• Journal of Pharmaceutical Investigation
• /
• v.40 no.2
• /
• pp.109-115
• /
• 2010

The purpose of the present study was to evaluate the bioequivalence of two choline alphoscerate soft capsules, Gliatilin soft capsule (Daewoong Pharmaceuticals Co., Ltd.) and Cholicerin soft capsule (Sam Chun Dang Pharm. Co., Ltd.), according to the guidelines of Korea Food and Drug Administration (KFDA). Serum concentrations of choline after oral administration of choline alphoscerate were determined using a validated LC/MS/MS method. This method showed linear response over the concentration range of 0.5-20 ${\mu}g$/mL with correlation coefficient of 0.9999. The lower limit of quantitation using 100 ${\mu}L$ of serum was 0.5 ${\mu}g$/mL which was sensitive enough for pharmacokinetic studies. Thirty six healthy male Korean volunteers received each medicine at the choline alphoscerate dose of 1200 mg in a $2{\times}2$ crossover study. There was a one-week washout period between the doses. Blood samples were taken at predetermined time intervals up to 8 hr. $AUC_t$ (the area under the serum concentration-time curve from time 0 to 8 hr) was calculated by the linear trapezoidal rule method. $C_{max}$ (the maximum serum drug concentration) and $T_{max}$ (the time to reach $C_{max}$) were compiled from the serum concentration-time data. Analysis of variance was carried out using logarithmically transformed $AUC_t$ and $C_{max}$. No significant sequence effect was found for all of the bioavailability parameters, indicating that the crossover design was properly performed. The 90% confidence intervals of the $AUC_t$ ratio and the $C_{max}$ ratio for Cholicerin/Gliatilin were log0.9998-log1.1172 and log0.9938-1.0944, respectively. These values were within the acceptable bioequivalence intervals of log0.80-log1.25. Thus, the criteria of the KFDA guidelines for the bioequivalence was satisfied, indicating Cholicerin soft capsule and Gliatilin soft capsule are bioequivalent.

• Journal of Pharmaceutical Investigation
• /
• v.38 no.6
• /
• pp.413-419
• /
• 2008

Carvedilol, is a nonselective $\beta$-blocking agent and it also has vasodilating properties that are attributed mainly to its blocking activity at ${\alpha}_1$-receptors. The purpose of the present study was to evaluate the bioequivalence of two carvedilol tablets, $Dilatrend^{(R)}$ tablet 12.5 mg (Chong Kun Dang Pharmaceutical Co., Ltd.) and Cadilan tablet 12.5 mg (KyungDong Pharmaceutical. Co., Ltd.), according to the guidelines of the Korea Food and Drug Administration (KFDA). The release of carvedilol from the two carvedilol formulations in vitro was tested using KP VIII Apparatus II method with pH 4.5 dissolution medium. Thirty two healthy male subjects, $25.00{\pm}3.09$ years in age and $70.71{\pm}11.35\;kg$ in body weight, were divided into two groups and a randomized $2{\times}2$ cross-over study was employed. After a single tablet containing 12.5 mg as carvedilol was orally administered, blood samples were taken at predetermined time intervals and the concentrations of carvedilol in serum were determined using HPLC with fluorescence detector. The dissolution profiles of two formulations were similar in the tested dissolution medium. The pharmacokinetic parameters such as $AUC_t$, $C_{max}$ and $T_{max}$ were calculated and ANOVA test was utilized for the statistical analysis of the parameters using logarithmically transformed $AUC_t$, $C_{max}$ and untransformed $T_{max}$. The results showed that the differences between two formulations based on the reference drug, $Dilatrend^{(R)}$ tablet 12.5 mg, were 4.66%, 8.33% and -7.45% for $AUC_t$, $C_{max}$ and $T_{max}$, respectively. There were no sequence effects between two formulations in these parameters. The 90% confidence intervals using logarithmically transformed data were within the acceptance range of log 0.8 to log 1.25 (e.g., $\log\;0.9823{\sim}\log\;1.1042$ and $\log\;1.0132{\sim}\log\;1.1875$ for $AUC_t$ and $C_{max}$, respectively). Thus, the criteria of the KFDA bioequivalence guideline were satisfied, indicating Cadilan tablet 12.5 mg was bioequivalent to $Dilatrend^{(R)}$ tablet 12.5 mg.

