RESUMO

Introduction: Rotavirus-associated diarrheal diseases significantly burden healthcare systems, particularly affecting infants under five years. Both Rotarix™ (RV1) and RotaTeq™ (RV5) vaccines have been effective but have distinct application schedules and limited interchangeability data. This study aims to provide evidence on the immunogenicity, reactogenicity, and safety of mixed RV1-RV5 schedules compared to their standard counterparts. Methods: This randomized, double-blind study evaluated the non-inferiority in terms of immunogenicity of mixed rotavirus vaccine schedules compared to standard RV1 and RV5 schedules in a cohort of 1,498 healthy infants aged 6 to 10 weeks. Participants were randomly assigned to one of seven groups receiving various combinations of RV1, and RV5. Standard RV1 and RV5 schedules served as controls of immunogenicity, reactogenicity, and safety analysis. IgA antibody levels were measured from blood samples collected before the first dose and one month after the third dose. Non-inferiority was concluded if the reduction in seroresponse rate in the mixed schemes, compared to the standard highest responding scheme, did not exceed the non-inferiority margin of -0.10. Reactogenicity traits and adverse events were monitored for 30 days after each vaccination and analyzed on the entire cohort. Results: Out of the initial cohort, 1,365 infants completed the study. Immunogenicity analysis included 1,014 infants, considering IgA antibody titers ≥20 U/mL as seropositive. Mixed vaccine schedules demonstrated non-inferiority to standard schedules, with no significant differences in immunogenic response. Safety profiles were comparable across all groups, with no increased incidence of serious adverse events or intussusception. Conclusion: The study confirms that mixed rotavirus vaccine schedules are non-inferior to standard RV1 and RV5 regimens in terms of immunogenicity and safety. This finding supports the flexibility of rotavirus vaccination strategies, particularly in contexts of vaccine shortage or logistic constraints. These results contribute to the global effort to optimize rotavirus vaccination programs for broader and more effective pediatric coverage.Clinical trial registration: ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT02193061.

Assuntos

RESUMO

INTRODUCTION: The history of levothyroxine has been linked to advances in the treatment of thyroid disease and to date it is the standard therapy for the treatment of hypothyroidism. Bioequivalence studies are the most widely used method to demonstrate interchangeability, although controversy persists regarding the best design for this molecule declared as a narrow therapeutic index product in many countries. This study aimed to evaluate the pharmacokinetic profile of two formulations of levothyroxine to determine bioequivalence between them. METHODS: This two-period, randomized, crossover, blind study was conducted in 80 healthy volunteers, of both sexes, using a single levothyroxine dose of 600 µg with a washout period of 42 days. Blood sampling was performed at - 30 min, - 15 min, and 0 h pre-dose and 30 min, 1, 1.5, 2, 2.5, 3, 4, 6, 8, 10, 12, 16, 24, and 48 h post-dose. RESULTS: A total of 78 subjects successfully completed both periods. There were no serious adverse events during the study and both formulations were well tolerated. Baseline correction of serum levothyroxine concentrations was performed before statistical analysis. The mean maximum plasma concentration of the test product (Levotiroxina MK®) was 57.49 ng/mL while for the reference product it reached 59.32 ng/mL. Importantly, both test and reference formulations reached maximum concentrations in plasma at about the same time. The areas under the pharmacokinetic curves with the test product showed AUC0-t of 1407.1 ng h/mL and the reference product 1394.3 ng h/mL. The bioequivalence statistical analysis showed that the 90% confidence interval (CI90%) of the ratio of test over reference formulation was within the bioequivalence margins of 90-111%. For Cmax, the test/reference ratio was 96.2% with CI90% of 91.6-100.9%, and for AUC0-t the test/reference ratio was 99.9 with CI90% of 93.3-107.0%. CONCLUSIONS: Both formulations have the same pharmacokinetic profile and are bioequivalent in the narrow therapeutic index required by some health authorities.

Assuntos

RESUMO

BACKGROUND: As patents for multiple sclerosis (MS) therapies expire, follow-on disease-modifying treatments (FO-DMTs) become available at reduced cost. Concerns exist that cheaper FO-DMTs are used simply to reduce healthcare costs. However, the well-being of people with MS should take priority. OBJECTIVES: To identify best practices for FO-DMT development and use by agreeing on principles and consensus statements through appraisal of published evidence. METHODS: Following a systematic review, we formulated five overarching principles and 13 consensus statements. Principles and statements were voted on by a multidisciplinary panel from 17 European countries, Argentina, Canada and the United States. RESULTS: All principles and statements were endorsed by >80% of panellists. In brief, FO-DMTs approved within highly regulated areas can be considered effective and safe as their reference products; FO-DMTs can be evaluated case by case and do not always require Phase III trials; long-term pharmacovigilance and transparency are needed; there is lack of evidence for multiple- and cross-switching among FO-DMTs; and education is needed to address remaining concerns. CONCLUSION: Published data support the use of FO-DMTs in MS. The consensus may aid shared decision-making. While our consensus focused on Europe, the results may contribute to enhanced quality standards for FO-DMTs use elsewhere.

