khaoula
★    

Algeria,
2014-09-08 17:01
(3489 d 20:51 ago)

Posting: # 13464
Views: 4,173
 

 difficulty of understanding HVDPs [RSABE / ABEL]

Hi Everybody , I have big problem to understand what's HVDP's
soI read : HVDPs are products in which the drug is not highly variable, but the product is of poor pharmaceutical quality and high within-formulation variability, so What’s the difference between : Within formulation variability and Subject by formulation interaction? Is subject by formulation interaction contribute to high CVW ( >30%) in HVDPs?
I confounds between the two , for me subject by formulation interaction is inter-individual variability, when the excipients in a formulation influence physiological variables, or the physicalchemical properties of a formulation and/or its drug, in the gastro intestinal tract
thank you :)
ElMaestro
★★★

Denmark,
2014-09-08 17:47
(3489 d 20:05 ago)

@ khaoula
Posting: # 13465
Views: 3,511
 

 difficult to mee too

Hi Kaoula,

❝ Hi Everybody , I have big problem to understand (...)


You're not alone - I think most of us have trouble getting the definitions right from time to time.
Here's how I think about it, but please be aware I am often wrong:
1. When something is highly variable in the context of BE it currently means it is associated with an intra-subject CV>30%.
2. When a drug product is a HVDP then it means it has been associated with a CV>30%, preferably measured with a replicate administration in order to qualify.
3. You can give a drug directly intra-vascular and still observe a within-subject CV>30% - this would, I guess, qualify it as a HVD. If the formulation of interest itself is an IV formulation then the drug is a HVD, and the formulation hence is a HVDP.
4. HVDP and HVD thus differ by the extra layer of complexity introduced by the formulation of the drug (drug here means the API).
5. A formulation of a HVD will be a HVDP unless you measure a mighty rare statistical fluctuation. Are there case stories, anyone knows?
6. Subject-by-Formulation interaction is when the GMR or similarity of test and Ref depends on what subject you measure it in. Bear in mind that when you measure something in practice there will be a lot of measurement uncertainty or error variance and in some cases and depending on study design you might say the this uncertainty is a measure somehow of the intrasubject variability. But this uncertainty itself has nothing to with the SxF interaction. An SxF interaction is an effect.

I'll state this a little differently. Imagine this:
- John, Jimmy and Jenny respond identically (plusminus some measurement uncertainty) to Fred and Fiona in terms of Cmax of the Test product.
- John, Jimmy and Jenny respond identically (plusminus some measurement uncertainty) in terms of Cmax of the reference product, but they do not respond identically to Fred and Fiona in term of Cmax of the reference product.
That's an SxF interaction.
If you run a study with N formulations and M subjects you'd introduce a max of NxM columns in the model matrix if you want to study it (minus the model's redundancy that arise from the other terms); their total will deduct from the error's df if speaking of one such is relevant.

Pass or fail!
ElMaestro
Helmut
★★★
avatar
Homepage
Vienna, Austria,
2014-09-13 20:49
(3484 d 17:03 ago)

@ khaoula
Posting: # 13503
Views: 3,311
 

 HVDs ≠ HVDPs

Hi khaoula & ElMaestro,

the definition is simple (and can be found in one of Kamal Midha’s papers; based on replicated administration):
  • HVD
    CVintra >30% if administered as a solution (i.e., related to drug-specific properties like absorption, permeation, transporters, :blahblah:, and/or clearance).
  • HVDP
    CVintra >30% if administered as a formulation (i.e., any of the above effects + formulation specific ones, effects of excipients, etc).
Example: Diclofenac is not a HVD (CV ~10% if administered as a solution), but can be a HVDP (i.e., gastro-resistant tablets).

Dif-tor heh smusma 🖖🏼 Довге життя Україна! [image]
Helmut Schütz
[image]

The quality of responses received is directly proportional to the quality of the question asked. 🚮
Science Quotes
khaoula
★    

Algeria,
2014-09-13 21:44
(3484 d 16:08 ago)

@ Helmut
Posting: # 13504
Views: 3,326
 

 HVDs ≠ HVDPs

Hi Helmut
I understand what's difference between HVD and HDVP, my question is: so What’s the difference between: Within formulation variability and Subject by formulation interaction? Is subject by formulation interaction contribute to high CVW ( >30%) in HVDPs?, in my opinion, no, because I think that subject by formulation interaction is between subject, so inter subject variability, no?
UA Flag
Activity
 Admin contact
22,957 posts in 4,819 threads, 1,636 registered users;
106 visitors (0 registered, 106 guests [including 6 identified bots]).
Forum time: 12:52 CET (Europe/Vienna)

With four parameters I can fit an elephant,
and with five I can make him wiggle his trunk.    John von Neumann

The Bioequivalence and Bioavailability Forum is hosted by
BEBAC Ing. Helmut Schütz
HTML5