Determining bioequivalence of topical dermatological drug products by tape-stripping

  • William Navidi
  • Ashlyn Hutchinson
  • Berthe N’Dri-Stempfer
  • Annette Bunge
Article

Abstract

The maximum level of drug in the stratum corneum (Cmax) and the area under the curve of drug level in the stratum corneum versus time (AUC) have been proposed as metrics for assessing bioequivalence of topical drugs. These metrics, which require that concentrations be measured at eight or more times, were developed for drugs that are absorbed into the bloodstream, and are less appropriate for topical drugs. Concentrations of topical drugs are measured by tape-stripping, and it is difficult to make a large number of precise measurements due to the limited amount of available skin. We present a new method (the two-time method) for assessing bioequivalence of topical drugs. The method involves some modifications to standard tape-stripping methodology, designed to reduce the variability in measured drug levels. Perhaps most importantly, drug levels are measured at only two times, one during the uptake phase and one during the clearance phase. Measuring concentrations at only two times allows replicate measurements to be made, which increases efficiency. We compared the performance of the two-time method with a standard method through a simulation study that uses a model based on real data. When two drugs are in fact bioequivalent, the two-time method requires only 20 subjects to achieve the efficiency of a standard study with 50 subjects. In a situation in which two drugs are bioinequivalent, the two-time method requires only 30 subjects to achieve the efficiency of a standard study with 100 subjects.

Keywords

Bioequivalence Topical drugs Tape-stripping Efficiency 

References

  1. 1.
    FDA (2007) Approved drug products with therapeutic equivalence evaluations (electronic orange book), 27th edn. U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Food and Drug Administration, Center for Drug Evaluation and Research, Office of Pharmaceutical Science, Office of Generic DrugsGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Schoenwald R (2001) Pharmacokinetic principles of dosing adjustments: understanding the basics. CRC Press, Boca Raton, FloridaGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    FDA (1988) Guidance for industry: topical dermatological drug product ndas and andas—in vivo bioavailability, bioequivalence, in vitro release, and associated studies. Draft guidance, June 1988. U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Food and Drug Administration, Center for Drug Evaluation and Research (CDER)Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Pershing LK (2000) Final report to food and drug administration (FDA): dermatopharmacokinetic bioequivalence study on three tretinoin gel, 0.025% products. University of Utah, Salt Lake CityGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Pershing LK (2001) Bioequivalence assessment of three 0.025% tretinoin gel products: dermatopharmacokinetic vs. clinical trial methods. Presentation, advisory committee for pharmaceutical sciences meeting, Center for Drug Evaluation and Research (CDER), Food and Drug Administration (FDA), Rockville, MD, 29 November 2001Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Pershing LK, Corlett JL, Nelson JL (2002) Comparison of dermatopharmacokinetic vs. clinical efficacy methods for bioequivalence assessment of miconazole nitrate vaginal cream, 2% in humans. Pharm Res 19: 270–277CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Bunge A, N’Dri-Stempfer B, Navidi W, Guy R (2007) Final report to food and drug administration (FDA): therapeutic equivalence of topical products, Colorado School of Mines, Golden, Colorado. Available upon request: email abunge@mines.eduGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    N’Dri-Stempfer B, Guy R, Navidi W, Bunge A (2008) Improving dermatopharmacokinetic bioequivalence assessment of topical dermatological products, in preparationGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Schuirmann D (1987) A comparison of the two one-sided tests procedure and the power approach for assessing the equivalence of average bioavailability. J Pharmaokinet Biopharm 15: 657–680CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Herkenne C, Naik A, Kalia YN, Hadgraft J, Guy RH (2006) Pig ear skin ex vivo as a model for in vivo dermatopharmacokinetic studies in man. Pharm Res 23: 1850–1856CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Pershing L, Nelson J, Corlett J, Shrivastava S, Hare D, Shah V (2003) Assessment of dermatopharmacokinetic approach in the bioequivalence determination of topical tretinoin gel products. J Am Acad Dermatol 48: 740–751CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC 2008

Authors and Affiliations

  • William Navidi
    • 1
  • Ashlyn Hutchinson
    • 1
  • Berthe N’Dri-Stempfer
    • 2
  • Annette Bunge
    • 2
  1. 1.Mathematical and Computer SciencesColorado School of MinesGoldenUSA
  2. 2.Chemical EngineeringColorado School of MinesGoldenUSA

Personalised recommendations