A Survey of the Regulatory Requirements for the Waiver of In Vivo Bioequivalence Studies of Generic Products in Certain Dosage Forms by Participating Regulators and Organisations of the International Pharmaceutical Regulators Programme.

The requirements to waive in vivo bioequivalence studies for immediate release solid oral dosage forms based on the Biopharmaceutics Classifications System (BCS) are well known, and biowaivers[1] for other types of oral dosage forms based on pre-defined criteria may also be acceptable. Similarly, biowaivers for dosage forms such as injectable products may also be allowed if certain criteria are met. The current paper summarises the biowaiver requirements for oral solutions and suspensions, soft gelatin capsules and injectable products (intravenous injections, subcutaneous and intramuscular injections, emulsions for injection and micellar solutions for injection) among the participants of the Bioequivalence Working Group for Generics (BEWGG) of the International Pharmaceutical Regulators Programme (IPRP). A review of the requirements indicated that there was a trend towards convergence when the dosage form became less complex; however, the most common approach used by each of the jurisdictions was a case-by-case approach given that most jurisdictions do not have well defined guidelines to support all possible scenarios. Even in the simplest case of intravenous solutions, the acceptability of qualitative changes in excipients differ between the IPRP members.  Notwithstanding the differences, the dissemination of the information is a first step towards regulatory convergence regarding biowaivers for certain dosage forms and should be useful for pharmaceutical companies currently developing generic medicinal products for IPRP jurisdictions.

The Requirements for Additional Strength Biowaivers for Immediate Release Solid Oral Dosage Forms in International Pharmaceutical Regulators Programme Participating Regulators and Organisations: Differences and Commonalities.

In relation to the registration of generic products, waivers of in vivo bioequivalence studies (biowaivers) are considered in three main cases: certain dosage forms for which bioequivalence is self-evident (e.g. intravenous solutions), biowaivers based on the Biopharmaceutics Classification System and biowaivers for additional strengths with respect to the strength for which in vivo bioequivalence has been shown. The objective of this article is to describe the differences and commonalities in biowaivers for additional strengths of immediate release solid oral dosage forms between the participating members of the International Pharmaceutical Regulators Program (IPRP). The requirements are based on five main aspects; the pharmacokinetics of the drug substance, the manufacturing process, the qualitative and quantitative composition of the different strengths, and the comparative dissolution profiles. For the pharmacokinetic aspects, many regulators/agencies have the same requirements. All strengths must be manufactured with the same process, although a few regulators/agencies accept small differences. In relation to the formulation aspects, the data required breaks down into three major approaches based initially on one of those of the EU, the USA or Japan, but there are some differences in these three major approaches with some country specific interpretations. Most regulators/agencies also have the same requirements for the dissolution data, though there are some notable exceptions.

A Survey of the Regulatory Requirements for the Acceptance of Foreign Comparator Products by Participating Regulators and Organizations of the International Generic Drug Regulators Programme.

The acceptance of foreign comparator products is the most limiting factor for the development and regulatory assessment of generic medicines marketed globally. Bioequivalence studies have to be repeated with the local comparator products of each jurisdiction because it is unknown if the comparators of the different countries are the same product, with the consequent duplication of efforts by regulators and industry alike. The regulatory requirements on the acceptability of foreign comparator products of oral dosage forms differ between countries participating in the Bioequivalence Working Group for Generics of the International Pharmaceutical Regulators Programme. Brazil, Colombia, the European Union member States, Japan, Mexico, South Korea and the United States only accept bioequivalence studies with their local comparator. In contrast, Australia, Canada, New Zealand, Singapore, South Africa, Switzerland and Taiwan accept studies with foreign comparators under certain conditions. Canada limits its use to highly soluble drugs with a wide therapeutic range in immediate release products. Australia requires a comparison of the quantitative composition. In contrast, there are fewer restrictions on the acceptance of foreign comparators in New Zealand, Singapore, South Africa, Switzerland and Taiwan. For the WHO Prequalification of Medicines and for developing generics of the essential medicines the WHO lists comparators from different countries. In conclusion, there is currently no consensus amongst regulators on the acceptability of foreign comparator products.