• Journal of Pharmaceutical Investigation
• /
• v.34 no.2
• /
• pp.139-145
• /
• 2004

The purpose of the present study was to evaluate the bioequivalence of two risperidone tablets, Risperdal (Janssen Korea Co., Ltd.) and Rispen (Myung In Pharm. Co., Ltd), according to the guidelines of Korea Food and Drug Administration (KFDA). The risperidone release from the two risperidone formulations in vitro was tested using KP VIII Apparatus II method with various of dissolution media (pH 1.2, 4.0, 6.8 buffer solution and water). Twenty four healthy male subjects, $23.33\;{\pm}2.10$ years in age and $69.24{\pm}8.05\;kg$ kg in body weight, were divided into two groups and a randomized $2\;{\times}\;2$ cross over study was employed. After one tablet containing 2 mg as risperidone was orally administered, blood was taken at predetermined time intervals and the concentrations of risperidone in serum were determined using HPLC method with UV detector. The dissolution profiles of two formulations were similar at all dissolution media. Besides, the pharmacokinetic parameters such as $AUC_t$,$C_{max},\;and\;T_{max}$ were calculated and ANOVA test was utilized for the analysis of the parameters using logarithmically transformed $AUC_t$,$C_{max}$ and untransformed $T_{max}$. The results showed that the differences between two formulations based on the Risperdal were 0.20, -1.29 and -11-09% for $AUC_t$,$C_{max},\;and\;T_{max}$, respectively There were no sequence effects two formulations in parameters. The 90% confidence intervals using logarithmically transformed data were within the acceptance range of log(0.8) to log(1.25) (e.g.,$log(0.90){\sim}log(1.30)$ and $log(0.84){\sim}log(1.09)$ for$AUC_t$ and $C_{max}$, respectively). Thus, the criteria of the KFDA guideline for the bioequivalence were satisfied, indicating Rispen tablet and Risperdal tablet were bioequivalent.

• Journal of Pharmaceutical Investigation
• /
• v.34 no.2
• /
• pp.147-153
• /
• 2004

The purpose of the present study was to evaluate the bioequivalence of two glimepiride tablets, $Amaryl^{\circledR}$ (Handok/Aventis Pharm. Co., Ltd.) and Glimed (Kuhn II Pharm. Co., Ltd.), according to the guidelines of Korea Food and Drug Administration (KFDA). The glimepiride release from the two glimepiride formulations in vitro was tested using KP VIII Apparatus II method with a variety of dissolution media (pH 1.2, 4.0, 6.8 buffer solution, water and blend of PSB 80 into each dissolution medium). Twenty six healthy male subjects, $22.65{\pm}2.19$ years in age and $66.55{\pm}8.85$ kg in body weight, were divided into two groups and a randomized $2\;{\times}\;2$ cross-over study was employed. After one tablet containing 2 mg as glimepiride was orally administered, blood was taken at predetermined time intervals and the concentrations of glimepiride in serum were determined using HPLC method with UV detector. The dissolution profiles of two formulations were similar at all dissolution media. Besides, the pharmacokinetic parameters such as $AUC_t$, $C_{max}$ and $T_{max}$ were calculated and ANOVA test was utilized for the statistical analysis of the parameters using logarithmically transformed $AUC_t$, $C_{max}$ and untransformed $T_{max}$. The results showed that the differences between two formulations based on the Amaryl were -3.70, -8.28 and 0.61% for $AUC_t$, $C_{max}$ and $T_{max}$, respectively. There were no sequence effects between two formulations in these parameters. The 90% confidence intervals using logarithmically transformed data were within the acceptance range of log(0.8) to log(1.25) (e.g., $log(0.84){\sim}log(1.04)$ for $log(0.82){\sim}log(1.03)$ for $AUC_t$ and $C_{max}$, respectively). Thus, the criteria of the KFDA guideline for the bioequivalence were satisfied, indicating Glimed tablet and Amaryl tablet were bioequivalent.

• Journal of Pharmaceutical Investigation
• /
• v.34 no.3
• /
• pp.223-228
• /
• 2004

A new medical system was started in Korea in 2000 and pharmaceutical affairs law was revised in 2001. According to the revised law, generic substitution is permitted only to the drug products which are proven to be bioequivalent to the reference listed drugs. To expand the list of bioequivalence-proven drug products and to ensure the credibility of the therapeutic equivalence of generic drug are the hot issues in Korea. Also, the KFDA has a plan to revise the pharmaceutical affairs law that bioequivalence reports of all the generic prescription drug products should be submitted to the KFDA for drug approval after July in 2004. Therefore, it is increasing the necessity to develop the bioequivalence-demonstrating methods for specific drug substances and preparations which require to conduct food-effect bioavailability or bioequivalence study. There are some differences between US and Japanese guidances of food-effect bioavailability and bioequivalence studies. In this paper, we examined the recently published US guidance about food-effect study and it will be a reference to make our own guidance about food-effect bioavailability and bioequivalence guidances in Korea.

