should be educated on the risks associated with uncontrolled conversion.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.4
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available