Advertisement

Nonlinear in Vitro-in Vivo Correlations

  • Jeanne Mendell-Harary
  • James Dowell
  • Sian Bigora
  • Deborah Piscitelli
  • Jackie Butler
  • Colm Farrell
  • John Devane
  • David Young
Part of the Advances in Experimental Medicine and Biology book series (AEMB, volume 423)

Abstract

A Level A in vitro-in vivo correlation (IVIVC) has been defined as a predictive mathematical model for the relationship between the entire in vitro dissolution/ release time course and the entire in vivo response time course (e.g. the time course of the plasma drug concentration or amount of drug absorbed.)1. A definite, reproducible model across individuals would have great advantages in drug development and manufacturing2. For example, a Level A correlation can be used to establish dissolution specifications required for quality control. More recently, a Level A correlation has been proposed as a surrogate marker for human bioequivalence studies. The goal has been to obtain a linear correlation in which the profiles of in vitro and in vivo percent released versus time are parallel. Rather than achieve linearity by iteratively altering in vitro dissolution tests to match the in vivo release data or by employing other methods such as time scaling, nonlinear functions could be used to adequately predict in vivo response time course. Application of nonlinear IVIVC has been suggested by several authors3,4,5. There are a number of examples of in vitro-in vivo profiles in the literature which appear to indicate curvature and where use of a nonlinear function may be more appropriate than linear regression analysis6,7,8. This chapter outlines several nonlinear functions which could be used to characterize nonlinear IVIVC in lieu of linear regression.

Keywords

Standard Deviation Nonlinear Function Dissolution Profile Immediate Release Akaike Information Criterion 
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.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 1.
    Guidance for Industry: Extended release solid oral dosage forms development, evaluation and application of in vitro-in vivo correlations. FDA, Center for Drug Evaluation and Research (CEDER). July 1996Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Guidance for Industry: Immediate release solid oral dosage forms; scale-up and post-approval changes: chemistry, manufacturing and controls, In vitro dissolution testing, and in vivo bioequivalence documentation. Center for Drug Evaluation and Research. November 1995Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Leeson LJ. In vitro/In vivo correlations. Drug Infor J 1995; 29: 903–915CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Skoug JW, Borin MT, Fleishaker JC and Cooper AM. In vitro and in vivo evaluations of whole and half tablets of sustained-release adinazolam mesylate. Pharm Research 1991; 8: 1482–1488CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Dietrich BR, Brausse R, Benedikt G and Steinijans VW. Feasibility of in vitro/in vivo correlation in the case of a new sustained-release theophylline pellet formulation. Arz Forsch 1988; 38: 1229–1237Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Hayashi T, Ogura T and Takagishi Y. New evaluation method for in vitro/in vivo correlation of entericcoated multiple unit dosage forms. Pharm Research 1995; 12: 1333–1337CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Mendes RW, Masih SZ and Kanumuri RR. Effect of formulation and process variables on bioequivalency of nitrofurantoin II: In vitro-in vivo correlation. J Pharm Sci 1978; 67: 1616–1619PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Benedikt G, Steinijans VW and Dietrich R. Galenical development of a new sustained-release theophylline pellet formulation for once-daily administration. Arz Forsch 1988; 38: 1203–9Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Yamaoka A, Nakagawa T, and Uno T. Application of the Akaike Information Criteria (AIC) in the evaluation of linear pharmacokinetic equations. J Pharmacokinet Biopharm 1978; 6: 165–175PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Gillespsie WR. PCDCON: Deconvolution for pharmacokinetic applications. University of Texas at Austin. Austin, TX 1992Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    ADAPT II. David D’Argenio. Biomedical Simulations Resource. University of Southern California. Los Angeles, CA 1992Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Plenum Press, New York 1997

Authors and Affiliations

  • Jeanne Mendell-Harary
    • 1
    • 2
  • James Dowell
    • 1
    • 2
  • Sian Bigora
    • 1
    • 2
  • Deborah Piscitelli
    • 1
    • 2
  • Jackie Butler
    • 1
    • 2
  • Colm Farrell
    • 1
    • 2
  • John Devane
    • 1
    • 2
  • David Young
    • 1
    • 2
  1. 1.IVIVR Cooperative Working GroupUniversity of Maryland at Baltimore Pharmacokinetics and Biopharmaceutics LaboratoryBaltimoreUSA
  2. 2.Elan Corporation PLCAnthloneIreland

Personalised recommendations