Assuntos

RESUMO

Abstract The treatment of epilepsy is complex and a matter of concern is the interchangeability among different formulations available for antiepileptic drugs. To evaluate the effects of interchangeability among carbamazepine formulations on patients with epilepsy. This is a prospective cohort study that included adult outpatients diagnosed with epilepsy and under pharmacological treatment with carbamazepine. Before switching the brand/manufacturer, the "Interchangeable Pharmaceutical Product in the Treatment of Epilepsies" questionnaire was applied. The questionnaires "Adverse Events Profile" and Quality of Life in Epilepsy-31, so as the plasma carbamazepine concentrations, were evaluated before and after the brand/ manufacturer switch. Physical-chemical tests aiming to assess tablets quality were performed in accordance with the Brazilian Pharmacopoeia 5th edition. The study population was composed by 14 patients (mean age: 44.6 years), with 10 of females. From those interviewed, 10 had no knowledge about the three antiepileptic drugs formulations available. The frequency of adverse event "problems with skin" incresead (p=0.023) and "upset stomach" decreased (p=0.041) after the changeover. The adverse events profile was associated with only two quality of life domains: "energy/fatigue" (p=0.048) and "total score" (p=0.018). Divergent results between generic and reference formulations were observed in purity-water test (reference: 1.96%, generic: 4.84%) and dissolution test, in which the generic formulation presented 66.27 to 85.77% of carbamazepine dissolved after the third level. Conclusions: Objective differences before and after the brand/manufacturer switch were not observed, in spite of patients' perceptions. Despite that, more studies in the field are necessary, especially on the interchangeability among generic antiepileptics, in order to better elucidate switching consequences on patients' life.

Assuntos

RESUMO

El Alprazolam pertenece a las benzodiazepinas. Sus efectos se atribuyen a que actúa sobre receptores de membrana específicos, lo cual facilita la acción inhibitoria presináptica y postsináptica del ácido γ-aminobutírico (GABA), especialmente en la formación reticular ascendente. Se utiliza para el tratamiento de los estados de ansiedad, crisis de angustia, ataques de pánico y estrés intenso. Este estudio se realizó para analizar los parámetros comparativos de control de calidad in vitro mediante la evaluación de la variación de peso, friabilidad, dureza, tiempo de desintegración, perfil y eficiencia de disolución entre el medicamento innovador (Xanax®) y multifuentes que son comercializados en el mercado peruano. Para realizarlo, se seleccionaron tabletas de Alprazolam 0,5 mg multifuente de diferentes laboratorios comparándolos con el medicamento innovador y se evaluaron las características fisicoquímicas y biofarmacéuticas. Los ensayos farmacopeicos se evaluaron según lo establecido en la USP 42. Los resultados de las pruebas fisicoquímicas indicaron que las muestras analizadas no tenían diferencia significativa y estaban dentro de lo establecido en la farmacopea, así mismo el perfil y eficiencia de disolución permitieron establecer que el comportamiento biofarmacéutico de las mismas era muy similar para ambos tipos de molécula. Se estableció que las tabletas multifuentes de Alprazolam 0,5 mg de esta investigación son bioequivalentes con el innovador, por lo que permite proponer a la comunidad científica la determinación de la equivalencia biofarmacéutica como elemento de apoyo en la toma de decisiones de compra en el servicio farmacéutico

Alprazolam belongs to benzodiazepines. Its effects are attributed to the fact that it acts on specific membrane receptors, which facilitates the presynaptic and postsynaptic inhibitory action of γ-aminobutyric acid (GABA), especially in the ascending reticular formation. It is used to treat anxiety states, panic attacks, and intense stress. This study was carried out to analyze comparative parameters of in vitro quality control by evaluating the variation in weight, friability, hardness, disintegration time, profile and dissolution efficiency between the innovative drug (Xanax®) and multi-sources tablets that are marketed in the Peruvian market. To perform this, Alprazolam 0.5 mg multi-source tablets were selected from different laboratories comparing them with the innovative medicine and the physicochemical and biopharmaceutical characteristics were evaluated. Pharmacopoeial trials were evaluated as established in USP 42. The results of physicochemical tests indicated that analyzed samples did not have a significant difference and were within the established in the pharmacopoeia, as well as the profile and dissolution efficiency allowed to establish that their biopharmaceutical behavior was very similar for both types of molecules. It was established that Alprazolam 0.5 mg multi-source tablets from this research are bioequivalent with innovator, which makes it possible to propose to scientific community determination of biopharmaceutical equivalency as a support element in decision-making process for purchasing services pharmacist

