PRINCIPLES OF STATISTICAL EVALUATION OF BIOEQUIVALENCE STUDIES IN THE CONTEXT OF CURRENT REGULATORY REQUIREMENTS AND LEGAL ACTS

The article analyses regulatory documents and requirements for statistical principles of planning and evaluation of results of bioequivalence studies. It describes current statistical approaches to bioequivalence evaluation and relevant recommendations for the planning of studies of conventional medicinal products, medicinal products with a narrow therapeutic range, and analogues of endogenous compounds. The article analyses such statistical approaches as average Bioequivalence (ABE), Average Bioequivalence with Expanding Limits (ABEL), Reference-Scaled Average Bioequivalence (RSABE). It describes specific aspects of statistical analysis of insufficiently studied medicinal products. The article also describes acceptable algorithms of planning and performing two-stage bioequivalence study designs, since such studies call for multiple testing of the bioequivalence hypothesis which leads to an increased probability of type i error (consumer risk). The article offers recommendations for the choice of statistical approaches and describes some aspects of statistical analysis methods depending on the design of the study and the type of generic medicines.

1. Federal Law of the Russian Federation, April 12, 2010, No. 61-FZ «On Circulation of Medicines» (In Russ.)

2. Federal Law of the Russian Federation, December 22, 2014, No. 429-FZ «On Amendments to the Federal Law «On Circulation of Medicines» (In Russ.)

3. Federal Law of the Russian Federation, July 13, 2015, No. 241-FZ «On Amendments to the Federal Law ‘On Circulation of Medicines’» and the Federal Law «On Amendments to the Federal Law ‘On Circulation of Medicines’» (In Russ.)

4. Yu LX, Li BV, eds. FDA Bioequivalence Standards. New York: Springer; 2014

5. Khokhlov AL, ed. Theoretical and Practical Basis for Carrying out Studies of Reproduced Drugs: Monograph. Moscow–Yaroslavl– Prague: PhotoLife; 2017 (In Russ.)

6. Guideline on Investigation of Bioequivalence (CPMP/EWP/ QWP/1401/98 Rev. 1). European Medicines Agency. Available from: http://www.ema.europa.eu/docs/en_GB/document_library/Scientific_guideline/2010/01/WC500070039.pdf

7. Smirnov AS, Schneider А, Frolov МYu, Petrov VI. Modern Criteria of Bioequivalence of Pharmaceuticals: Harmonization of National Standards. Pharmaceutical Chemistry Journal 2014;48(5):3–10 (In Russ.)

8. Guidance on Evaluation of Medicines. V. 1. Moscow: Grif i K; 2013 (In Russ.)

9. Rules for Bioequivalence Studies of Drugs of the Eurasian Economic Union (In Russ.) Available from: http://www.eurasiancommission.org/ru/act/texnreg/deptexreg/konsultComitet/Documents/%D0%9F%D1%80%D0%B0%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%BB%D0%B0%20%D0%91%D0%AD%D0%98%20%D0%B8%D1%82%D0%BE%D0%B3%2020.02.2015%20%D0%BD%D0%B0%20%D1%81%D0%B0%D0%B9%D1%82.pdf

10. Jiang W, Makhlouf F, Schuirmann DJ, Zhang X, Zheng N, Conner D, et al. A Bioequivalence Approach for Generic Narrow Therapeutic Index Drugs: Evaluation of the Reference-Scaled Approach and Variability Comparison Criterion. AAPS J 2015;17(4):891–901.

11. Davit BM, Chen ML, Conner DP, Haidar SH, Kim S, Lee CH, et al. Implementation of a Reference-Scaled Average Bioequivalence Approach for Highly Variable Generic Drug Products by the US Food and Drug Administration. AAPS J 2012;14(4):915–24.

12. Howe WG. Approximate Confidence Limits on the Mean of X+Y Where X and Y are Two Tabled Independent Random Variables. Journal of the American Statistical Association 1974;69(347):789–94.

13. Potvin D, Diliberti CE, Hauck WW, Parr AF, Schuirmann DJ, and RA Smith. Sequential Design Approaches for Bioequivalence Studies with Crossover Designs. Pharmaceutical Statistics 2008;7(4):245–62.

14. Talibov OB. Adaptive Design in Bioequivalence Studies (a Review). The Bulletin of Roszdravnadzor 2015;(2):31–4 (In Russ.)