美国FDA《特定药物的生物等效性指导原则》 高变异性药物生物等效性指导原则调研

目的：研究美国食品药品管理局（FDA）《特定药物的生物等效性指导原则》对高变异性药物生物等效性研究相关规定,为我国仿制药质量和疗效一致性评价工作提供借鉴和帮助。方法：从剂型、给药方式、试验设计、受试者选择、给药条件、检测物质选择、豁免条件、体外溶出试验等多个方面对美国FDA公布的高变异性药物《特定药物的生物等效性指导原则》进行详细分析,并特别指出涉及我国仿制药质量与疗效一致性评价首批品种的高变异性药物。结果：美国FDA公布的涉及高变异性药物《特定药物的生物等效性指导原则》对具体化学仿制药的生物等效性评价从多个方面进行较为详细的规范,是对美国FDA相关生物等效性总则的补充和解读,对仿制药的发展有重要的推动作用。结论：在我国国家食品药品监督管理总局（CFDA）尚未颁布针对具体高变异性药物相关生物等效性指导原则的背景下,美国FDA《特定药物的生物等效性指导原则》中对高变异性药物相关规范对我国正在进行的仿制药质量和疗效一致性评价具有一定指导和借鉴意义。     

FDA对撒拌及经鼻胃管等特殊给药方式的固体口服仿制药生物等效性试验要求的分析

摘 要研究美国食品药品管理局（FDA）对撒拌及经鼻胃管等特殊给药方式的固体口服仿制药如何开展生物等效性试验的要求及相关指导原则,针对该类仿制药物关键质量属性、生物等效性试验的设计、体外鼻胃管对比试验等多个方面对FDA发布的《单项品种的生物等效性指导原则》中相关内容进行详细分析,为企业研发该类仿制药产品及开展相关品种的一致性评价工作及提供借鉴和帮助。     

仿制药质量与疗效一致性评价的生物豁免原则及各国及国际组织的生物等效性豁免品种

目的 为我国仿制药质量与疗效一致性评价的生物等效性试验,提供可豁免药物品种的参考。方法 以《人体生物等效性试验豁免指导原则（征求意见稿）》为基础,以我国一致性评价的首批药物为前提,简要介绍和归纳美国食品药品管理局（FDA）、世界卫生组织（WHO）、欧洲药品局（EMA）的生物等效性试验豁免的标准和可申请豁免的药物品种。结果 对比FDA,289个一致性评价药物品种中可申请豁免的有59个,不可申请豁免的有19个;对比WHO,可豁免的药物有10个,EMA中有1个。结论 目前,我国生物等效性试验豁免的具体药物名单尚未公布,企业应该对比参考国内外的相关标准和具体药物,以加快一致性评价工作的进展。     

我国特定药物生物等效性研究技术指导原则汇总及思考

生物等效性试验是评价仿制药与原研药质量和疗效一致性的重要方法,试验方法的科学性、评价标准的适用性、数据资料的规范性直接影响对仿制药质量和疗效评价的准确性。对中国2020年8月以来累计发布的48个特定药物生物等效性研究技术指导原则（含征求意见稿16个）进行逐个汇总、梳理,从多个维度对已发布的特定药物生物等效性研究技术指导原则的发布情况进行概括,结合美国、欧盟及日本等国际先进监管机构相关工作经验,对中国特定药物生物等效性研究技术指导原则的发布情况提出一般考虑,以期提高仿制药质量和疗效,进一步满足临床需求的同时减轻患者用药负担。     

FDA对咀嚼片生物等效性要求的分析

研究国内外药品监管机构对咀嚼片仿制药品种的关键质量属性及生物等效性试验的要求及相关指导原则,为企业开展相关品种的一致性评价工作提供借鉴和帮助。从试验设计、检测物质选择、受试者选择、给药条件、豁免条件、体外溶出试验等多个方面对FDA发布的《单项品种的生物等效性指导原则》中相关内容进行详细分析,以指导我国咀嚼片仿制药质量与疗效的一致性评价。     

美国FDA《仿制药开发的个药指导原则》中局部外用药的生物等效性评价方法介绍和分析

为了明确国外先进监管机构对皮肤局部外用仿制药生物等效性评价的要求,该文汇总了美国FDA截至2021年4月发布的《仿制药开发个药指导原则》中收录的局部外用药生物等效性评价方法,介绍和分析了美国FDA评价局部外用仿制药生物等效性的常用研究方法和相关规定,以期为我国局部外用仿制药的开发、评价,以及制定适合我国国情的局部外用药...     

