EMA: Q&A on biphasic MR products [BE/BA News]
as a first augury of the new MR guideline (draft expected QIV 2012), the Q&A document was updated (Section 12). Excerpt:
Biphasic modified release formulations are characterised by two phases of drug release: a first phase determined by the immediate release dose fraction to provide a therapeutic drug level shortly after administration, and a second extended release phase to provide the dose fraction required to maintain an effective therapeutic level for a prolonged period. The clinical rationale behind their development is that a rapid onset of action is required in addition to subsequent prolonged release characteristics.
For the pharmacokinetic evaluation, these two phases should be separated through a cut-off time point, which needs to be pre-specified and universally applied to all subjects and for both test product and reference product. The identification of this cut-off time point should aim to describe the plasma concentrations in the first phase driven by the immediate release dose fraction whilst avoiding bias through an increasing contribution of the extended release phase.
Equivalence needs to be shown for both extent and rate of absorption (reflecting AUC and Cmax for conventional bioequivalence criteria), separately for both phases:
- For the first phase, the assessment of equivalence should be based on the truncated AUC from t=0 until the cut-off time describing the immediate release dose fraction, and on Cmax during the first phase.
- For the second phase, the assessment of equivalence should be based on the AUC from the cut-off time until the end of observation period, and on Cmax during the second phase.
These considerations are in principle valid for studies in fed state and in fasting state. If no significantly different pharmacokinetic profile between fasting and fed state is expected then the cut-off time point should be identical.
These recommendations are inline with recent product-specific guidances of the FDA (methylphenidate ER capsules: fasting 3 h, fed 4 h, zolpidem ER tablet: fasting 1.5 h, fed no cut-off).
Dif-tor heh smusma 🖖🏼 Довге життя Україна!
![[image]](https://static.bebac.at/pics/Blue_and_yellow_ribbon_UA.png)
Helmut Schütz
![[image]](https://static.bebac.at/img/CC by.png)
The quality of responses received is directly proportional to the quality of the question asked. 🚮
Science Quotes
Complete thread:
- EMA: Q&A on biphasic MR productsHelmut 2012-03-06 15:23 [BE/BA News]
- EMA: Q&A on biphasic MR products ElMaestro 2012-03-06 19:09
- EMA: Q&A on biphasic MR products Helmut 2012-03-07 03:52
- EMA: Q&A on biphasic MR products ElMaestro 2012-03-07 19:20
- EMA: Q&A on biphasic MR products Helmut 2012-03-07 03:52
- EMA vs. FDA d_labes 2012-03-07 10:26
- MPH examples Helmut 2012-03-07 14:22
- MPH examples d_labes 2012-03-07 16:18
- MPH examples Helmut 2012-03-08 01:07
- FDA more straight? d_labes 2012-03-08 08:29
- and what about power? ElMaestro 2012-03-08 11:37
- and what about power? d_labes 2012-03-08 13:26
- and what about power? Helmut 2012-03-08 13:36
- FDA more straight? Helmut 2012-03-08 12:51
- FDA more straight? luvblooms 2012-03-09 06:55
- Multiphasic MR ≠ DR Helmut 2012-03-09 12:18
- Multiphasic MR ≠ DR jag009 2012-03-28 15:29
- Metadate CD (30/70) Helmut 2012-03-28 15:45
- Multiphasic MR ≠ DR jag009 2012-03-28 15:29
- Multiphasic MR ≠ DR Helmut 2012-03-09 12:18
- FDA more straight? luvblooms 2012-03-09 06:55
- and what about power? ElMaestro 2012-03-08 11:37
- FDA more straight? d_labes 2012-03-08 08:29
- MPH examples Helmut 2012-03-08 01:07
- MPH examples d_labes 2012-03-07 16:18
- MPH examples Helmut 2012-03-07 14:22
- EMA: Q&A on biphasic MR products ElMaestro 2012-03-06 19:09