Assuntos

RESUMO

Introduction: Evidence on the interchangeability between the two pediatric pneumococcal conjugate vaccines (PCVs) - pneumococcal non-typeable Haemophilus influenzae protein D-conjugate vaccine (PHiD-CV) and 13-valent PCV (PCV13) - is limited but growing. We performed a systematic literature review to summarize evidence for PHiD-CV/PCV13 interchangeability regarding immunogenicity, safety, and effectiveness against pneumococcal disease. Areas covered: Seven records disclosing results from six studies on PHiD-CV/PCV13 interchangeability were identified. Four clinical trials showed that mixed schedules with a PHiD-CV-to-PCV13 switch at boosting or a PCV13-to-PHiD-CV switch during priming or at boosting were immunogenic with no apparent safety concerns. Two observational studies in the context of a programmatic PHiD-CV-to-PCV13 switch showed similarly high effectiveness against overall invasive pneumococcal disease with a mixed PHiD-CV/PCV13 schedule and a PCV13-only schedule. No effectiveness data for a PCV13-to-PHiD-CV switch and no immunogenicity/safety/effectiveness data for a PHiD-CV-to-PCV13 switch during priming were found. Expert opinion: For epidemiological or programmatic reasons, several local/national authorities have switched PCVs in their immunization programs. Consequently, children have received mixed schedules. Although herd immunity may obscure the individual effect, the limited data are reassuring. Additional evidence from these settings - especially effectiveness or impact data - may provide the necessary information for authorities to make informed decisions on interchanging PCVs.

Assuntos

RESUMO

Introduction: Biological products, including infliximab (INF), are a therapeutic option for various medical conditions. In the Peruvian Social Security (EsSalud), infliximab is approved for the treatment of rheumatoid arthritis, psoriasis, psoriatic arthropathy, ankylosing spondylitis, ulcerative colitis and Crohn's disease (in cases refractory to conventional treatment). Biosimilars are a safe and effective alternative approved for these diseases in patients who start treatment with infliximab. Nevertheless, there are people in treatment with the biological reference product (BRP), in whom the continuing therapy with a biosimilar biological product (BBP) must be evaluated. Objectives: To synthesize the best available evidence, calculate a preliminary financial impact and conduct technical discussions about the interchangeability into biosimilar in patients receiving treatment with original infliximab for medical conditions approved in EsSalud. Methodology: We carried out a systematic review of controlled clinical trials. Primary search was performed in Pubmed- MEDLINE, SCOPUS, WOS, EMBASE, TRIPDATABASE, DARE, Cochrane Library, NICE, AHRQ, SMC, McMaster-PLUS, CADTH, and HSE until June-2018. We used the Cochrane Collaboration tool to assess the risk of bias. Also, we implemented a preliminary financial analysis about the impact of biosimilar introduction on institutional purchasing budget. Moreover, technical meetings with medical doctors specialized in rheumatology, gastroenterology and dermatology were held for discussing findings. Results: In primary search, 1136 records were identified, and 357 duplicates were removed. From 799 records, we excluded 765 after title and abstract evaluation. From 14 full-text appraised documents, we included five clinical trials in the risk of bias assessment: four studies evaluated CTP-13 and one tested SB2. Two double-blind clinical trials reported no differences in efficacy and safety profiles between maintenance group (INF/INF) and interchangeability group in all diseases included (INF/CTP-13) and rheumatoid arthritis (CTP13 and SB2). In the other three studies, open-label extension of primary clinical trials, no differences were founded in efficacy and safety profiles between CTP-13/CTP-13 and INF/CTP-13 groups. In financial analysis, the inclusion of biosimilars implied savings around S/7´642,780.00 (1USD=S/3.30) on purchasing budget of EsSalud. In technical meetings, beyond certain concerns, specialists agreed with the findings. Conclusions: Evidence from clinical trials support that there are no differences in efficacy or safety of continuing the treatment with Infliximab BRP or exchanging into its biosimilar in patients with medical conditions approved in EsSalud. Financial analysis shows that the biosimilar introduction produce savings in purchasing institutional budget. Therefore, based on cost-opportunity principle, exchanging into biosimilar in patients receiving the original Infliximab, is a valid therapeutic alternative in the Peruvian Social Security.

