The scaling-up of access to antiretroviral therapy, particularly in low- to middle-income countries, was facilitated by the introduction and widespread use of generic antiretroviral medicines and fixed-dose combinations. Generic medicines are approved by regulatory authorities based on the demonstration of bioequivalence with the innovator or reference product, as well as meeting quality standards. In clinical practice, however, it is not unusual for generics to be interchanged between each other. This study investigated the differences in bioavail-ability between WHO-prequalified first-line antiretroviral generics by means of adjusted indirect comparisons to ensure interchangeability between these generics.
Methods
Data on 34 products containing emtricitabine, tenofovir disoproxil fumarate, lamivudine and efavirenz in single formulations or fixed-dose combinations were included in the analysis. The 90% CI for the adjusted indirect comparisons was calculated using the homoscedastic method that uses the conventional t-test, and assumes homogeneity of variances between the studies and small sample sizes. The combined standard deviation of both bioequivalence studies was calculated from the variability of each individual study.
Results
The adjusted indirect comparisons between generics showed that the differences, expressed as 90% CIs, are less than 30%. Confidence in the interchange-ability of two generic products was reduced if the mean difference between the test and reference in the original studies is more than 10%.
Conclusions
From a bioequivalence perspective, the generic antiretroviral medicines prequalified by WHO are interchangeable with the reference, as well as between each other without safety or efficacy concerns.
World Health Organization.Consolidated Guidelines on the Use of Antiretroviral Drugs for Treating and Preventing HIV Infection: Recommendations for a Public Health Approach. Geneva; 2013. (Accessed 22 December 2015.) Available from http://www.who.int/hiv/pub/guidelines/arv2013/download/en/.
WaningB., DiedrichsenE., MoonS.A lifeline to treatment: the role of Indian generic manufacturers in supplying antiretroviral medicines to developing countries.J Int AIDS Soc2010; 13: 35.
AstutiN., MaggioloF.Single-tablet regimens in HIV therapy.Infect Dis Ther2014; 3: 1–17.
8.
‘t HoenE.F.M., HogerzeilH.V., QuickJ.D., SilloH.B.A quiet revolution in global public health: The World Health Organization's Prequalification of Medicines Programme.J Public Health Policy2014; 35: 137–161.
US Department of Health and Human Services.Food and Drug Administration. Center for Drug Evaluation and Research (CDER). Guidance for industry bioavailability and bioequivalence studies for orally administered drug products — general considerations. Washington DC; 2003. (Accessed 8 February 2016.) Available from http://www.fda.gov/ohrms/dockets/ac/03/briefing/3995B1_07_GFI-BioAvail-BioEquiv.pdf.
11.
ChowS.C., LiuJ.Meta-analysis for bioequivalence review.J Biopharm Stat1997; 7: 97–111.
12.
GwazaL., GordonJ., WelinkJ.Statistical approaches to indirectly compare bioequivalence between generics: a comparison of methodologies employing artemether/ lumefantrine 20/120 mg tablets as prequalified by WHO.Eur J Clin Pharmacol2012; 68: 1611–1618.
13.
HerranzM., Morales-AlcelayS., Corredera-HernándezM.T.Bioequivalence between generic tacrolimus products marketed in Spain by adjusted indirect comparison.Eur J Clin Pharmacol2013; 69: 1157–1162.
14.
GwazaL., GordonJ., WelinkJ.Adjusted indirect treatment comparison of the bioavailability of WHO-prequalified first-line generic antituberculosis medicines.Clin Pharmacol Ther2014; 96: 580–588.
SongF., AltmanD.G., GlennyA-M, DeeksJ.J.Validity of indirect comparison for estimating efficacy of competing interventions: empirical evidence from published meta-analyses.BMJ2003; 326: 472.
17.
BucherH.C., GuyattG.H., GriffithL.E., WalterS.D.The results of direct and indirect treatment comparisons in meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.J Clin Epidemiol1997; 50: 683–691.
18.
GünthardH.F., AbergJ.A., EronJ.J.Antiretroviral treatment of adult HIV infection.JAMA2014; 312: 410–425.
el-TahtawyA.A., JacksonA.J., LuddenT.M.Comparison of single and multiple dose pharmacokinetics using clinical bioequivalence data and Monte Carlo simulations.Pharm Res1994; 11: 1330–1336.
21.
GoundenV., van NiekerkC., SnymanT., GeorgeJ.A.Presence of the CYP2B6 516G> T polymorphism, increased plasma efavirenz concentrations and early neuropsychiatric side effects in South African HIV-infected patients.AIDS Res Ther2010; 7: 32.
22.
ApostolovaN., FunesH.A., Blas-GarciaA., GalindoM.J., AlvarezA., EspluguesJ.V.Efavirenz and the CNS: what we already know and questions that need to be answered.J Antimicrob Chemother2015; 70: 2693–2708.
23.
NyakutiraC., RöshammarD., ChigutsaE.High prevalence of the CYP2B6 516G→T(*6) variant and effect on the population pharmacokinetics of efavirenz in HIV/ AIDS outpatients in Zimbabwe.Eur J Clin Pharmacol2008; 64: 357–365.
24.
HaasD.W., RibaudoH.J., KimR.B.Pharmacogenetics of efavirenz and central nervous system side effects: an Adult AIDS Clinical Trials Group study.AIDS2004; 18: 2391–2400.
25.
DhoroM., ZvadaS., NgaraB.CYP2B6*6, CYP2B6*18, body weight and sex are predictors of efavirenz pharmacokinetics and treatment response: population pharmacokinetic modeling in an HIV/AIDS and TB cohort in Zimbabwe.BMC Pharmacol Toxicol2015; 16: 4.
26.
SwartM., SkeltonM., RenY., SmithP., TakuvaS., DandaraC.High predictive value of CYP2B6 SNPs for steady-state plasma efavirenz levels in South African HIV/AIDS patients.Pharmacogenet Genomics2013; 23: 415–427.
27.
GwazaL., GordonJ., PotthastH.Influence of point estimates and study power of bioequivalence studies on establishing bioequivalence between generics by adjusted indirect comparisons.Eur J Clin Pharmacol2015; 71: 1083–1089.
WHO Expert Committee on Specifications for Pharmaceutical Preparations.Annex 9: Multisource (generic) pharmaceutical products: guidelines on registration requirements to establish interchangeability. (Accessed 4 July 2016.) Available from http://apps.who.int/medicinedocs/en/d/Js5516e/19.html.
TakanoR., SuganoK., HigashidaA.Oral absorption of poorly water-soluble drugs: computer simulation of fraction absorbed in humans from a miniscale dissolution test.Pharm Res2006; 23: 1144–1156.
35.
KasimN.A., WhitehouseM., RamachandranC.Molecular properties of WHO essential drugs and provisional biopharmaceutical classification.Mol Pharm2004; 1: 85–96.
36.
LindenbergM., KoppS., DressmanJ.B.Classification of orally administered drugs on the World Health Organization Model list of Essential Medicines according to the biopharmaceutics classification system.Eur J Pharm Biopharm2004; 58: 265–278.
YuY., TeerenstraS., VanmolkotF., NeefC., BurgerD., MaliepaardM.Interchangeability of gabapentin generic formulations in the Netherlands: a comparative bioavailability study.Clin Pharmacol Ther2013; 94: 519–524.
39.
YuY., TeerenstraS., NeefC., BurgerD., MaliepaardM.Investigation into the interchangeability of generic formulations using immunosuppressants and a broad selection of medicines.Eur J Clin Pharmacol2015; 71: 979–990.