美国FDA鼻用制剂相关个药指导原则汇总分析

目的 通过梳理美国食品药品监督管理局（Food and Drug Administration,FDA）发布的鼻用制剂相关个药指导原则,总结FDA对鼻用制剂仿制药的研究要求,为国内鼻用制剂仿制药开发和评价提供参考。方法 在FDA官网发布的个药指导原则中筛选出鼻用制剂相关指导原则,进行汇总分析。结果 目前FDA现行43个鼻用制剂相关个药指导原则,推荐的生物等效性方法包括体外生物等效性研究、药动学研究、比较临床终点研究方法等,因不同品种而有所区别。部分个药指导原则已收录先进的体外检测技术如形态定向拉曼光谱用于代替体内临床试验。本文对不同种类生物等效性试验的试验设计、主要研究终点和等效性标准方面进行了代表性描述。结论 本文对FDA发布的鼻用制剂相关个药指导原则进行了汇总分析,为国内鼻用制剂仿制药开发和评价提供参考。     

中国他达拉非片生物等效性试验研究现状及其审评要求

他达拉非片用于治疗男性勃起功能障碍及改善勃起功能障碍合并良性前列腺增生的症状和体征,属临床常用药物,也是原研药品专利到期后多家企业立项仿制的重点关注品种之一。结合欧盟、美国该品种生物等效性试验指导原则要求,通过对近年来中国开展的他达拉非片生物等效性试验结果进行总结、分析,并对其生物等效性试验审评中发现的多种情况提出一般考虑,为他达拉非片仿制药研发中的生物等效性试验提供依据与参考。     

对提高人体生物等效性试验安全性策略的探讨

人体生物等效性试验虽然相对简单,但安全性却不容忽视。结合美国食品药品监督管理局(FDA)对仿制药单品种生物等效性(bioequivalence,BE)试验的研究指南,我们在完成多项仿制药人体生物等效性试验的过程中,在保护受试者安全方面总结了一些经验和体会。针对特殊药物,充分考虑到药物的药理活性可能给受试者带来的安全性问题,科学审慎地从试验方案设计、试验用药、受试者筛选、临床监护到生物样品采集等诸多环节均将受试者的安全和权益考虑在内,尽可能降低受试者的风险,保护受试者安全。文章旨在通过对人体生物等效性试验中安全性策略的探讨,为我国人体生物等效性试验的规范设计操作和提高安全性提供一些建设性意见。     

FDA药物体内生物等效性指导原则介绍

１９９５年出版的美国药典（ＵＳＰ）第２３版收载了美国食品药品管理局（ＦＤＡ）制定的药物体内生物等效性试验指导原则。该指导原则分为两部分，一部分是关于生物等效性试验的指导原则，另一部分是几个具体药物的生物利用度的实验规程。该指导原则由ＦＤＡ的基本药物办公室（ＯＧＤ）下属的生物等效性评价处（ＤｉｖｉｓｉｏｎｏｆＢｉｏｅｑｕｉｖａ－ｌｅｎｃｅ）制订。本文介绍第一部分内容。１引言美国ＯＧＤ下属的生物等效性评价处通常选用健康受试者比较试验制剂和参比制剂的体内吸收速率和吸收度来评价其生物等效性。一个标准的体…     

FDA对药品说明书中提供钠、钾和磷的定量信息的相关要求

美国食品药品监督管理局（FDA）于2022年9月发布了“人用OTC和处方药品说明书中钠、钾和磷的定量信息供企业用的指导原则（草案）”。该指导原则草案要求人用处方药和非处方药说明书中要提供钠、钾和磷的定量信息，详细阐明了对这些信息内容和位置的建议并在附录中列举了示例。而中国目前还没有类似的指导原则，详细介绍FDA该指导原则草案的主要内容，以期对我国这类说明书的撰写和监管有所帮助。     

FDA对药品说明书“要点”部分的产品标题和美国首次批准的撰写要求

美国食品药品管理局（FDA）于2018年1月公布了“人用处方药和生物制品处方资料要点中的产品标题和美国首次批准——内容和格式行业指导原则”,提出了药品说明书中关于人用处方药和生物制品的产品标题和美国首次批准年份的内容和格式的撰写建议。介绍FDA该指导原则的主要内容,为细化我国药品说明书指导原则提供参考。     

On statistical power for average bioequivalence testing under replicated crossover designs

In its recent guidance on bioequivalence, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) recommends a two-sequence, four-period (2 x 4) replicated crossover design be used for assessment of population and individual bioequivalence [FDA. Guidance for Industry on Statistical Approaches to Establishing Bioequivalence; Center for Drug Evaluation and Research, Food and Drug Administration: Rockville, MD, 2001]. The recommended replicated crossover design not only allows estimates of both the inter-subject and the intra-subject variabilities and the variability due to subject-by-formulation interaction, but also provides an assessment of average bioequivalence (ABE). In this article, power function for assessment of ABE under a general replicated crossover design (i.e., a 2 x 2m replicated crossover design) based on the traditional analysis of variance model and the mixed effects model as suggested by the FDA are studied. It is found that the power of a 2 x 2m replicated crossover design depends upon the variability due to subject-by-formulation interaction and the number of replicates. Based on the derived power function, formula for sample size calculation for assessment of ABE under a 2 x 2m replicated crossover design is also provided.     

