Abstract
Comparator products should be the products that were shown to be safe and efficacious in pivotal clinical trials to ensure prescribability of generics. The use of a common comparator ensures switchability between generics. The selection of the comparator is a national responsibility and may be different between countries. This paper discusses the current recommendations on selection of comparators, the associated problems, and the possibility of harmonization. Most countries follow the World Health Organization (WHO) recommendations for selecting comparator products and require the comparator product to be obtained from their national markets to ensure switchability between the local comparator and their generics. These recommendations are only feasible in the few countries where the repetition of the bioequivalence study is economically feasible, but they are impracticable in all other countries. Furthermore, the exclusive use of the local comparator to ensure switchability is ethically and scientifically questionable. The innovator product from well-regulated markets should be the global comparator. This harmonization is feasible as the concept already applies in the WHO prequalification program. It is ineffectual to harmonize only the requirements for performing bioequivalence studies, if such a study has to be repeated for every single country simply because of the different comparator products.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
WHO Expert Committee on Pharmaceutical Preparations. Multisource (generic) pharmaceutical products: guidelines on registration requirements to establish interchangeability. In: WHO Technical Report Series. 49th ed. Geneva: World Health Organization; 2015. p. 17–9.
Chow SC, Liu J. Meta-analysis for bioequivalence review. J Biopharm Stat. 1997;7(1):97–111.
Anderson S. Individual bioequivalence: a problem of switchability. Biopharm Rep. 1993;2(2):1–11.
Davit BM, Nwakama PE, Buehler GJ, Conner DP, Haidar SH, Patel DT, et al. Comparing generic and innovator drugs: a review of 12 years of bioequivalence data from the United States Food and Drug Administration. Ann Pharmacother. 2009;43(10):1583–97.
Maliepaard M, Hekster YA, Kappelle A, Van Puijenbroek EP, Elferink AJ, Welink J, et al. Requirements for generic anti-epileptic medicines: a regulatory perspective. J Neurol. 2009;256(12):1966–71.
The European Federation for Pharmaceutical Sciences (EUFEPS). The Global Bioequivalence Harmonisation Initiative. [cited2016 Mar 3]. Available from: http://www.eufeps.org/node/51.
WHO Expert Committee on Specifications for Pharmaceutical Preparations. Annex 8 Guidance on the selection of comparator pharmaceutical. WHO Tech Rep Ser. Forty-nint. Geneva; 2015;992(Annex 8):185–9.
Gwaza L, Gordon J, Welink J, Potthast H, Leufkens H, Stahl M, et al. Interchangeability between first-line generic antiretroviral products prequalified by WHO using adjusted indirect comparisons. Antivir Ther. 2016; doi:10.3851/IMP3089.
Woodcock J, Khan M, Yu LX. Withdrawal of generic budeprion for nonbioequivalence. N Engl J Med. 2012;367(26):2463–5.
Robertsen I, Asberg A, Ingerø AO, Vethe NT, Bremer S, Bergan S, et al. Use of generic tacrolimus in elderly renal transplant recipients: precaution is needed. Transplantation. 2014;0(0):1–5.
Chaudhuri S. Can foreign firms promote local production of pharmaceuticals in Africa. In: Mackintosh M, Banda G, Tibandebage P, Wamae W, editors. Making medicines in Africa: the political economy of industrializing for local health. London: Palgrave Macmillan; 2015. p. 103–21.
African Union Commission-UNIDO. Pharmaceutical manufacturing plan for Africa: business plan. Addis Ababa; 2012.
Knoben JE, Scott GR, Tonelli RJ. An overview of the FDA publication Approved Drug Products with Therapeutic Equivalence Evaluations. Am J Hosp Pharm. 1990;47(12):2696–700.
United States Food and Drug Administration. Orange Book: Approved Drug Products with Therapeutic Equivalence Evaluations.[cited 2016 Mar 1]. Available from: http://www.accessdata.fda.gov/scripts/cder/ob/.
WHO Prequalification Team-Medicines. WHO prequalification of medicines programme. [cited 2016 Mar 2]. Available from: http://apps.who.int/prequal/.
‘t Hoen EFM, Hogerzeil H V, Quick JD, Sillo HB. A quiet revolution in global public health: the World Health Organization’s Prequalification of Medicines Programme. J Public Health Policy 2014;35(2):137–161.
WHO Prequalification Team-Medicines. Recommended comparator products: anti-tuberculosis medicines. Geneva; 2016. Available from: http://apps.who.int/prequal/info_applicants/BE/2016/Comparator-TB2016-11February.pdf.
Welink J, Gordon JD, Stahl M. Selection of the comparator product in the World Health Organisation Prequalification of Medicines Programme. J Generic Med. 2013;10(3–4):193–204.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Additional information
This manuscript represents the personal opinion of the authors and does not necessarily represent the views or policy of their corresponding Regulatory Agencies or the World Health Organization
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Gwaza, L., Gordon, J., Leufkens, H. et al. Global Harmonization of Comparator Products for Bioequivalence Studies. AAPS J 19, 603–606 (2017). https://doi.org/10.1208/s12248-017-0068-6
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1208/s12248-017-0068-6