Assessing the Structural and Functional Similarity of Insulin Glargine Biosimilars

Background: A biosimilar product is expected to exhibit similar safety, efficacy, and quality as that of the approved reference product. Only a few reports of thorough evaluation of the quality of insulin glargine biosimilars are available in literature. Here, we examine the structural and functional similarity of biosimilars of insulin glargine, the first basal long-acting insulin analogue with respect to its innovator product (Lantus® from Sanofi Aventis). Methods: Structural similarity was established using mass spectrometry, chromatographic, and spectroscopic techniques. Stability was compared by performing accelerated thermal stress studies. Functional similarity was established via in vitro assay. Results: Biosimilar 4 exhibited greater content of high molecular weight species (HMWs) (0.80%) and related substances (RS) (0.45±0.06%) vs others (HMWs of 0.04% and RS of 0.17%). Biosimilars 1 and 3 exhibited higher rate of impurity generation (0.78% and 0.73% per week, respectively), as compared with other drug products (0.02% to 0.43% per week). Furthermore, %aggregation at 14 days was found to statistically correlate ( R2= 0.99, root mean square error (RMSE) = 0.095) with %aggregation at 0 day (linearly) and the number of months from expiry (nonlinearly), highlighting the overpowering impact of the latter. Conclusions: While an overall structural and functional similarity was observed across insulin glargine biosimilars with respect to the innovator product, low amounts of product-related variants were seen in some biosimilars and these impact product stability. The %aggregation at 14 days exhibits statistical correlation with %aggregation at 0 day and the number of months from expiry. The order of biosimilarity was denoted as Lantus®>Biosimilar 2>Biosimilar 4>Biosimilar 1>Biosimilar 3.

Quality Evaluation of Generic Products of Metformin and Vildagliptin Tablets

The aim of the present study was the evaluation and comparison between four different Metformin and Vildagliptin tablets which are commercially available in Indian market. These tablets were assessed for various pharmacopoeial quality control tests. Parameters including weight variation, hardness, friability, drug content, and disintegration time were evaluated. Results were within acceptable limits for all selected products (three generic and an innovator). These results show that the tested generic products were biopharmaceutically similar to the innovator formulation. Therefore, the consumer can select any one of these equivalent products as a substitute for innovator product in case of cost concern or unavailability.

Comparative study of different meloxicam generic products with the brand product

This study aims to evaluate different products of meloxicam Table; Five meloxicam immediate-release generic products (15 mg Tables) were compared with the innovator, reference product, (Mobic®, Boehringer) to find the interchangeable product with the innovator product. Different physical tests were conducted including weight uniformity, thickness, diameter, hardness, friability and disintegration test. In addition, prediction of in-vivo behavior was assessed by measuring the dissolution profile of meloxicam for all the products. Similarity factor (f2) was calculated to compare between the dissolution profile of the generic products with the dissolution profile of innovator product. The results revealed that all the studied products are complied with the British Pharmacopoeia requirements. However, not all of them showed similar in-vitro profile to the brand product. Four out of five generic products, included in this study, showed similarity in dissolution profile to the brand one, which indicates possible bio-equivalency, with the advantages of money saving of using such generic products. One generic product showed similarity factor less than 50, which might give an indication that this generic product is not capable to be bioequivalent with the brand (innovator) product. Overall, this study can be considered an important applicable study that gives an indication about the in-vivo performance of different products. In addition, the study demonstrates the applicability of a simple in-vitro dissolution study as a surrogate way of assessing product bioavailability instead of an expensive and complicated in-vivo bioequivalent study.

Assessment of physical and dissolution characteristics of various itraconazole capsule formulations: a comparative analysis

<p class="abstract"><strong>Background:</strong> This <em>in vitro</em> study compared physical parameters and the dissolution profile of innovator itraconazole capsule formulation, i-Tyza, and 5 other generic capsule formulations available in the Indian market.</p><p class="abstract"><strong>Methods:</strong> The number of pellets and size distribution were determined using naked eye examination and sieving method, respectively. Dissolution profile of formulations was done at 15, 30, 45, and 60 minutes, using a United States Pharmacopeia type II Paddle apparatus in simulated gastric fluid (SGF, pH 1.2) without enzymes, acetate buffer (pH 4.5) with 0.5% sodium lauryl sulfate (SLS), and phosphate buffer (pH 6.8) with 0.5% SLS.<strong></strong></p><p class="abstract"><strong>Results:</strong> All formulations had capsule size 0. Capsule fill weight (~335 to ~510 mg) and total pellet number (127 to 810) varied across formulation, with the innovator brand having the highest number of pellets. Innovator product and i-Tyza had similar fill weight (~460 mg). Pellet size distribution of the innovator product, brand 2, brand 3, and i-Tyza was relatively narrow. In SGF, except brand 1 (84% dissolved) and brand 5 (80% dissolved), all the formulations had near-complete (&gt;85% drug dissolved) or complete dissolution (&gt;90% drug dissolved) at 60 minutes. In acetate buffer, pH 4.5 with 0.5% SLS and phosphate buffer, pH 6.8 with 0.5% SLS, only the innovator product and i-Tyza demonstrated near-complete to complete dissolution at 60 minutes (96% and 90% dissolved).</p><p class="abstract"><strong>Conclusions:</strong> Across all the itraconazole generic formulations evaluated, i-Tyza had comparable physical characteristics and dissolution profile to the innovator product. The <em>in vitro</em> dissolution profile of i-Tyza may indicate adequate <em>in vivo</em> performance.</p>