FDA对药物相互作用研究及其说明书该项的建议

FDA在2012年公布了＂药物相互作用——研究设计、资料分析、对给药的影响和对说明书的建议＂的指导原则（草案）。介绍其中的Ⅱ指导原则摘要和Ⅵ对说明书的建议两部分,希望对我国药物相互作用研究和说明书撰写有益。     

FDA《根据BCS豁免速释固体口服制剂体内生物利用度和生物等效性研究的指导原则》介绍

美国食品药品管理局于2017年12月发布了《根据生物药剂学分类系统豁免速释固体口服制剂体内生物利用度和生物等效性研究指导原则》的正式版本。该指导原则指出原料药属于生物药剂学分类系统（BCS）1类（而且制剂是速溶的）和3类（而且制剂是极速溶的）的速释（IR）固体口服制剂的生物利用度（BA）或生物等效性（BE）研究可获得豁免。正式版本对2015年草案版做了许多修订。详细介绍该指导原则的正式版本并标明约30处修订。该指导原则对我国IR固体口服制剂BA或BE研究的豁免和监管有重要参考价值。     

Progress report on the guidance for industry for statistical aspects of the design, analysis, and interpretation of chronic rodent carcinogenicity studies of pharmaceuticals

The U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) is in the process of preparing a draft Guidance for Industry document on the statistical aspects of carcinogenicity studies of pharmaceuticals for public comment. The purpose of the document is to provide statistical guidance for the design of carcinogenicity experiments, methods of statistical analysis of study data, interpretation of study results, presentation of data and results in reports, and submission of electronic study data. This article covers the genesis of the guidance document and some statistical methods in study design, data analysis, and interpretation of results included in the draft FDA guidance document.     

Nonclinical safety testing of imaging agents,contrast agents and radiopharmaceuticals

Drug development includes imaging agents, contrast agents and radiopharmaceuticals; these materials differ from therapeutic drugs in that they are largely used to diagnose and/or monitor diseases and not treat them. Consequently, nonclinical safety testing needs are different. An examination of testing packages supporting clinical entry and/or marketing of these materials has shown a common approach to some study types (eg, imaging, biodistribution and toxicity testing). Recent regulatory guidelines to support development are the United States Food and Drug Administration (FDA)’s “Guidance for Industry Microdose Radiopharmaceutical Diagnostic Drugs: Nonclinical Study Recommendations” and the European Medicines Agency (EMA)’s “Guideline on the Non‐Clinical Requirements for Radiopharmaceuticals” (currently draft). It is hoped that these documents will allow developers to only perform nonclinical studies that are necessary to support functionality, follow distribution of the material and examine general safety/toxicity. However, as they are mainly focused on radiopharmaceuticals, companies are likely to apply knowledge of established testing packages to other new imaging agents and/or follow principles given in older regulatory guidelines, namely FDA’s “Guidance for Industry Developing Medical Imaging Drug and Biological Products Part I Conducting Safety Assessments”. Thus, in some cases, the need for regulatory agency interaction is still vital to avoid development surprises and delays due to an incomplete or badly performed testing package.     

A contract research organization's response to the new FDA guidances for bioequivalence/bioavailability studies for orally administered drug products

The new FDA Guidance for Industry BA and BE Studies for Orally Administered Drug Products--General Considerations and Average, Population, and Individual Approaches to Establishing Bioequivalence imply significant changes in the areas of enrollment, cost, ethics, time, entry, validation applications (EVAs), and statistical and pharmacokinetic methods. The changes from three-period to two-period design for food effect studies, the elimination of most steady state studies, and the analyses of only the active moiety or ingredient are welcome. However, if the current guidances are adopted, additional time will be needed for participants, and more participants will be needed, resulting in higher costs to drug developers. The PK parameters needed to assess BE and the need for replicate designs for drugs with long t1/2 are still unclear. Finally, the advantages of the aggregate property of the FDA metric versus the disaggregate criteria are challenged, and four bioequivalence criteria are proposed.     

Reflections on FDA Draft Guidance for Products Containing Nanomaterials: Is the Abbreviated New Drug Application (ANDA) a Suitable Pathway for Nanomedicines?

The US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) recently released a draft guidance for industry titled “Drug Products, Including Biological Products, that Contain Nanomaterials.” The FDA’s attention to the unique safety and efficacy aspects of drugs containing nanomaterials is commendable. This Draft Guidance succeeds in acknowledging the complexity of these products, as well as the challenges associated with approving safe and therapeutically equivalent complex generic versions. However, the challenge posed by the manufacturing process for drugs containing nanomaterials is insufficiently addressed. The critical quality attributes of such products cannot be properly defined, and therefore it is not possible to design informative comparative physicochemical assessments for equivalence. As a consequence, the 505(j) Abbreviated New Drug Application (ANDA) pathway, currently advised as the standard from the FDA, is not suitable for the approval of complex generic products. Drawing from the successful story of biologics, we propose instead a stepwise totality-of-evidence approach, demonstrating similarity and including clinical studies when deemed necessary, as an appropriate alternative to the 505(j) ANDA pathway.