# Application of the Modified Chi-Square Ratio Statistic in a Stepwise Procedure for Cascade Impactor Equivalence Testing

- 474 Downloads
- 5 Citations

**Part of the following topical collections:**

## Abstract

Equivalence testing of aerodynamic particle size distribution (APSD) through multi-stage cascade impactors (CIs) is important for establishing bioequivalence of orally inhaled drug products. Recent work demonstrated that the median of the modified chi-square ratio statistic (MmCSRS) is a promising metric for APSD equivalence testing of test (*T*) and reference (*R*) products as it can be applied to a reduced number of CI sites that are more relevant for lung deposition. This metric is also less sensitive to the increased variability often observed for low-deposition sites. A method to establish critical values for the MmCSRS is described here. This method considers the variability of the *R* product by employing a reference variance scaling approach that allows definition of critical values as a function of the observed variability of the *R* product. A stepwise CI equivalence test is proposed that integrates the MmCSRS as a method for comparing the relative shapes of CI profiles and incorporates statistical tests for assessing equivalence of single actuation content and impactor sized mass. This stepwise CI equivalence test was applied to 55 published CI profile scenarios, which were classified as equivalent or inequivalent by members of the Product Quality Research Institute working group (PQRI WG). The results of the stepwise CI equivalence test using a 25% difference in MmCSRS as an acceptance criterion provided the best matching with those of the PQRI WG as decisions of both methods agreed in 75% of the 55 CI profile scenarios.

## KEY Words

aerodynamic particle size distribution bioequivalence cascade impactor chi-square ratio statistic orally inhaled drug products## Supplementary material

## References

- 1.Lee SL, Adams WP, Li BV, Conner DP, Chowdhury BA, Yu LX. In vitro considerations to support bioequivalence of locally acting drugs in dry powder inhalers for lung diseases. AAPS J. 2009;11:414–23.PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 2.Evans C, Cipolla D, Chesworth T, Agurell E, Ahrens R, Conner D,
*et al*. Equivalence considerations for orally inhaled products for local action-ISAM/IPAC-RS European workshop report. J Aerosol Med Pulm Drug Deliv. 2012;25:117–39.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar - 3.Weber B, Hochhaus G, Adams W, Lionberger R, Li B, Tsong Y,
*et al*. A stability analysis of a modified version of the chi-square ratio statistic: implications for equivalence testing of aerodynamic particle size distribution. AAPS J. 2013;15:1–9.PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar - 4.Weber B, Lee SL, Lionberger R, Li BV, Tsong Y, Hochhaus G. A sensitivity analysis of the modified chi-square ratio statistic for equivalence testing of aerodynamic particle size distribution. AAPS J. 2013;15:465–76.PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 5.Adams WP, Christopher D, Lee DS, Morgan B, Pan Z, Singh GJ,
*et al*. Product Quality Research Institute evaluation of cascade impactor profiles of pharmaceutical aerosols, part 1: background for a statistical method. AAPS PharmSciTech. 2007;8:E32–7.PubMedCentralCrossRefGoogle Scholar - 6.Christopher D, Adams W, Amann A, Bertha C, Byron PR, Doub W,
*et al*. Product Quality Research Institute evaluation of cascade impactor profiles of pharmaceutical aerosols, part 3: final report on a statistical procedure for determining equivalence. AAPS PharmSciTech. 2007;8:65–74.PubMedCentralCrossRefGoogle Scholar - 7.Christopher D, Adams WP, Lee DS, Morgan B, Pan Z, Singh GJ,
*et al*. Product Quality Research Institute evaluation of cascade impactor profiles of pharmaceutical aerosols: part 2—evaluation of a method for determining equivalence. AAPS PharmSciTech. 2007;8:E39–48.PubMedCentralCrossRefGoogle Scholar - 8.PQRI APSD Profile Comparisons Working Group. Realistic Scenarios 1–33 of 55. http://www.pqri.org/commworking/minutes/pdfs/dptc/psdpcwg/Addl/Realistic Scenarios 1–33 of 55.pdf. Accessed 08 June 2014
- 9.PQRI APSD Profile Comparisons Working Group. Realistic Scenarios 34–55 of 55. http://www.pqri.org/commworking/minutes/pdfs/dptc/psdpcwg/Addl/Realistic Scenarios 34–55 of 55.pdf. Accessed 08 June 2014
- 10.Hollander M, Wolfe DA. Nonparametric statistical methods. 2nd ed. New York: John Wiley & Sons; 1999. p. 178–86.Google Scholar
- 11.Labes D. Power and Sample size based on two one-sided t-tests (TOST) for (bio)equivalence studies. http://cran.r-project.org/web/packages/PowerTOST/PowerTOST.pdf. Accessed 08 June 2014
- 12.R Development Core Team. R: A language and environment for statistical computing. http://www.r-project.org/. Accessed 08 June 2014
- 13.Genz A, Bretz F, Miwa T, Mi X, Leisch F, Scheipl F, et al. Multivariate normal and t distributions. http://cran.r-project.org/web/packages/mvtnorm/mvtnorm.pdf. Accessed 08 June 2014
- 14.Efron B. Better bootstrap confidence intervals. JASA. 1987;82:171–85.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 15.Weber B, Adams W, Lionberger R, Li B, Tsong Y, Hochhaus G,
*et al*. Evaluation of statistical methods for determining equivalence of aerodynamic particle size distribution. Respir Drug Deliv. 2012;3:803–8.Google Scholar