RESUMO

RESUMEN Los medicamentos genéricos son una alternativa para mejorar el acceso a las medicinas que la población necesita y, además, hacen más sostenibles los programas de salud públicos y privados. Se ha seleccionado información y evidencia científica sobre este tipo de medicamentos de tal manera que los lectores -médicos, financiadores, organismos públicos y privados-puedan conformar su propia opinión y ayudar a tomar las decisiones más efectivas y eficientes. La relación existente entre los precios de estos productos y la protección de la propiedad intelectual a través de las patentes de los medicamentos es un centro de conflictos entre la industria farmacéutica y los sistemas de salud. En los Estados Unidos, la ley Hatch-Waxman ha cumplido una función muy importante al estimular el desarrollo de medicamentos genéricos. En un mismo intento, la Unión Europea (UE) ha desarrollado, a través de la Agencia Europea del Medicamento (EMA), una homogeneización en materia de autorización de medicamentos y exclusividad de los datos.

SUMMARY Generic medicines give the chance to improve access to medicaments that the population needs, and the possibility of making public and private health programs more sustainable. Information and scientific evidence on this type of medicines has been selected in such a way that the readers - doctors, financiers, public and private organizations - can shape their own opinion and help take the most effective and efficient decisions. The relationship between the prices of these products and the protection of intellectual property through patents for medicines is a center of conflicts between the Pharmaceutical Industry and health systems. In the United States, the Hatch-Waxman Act has played a very important role in stimulating the development of generic drugs. By his side, the European Union (EU) has developed, through the European Medicines Agency (EMA), a homogenization in terms of authorization of medicines and exclusivity of data.

RESUMO

Biosimilar products are already approved and marketed in several countries. The Food and Drug Administration has approved ten different biosimilars, and the European Medicines Agency has approved 40. Even though this scenario has provided important experience with biosimilar products, there are still challenges and unanswered questions. Up to now, a good amount of knowledge has been gathered in order to support the importance of the totality of evidence and the construction of a biosimilarity exercise for regulatory approval. In addition, the extrapolation of indications has been proved viable when a careful analysis is performed. The models for clinical trials and the use of the most sensible populations have been extensively discussed, and there is apparent homogeneity in manufacturer choices for study designs. However, some challenges remain. The lack of regulatory harmony, especially concerning naming, the marketed intended copies, the interchangeability, and the biosimilars in orphan diseases are some of those and are the focus of discussion in this review.

RESUMO

The biotechnology-derived medicines known as biosimilars are defined as non-originator treatments that have demonstrated quality, efficacy, and safety comparable to the reference biologic drug. Clinical trials have shown that the infliximab biosimilar, CT-P13, and the candidates for the adalimumab biosimilars, ABP 501 and ZRC 3197, are not significantly different, with respect to efficacy and safety, from the originator drugs in patients with other autoimmune diseases. However, controversy has arisen over the use of biosimilars in inflammatory bowel disease, due to the incipient evidence not only in patients with no previous biotechnology treatment, but also in patients in remission, that could be switched to a biosimilar for non-medical reasons. The present review is the first critical analysis by different specialists in the area of gastroenterology on the use of biosimilars in inflammatory bowel disease, the evidence on interchangeability, the extrapolation of indications, efficacy, safety, immunogenicity, and the clinical impact of the Mexican health regulations. The aim of our review was to make the positioning and recommendations of these new therapeutic options known, given that they have a potential cost-benefit for both patients and healthcare institutions.

Assuntos

RESUMO

The present document is a position statement of the Mexican College of Rheumatology on the use of biosimilars in rheumatic diseases. This position considers that biosimilars should be considered as interchangeable, that automatic substitution without previous notice in stable patients during follow-up is not ethical, that the approval of a biosimilar should only be given after exhaustive review of preclinical and clinical data marked by Mexican regulations, that it should be clearly stated in the nomenclature of biologic drugs which is the innovator and which is the biosimilar, that it is not correct to choose a biosimilar as treatment based only on economic reasons or extrapolate indications based only on the approval of the innovator and in the absence of safety and efficacy data for the biosimilar.

Assuntos

RESUMO

Resumen La enfermedad inflamatoria intestinal (EII) es un término con el que se conocen varias entidades, las 2 más importantes son: la colitis ulcerativa idiopática (CUI) y la enfermedad de Crohn (EC), cuyo origen es multifactorial y se caracterizan por un fenómeno inflamatorio, crónico, recurrente con diferentes grados de severidad del tubo digestivo; pero además con afectación potencial de otros órganos. En la última década ha habido un renovado interés en dichas entidades, debido a una incidencia creciente de estas, pero también debido al desarrollo de medicamentos que por primera vez están cambiando la historia natural de estas enfermedades: son los medicamentos llamados biológicos, que son aquellos producidos o derivados de organismos vivos y representan el sector de mayor crecimiento en la industria farmacéutica mundial. Debido al interés comercial, se han desarrollado y sometido a las autoridades reguladoras productos no originadores; similares, pero no idénticos a los productos de referencia. La Agencia Europea de Medicamentos (EMA) aprobó el primer biosimilar del infliximab para todas las indicaciones en las cuales este estaba aprobado, incluidas: colitis ulcerativa moderada a severa en todas las edades, EC moderada a severa en todas las edades, al igual que EC fistulizante, artritis psoriásica (AP), psoriasis, espondilitis anquilosante (EA) y artritis reumatoide (AR) (1). En esta revisión nos proponemos definir lo que son estos productos al igual que algunos conceptos relacionados (extrapolación, sustitución e intercambiabilidad), además hacer una revisión histórica de su desarrollo, sus indicaciones actuales, las posiciones de las diferentes asociaciones científicas al respecto y, lo más importante, brindar datos de la vida real en cuanto a su efectividad, seguridad y costos en los diferentes países donde se han estado usando.

