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

posted by Helmut Homepage – Vienna, Austria, 2020-05-29 17:51 (759 d 10:37 ago) – Posting: # 21492
Views: 794

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 🖖 [image]
Helmut Schütz
[image]

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

Complete thread:

UA Flag
Activity
 Admin contact
22,178 posts in 4,646 threads, 1,571 registered users;
online 11 (0 registered, 11 guests [including 5 identified bots]).
Forum time: Tuesday 04:28 CEST (Europe/Vienna)

It is futile to do with more things
that which can be done with fewer.    William of Ockham

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