Advertisement

The AAPS Journal

, Volume 17, Issue 2, pp 400–404 | Cite as

Reference Datasets for Bioequivalence Trials in a Two-Group Parallel Design

  • Anders Fuglsang
  • Helmut Schütz
  • Detlew Labes
Research Article
  • 339 Downloads

Abstract

In order to help companies qualify and validate the software used to evaluate bioequivalence trials with two parallel treatment groups, this work aims to define datasets with known results. This paper puts a total 11 datasets into the public domain along with proposed consensus obtained via evaluations from six different software packages (R, SAS, WinNonlin, OpenOffice Calc, Kinetica, EquivTest). Insofar as possible, datasets were evaluated with and without the assumption of equal variances for the construction of a 90% confidence interval. Not all software packages provide functionality for the assumption of unequal variances (EquivTest, Kinetica), and not all packages can handle datasets with more than 1000 subjects per group (WinNonlin). Where results could be obtained across all packages, one showed questionable results when datasets contained unequal group sizes (Kinetica). A proposal is made for the results that should be used as validation targets.

KEY WORDS

bioequivalence parallel design software validation 

Supplementary material

12248_2014_9704_MOESM1_ESM.ods (47 kb)
ESM 1 (ODS 46 kb)
12248_2014_9704_MOESM2_ESM.r (2 kb)
ESM 2 (R 2 kb)
12248_2014_9704_MOESM3_ESM.sas (1 kb)
ESM 3 (SAS 1 kb)
12248_2014_9704_MOESM4_ESM.txt (0 kb)
ESM 4 (TXT 0 kb)
12248_2014_9704_MOESM5_ESM.txt (0 kb)
ESM 5 (TXT 0 kb)
12248_2014_9704_MOESM6_ESM.txt (0 kb)
ESM 6 (TXT 0 kb)
12248_2014_9704_MOESM7_ESM.txt (1 kb)
ESM 7 (TXT 0 kb)
12248_2014_9704_MOESM8_ESM.txt (1 kb)
ESM 8 (TXT 1 kb)
12248_2014_9704_MOESM9_ESM.txt (1 kb)
ESM 9 (TXT 0 kb)
12248_2014_9704_MOESM10_ESM.txt (19 kb)
ESM 10 (TXT 18 kb)
12248_2014_9704_MOESM11_ESM.txt (32 kb)
ESM 11 (TXT 32 kb)
12248_2014_9704_MOESM12_ESM.txt (32 kb)
ESM 12 (TXT 32 kb)
12248_2014_9704_MOESM13_ESM.txt (19 kb)
ESM 13 (TXT 18 kb)
12248_2014_9704_MOESM14_ESM.txt (19 kb)
ESM 14 (TXT 18 kb)
12248_2014_9704_Fig1_ESM.gif (13 kb)
ESM 15

(GIF 12 kb)

12248_2014_9704_MOESM15_ESM.tif (18 kb)
High resolution image (TIFF 18 kb)
12248_2014_9704_Fig2_ESM.gif (13 kb)
ESM 16

(GIF 12 kb)

12248_2014_9704_MOESM16_ESM.tif (17 kb)
High resolution image (TIFF 17 kb)
12248_2014_9704_Fig3_ESM.gif (11 kb)
ESM 17

(GIF 10 kb)

12248_2014_9704_MOESM17_ESM.tif (16 kb)
High resolution image (TIFF 16 kb)
12248_2014_9704_Fig4_ESM.gif (12 kb)
ESM 18

(GIF 12 kb)

12248_2014_9704_MOESM18_ESM.tif (18 kb)
High resolution image (TIFF 18 kb)
12248_2014_9704_Fig5_ESM.gif (16 kb)
ESM 19

(GIF 15 kb)

12248_2014_9704_MOESM19_ESM.tif (23 kb)
High resolution image (TIFF 22 kb)
12248_2014_9704_Fig6_ESM.gif (15 kb)
ESM 20

(GIF 15 kb)

12248_2014_9704_MOESM20_ESM.tif (22 kb)
High resolution image (TIFF 21 kb)
12248_2014_9704_Fig7_ESM.gif (16 kb)
ESM 21

(GIF 15 kb)

