Comparison of In Vivo Pharmacokinetics and Pharmacodynamics of Vancomycin Products Available in Korea.

PURPOSE: Few studies have been investigated the in vivo efficacy of generic vancomycin products available outside of the United States. In this study, we aimed to compare the in vivo pharmacokinetics (PK) and pharmacodynamics (PD) of five generic vancomycin products available in Korea with those of the innovator. MATERIALS AND METHODS: The in vitro vancomycin purity of each product was examined using high-pressure liquid chromatography. Single-dose PK analyses were performed using neutropenic mice. The in vivo efficacy of vancomycin products was compared with that of the innovator in dose-effect experiments (25 to 400 mg/kg per day) using a thigh-infection model with neutropenic mice. RESULTS: Generic products had a lower proportion of vancomycin B (range: 90.3-93.8%) and a higher proportion of impurities (range: 6.2-9.7%) than the innovator (94.5% and 5.5%, respectively). In an in vivo single-dose PK study, the maximum concentration (Cmax) values of each generic were lower than that of the innovator, and the geographic mean area under the curve ratios of four generics were significantly lower than that of the innovator (all p<0.1). In the thigh-infection model, the maximum efficacies of generic products reflected in maximal effect (Emax) values were not significantly different from the innovator. However, the PD profile curves of some generic products differed significantly from that of the innovator in mice injected with a high level of Mu3 (all p≤0.05). CONCLUSION: Some generic vancomycin products available in Korea showed inferior PK and PD profiles, especially in mice infected with hetero-vancomycin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus.

Relative potency of different generic brands of meropenem, colistin and fosfomycin: Implications for antimicrobial therapy and antimicrobial formulary.

There is a need of a relatively simple and inexpensive method for the determination of relative potency of various generic brands of antibiotics in comparison to original products. The current study describes an agar diffusion method which can be performed in any microbiology laboratory, is cheap (costs $2 per test) and its results can be available after overnight incubation. The results show that neither all generics are reliable nor are all generic antibiotics of poor quality.

Systematic screening of generic drugs for progressive multiple sclerosis identifies clomipramine as a promising therapeutic.

The treatment of progressive multiple sclerosis (MS) is unsatisfactory. One reason is that the drivers of disease, which include iron-mediated neurotoxicity, lymphocyte activity, and oxidative stress, are not simultaneously targeted. Here we present a systematic screen to identify generic, orally available medications that target features of progressive MS. Of 249 medications that cross the blood-brain barrier, 35 prevent iron-mediated neurotoxicity in culture. Of these, several antipsychotics and antidepressants strongly reduce T-cell proliferation and oxidative stress. We focus on the antidepressant clomipramine and found that it additionally inhibits B-lymphocyte activity. In mice with experimental autoimmune encephalomyelitis, a model of MS, clomipramine ameliorates clinical signs of acute and chronic phases. Histologically, clomipramine reduces inflammation and microglial activation, and preserves axonal integrity. In summary, we present a systematic approach to identify generic medications for progressive multiple sclerosis with the potential to advance rapidly into clinical trials, and we highlight clomipramine for further development.

Clinical efficacy, safety and anti-inflammatory activity of two sevelamer tablet forms in patients on low-flux hemodialysis.

