Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Mostrar: 20 | 50 | 100
Resultados 1 - 4 de 4
Filtrar
Mais filtros










Base de dados
Intervalo de ano de publicação
1.
Daru ; 30(1): 229-243, 2022 Jun.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-35094370

RESUMO

OBJECTIVES: There are a multitude of different modelling techniques that have been used for inhaled drugs. The main objective of this review was to conduct an exhaustive survey of published mathematical models in the area of asthma and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) for inhalation drugs. Additionally, this review will attempt to assess the applicability of these models to assess bioequivalence (BE) of orally inhaled products (OIPs). EVIDENCE ACQUISITION: PubMed, Science Direct, Web of Science, and Scopus databases were searched from 1996 to 2020, to find studies that described mathematical models used for inhaled drugs in asthma/COPD. RESULTS: 50 articles were finally included in this systematic review. This research identified 22 articles on in silico aerosol deposition models, 20 articles related to population pharmacokinetics and 8 articles on physiologically based pharmacokinetic modelling (PBPK) modelling for inhaled drugs in asthma/COPD. Among all the aerosol deposition models, computational fluid dynamics (CFD) simulations are more likely to predict regional aerosol deposition pattern in human respiratory tracts. Across the population PK articles, body weight, gender, age and smoking status were the most common covariates that were found to be significant. Further, limited published PBPK models reported approximately 29 parameters relevant for absorption and distribution of inhaled drugs. The strengths and weaknesses of each modelling technique has also been reviewed. CONCLUSION: Overall, while there are different modelling techniques that have been used for inhaled drugs in asthma and COPD, there is very limited application of these models for assessment of bioequivalence of OIPs. This review also provides a ready reference of various parameters that have been considered in various models which will aid in evaluation if one model or hybrid in silico models need to be considered when assessing bioequivalence of OIPs.


Assuntos
Asma , Doença Pulmonar Obstrutiva Crônica , Administração por Inalação , Aerossóis , Asma/tratamento farmacológico , Simulação por Computador , Humanos , Modelos Biológicos , Doença Pulmonar Obstrutiva Crônica/tratamento farmacológico , Equivalência Terapêutica
2.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-27418820

RESUMO

BACKGROUND: The use of chlorofluorocarbons (CFCs) has contributed to the depletion of the stratospheric ozone layer resulting in serious health concerns. Ipratropium bromide/salbutamol sulphate CFC-pressurized metered-dose inhalers (IB/SAL-CFC pMDI) have been in widespread use for many years without any apparent ill consequences. This combination has now been reformulated using the hydrofluoroalkane (HFA) propellant. This study sought to establish the clinical noninferiority of a new HFA-containing IB/SAL pMDI to the conventional IB/SAL-CFC pMDI in subjects with mild/moderate COPD. METHODS: This was a randomized, double-blind, parallel-group, multicenter study in two consecutive periods: a 14-day run-in period followed by a 85-day treatment period. Eligible mild-to-moderate stable COPD subjects aged 40-75 years were enrolled into the study and entered the run-in period during which subjects withdrew all the bronchodilators, except for salbutamol as rescue medication. Subjects were randomized to 85 days treatment with either IB/SAL-HFA or IB/SAL-CFC, 20 µg qid. RESULTS: Of the 290 randomized patients, 249 completed the study. The primary efficacy variable was the change in forced expiratory volume in one second from predose to 60 minutes after dosing on day 85. At the end of the treatment period, the adjusted mean change in forced expiratory volume in one second at 60 minutes was 123 mL in the IB/SAL-HFA pMDI group and 115 mL in the IB/SAL-CFC pMDI group. Because the lower limit of the 95% confidence interval for the between-group difference (-62 mL) was well within the noninferiority margin (-100 mL), the HFA formulation was deemed clinically noninferior to the CFC formulation. This finding was supported by secondary efficacy assessments. Both formulations of IB/SAL were well tolerated during the prolonged multiple dosing. CONCLUSION: It is concluded that IB/SAL-HFA pMDI provides effective bronchodilation of similar degree to that achieved with IB/SAL-CFC pMDI. Therefore, IB/SAL-HFA pMDI is a valuable alternative to IB/SAL-CFC pMDI.