A Survey of the Regulatory Requirements for BCS-Based Biowaivers for Solid Oral Dosage Forms by Participating Regulators and Organisations of the International Generic Drug Regulators Programme.

PURPOSE: The Biopharmaceutics Classification System (BCS) based biowaiver is a scientific model which enables the substitution of in vivo bioequivalence studies with in vitro data as evidence of therapeutic equivalence subject to certain conditions. Despite being based on the same principles, BCS-based biowaivers are interpreted and regulated differently among international regulatory agencies. In this survey, the Bioequivalence Working Group (BEWG) of the International Generic Drug Regulators Programme (IGDRP) compared the criteria for BCS-based biowaivers applied by the participating regulators and organisations. METHODS: Differences and similarities regarding solubility, permeability, dissolution, excipients and fixed-dose combination products, were identified and compared in a detailed survey of each participant's criteria for BCS-based biowaivers. These criteria were determined based upon the participants' respective regulatory guidance documents, policies and practices. RESULTS: This review has, with the exception of two participants who do not accept BCS-based biowaivers, revealed that most IGDRP participants interpret the BCS principles and conditions similarly but notable differences exist in the application of these principles.  Conclusion: Although many similarities exist, this review identifies several opportunities for greater convergence of regulatory requirements amongst the surveyed jurisdictions. This article is open to POST-PUBLICATION REVIEW. Registered readers (see "For Readers") may comment by clicking on ABSTRACT on the issue's contents page.

Controlled release vaccine implants for delivery of booster immunisations.

Most current animal vaccine regimes involve a primary vaccination followed sometime later by a booster vaccination. This presents challenges when vaccinating difficult to access animals such as livestock. Mustering livestock to deliver a vaccine boost is costly and stressful for animals. Thus, we have produced a platform system that can be administered at the same time as the priming immunisation and delivers payload after an appropriate delay time to boost the immune response, without need for further handling of animals. A 30 × 2 mm osmotically triggered polymer implant device with burst-release characteristics delivered the booster dose of a tetanus vaccine. Blood samples were collected from an experimental group that received the priming vaccine and implant on day 0 and control group that received the initial vaccine (tetanus toxoid) and then a bolus dose 28 days later via subcutaneous injection. The two groups showed identical weight gain curves. T cell proliferation following in vitro stimulation with antigen was identical between the two groups at all time points. However, serum IgG antibody responses to the tetanus toxoid antigen were significantly higher in the control group at weeks 8 and 12. The implant capsules stayed at the site of implantation and at week 12 there was evidence of tissue integration. No local reactions at the implant site were observed, other than mild thickening of the skin in half of the experimental group animals and no other adverse health events were recorded in either group.

Hendra virus outbreak with novel clinical features, Australia.

To determine the epidemiologic and clinical features of a 2008 outbreak of Hendra virus infection in a veterinary clinic in Australia, we investigated the equine case-series. Four of 5 infected horses died, as did 1 of 2 infected staff members. Clinical manifestation in horses was predominantly neurologic. Preclinical transmission appears likely.

2013 White Paper on recent issues in bioanalysis: 'hybrid'--the best of LBA and LCMS.

The 2013 7th Workshop on Recent Issues in Bioanalysis was held in Long Beach, California, USA, where close to 500 professionals from pharmaceutical and biopharmaceutical companies, CROs and regulatory agencies convened to discuss current topics of interest in bioanalysis. These 'hot' topics, which covered both small and large molecules, were the starting point for fruitful exchanges of knowledge, and sharing of ideas among speakers, panelists and attendees. The discussions led to specific recommendations pertinent to bioanalytical science. Such as the previous editions, this 2013 White Paper addresses important bioanalytical issues and provides practical answers to the topics presented, discussed and agreed upon by the global bioanalytical community attending the 7th Workshop on Recent Issues in Bioanalysis.