Sevelamer hydrochloride is an ionic exchange resin with high affinity for phosphate. This phosphate-binding agent has few serious adverse reactions with the advantage of reducing total and low density lipoprotein (LDL) cholesterol levels. However, it is controversial as to whether sevelamer hydrochloride can modulate the inflammatory response via endotoxin reduction. Therefore, a single-center, open-label, prospective and randomized study was performed to compare the clinical efficacy, safety and anti-inflammatory activity of two sevelamer hydrochloride tablet forms a branded tablet form, Renagel (Genzyme manufacturer) and its generic equivalent (EMS manufacturer). Twenty-eight chronic kidney disease volunteer patients at stage 5 (CDK 5D), on chronic low-flux hemodialysis carried out in 4-hour sessions, three times a week, were studied. The serum phosphorus, ionic calcium, total cholesterol and fractions, bicarbonate, blood pH, interleukin (IL)-6, IL-10, IL-1 beta and tumor necrosis factor-alpha (TNF-alpha) levels were collected prior to dialysis at mid-week. The incidence of gastrointestinal adverse effects were determined at the end of the phosphate-binder washout period as well as at the end of the fourth and eighth weeks of use of both tablet forms. The same magnitude of reduction in serum phosphorus was observed with both sevelamer tablet forms. Only the Renagel group showed lower total cholesterol and lower LDL cholesterol levels at the fourth and eighth week versus baseline. No significant differences in serum cytokine levels were identified in either drug group. However, the incidence of intestinal obstipation was higher among patients who used the generic equivalent form. In conclusion, Renagel and its EMS generic equivalent tablet forms have a similar clinical efficacy in reducing phosphorus in CKD 5D patients on low-flux hemodialysis and a similar safety profile.

Therapeutic equivalence requires pharmaceutical, pharmacokinetic, and pharmacodynamic identities: true bioequivalence of a generic product of intravenous metronidazole.

Animal models of infection have been used to demonstrate the therapeutic failure of "bioequivalent" generic products, but their applicability for this purpose requires the accurate identification of those products that are truly bioequivalent. Here, we present data comparing one intravenous generic product of metronidazole with the innovator product in a neutropenic mouse thigh anaerobic infection model. Simultaneous experiments allowed comparisons (generic versus innovator) of potency and the concentration of the active pharmaceutical ingredient (API), analytical chemistry (liquid chromatography/mass spectrometry [LC/MS]), in vitro susceptibility testing, single-dose serum pharmacokinetics (PK) in infected mice, and in vivo pharmacodynamics (PD) against Bacteroides fragilis ATCC 25825 in synergy with Escherichia coli SIG-1 in the neutropenic mouse thigh anaerobic infection model. The Hill dose-response model followed by curve-fitting analysis was used to calculate and compare primary and secondary PD parameters. The generic and the innovator products were identical in terms of the concentration and potency of the API, chromatographic and spectrographic profiles, MIC and minimal bactericidal concentrations (MBC) (2.0 mg/liter), and mouse PK. We found no differences between products in bacteriostatic doses (BD) (15 to 22 mg/kg of body weight per day) or the doses needed to kill 1 log (1LKD) (21 to 29 mg/kg per day) or 2 logs (2LKD) (28 to 54 mg/kg per day) of B. fragilis under dosing schedules of every 12 h (q12h), q8h, or q6h. The area under the concentration-time curve over 24 h in the steady state divided by the MIC (AUC/MIC ratio) was the best PD index to predict the antibacterial efficacy of metronidazole (adjusted coefficient of determination [AdjR(2)] = 84.6%), and its magnitude to reach bacteriostasis in vivo (56.6 ± 5.17 h) or to kill the first (90.8 ± 9.78 h) and second (155.5 ± 22.2 h) logs was the same for both products. Animal models of infection allow a thorough demonstration of the therapeutic equivalence of generic antimicrobials.

Monitoring of effectiveness and safety of generic formulation of meropenem for treatment of infections at Siriraj Hospital.