Assuntos
Agonistas de Receptores Adrenérgicos beta 2/administração & dosagem , Propelentes de Aerossol , Albuterol/administração & dosagem , Broncodilatadores/administração & dosagem , Hidrocarbonetos Fluorados , Ipratrópio/administração & dosagem , Pulmão/efeitos dos fármacos , Inaladores Dosimetrados , Antagonistas Muscarínicos/administração & dosagem , Doença Pulmonar Obstrutiva Crônica/tratamento farmacológico , Administração por Inalação , Agonistas de Receptores Adrenérgicos beta 2/efeitos adversos , Adulto , Propelentes de Aerossol/efeitos adversos , Idoso , Albuterol/efeitos adversos , Broncodilatadores/efeitos adversos , Método Duplo-Cego , Combinação de Medicamentos , Desenho de Equipamento , Feminino , Volume Expiratório Forçado , Humanos , Hidrocarbonetos Fluorados/efeitos adversos , Índia , Ipratrópio/efeitos adversos , Pulmão/fisiopatologia , Masculino , Pessoa de Meia-Idade , Antagonistas Muscarínicos/efeitos adversos , Doença Pulmonar Obstrutiva Crônica/diagnóstico , Doença Pulmonar Obstrutiva Crônica/fisiopatologia , Índice de Gravidade de Doença , Equivalência Terapêutica , Fatores de Tempo , Resultado do Tratamento
3.
AAPS J ; 17(5): 1285-304, 2015 Sep.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-26002510

RESUMO

This article describes regulatory approaches for approval of "generic" orally inhaled drug products (OIDPs) in the United States, European Union, Brazil, China and India. While registration of a generic OIDP in any given market may require some documentation of the formulation and device similarity to the "original" product as well as comparative testing of in vitro characteristics and in vivo performance, the specific documentation approaches, tests and acceptance criteria vary by the country. This divergence is due to several factors, including unique cultural, historical, legal and economic circumstances of each region; the diverse healthcare and regulatory systems; the different definitions of key terms such as "generic" and "reference" drug; the acknowledged absence of in vitro in vivo correlations for OIDPs; and the scientific and statistical issues related to OIDP testing (such as how best to account for the batch-to-batch variability of the Reference product, whether to use average bioequivalence or population bioequivalence in the statistical analysis of results, whether to use healthy volunteers or patients for pharmacokinetic studies, and which pharmacodynamic or clinical end-points should be used). As a result of this discrepancy, there are ample opportunities for the regulatory and scientific communities around the world to collaborate in developing more consistent, better aligned, science-based approaches. Moving in that direction will require both further research and further open discussion of the pros and cons of various approaches.


Assuntos
Aprovação de Drogas/legislação & jurisprudência , Medicamentos Genéricos/administração & dosagem , Administração por Inalação , Química Farmacêutica , Medicamentos Genéricos/farmacocinética , Humanos , Equivalência Terapêutica
4.
AAPS J ; 17(3): 769-75, 2015 May.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-25762449

RESUMO

The presentations at the Orlando Inhalation Conference on pharmacokinetic (PK) studies indicated that PK is the most sensitive methodology for detecting formulation differences of oral inhaled drug products (OIDPs) that have negligible gastrointestinal bioavailability or for which oral absorption can be prevented (e.g., ingestion of charcoal). PK studies, therefore, may represent the most appropriate methodology for assessing local and systemic bioequivalence (BE). It was believed by many (but not all participants) that potential differences between formulations are more likely to be detected in healthy adult volunteers, as variability is reduced while deposition to peripheral areas is not restricted. A study design allowing assessment and statistical consideration of intra-subject and inter-batch variability within the evaluation of BE studies was suggested, while optimal inhalation technique during PK studies should be enforced to decrease variability. Depending on the drug and in vitro method, in vitro tests may not detect differences in PK parameters. Harmonization of BE testing requirements among different countries should be encouraged to improve global availability of low cost OIDPs and decrease industry burden.


Assuntos
Preparações Farmacêuticas/administração & dosagem , Farmacocinética , Projetos de Pesquisa , Administração por Inalação , Adulto , Disponibilidade Biológica , Humanos , Preparações Farmacêuticas/metabolismo , Equivalência Terapêutica
SELEÇÃO DE REFERÊNCIAS
DETALHE DA PESQUISA
...