COMPARATIVE IN VITRO DISSOLUTION STUDY ON METFORMIN MARKET PRODUCTS USING DIFFERENT DISSOLUTION APPARATUSES

Objective: This study was proposed to evaluate and compare the in vitro dissolution profiles of six Metformin Hydrochloride (MH) market products. Methods: Different dissolution apparatuses (USP apparatus II, IV and beaker method) were used to evaluate the dissolution profiles (in phosphate buffer, pH 6.8) of two immediate release (IR) generic products of Metformin Hydrochloride (MH): Cidophage® 1000 mg (G1, Egyptian market) and Metformin arrow® 1000 mg (G2, French market) with respect to the reference products named Glucophage® 850 mg (R1, Egyptian market and R2, French market). In addition to a generic controlled-release (CR) product; Cidophage Retard® 850 mg (G3) versus the reference product; Glucophage XR® 1000 mg (R3) (both from Egyptian market). Dissolution efficiency (D. E.) and the similarity factor (f2) were calculated. Weight uniformity, hardness, tablet dimensions and MH content were measured. Results: Results of the three apparatuses showed that MH IR products studied (reference and generics) did not meet the 75% USP 30 specifications for MH dissolved at 30 min. For MH CR products, Glucophage XR® did not fulfill the USP release criteria, while Cidophage Retard® did. USP apparatus IV revealed the highest sensitivity and discriminative capability. Conclusion: Generally, MH IR generics (G1 and G2) might be interchangeable with the innovator product (Glucophage®). However, Cidophage Retard® might not be interchangeable with Glucophage XR®.

Can We Extrapolate Data from One Immune-Mediated Inflammatory Disease to Another One?

Immune-mediated inflammatory diseases share several pathogenic pathways and this pushes sometimes to extrapolate from one disease or indication to others. A biosimilar can be defined as a biotherapeutic product which is similar in terms of quality, safety, and efficacy to an already licensed reference biotherapeutic product. We review the substrate for extrapolation, the current approval process for biosimilars and the pioneering studies on biosimilars performed in rheumatoid arthritis patients. A biosimilar has the same amino acid sequence as its innovator product. However, post-translational modifications can occur and the current analytical techniques do not allow the final structure. To test the efficacy in one indication, a homogeneous population should be chosen and immunogenicity features are essential in switching and interchangeability. CT-P13 (Remsima™; Inflectra™) is a biosimilar of reference infliximab (Remicade®). It meets most of the requirements for extrapolation. Nevertheless, in inflammatory bowel diseases (IBD) we need more studies to confirm the postulates of extrapolation from rheumatoid arthritis and ankylosing spondylitis to IBD. Furthermore, an effective pharmacovigilance schedule is mandatory to look for immunogenicity and side effects.

In Vitro and In Vivo Quality Evaluation of Glibenclamide Tablets Marketed in Addis Ababa, Ethiopia

Good quality drugs fulfilling the regulatory parameters and produced per the current good manufacturing (CGMP) standards are very critical for best therapeutic outcome in patient therapy. Hence, this study assesses quality as well as physicochemical bioequivalence of five brands of glibenclamide tablets marketed in Addis Ababa using in vitro and in vivo methods. Friability, disintegration, dissolution, and assay for the content of active ingredients were evaluated using the methods described in the British Pharmacopeia (2009) and United States Pharmacopeia (2007). All the brands of glibenclamide tablets complied with the official specification for hardness, friability, disintegration, and assay. Difference factor (f1) values were less than 15 and similarity factor (f2) values were greater than 50 for all products of glibenclamide. The hypoglycemic effect of different products of glibenclamide tablets was evaluated on normoglycemic mice. The in vivo studies indicated that there is no significant difference in percent reduction of blood glucose level between the brands of glibenclamide and the innovator product (p > 0.05). Hence, based on the in vivo results and in vitro dissolution studies, the brands might be substituted with the innovator product in clinical practice.