phkineticaФармакокинетика и ФармакодинамикаPharmacokinetics and Pharmacodynamics2587-78362686-8830ООО «Издательство ОКИ»phkinetica-195Research ArticleИССЛЕДОВАНИЯ БИОЭКВИВАЛЕНТНОСТИBIOEQUIVALENCE STUDIESСтатистический анализ данных исследований биоэквивалентностиБондареваИрина Борисовнаclinvest@mail.ruНИИ физико-химической медицины МЗ РФ, МоскваRussian Federation20041104202001Клиническая фармакокинетика1422Copyright © Бондарева И.Б., 20202020Бондарева И.Б.Бондарева И.Б.Данная работа распространяется под лицензией Creative Commons Attribution 4.0.This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.https://www.pharmacokinetica.ru/jour/article/view/195

Появление большого количества генерических лекарственных препаратов объясняет всё вырастающий интерес к проблеме биоэквивалентности, планированию и статистическому анализу данных исследований, проводимых для и установления биоэквивалентности. Установление биоэквивалентности (фармакокинетической биоэквивалентности) препаратов (обычно генерического и оригинального), предназначенных для внесосудистого введения и действие которых опосредовано появлением лекарственного средства в системном кровотоке, предполагает выполнение специального фармакокинетического исследования для сравнения относительной биодоступности лекарственного вещества при введении в одинаковых дозах при одинаковых условиях. Биодоступность характеризуется степенью всасывания (количеством препарата, достигающим системного кровотока) и скоростью процесса всасывании. Обычно такие исследования проводятся в соответствии с двойным слепым перекрестным дизайном. В качестве стандарта для сравнения обычно берётся известный зарегистрированный препарат со сходными свойствами.

статистический анализисследования биоэквивалентностифармакокинетическая биоэквивалентностьотносительная биодоступностьReferencesМетодические рекомендации по проведению качественных клинических исследований биоэквивалентности лекарственных препаратов // МЗ РФ, Москва, 2001.Методические рекомендации по проведению качественных клинических исследований биоэквивалентности лекарственных препаратов // МЗ РФ, Москва, 2001.Сергиенко В.И., Бондарева И.Б. «Математическая статистика в клинических исследованиях» // «Гэотар Медицина», Москва, 2000.Сергиенко В.И., Бондарева И.Б. «Математическая статистика в клинических исследованиях» // «Гэотар Медицина», Москва, 2000.Benet LZ., Goyan JE. «Bioequivalence and Narrow Therapeutic Index Drugs» // Pharmacotherapy 15(4): 433-440, 1995.Benet LZ., Goyan JE. «Bioequivalence and Narrow Therapeutic Index Drugs» // Pharmacotherapy 15(4): 433-440, 1995.Chen M-L, Patnaik R, Hauck WW, et al. «An Individual Bioequivalence Criterion: Regulatory Consideration» // Statistics in Medicine 19(20): 2821-2842, 2000.Chen M-L, Patnaik R, Hauck WW, et al. «An Individual Bioequivalence Criterion: Regulatory Consideration» // Statistics in Medicine 19(20): 2821-2842, 2000.Diletti E., Hauschke D., Steinijans V.W. «Sample Size Determination for Bioequivalence Assessment by Means of Confidence Intervals» // Intern J Clin Pharmacol, Ther and Toxicology 29(1): 1-8 , 1991.Diletti E., Hauschke D., Steinijans V.W. «Sample Size Determination for Bioequivalence Assessment by Means of Confidence Intervals» // Intern J Clin Pharmacol, Ther and Toxicology 29(1): 1-8 , 1991.Diletti E., Hauschke D., Steinijans V.W. «Sample Size Determination: Extended Tables for the Multiplicative Model and Bioequivalence Ranges of 0.9 to 1.11 and 0.7 to 1.43» // Intern J Clin Pharmacol, Ther and Toxicology 30(8):287-290, 1992.Diletti