12248_2014_9704_MOESM21_ESM.tif (29 kb)
High resolution image (TIFF 29 kb)
12248_2014_9704_Fig8_ESM.gif (23 kb)
ESM 22

(GIF 23 kb)

12248_2014_9704_MOESM22_ESM.tif (63 kb)
High resolution image (TIFF 63 kb)
12248_2014_9704_Fig9_ESM.gif (18 kb)
ESM 23

(GIF 17 kb)

12248_2014_9704_MOESM23_ESM.tif (44 kb)
High resolution image (TIFF 44 kb)
12248_2014_9704_Fig10_ESM.gif (16 kb)
ESM 24

(GIF 15 kb)

12248_2014_9704_MOESM24_ESM.tif (29 kb)
High resolution image (TIFF 29 kb)
12248_2014_9704_Fig11_ESM.gif (16 kb)
ESM 25

(GIF 15 kb)

12248_2014_9704_MOESM25_ESM.tif (29 kb)
High resolution image (TIFF 29 kb)

References

  1. 1.
    European Medicines Agency, Committee for Human Medicinal Products. Guideline on the investigation of bioequivalence. CPMP/EWP/QWP/1401/98 Rev. 1/ Corr. 2010.Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    US Food and Drug Administration. Bioavailability and bioequivalence studies for orally administered drug products—general considerations. Revision 1. 2003.Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    World Health Organization. Multisource (generic) pharmaceutical products: guidelines on registration requirements to establish interchangeability. In: Fortieth report of the WHO Expert Committee on Specifications for Pharmaceutical Preparations. Geneva, World Health Organization. WHO Technical Report Series, No. 937, Annex 7. 2006.Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Health Canada, Therapeutic Products Directorate. Conduct and analysis of comparative bioavailability studies. 2012.Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Schütz H, Labes D, Fuglsang A. Reference datasets for 2-treatment, 2-sequence, 2-period bioequivalence studies. The AAPS J. 2014;16:1292–7. doi: 10.1208/s12248-014-9661-0.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Clayton D, Leslie A. The bioavailability of erythromycin stearate versus enteric-coated erythromycin base when taken immediately before and after food. J Int Med Res. 1981;9:470–7. doi: 10.1177/030006058100900608.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    European Medicines Agency, Committee for Medicinal Products for Human Use. Guideline on the requirements for clinical documentation for orally inhaled products (OIP) including the requirements for demonstration of therapeutic equivalence between two inhaled products for use in the treatment of asthma and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) in adults and for use in the treatment of asthma in children and adolescents. CPMP/EWP/4151/00 Rev.1. 2009.Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Bolton S and Bon C. Statistical consideration: alternate designs and approaches for bioequivalence assessments. In: Kanfer I and Shargel L, editors. Generic Drug Product Development. Bioequivalence Issues. New York: Informa Healthcare; 2008. p. 123–141.Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Hughes L, Adjusting for Unequal Variances in WNL Bioeq. Certara Forums, Phoenix WNL Basics, 1 July 2013 http://www.certara.com/forums/topic/453-adjusting-for-unequal-variances-in-wnl-bioeq/ accessed 5 November 2014; free registration required
  10. 10.
    Anon. Phoenix WinNonlin 6.4 User’s Guide, Pharsight 2014, p. 86.Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Wang H, Chow S-C. A practical approach for comparing means of two groups without equal variance assumption. Statist Med. 2002;21:3137–51. doi: 10.1002/sim.1238.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Moser BK, Stevens GR. Homogeneity of variance in the two-sample means test. Am Stat. 1992;46:19–21.Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Ruxton GD. The unequal variance t-test is an underused alternative to Student’s t-test and the Mann–Whitney U test. Behav Ecol. 2006;17:688–90. doi: 10.1093/beheco/ark016.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    US Food and Drug Administration. Statistical approaches establishing bioequivalence. 2001.Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Anon. Kinetica 5.0 User Manual Revision Number 1.00. Thermo Fisher Scientific Inc. 2008. p. 667.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© American Association of Pharmaceutical Scientists 2014

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Fuglsang PharmaHaderslevDenmark
  2. 2.BEBAC–Consultancy Services for Bioequivalence and Bioavailability StudiesViennaAustria
  3. 3.Cooperative Clinical Drug Research and Development AGHoppegartenGermany

Personalised recommendations