T = EV ∧ R = IV ¬ BE (→ absolute BA) [Regulatives / Guidelines]

posted by Helmut Homepage – Vienna, Austria, 2020-05-29 17:51 (182 d 06:40 ago) – Posting: # 21492
Views: 496

Hi Ani,

» Dear Helmut,

     ▲▲▲▲▲▲ Not interested in opinions of others?


» I am interested in finding out if bioequivalence study is needed in the US when an IV formulation is changed to a subcutaneous formulation.

That’s not BE but absolute bioavailability.

» I would also appreciate if you can please give me references to US FDA Guidance document that addresses this topic.

Contrary to IV, in SC you have an absorption site. Hence, calling that a “formulation change” is an euphemism. The NDA/IND guidance is a starter.

Dif-tor heh smusma 🖖
Helmut Schütz
[image]

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

Complete thread:

Activity
 Admin contact
21,214 posts in 4,427 threads, 1,482 registered users;
online 12 (0 registered, 12 guests [including 8 identified bots]).
Forum time: Friday 23:32 CET (Europe/Vienna)

Biostatistician. One who has neither the intellect for mathematics
nor the commitment for medicine but likes to dabble in both.    Stephen Senn

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