E., Hauschke D., Steinijans V.W. «Sample Size Determination: Extended Tables for the Multiplicative Model and Bioequivalence Ranges of 0.9 to 1.11 and 0.7 to 1.43» // Intern J Clin Pharmacol, Ther and Toxicology 30(8):287-290, 1992.Endrenyi L., Fritsch S, Yan W. «Cmax/AUC Is a Clearer Measure Than Cmax for Absorption Rates in Investigations of Bioequivalence» // Intern J Clin Pharmacol, Ther and Toxicology 29(10): 394-399, 1991.Endrenyi L., Fritsch S, Yan W. «Cmax/AUC Is a Clearer Measure Than Cmax for Absorption Rates in Investigations of Bioequivalence» // Intern J Clin Pharmacol, Ther and Toxicology 29(10): 394-399, 1991.Endrenyi L., Taback N., Tothfalusi L. «Properties of the Estimated Variance Component for Subject-by-formulation Interaction in Studies of Individual Bioequivalence» // Statistics in Medicine 19(20): 2867-2878, 2000.Endrenyi L., Taback N., Tothfalusi L. «Properties of the Estimated Variance Component for Subject-by-formulation Interaction in Studies of Individual Bioequivalence» // Statistics in Medicine 19(20): 2867-2878, 2000.Esinhart J.D., Chinchilli V.M. «Sample Size Considerations for Assessing Individual Bioequivalence Based on the Method of Tolerance Intervals» // Intern J Clin Pharmacol, Ther and Toxicology 32(1): 26-32 , 1994.Esinhart J.D., Chinchilli V.M. «Sample Size Considerations for Assessing Individual Bioequivalence Based on the Method of Tolerance Intervals» // Intern J Clin Pharmacol, Ther and Toxicology 32(1): 26-32 , 1994.Fluehler H., Hirtz J., Moser H.A. «An Aid to Decision - Making in Bioequivalence Assessment» // J Pharmacokin Biopharm 9(2): 235-243, 1981.Fluehler H., Hirtz J., Moser H.A. «An Aid to Decision - Making in Bioequivalence Assessment» // J Pharmacokin Biopharm 9(2): 235-243, 1981.Gould AL. «Discussion of Individual Bioequivalence by M.-L. Chen» // J Biopharm Stat 7(1): 23-29, 1997.Gould AL. «Discussion of Individual Bioequivalence by M.-L. Chen» // J Biopharm Stat 7(1): 23-29, 1997.Gould AL. «A Practical Approach for Evaluating Population and Individuai Bioequavalence» // Statistics in Medicine 19(20): 2721-2740, 2000.Gould AL. «A Practical Approach for Evaluating Population and Individuai Bioequavalence» // Statistics in Medicine 19(20): 2721-2740, 2000.Grieve A.P. «Evaluation of Bioequivalence Studies» // Eur J Clin Pharmacol 40: 201-203, 1991.Grieve A.P. «Evaluation of Bioequivalence Studies» // Eur J Clin Pharmacol 40: 201-203, 1991.Grizzle J.E. «The Two-Period Change-Over Design and Its Use in Clinical Trials» // Biometrics, June 1965.Grizzle J.E. «The Two-Period Change-Over Design and Its Use in Clinical Trials» // Biometrics, June 1965.Hauck W.W., Anderson S. «Types of Bioequivalence and Related Statistical Considerations» // Intern J Clin Pharmacol, Ther and Toxicology 30(5): 181-187, 1992.Hauck W.W., Anderson S. «Types of Bioequivalence and Related Statistical Considerations» // Intern J Clin Pharmacol, Ther and Toxicology 30(5): 181-187, 1992.Hauschke D., Steinijans V.W. «The U.S. Draft Guidance Regarding Population and Individual Bioequivalence Approaches: Comments by Research-based Pharmaceutical Company» // Statistics in Medicine 19(20): 2769-2774, 2000.Hauschke D., Steinijans V.W. «The U.S. Draft Guidance Regarding Population and Individual Bioequivalence Approaches: Comments by Research-based Pharmaceutical Company» // Statistics in Medicine 19(20): 2769-2774, 2000.Hauschke D., Steinijans V.W., Diletti E., et al «Presentation of the Intrasubject Coefficient of Variation for Sample Size Planning in Bioequivalence