Abstract The term Inflammatory Bowel Disease (IBD) is used to identify several entities, the two most important of which are Idiopathic Ulcerative Colitis (IUC) and Crohn's Disease (EC). Both are multifactorial in origin, are chronic and recurrent, are characterized by inflammation, have varying degrees of severity, and potentially involve other organs. In the last decade there has been renewed interest in these entities due to growing incidence and to the development of drugs called biologicals. For the first time, these drugs have changed the natural history of these diseases. They are produced or derived from living organisms and represent the fastest growing sector in the global pharmaceutical industry. Due to commercial interest, products similar but not identical to the original products have been developed and submitted to regulatory authorities. The European Medicines Agency has approved the first biosimilar for infliximab for all indications for which it has been approved. These include moderate to severe ulcerative colitis (UC) at all ages, moderate to severe Crohn's disease (CD) at all ages, fistulizing Crohn's disease, Psoriasic arthritis, Psoriasis, Ankylosing Spondylitis, and Rheumatoid Arthritis. 1 In this review, we define what these products are, as well as some concepts coined for their usage including extrapolation, substitution and interchangeability. We also make a historical review of their development, current indications, the positions of various scientific associations with respect to them, and - most importantly - provide real-life data regarding their effectiveness, safety and costs in countries where they have been used.

Assuntos

RESUMO

A implementação de medicamentos genéricos no Brasil e de programas e políticas para garantir o acesso da população a medicamentos com qualidade, segurança e eficácia resultaram em mais de 3.800 medicamentos genéricos de 445 fármacos registrados na Agência Nacional de Vigilância Sanitária (ANVISA) desde 1999. Os medicamentos genéricos comprovaram a sua equivalência terapêutica e, portanto, intercambialidade com seus respectivos medicamentos de referência por meio de estudos de bioequivalência. Em 2014, a ANVISA estendeu a intercambialidade aos medicamentos similares, aumentando o número de medicamentos intercambiáveis para cada medicamento de referência. As normas para prescrição e dispensação permitem apenas a substituição de medicamento de referência por seu medicamento genérico ou similar intercambiável e vice-versa. Entretanto, o que se observa na prática é a substituição entre medicamentos genéricos e similares de um mesmo fármaco, tanto na rede privada onde os descontos chegam até 90% do preço estabelecido para a venda, como na rede pública, em função da disponibilidade dos medicamentos, visto que as compras públicas se baseiam no menor preço ofertado pelos fabricantes. Entretanto, a bioequivalência e a intercambialidade entre os medicamentos genéricos ou similares de um mesmo referência não pode ser garantida pois os mesmos não foram testados entre si. A ausência de bioequivalência entre medicamentos substituídos pode provocar ineficácia terapêutica ou aparecimento de eventos adversos ou até mesmo intoxicação em pacientes. Consequentemente, podem ocorrer desperdício, gastos com tratamento de eventos adversos, abandono do tratamento e adoção de segunda linha de tratamentos. Este trabalho avaliou a bioequivalência entre os medicamentos genéricos e similares de um mesmo medicamento de referência por meio do método de metanálise, empregando dados de estudos de bioequivalência realizados para o registro de medicamentos genéricos e similares na ANVISA. Foram incluídos na análise estudos de aciclovir, amoxicilina, cefalexina, doxazosina, fenitoína, fluoxetina, levofloxacino e quetiapina. Os resultados demonstraram a ausência de bioequivalência entre a maioria dos medicamentos genéricos e similares contendo o mesmo fármaco. os resultados comprovam que medicamentos genéricos e similares de mesmo fármaco não são obrigatoriamente intercambiáveis e a substituição, principalmente para aqueles usados no tratamento de doenças crônicas, podem trazer graves consequências clínicas. Esta preocupação é aumentada para os fármacos com estreita faixa terapêutica e aqueles com alta variabilidade no processo de absorção. A adoção de uma lista de medicamentos não substituíveis, a exemplo de outros países, e o investimento na divulgação de informações sobre intercambialidade de medicamentos, tanto para profissionais de saúde como para a população, podem contribuir para a redução da substituição entre medicamentos não intercambiáveis, a promoção do uso racional dos medicamentos, a redução de gastos com medicamentos e tratamento de eventos adversos e o aumento da adesão do paciente ao tratamento

