Only fed study [Design Issues]

posted by Jaime_R – Barcelona, 2005-10-04 22:42 (7160 d 12:37 ago) – Posting: # 39
Views: 15,929

Hi Helmut!

The reasoning behind is that although you write something in the SPC, there is no guarantee, that patients act accordingly, i.e. swallow your drug together with food. Maybe they 'know' that any drug acts 'faster'/'better' if adminstered on an empty stomach, or they don't even read the SPC.

❝ Anyhow, if the food effect documented in the reference's SmPC is

❝ safety-related (i.e., AEs due to GI-disturbances), you may start an

❝ argument.


Yes, but: see above ;-)

❝ Remark: in such a case European Guidelines call only for a fed

❝ study.


Again yes, but: I've heard of an application where the Dutch regulators wanted to see a fasting study - after the submitted fed study (which showed BE).
Regulators have all post approval data of the inovator's product on file; maybe that's the reason.

Regards, Jaime

Complete thread:

UA Flag
Activity
 Admin contact
23,424 posts in 4,927 threads, 1,668 registered users;
106 visitors (0 registered, 106 guests [including 61 identified bots]).
Forum time: 11:19 CEST (Europe/Vienna)

No matter what side of the argument you are on,
you always find people on your side
that you wish were on the other.    Thomas Berger

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