Studies» // Intern J Clin Pharmacol, Ther and Toxicology 32(7): 376 - 378, 1994.Hauschke D., Steinijans V.W., Diletti E., et al «Presentation of the Intrasubject Coefficient of Variation for Sample Size Planning in Bioequivalence Studies» // Intern J Clin Pharmacol, Ther and Toxicology 32(7): 376 - 378, 1994.Hills M., Armitage P. «The Two-Period Cross-Over Clinical Trial» // Br J Clin Pharmac 8: 7-20, 1979.Hills M., Armitage P. «The Two-Period Cross-Over Clinical Trial» // Br J Clin Pharmac 8: 7-20, 1979.Hsuan FC. «Some Statistical Considerations on the FDA Draft Guidance for Individual Bioequivalence» // Statistics in Medicine 19(20): 2879-2884, 2000.Hsuan FC. «Some Statistical Considerations on the FDA Draft Guidance for Individual Bioequivalence» // Statistics in Medicine 19(20): 2879-2884, 2000.In vivo bioequivalence guidance’s // U.S. Pharmacopeia 24-NF 19, National Formulary, Supplement 1090, 2000.In vivo bioequivalence guidance’s // U.S. Pharmacopeia 24-NF 19, National Formulary, Supplement 1090, 2000.Ju H.L. «On TIER Method for Assessment of Individual Bioequivalence» // J Biopharm Statist, 7(1): 63-85, 1997.Ju H.L. «On TIER Method for Assessment of Individual Bioequivalence» // J Biopharm Statist, 7(1): 63-85, 1997.Liu J.P., Chow S-C. «A Two One-Sided Tests Procedure for Assessment of Individual Bioequivalence» // J Biopharm Stat 7(1): 49-61, 1997.Liu J.P., Chow S-C. «A Two One-Sided Tests Procedure for Assessment of Individual Bioequivalence» // J Biopharm Stat 7(1): 49-61, 1997.Liu J.P., Weng C.S. «Estimation of Direct formulation Effect under log Normal Distribution in Bioavailability/Bioequivalence Studies» // Statistics In Medicine 11: 881-896, 1992.Liu J.P., Weng C.S. «Estimation of Direct formulation Effect under log Normal Distribution in Bioavailability/Bioequivalence Studies» // Statistics In Medicine 11: 881-896, 1992.Lund RE. «Tables for an Approximate Test for Outliers in Linear Models» // Technometrics, Vol. 17(4): 473-476, 1975.Lund RE. «Tables for an Approximate Test for Outliers in Linear Models» // Technometrics, Vol. 17(4): 473-476, 1975.Mandallaz D., Mau J. «Comparison of Different Methods for Decision-Making in Bioequivalence Assessment» // Biometrics 37: 213-222, 1981.Mandallaz D., Mau J. «Comparison of Different Methods for Decision-Making in Bioequivalence Assessment» // Biometrics 37: 213-222, 1981.Pabst G., Jaeger H. «Review of Methods and Criteria for the Evaluation of Bioequivalence Studies» // Eur J Clin Pharmacol 38: 5-10, 1990.Pabst G., Jaeger H. «Review of Methods and Criteria for the Evaluation of Bioequivalence Studies» // Eur J Clin Pharmacol 38: 5-10, 1990.Phillips K.F. «Power of the Two One-Sided Tests Procedure in Bioequivalence» // J pharmacokin Biopharm 18(2): 137-144, 1990.Phillips K.F. «Power of the Two One-Sided Tests Procedure in Bioequivalence» // J pharmacokin Biopharm 18(2): 137-144, 1990.Rescigno A. «Rate of Absorption» // Pharmacological Research 35(1): 5-6, 1997.Rescigno A. «Rate of Absorption» // Pharmacological Research 35(1): 5-6, 1997.Rescigno A., Powers J.D. «AUC and Cmax Are Not Sufficient to Prove Bioequivalence» // Pharmacological Research 37(2):93-95, 1998.Rescigno A., Powers J.D. «AUC and Cmax Are Not Sufficient to Prove Bioequivalence» // Pharmacological Research 37(2):93-95, 1998.Sauter R., Steinijans VW., Diletti E., et al. «Presentation of Results from Bioequivalence Studies» // Internat J Clin Pharmacol, Ther and Toxicol 30(7): 233-256, 1992.Sauter R., Steinijans VW., Diletti E., et al. «Presentation of Results from