The AAPS Journal

, Volume 17, Issue 3, pp 769–775 | Cite as

Pharmacokinetics of Orally Inhaled Drug Products

  • Günther Hochhaus
  • Stephen Horhota
  • Leslie Hendeles
  • Sandra Suarez
  • Juliet Rebello
Meeting Report Theme: Current Scientific and Regulatory Approaches for Development of Orally Inhaled and Nasal Drug Products
Part of the following topical collections:
  1. Theme: Current Scientific and Regulatory Approaches for Development of Orally Inhaled and Nasal Drug Products


The presentations at the Orlando Inhalation Conference on pharmacokinetic (PK) studies indicated that PK is the most sensitive methodology for detecting formulation differences of oral inhaled drug products (OIDPs) that have negligible gastrointestinal bioavailability or for which oral absorption can be prevented (e.g., ingestion of charcoal). PK studies, therefore, may represent the most appropriate methodology for assessing local and systemic bioequivalence (BE). It was believed by many (but not all participants) that potential differences between formulations are more likely to be detected in healthy adult volunteers, as variability is reduced while deposition to peripheral areas is not restricted. A study design allowing assessment and statistical consideration of intra-subject and inter-batch variability within the evaluation of BE studies was suggested, while optimal inhalation technique during PK studies should be enforced to decrease variability. Depending on the drug and in vitro method, in vitro tests may not detect differences in PK parameters. Harmonization of BE testing requirements among different countries should be encouraged to improve global availability of low cost OIDPs and decrease industry burden.


Fluticasone Propionate Salmeterol European Medicine Agency Tiotropium Mucociliary Clearance 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


Conflict of Interest

Dr. Hochhaus is the PI on research grants to the University of Florida for the FDA, Astra-Zeneca, and Compleware. Dr. Horhota is an employee of Boehringer-Ingelheim. Dr. Hendeles is the PI on research grants to the University of Florida for GlaxoSmithKline, Teva, and Novartis. Dr. Suarez has no conflicts. Dr. Rebello is an employee of Cipla.


