Synovia is a nasty beast [Dissolution / BCS / IVIVC]

posted by dshah  – India/United Kingdom, 2022-01-10 15:31 (136 d 03:31 ago) – Posting: # 22728
Views: 792

Dear all!
The applicant wanted a wavier from Clinical end point study and so they have used a PBPK approach to prove that the levels of free drug in fluid are similar to reference product. As per the article- "The applicant conducted the PSG- recommended in vivo BE study with PK end points but did not perform the PSG- recommended comparative clinical end point study. Instead, the applicant developed a dermal PBPK model for a VBE assessment based on drug exposure at the presumed site of action between the reference and the test products."
The applicant choose- “the most accurate, sensitive, and reproducible approach available among those set forth" which is PK endpoint compared to clinical endpoint.
To further support- Q1, Q2 and Q3 (IVRT and IVPT) were compared against RLD.
Based on all the data- it is acceptable to presume that there is no significant difference between reference drug and applicant formulation. On the same basis- FDA has accepted the application.
Regards,
Dshah

Complete thread:

UA Flag
Activity
 Admin contact
22,105 posts in 4,630 threads, 1,566 registered users;
online 5 (1 registered, 4 guests [including 2 identified bots]).
Forum time: Thursday 20:03 CEST (Europe/Vienna)

Operational hectic replaces
intellectual calms.    Alexander Huiskes

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