Bioequivalence Studies» // Internat J Clin Pharmacol, Ther and Toxicol 30(7): 233-256, 1992.Schuirmann D.J. «A Comparison of the Two One-Sided Tests Procedure ana Power Approach for Assessing the Equivalence of Average Bioavailability» // J Pharmacokin Biopharm 15(6): 657-680, 1987.Schuirmann D.J. «A Comparison of the Two One-Sided Tests Procedure ana Power Approach for Assessing the Equivalence of Average Bioavailability» // J Pharmacokin Biopharm 15(6): 657-680, 1987.Selwyn MR., Dempster AP., Hall NR. «A Bayesian Approach to Bioequivalence for 2X2 Changeover Design» // Biometrics 37: 11-21, 1981.Selwyn MR., Dempster AP., Hall NR. «A Bayesian Approach to Bioequivalence for 2X2 Changeover Design» // Biometrics 37: 11-21, 1981.Steinijans VW., Hauschke D. «International harmonization of Regulatory Requirements» // Clinical Research and Regulatory Affairs 10: 203-220, 1993.Steinijans VW., Hauschke D. «International harmonization of Regulatory Requirements» // Clinical Research and Regulatory Affairs 10: 203-220, 1993.Steinijans VW., Hauschke D., Schall R. «International harmonization of Regulatory Requirements for Average Bioequivalence and current Issue in Individual Bioequivalence» // Drug Information Journal 29: 1055-1062, 1995.Steinijans VW., Hauschke D., Schall R. «International harmonization of Regulatory Requirements for Average Bioequivalence and current Issue in Individual Bioequivalence» // Drug Information Journal 29: 1055-1062, 1995.Steinijans VW., Hauschke D. «Update on Statictical Analysis of Bioequivalence Studies» // Intern J Clin Pharmacol, Ther and Toxicology 28(3): 105-110, 1990.Steinijans VW., Hauschke D. «Update on Statictical Analysis of Bioequivalence Studies» // Intern J Clin Pharmacol, Ther and Toxicology 28(3): 105-110, 1990.Steinijans VW., Diletti E. «Generalization of Distribution-Free Confidence Intervals for Bioavailability Ratios» // Eur J Clin Pharmacol 28: 85-88, 1985.Steinijans VW., Diletti E. «Generalization of Distribution-Free Confidence Intervals for Bioavailability Ratios» // Eur J Clin Pharmacol 28: 85-88, 1985.Steinijans VW., Diletti E. «Statistical Analysis of Bioavailability Studies: Parametric and Nonparametric Confidence Intervals» // Eur J Clin Pharmacol 24: 127-136, 1983.Steinijans VW., Diletti E. «Statistical Analysis of Bioavailability Studies: Parametric and Nonparametric Confidence Intervals» // Eur J Clin Pharmacol 24: 127-136, 1983.Wellek S. «A Comment on So-Called Individual Criteria of Bioequivalence» // J Biopharm Stat 7(1): 17-21, 1997.Wellek S. «A Comment on So-Called Individual Criteria of Bioequivalence» // J Biopharm Stat 7(1): 17-21, 1997.Westlake WJ. «Response to Bioequivalence Testing: a need to rethink» // Biometrics 37: 591-993, 1981.Westlake WJ. «Response to Bioequivalence Testing: a need to rethink» // Biometrics 37: 591-993, 1981.Westlake WJ. «Symmetrical Confidence Intervals for Bioequivalence Trials» // Biometrics, 32: 741-744, 1976.Westlake WJ. «Symmetrical Confidence Intervals for Bioequivalence Trials» // Biometrics, 32: 741-744, 1976.Yafune A., Ishiguro M. «Bootstrap Approach for Constructing Confidence Intervals for Population Pharmacokinetic Parameters. I: a Use of Bootstrap Standard Error» // Statistics in Medicine 18(5): 581-599, 1999.Yafune A., Ishiguro M. «Bootstrap Approach for Constructing Confidence Intervals for Population Pharmacokinetic Parameters. I: a Use of Bootstrap Standard Error» // Statistics in Medicine 18(5): 581-599, 1999.

The authors declare that there are no conflicts of interest present.