• Journal of Pharmaceutical Investigation
• /
• v.34 no.6
• /
• pp.529-540
• /
• 2004

After new medical system of separation of dispensary from medical practice was started in 2000 in Korea, to expand bioequivalence-proven drug products and to ensure the credibility of the therapeutic equivalence of generic drugs are hot issues in Korea. It will be obligatory to submit bioequivalence reports for getting licenses of all generic prescription drugs in the near future. Like other countries such as US and Japan, the KFDA also has a plan to re-evaluate the already approved drugs by bioequivalence studies. Therefore, it becomes more necessary to develop bioequivalence-demonstrating methods for specific preparations such as topical drug products among already approved drug products. There are some differences between US and Japanese guidances of bioequivalence studies of generic drug products for topical use. The information on Japanese guidance and the guidance's Q&As is already provided in our previous paper. In this paper, we examined the US guideline published in 1995 and compared with the Japanese guideline, which will give a useful information to make a guidance on bioequivalence studies of topical drug products in Korea.

• Journal of Pharmaceutical Investigation
• /
• v.34 no.4
• /
• pp.333-340
• /
• 2004

A new medical system of separation of dispensary from medical practice was started in 2000 in Korea. To expand bioequivalence-proven drug products and to ensure the credibility of the therapeutic equivalence of generic drug are hot issues in Korea. The KFDA also has a plan to revise the pharmaceutical affairs law that bioequivalence reports of all the generic prescription drugs should be submitted to the KFDA in the application for drug approval. Therefore, it becomes more necessary to develop bioequivalence-demonstrating methods for specific preparations such as topical drug products. There are some differences between US and Japanese guidances of bioequivalence studies of generic drug products for topical use. In this paper, we examined the recently published Japanese guideline, Guideline for Bioequivalence Studies of Generic Products For Topical Uses, and Q&A of the guideline, which will be references to make a guidance on bioequivalence studies of topical drug products in Korea.

• Proceedings of the PSK Conference
• /
• 2003.04a
• /
• pp.90-90
• /
• 2003

Sample size calculations play an important role in bioequivalence trials. In almost all clinical trials sample size is determined by considering power under the alternative hypothesis. The alternative hypothesis is the hypothesis that we wish to prove with experiments. Hence, in bioequivalence trials the alternative hypothesis is that two formulations are bioequivalent, while the null hypothesis is that the two formulations are not bioequivalent. (omitted)

• Biomolecules & Therapeutics
• /
• v.5 no.3
• /
• pp.260-264
• /
• 1997

The bioequivalence of two nicotine patches was evaluated in 16 normal male volunteers (age 21 ~ 27 yrs) following single transdermal application. Test product was "Nicostop patch" made by Sam Yang Co. and reference product was "Nicotinell TTS patch" made by Korean Searle Ciba-Geigy Co. After nicotine patches were applied onto the inside of the forearm, blood was taken at predetermined time intervals and the nicotine concentration in plasma was determined with a sensitive GC method using NPD detector. AUC and Cm\ulcorner were calculated and statistically analyzed for the bioequivalence of the two products. The results showed that the differences in AUC and $C_{msx}$between two products were 5.47% and 2.70%, respectively. The powers (1-$\beta$) for AUC and $C_{max}$. were >90% and 88.76%, respectively. Detectable differences($\Delta$) and confidence intervals were all less than 20%. All of these parameters met the criteria of KFDA for bioequivalence, indicating that "Nicostop patch" is bioequivalent to "Nicotinell TTS patch" . . .

• Journal of the Korean Statistical Society
• /
• v.35 no.3
• /
• pp.239-250
• /
• 2006

A $2{\times}2$ crossover design including carryover effect is considered for assessment of population bioequivalence of two drug formulations in a Bayesian framework. In classical analysis, it is complex to deal with the carryover effect since the estimate of the drug effect is biased in the presence of a carryover effect. The proposed method in this article uses uninformative priors and vague proper priors for objectiveness of priors and the posterior probability distribution of the parameters of interest is derived with given priors. The posterior probabilities of the hypotheses for assessing population bioequivalence are evaluated based on a Markov chain Monte Carlo simulation method. An example with real data set is given for illustration.