4.0 Review

Drug Information Association Pharmacovigilance and Risk Management Strategies 2017: Overview of the Generic Drug Program and Surveillance

Journal

THERAPEUTIC INNOVATION & REGULATORY SCIENCE
Volume 53, Issue 2, Pages 249-253

Publisher

SAGE PUBLICATIONS INC
DOI: 10.1177/2168479018774557

Keywords

postmarketing; safety; surveillance; generic drugs; office of generic drugs; bioequivalence; pharmaceutical equivalence

Funding

  1. Intramural FDA HHS [FD999999] Funding Source: Medline

Ask authors/readers for more resources

The US Food and Drug Administration's (FDA's) generic drug program has dramatically increased the availability of affordable, high quality generic drugs. The foundation of generic drug approvals is a two-tiered regulatory framework of pharmaceutical equivalence and bioequivalence. Intrinsic to both of these is consideration of the clinical relevance of formulation and bioequivalence data to support an inference of therapeutic equivalence, based on clear evidence that there are no significant differences between the generic drug and the brand name drug. These analyses allow FDA to determine that the generic drug will perform in the patient in the same way, with the same safety and efficacy profiles, as the brand name drug. Allowable differences and the precise definition of what is meant by equivalence are critical to maintaining the quality, efficacy, and safety of generic drugs. The FDA Office of Generic Drugs' (OGD's) Clinical Safety Surveillance Staff (CSSS) has developed investigative processes that complement the broader FDA safety efforts that focus on the potential impact of allowable differences and equivalence determinations for generic drugs. Two recent examples of the CSSS's processes include a clonidine transdermal system and lansoprazole oral disintegrating tablet. Ongoing efforts of the CSSS result in improvements to the FDA's review processes and the quality of generic drugs in the US market.

Authors

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

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.0
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available