The implementation of generic drugs in Brazil, as well as programs and policies to ensure access to medicines with quality, safety and efficacy to the overall population, resulted in more than 3,800 generic drug products of 445 drugs registered in the National Health Surveillance Agency (ANVISA) since 1999. Generic drug products proved their therapeutic equivalence in bioequivalence studies and, therefore, the interchangeability with their respective reference drug product. In 2014, ANVISA expanded the interchangeability to similar drug products, increasing the number of interchangeable drug products for each reference drug product. Regulations for the prescription and dispensation of medicine only allow the substitution of a reference drug product for a generic or an interchangeable similar drug product or vice versa. However, in practice, it appears that there is a substitution between generic and similar drug products of a same reference drug product in private pharmacy chains - where discounts reach up to 90% of the selling price - as well as in public pharmacy, depending on the medicine availability, because public purchases are based on the lower price offered by the manufacturers. Nevertheless, the bioequivalence and interchangeability between generic and similar drug products of the same reference drug product cannot be guaranteed because they haven't been evaluated. Lack of bioequivalence between substituted drug products may result in therapeutic ineffectiveness or the occurrence of adverse events and even to patient intoxication. As a consequence, there might be waste, expenses due to adverse events treatment, no adherence to the treatment or the adoption of second-line treatment. This study evaluated the bioequivalence between generic and similar drugs of the same reference drug product through a meta-analysis, using data from bioequivalence studies carried out for the registration of generic and similar drug products at ANVISA. The drugs included in the study were acyclovir, amoxicillin, cephalexin, doxazosin, phenytoin, fluoxetine, levofloxacin and quetiapine. Results showed lack of bioequivalence between most of the generic and similar drugs containing the same drug and prove that generic and similar drug products of the reference drug product are not necessarily interchangeable. Moreover, the substitution of drugs used for chronic illnesses could lead to serious clinical consequences. This concern increases for drugs with narrow therapeutic index and those with high variable absorption process. The adoption of a list of non-interchangeable medicines - like in other countries - and investment in the dissemination of information about interchangeability between drug products to health professionals and to the population may contribute to reduce the substitution of drugs which are not interchangeable, promote a rational use of medicines, the reduction of expenses with drugs and adverse effects treatment and to improve treatment adherence

Assuntos

RESUMO

A implementação de medicamentos genéricos no Brasil e de programas e políticas para garantir o acesso da população a medicamentos com qualidade, segurança e eficácia resultaram em mais de 3.800 medicamentos genéricos de 445 fármacos registrados na Agência Nacional de Vigilância Sanitária (ANVISA) desde 1999. Os medicamentos genéricos comprovaram a sua equivalência terapêutica e, portanto, intercambialidade com seus respectivos medicamentos de referência por meio de estudos de bioequivalência. Em 2014, a ANVISA estendeu a intercambialidade aos medicamentos similares, aumentando o número de medicamentos intercambiáveis para cada medicamento de referência. As normas para prescrição e dispensação permitem apenas a substituição de medicamento de referência por seu medicamento genérico ou similar intercambiável e vice-versa. Entretanto, o que se observa na prática é a substituição entre medicamentos genéricos e similares de um mesmo fármaco, tanto na rede privada onde os descontos chegam até 90% do preço estabelecido para a venda, como na rede pública, em função da disponibilidade dos medicamentos, visto que as compras públicas se baseiam no menor preço ofertado pelos fabricantes. Entretanto, a bioequivalência e a intercambialidade entre os medicamentos genéricos ou similares de um mesmo referência não pode ser garantida pois os mesmos não foram testados entre si. A ausência de bioequivalência entre medicamentos substituídos pode provocar ineficácia terapêutica ou aparecimento de eventos adversos ou até mesmo intoxicação em pacientes. Consequentemente, podem ocorrer desperdício, gastos com tratamento de eventos adversos, abandono do tratamento e adoção de segunda linha de tratamentos. Este trabalho avaliou a bioequivalência entre os medicamentos genéricos e similares de um mesmo medicamento de referência por meio do método de metanálise, empregando dados de estudos de bioequivalência realizados para o registro de medicamentos genéricos e similares na ANVISA. Foram incluídos na análise estudos de aciclovir, amoxicilina, cefalexina, doxazosina, fenitoína, fluoxetina, levofloxacino e quetiapina. Os resultados demonstraram a ausência de bioequivalência entre a maioria dos medicamentos genéricos e similares contendo o mesmo fármaco. os resultados comprovam que medicamentos genéricos e similares de mesmo fármaco não são obrigatoriamente intercambiáveis e a substituição, principalmente para aqueles usados no tratamento de doenças crônicas, podem trazer graves consequências clínicas. Esta preocupação é aumentada para os fármacos com estreita faixa terapêutica e aqueles com alta variabilidade no processo de absorção. A adoção de uma lista de medicamentos não substituíveis, a exemplo de outros países, e o investimento na divulgação de informações sobre intercambialidade de medicamentos, tanto para profissionais de saúde como para a população, podem contribuir para a redução da substituição entre medicamentos não intercambiáveis, a promoção do uso racional dos medicamentos, a redução de gastos com medicamentos e tratamento de eventos adversos e o aumento da adesão do paciente ao tratamento

