Critical review of EU BE guideline (Rev.1) [Regulatives / Guidelines]

posted by d_labes  – Berlin, Germany, 2008-08-25 11:14 (6141 d 13:21 ago) – Posting: # 2243
Views: 24,527

Dear Helmut,

❝ An anecdote from my side to lift your mood: [...]


Thanks. But your anecdote is suited to deepen bad mood or to run screaming away.

❝ Do you get the idea? :no:


Inscrutable are the Regulator's ways!
His spirit bloweth where it listeth.

(The holy Bible).


4.1.2 Reference and test product (page 6, lines 193-194)

'When variations to a generic product are made, the comparative medicinal product for the bioequivalence study should be the reference medicinal product.'

❝ IMHO, this a very good idea - nothing was stated about it in the 'old' NfG, ...


I don't know if this is not an over-interpretation. Lines 190-192 state what you find a good idea, and I also.
But reference medicinal product is defined above in lines 177-183 as "... must be a medicinal product ... on the basis of a complete dossier ...". And this term is used in lines 193-194.

Regards,

Detlew

Complete thread:

UA Flag
Activity
 Admin contact
23,424 posts in 4,927 threads, 1,672 registered users;
68 visitors (0 registered, 68 guests [including 51 identified bots]).
Forum time: 00:36 CEST (Europe/Vienna)

Truth and clarity are complementary.    Niels Bohr

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