Fed state: T higher variable than R [Study As­sess­ment]

posted by Helmut Homepage – Vienna, Austria, 2019-08-09 12:36 (801 d 23:22 ago) – Posting: # 20489
Views: 2,622

Hi Sukalpa,

» » Reformulate.
» OK. I would like to mention one thing that, the failed study was fed one, fasting study passed quite comfortably (both ABE and SABE). Is there any possibility that the test formulation is more variable in fed condition? :confused:

That’s quite possible. An extreme example of the past: The first PPIs were monolithic gastric-resistant formulations. Crazy variability, both fasting and fed. Current formulations are capsules with gastric-resistant pellets. Variability still high but way better than the monolithic forms. Of course, when the capsules were introduced, BE studies were performed. All PK metrics passed but by inspecting the profiles you could clearly see the lower variability of the capsules. OK, these are easy drugs (now many are already OTCs). Imagine that they would be NTIDs and the formulation change the other way ‘round (capsule → monolithic). No way ever to pass the swT/swR criterion.

In your case this means again to reformulate. Don’t ask me how (I’m not a formulation chemist). Maybe dissolution testing in the various stinking FeSSIF “biorelevant” media helps.

» This is the first time I am posting something in this forum. Bit confused regarding the rules and regulation of this forum. :confused:

Some hints in the Policy.

Dif-tor heh smusma 🖖
Helmut Schütz

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

Complete thread:

 Admin contact
21,739 posts in 4,546 threads, 1,543 registered users;
online 15 (1 registered, 14 guests [including 4 identified bots]).
Forum time: Tuesday 11:58 CEST (Europe/Vienna)

Sometimes the key to an answer is found
in the way you formulate the question.    David Brin

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