The implementation of generic drugs in Brazil, as well as programs and policies to ensure access to medicines with quality, safety and efficacy to the overall population, resulted in more than 3,800 generic drug products of 445 drugs registered in the National Health Surveillance Agency (ANVISA) since 1999. Generic drug products proved their therapeutic equivalence in bioequivalence studies and, therefore, the interchangeability with their respective reference drug product. In 2014, ANVISA expanded the interchangeability to similar drug products, increasing the number of interchangeable drug products for each reference drug product. Regulations for the prescription and dispensation of medicine only allow the substitution of a reference drug product for a generic or an interchangeable similar drug product or vice versa. However, in practice, it appears that there is a substitution between generic and similar drug products of a same reference drug product in private pharmacy chains - where discounts reach up to 90% of the selling price - as well as in public pharmacy, depending on the medicine availability, because public purchases are based on the lower price offered by the manufacturers. Nevertheless, the bioequivalence and interchangeability between generic and similar drug products of the same reference drug product cannot be guaranteed because they haven't been evaluated. Lack of bioequivalence between substituted drug products may result in therapeutic ineffectiveness or the occurrence of adverse events and even to patient intoxication. As a consequence, there might be waste, expenses due to adverse events treatment, no adherence to the treatment or the adoption of second-line treatment. This study evaluated the bioequivalence between generic and similar drugs of the same reference drug product through a meta-analysis, using data from bioequivalence studies carried out for the registration of generic and similar drug products at ANVISA. The drugs included in the study were acyclovir, amoxicillin, cephalexin, doxazosin, phenytoin, fluoxetine, levofloxacin and quetiapine. Results showed lack of bioequivalence between most of the generic and similar drugs containing the same drug and prove that generic and similar drug products of the reference drug product are not necessarily interchangeable. Moreover, the substitution of drugs used for chronic illnesses could lead to serious clinical consequences. This concern increases for drugs with narrow therapeutic index and those with high variable absorption process. The adoption of a list of non-interchangeable medicines - like in other countries - and investment in the dissemination of information about interchangeability between drug products to health professionals and to the population may contribute to reduce the substitution of drugs which are not interchangeable, promote a rational use of medicines, the reduction of expenses with drugs and adverse effects treatment and to improve treatment adherence

Assuntos

RESUMO

The scientific community and general public have been exposed to a series of achievements attributed to a new area of knowledge: Nanotechnology. Both abroad and in Brazil, funding agencies have launched programs aimed at encouraging this type of research. Indeed, for many who come into contact with this subject it will be clear the key role that chemical knowledge will play in the evolution of this subject. And even more, will see that it is a science in which the basic structure is formed by distilling different areas of inter-and multidisciplinary knowledge along the lines of new paradigms. In this article, we attempt to clarify the foundations of nanotechnology, and demonstrate their contribution to new advances in dermatology as well as medicine in general. Nanotechnology is clearly the future. .

Assuntos

RESUMO

Tem se tornado prática comum em nosso país a troca de medicamentos prescritos por outros similares, por produtos genéricos e até mesmo por produtos manipulados, muitas vezes ignorando-se preceitos básicos de bioequivalência, permutabilidade, estabilidade e características específicas do composto farmacêutico. No caso de drogas de índice terapêutico estreito, como a levotiroxina, esses problemas se agravam colocando em sério risco a eficácia do tratamento e a saúde do paciente. Revemos a legislação pertinente ressaltando as características da levotiroxina e os efeitos adversos que limitam a permutabilidade do composto.

The exchange of a prescribed drug by other similar, by generic products and even by custom products has become common practice in our country, often ignoring basic tenets of bioequivalence, interchangeability, stability and characteristics of the pharmaceutical compounds. In the case of drugs of narrow therapeutic index, such as levothyroxine, these problems are intensified, putting the effectiveness of treatment and patient health at serious risk. We review the pertinent legislation, emphasizing the characteristics of levothyroxine and adverse effects that limit the interchangeability of the compound.