OBJECTIVE: In Siriraj Hospital, generic meropenem (Monem) has been available and was substituted for original meropenem, but the effectiveness and safety of using generic meropenem in a clinical setting are the main concern. MATERIAL AND METHOD: From July 2007 to June 2009, hospitalized patients aged 18 or older who received meropenem for 48 hours were identified from the pharmacy database of Siriraj hospital. A retrospective study was conducted. Three hundred patients in each of original and generic meropenem groups were required to demonstrate non-inferiority of generic to original meropenem. RESULTS: The mean age of all patients was 63 years. Most of the patients had co-morbidities. Approximately 90% of the infections were health-care associated. Drug-resistant gram-negative bacteria including ESBL producing E. coli and K. pneumoniae, P. aeruginosa and A. baumannii account for nearly 50% of all organisms. No significant difference was found regarding characteristics, type or site of infection and pathogen between generic and original groups but for more patients in the original group having cardiovascular disease and more patients in the generic group receiving immunosuppressive agents. Eighty-two to 85% received meropenem with one of appropriate indications. No statistically significant difference occurred either in an overall favorable outcome (63% vs.70.4%, p = 0.07) or in overall mortality (38% vs. 32%, p = 0.17), as well as adverse effects between the original and the generic groups. CONCLUSION: Generic meropenem (Monem) was not inferior to original meropenem for therapy of infections in the hospitalized patients at Siriraj Hospital.

Generic vancomycin products fail in vivo despite being pharmaceutical equivalents of the innovator.

Generic versions of intravenous antibiotics are not required to demonstrate therapeutic equivalence with the innovator because therapeutic equivalence is assumed from pharmaceutical equivalence. To test such assumptions, we studied three generic versions of vancomycin in simultaneous experiments with the innovator and determined the concentration and potency of the active pharmaceutical ingredient by microbiological assay, single-dose pharmacokinetics in infected mice, antibacterial effect by broth microdilution and time-kill curves (TKC), and pharmacodynamics against two wild-type strains of Staphylococcus aureus by using the neutropenic mouse thigh infection model. The main outcome measure was the comparison of magnitudes and patterns of in vivo efficacy between generic products and the innovator. Except for one product exhibiting slightly greater concentration, vancomycin generics were undistinguishable from the innovator based on concentration and potency, protein binding, in vitro antibacterial effect determined by minimal inhibitory or bactericidal concentrations and TKC, and serum pharmacokinetics. Despite such similarities, all generic products failed in vivo to kill S. aureus, while the innovator displayed the expected bactericidal efficacy: maximum antibacterial effect (Emax) (95% confidence interval [CI]) was 2.04 (1.89 to 2.19), 2.59 (2.21 to 2.98), and 3.48 (2.92 to 4.04) versus 5.65 (5.52 to 5.78) log10 CFU/g for three generics and the innovator product, respectively (P<0.0001, any comparison). Nonlinear regression analysis suggests that generic versions of vancomycin contain inhibitory and stimulatory principles within their formulations that cause agonistic-antagonistic actions responsible for in vivo failure. In conclusion, pharmaceutical equivalence does not imply therapeutic equivalence for vancomycin.

Determination of therapeutic equivalence of generic products of gentamicin in the neutropenic mouse thigh infection model.

BACKGROUND: Drug regulatory agencies (DRA) support prescription of generic products of intravenous antibiotics assuming therapeutic equivalence from pharmaceutical equivalence. Recent reports of deaths associated with generic heparin and metoprolol have raised concerns about the efficacy and safety of DRA-approved drugs. METHODOLOGY/PRINCIPAL FINDINGS: To challenge the assumption that pharmaceutical equivalence predicts therapeutic equivalence, we determined in vitro and in vivo the efficacy of the innovator product and 20 pharmaceutically equivalent generics of gentamicin. The data showed that, while only 1 generic product failed in vitro (MIC = 45.3 vs. 0.7 mg/L, P<0.05), 10 products (including gentamicin reference powder) failed in vivo against E. coli due to significantly inferior efficacy (E(max) = 4.81 to 5.32 vs. 5.99 log(10) CFU/g, P

The scope and requirements related to preclinical and clinical studies of a new medicinal product, including biotechnological and biosimilar products.

The article presents an outline of the requirements concerning the planning of preclinical and clinical studies, necessary for the legal approval of a medicinal product. It describes the clinical research plan of innovative and generic pharmaceutical products, taking into account the specific situations in which the assessment of biological equivalence of a generic product is not possible based on pharmacokinetic parameters. The article also discusses the guidelines which determine the scope of studies which are necessary in the process of registration of biotechnological and biosimilar products.