  1. 1.
    FDA. Bioavailability and bioequivalence studies for orally administered drug products — general considerations: guidance for Industry. http://www.fdagov/downloads/Drugs/GuidanceComplianceRegulatoryInformation/Guidances/ucm070124.pdf.2003;1–26.
  2. 2.
    Adams WP, Ahrens RC, Chen M-L, Christopher D, Chowdhury BA, Conner DP, et al. Demonstrating bioequivalence of locally acting orally inhaled drug products (OIPs): workshop summary report. J Aerosol Med Pulm Drug Deliv. 2010;23(1):1–29.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    O’Connor D, Adams WP, Chen M-L, Daley-Yates P, Davis J, Derendorf H, et al. Role of pharmacokinetics in establishing bioequivalence for orally inhaled drug products: workshop summary report. J Aerosol Med Pulm Drug Deliv. 2011;24(3):119–35.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Rebello J. Challenges in the development of affordable orally inhaled products. 2014. Available from:
  5. 5.
    Lionberger R. Interpreting Pharmacokinetics for inhalation Bioequivalence. Orlando. Available from: (2014).
  6. 6.
    Hochhaus G, Möllmann H. Pharmacokinetic/pharmacodynamic characteristics of the beta-2-agonists terbutaline, salbutamol and fenoterol. Int J Clin Pharmacol Ther Toxicol. 1992;30(9):342–62.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Hindle M, Chrystyn H. Determination of the relative bioavailability of salbutamol to the lung following inhalation [see comments]. Br J Clin Pharmacol. Blackwell Publishing Ltd; 1992;34(4):311–5.Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Thorsson L, Edsbäcker S, Conradson TB. Lung deposition of budesonide from Turbuhaler is twice that from a pressurized metered-dose inhaler P-MDI. Eur Respir J. 1994;7(10):1839–44.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Edsbäcker S, Wollmer P, Selroos O, Borgström L, Olsson B, Ingelf J. Do airway clearance mechanisms influence the local and systemic effects of inhaled corticosteroids? Pulm Pharmacol Ther. 2008;21(2):247–58.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Goyal N, Hochhaus G, Dalby RN, Byron PR, Peart J. Demonstrating bioequivalence using pharmacokinetics: theoretical considerations across drug classes. Respiratory Drug Delivery. 2010.Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Dolovich M, Ryan G, Newhouse MT. Aerosol penetration into the lung; influence on airway responses. Chest. 1981;80(6 Suppl):834–6.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Ruffin RE, Dolovich MB, Wolff RK, Newhouse MT. The effects of preferential deposition of histamine in the human airway. Am Rev Respir Dis. 1978;117(3):485–92.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    EMA. Guideline on the Requirements for Clinical Documentation for Orally Inhaled Products (OIP) including the Requirements for Demonstration of their Therapeutic Equivalence between two Inhaled Products for use in the Treatment of Asthma and Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease (COPD) [Internet]. 2007 [cited 2010 Jul 21]. Available from:
  14. 14.
    Wachtel H. IVIVC in Pediatric OIPs [Internet]. Orlando Inhalation Conference. 2014 [cited 2014 Nov 9]. Available from:
  15. 15.
    Garcia-Arieta A. In vitro and PK studies for generics based on European experience [Internet]. 2014 [cited 2014 Oct 26]. Available from:
  16. 16.
    Mendes Lima Santos G. Considerations for generic OIPs in Brazil [Internet]. 2014 [cited 2014 Oct 26]. Available from:
  17. 17.
    FDA. Draft Guidance on Albuterol Sulfate [Internet]. 2013 [cited 2013 Apr 8]. Available from:
  18. 18.
    FDA. Draft Guidance on Fluticasone Propionate; Salmeterol Xinafoate
  19. 19.
    Davit BM, Conner DP, Fabian-Fritsch B, Haidar SH, Jiang X, Patel DT, et al. Highly variable drugs: observations from bioequivalence data submitted to the FDA for new generic drug applications. AAPS J. 2008;10(1):148–56.PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Implementation of a reference-scaled average bioequivalence approach for highly variable generic drug products by the US food and drug administration. Springer; 2012;14(4):915–24. Available from:
  21. 21.
    FDA. Draft Guidance on Lidocaine [Internet]. 2014 [cited 2014 Nov 11]. Available from:
  22. 22.
    FDA. Draft Guidance on Mesalamine [Internet]. Drug Discovery World Spring 2006. 2014 [cited 2014 Nov 11]. Available from:
  23. 23.
    Reisner C. In vitro/in vivo comparisons of formoterol MDI to Formoterol DPI: Lessons learned [Internet]. Orlando Inhalation Conference. 2014 [cited 2014 Oct 26]. Available from:
  24. 24.
    Horhota ST, Verkleij CB, Cornelissen PJG, Bour L, Sharma A, Trunk M. Case study: pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics of tiotropium and salmeterol following parallel administration in COPD patients using different dry powder inhalation systems [Internet]. Orlando Inhalation Conference. 2014 [cited 2014 Oct 26]. Available from:

Copyright information

© American Association of Pharmaceutical Scientists 2015

Authors and Affiliations

  • Günther Hochhaus
    • 1
  • Stephen Horhota
    • 2
  • Leslie Hendeles
    • 3
  • Sandra Suarez
    • 4
  • Juliet Rebello
    • 5
  1. 1.PharmaceuticsUniversity of FloridaGainesvilleUSA
  2. 2.Highly Distinguished Research FellowBoehringer Ingelheim PharmaceuticalsRidgefieldUSA
  3. 3.Pharmacotherapy and Translational ResearchUniversity of FloridaGainesvilleUSA
  4. 4.U.S. Food and Drug AdministrationSilver SpringsUSA
  5. 5.Clinical Research (Respiratory)CiplaMumbaiIndia

Personalised recommendations