Bioequivalence evaluation of glibenclamide 5-mg tablets: diabenil® and daonil® (in healthy volunteers).

##plugins.themes.academic_pro.article.sidebar##

Published Jun 25, 2015
Download
pdf
Vol. 93 No. 2 (2015): Issue Feb 2015

##plugins.themes.academic_pro.article.main##

Ghozzi Hanen
Hammami Serria
Affes Hanen
Ksouda Kamilia
Sahnoun Zouheir
Hakim Ahmed
Abid Mohamed

Abstract

Background: Prescription of generic products is a way to reduce health expense. Bioequivalence is the most appropriate procedure to evaluate the quality and therapeutic efficacy of a generic product. Generic prescriptions are a strategic choice in Tunisia.
Objective: We expose in this work, a bioequivalence study witch compare a generic (test) product: DIABENIL* manufactured by a Tunisian pharmaceutical industry Dar Essaidaly to the innovative (citationsRaw) product: DAONIL* of Aventis pharma laboratories.
Methods: The bioequivalence of two glibenclamide 5-mg tablets was determined in healthy human, adult volunteers after a single dose in a randomized cross-over in double blind study. Test and citationsRaw were administered to twenty-four healthy volunteers of both sexes after overnight fasting. In total, 15 Blood samples were collected before and following the administration of the drug. Serum concentrations of glibenclamide were determined by validated HPLC method. The pharmacokinetic parameters AUC0t, AUC0 , Cmax and tmax were tested for bioequivalence. Results: All parameters showed bioequivalence between both formulations as their confidence intervals were within the bioequivalence acceptable range of 0.80-1.25 limits.
Conclusion: We conclude that the two formulations exhibited comparable pharmacokinetic profiles and that the two products can be considered interchangeable in medical practice.

Keywords:

Glibenclamide, bioequivalence, pharmacokinetics, high-performance liquid chromatography.

##plugins.themes.academic_pro.article.details##

References

  1. Spino M, Tsang YC, Pop R. Dissolution and in vivo evidence of differences in reference products: impact on development of generic drugs. Eur J Drug Metab Pharmacokinet. 2000; 25: 18-24.
  2. Dunne S, Shannon B, Dunne C, Cullen W. A review of the differences and similarities between generic drugs and their originator counterparts, including economic benefits associated with usage of generic medicines, using Ireland as a case study. BMC Pharmacol Toxicol 2013; 14:1.
  3. Blume HH, Mcgilveray IJ, Midha KK. BIO-international 94, Conférence on Bioavailability, Bioequivalence and Pharmacokinetic Studies Preconference satellite on in vivo/in vitro correlation. Eur J Pharm Sci. 1995; 3: 113-24
  4. Williams RL, Adams W, Chen ML, et al. Where are we now and where do we go next in terms of the scientific basis for regulation on bioavailability and bioequivalence? Eur J Drug Metab Pharmacokinet. 2000; 25: 7-12
  5. Pascal Le Corre. Bioéquivalence et génériques de principes actifs à marge thérapeutique étroite. Presse Med. 2010; 39: 169-176
  6. Luo LF, Tian Y, Guo HM, Li G, Zhang ZJ. Pharmacokinetics and Bioequivalence of Two Ibuprofen Sustained-Release Formulations after Single and Multiple Doses in Healthy Chinese Male Volunteers.Drug Res (Stuttg) 2013 May 29. [Epub ahead of print]
  7. Karam JH. Hormones pancréatiques et médicaments antidiabétiques. In: Lagier G. Pharmacologie fondamentale et clinique, 7ème édition, 2000 (Piccin Italia) : 705-26.
  8. Andanson M, Santolaria N, Devys C, Bureau C. Les antidiabétiques oraux. Lyon Pharmaceutique. 1997; 48: 178-89.
  9. El-Sayed YM, Suleiman MS, Hasan MM, et al. Comparison of the pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics of two commercial products containing glibenclamide. Int J Clin Pharm Ther Toxicol. 1989; 27: 551-7.
  10. danpaan-Heikkila JE. Current status of the international comparator (reference) product system. Eur J Drug Metab Pharmacokinet. 2000; 25: 36-7.
  11. . Diletti E, Hauschke D, Steinijans VW. Sample Size determination for bioequivalence assessment by means of confidence intervals. Int J Clin Pharmacol Ther Toxicol. 1991; 29: 1-8
  12. Hauschke D, Steinijans VW, Diletti E, Burke M. Sample size determination for bioequivalence assessment using a multiplicative model. J Pharmacokinet Biopharm. 1992; 20: 557-61
  13. Hauschke D, Steinijans WV, Diletti E et al. Presentation of intrasubject coefficient of variation for simple size planning in bioequivalence studies. Int J Clin Pharmacol Ther. 1994; 32: 376-8
  14. Steinijans VW, Sauter R, Hauschke D et al. Reference tables for the intrasubject coefficient of variation in bioequivalence studies. Int J Clin Pharmacol Ther. 1995; 33: 427-30
  15. . United States Food and Drug Administration. In vivo bioéquivalence guidance/ general information. Fed Regist. 1992; 8:4382-406
  16. Flores-Murrieta FJ, Carrasco-Portugal Mdel C, Reyes-García G, MedinaSantillán R, Herrera JE. Bioequivalence of two oral formulations of glyburide (glibenclamide). Proc West Pharmacol Soc. 2007; 50:64-6
  17. . Rydberg T. Determination of glibenclamide and its two major metabolites in human serum and urine by column liquid chromatography. J Chromatogr. 1991; 564: 223-33
  18. Hubert P H, Chiap P, Crommen J, et al. Validation des procédures analytiques quantitatives. Harmonisation des démarches de validation. STP Pharma Prat. 2003 ; 13: 101-38
  19. Westlake WF. Use of confidence intervals in analysis of comparative bioavailability trials. J Pharm Sci. 1972; 61: 1340-1
  20. Schuirman D J. Comparison of two one sided tests procedure and the power approach for assessing the bioequivalence of average bioavailability. J Pharmacokinet Biopharm. 1987; 715: 657-80
  21. Signoretti EC, Delletti A, Cingolani E et al. Bioavailability of glibenclamide tablets. Farmaco Prat. 1984; 40(5): 141-51
  22. Neugebauer G, Betzien G, Hrstka V, Kaufmann B, Möllendorff E, Abshagen U. Absolute bioavailability and bioequivalence of glibenclamide (Semi-Euglucon N). Int J Clin Pharm Ther Toxicol. 1985; 23: 453-60.
  23. Blume HH, Midha KK. Bio-International 92, conference on bioavailability, bioequivalence, and pharmacokinetic studies. J Pharm Sci. 1993; 82: 1186-9
  24. . Guilbaud O. Exact comparison of means and within-subject variances in 2x2 crossover trials. Drug Info J. 1999; 33: 455-69.
  25. Hauck WW, Anderson S. Types of bioequivalence and related statistical considerations. Int J Clin Pharmacol Ther Toxicol. 1992; 30: 181-7
  26. Zintzaras E. The existence of sequence effect in cross-over bioequivalence trials. Eur J Drug Metab Pharmacokinet. 2000; 25: 241-4.