Assuntos

RESUMO

En el presente trabajo se hace un análisis de los conceptos, normativas y propuestas sobre la equivalencia terapéutica de medicamentos similares con respecto a los innovadores, desde una perspectiva internacional y nacional, explicando las bases científicas de los estudios de bioexención in vitro para determinar la intercambiabilidad de aquellos medicamentos similares provenientes de diferentes fuentes que se han liberado de los estudios de bioequivalencia (in vivo). Además, se presentan algunos resultados de estudios de test de disolución para dar a conocer la metodología usada en la bioexención y se detallan los requisitos para aprobar un Centro de Bioequivalencia in vitro.

In this review, the concepts, guidelines and proposals regarding the determination of therapeutic equivalence of similar drug products are analyzed from a national and international point of view. The scientific background of the in vitro biowaiver studies that may result in the interchange ability of multisource drug product that have been waived from the demonstration of in vivo bioequivalence studies is also explained. In order to explain the methods in biowaiver studies, results of dissolution kinetics are shown as well as the requirements to approve an in vitro biopharmaceutic center.

Assuntos

RESUMO

A Política Nacional de Medicamentos foi a diretriz inicial que culminou com o surgimento dos medicamentos genéricos, uma opção de prescrição, ao lado dos medicamentos inovadores e similares, já existentes no mercadobrasileiro, o que mudou radicalmente o mercado farmacêutico brasileiro e introduziu vários conceitos, tais como equivalência farmacêutica e terapêutica, biodisponibilidade e bioequivalência. Com a consolidação dos medicamentos genéricos no mercado brasileiro foi necessária também a comprovação da equivalência terapêutica para a comercializaçãodos medicamentos similares, tanto para os que seriam ainda lançados quanto para os que já estavam sendo comercializados. No entanto, devido ao prazo dado para que essa comprovação ocorra, até 2014 haverá no mercado medicamentos similares intercambiáveis e não intercambiáveis pelos respectivos medicamentos de referência. Até que a adequação do mercado não ocorra, permanece a dúvida entre os prescritores quanto à melhor opção terapêutica - medicamento de referência, genérico ou similar? - no que se refere à qualidade, eficácia e segurança. Assim, oobjetivo deste trabalho foi comparar entre si as três categorias de medicamentos existentes no Brasil e apresentar um paralelo entre elas, ao lado de uma breve história da evolução dos medicamentos no País.

The National Drug Policy sparked off the generic drugs in Brazil, an option to prescription, besides the previous existent drug classes (similar and innovative drugs), radically changing the Brazilian pharmaceutical market and introducing a number of concepts such as pharmaceutical and therapeutic equivalence, bioavailability and bioequivalence.The consolidation of generic drugs in Brazilian market led to a need to also prove the therapeutic equivalence between similar and reference drug for both those scheduled to be launched onto the market and those thatwere already available for sale. However, due to deadlines for proving such equivalency, by 2014, according to their reference medicines, there will be interchangeable and not interchangeable similar drugs on the market. Until then, among health professionals, the doubt about the best therapeutic option remains: Should professionals prescribe the innovative (reference), generic or similar drug? - as to quality, efficacy and security. Thus, the aim of this work was to compare these drug categories, including a brief history of the pharmaceutical evolution in Brazil.

RESUMO

OBJETIVOS: Discutimos aspectos controversos para a prescrição de medicamentos genéricos no tratamento das epilepsias e problemas relacionados à biodisponilidade e bioequivalência. Algumas drogas antiepilépticas (DAE) apresentam baixa solubilidade em água, apresentam cinética não linear e faixa terapêutica estreita, dados sugestivos da ocorrência de problemas relacionados à bioequivalência. MÉTODOS: Revisão da literatura. RESULTADOS E CONCLUSÕES: Há mais informações sobre as DAE tradicionais (fenitoína, carbamazepina e valproato) e apenas uma comunicação em congresso foi encontrada sobre a substituição de uma nova DAE, a lamotrigina. O nível de evidência é fraco, baseado em séries de casos e opinião de especialistas, com exceção talvez da fenitoína para a qual há alguns estudos analíticos. Podemos permitir o uso de genéricos para o tratamento das epilepsias, desde que tenhamos em mente que este abrirá a possibilidade de substituições sucessivas de formulações durante o tratamento, com conseqüências imprevisíveis como a recorrência de crises e suas conseqüências ou o aparecimento de efeitos adversos.

OBJECTIVE: We discuss some controversial aspects with prescription of generic drugs (GD) and the problems concerning bioequivalence in the treatment of epilepsy. Some antiepileptic drugs (AED) are poorly soluble in water, have nonlinear kinetics and a narrow therapeutic range, implying that problems with bioequivalence are likely to occur. There are clearly advantages (cost saving) and disadvantages (loss of seizure control or drug toxicity) in prescribing generics AED. METHODS: Review of literature. RESULTS AND CONCLUSION: The main information is about classical AED (phenytoin, carbamazepine and valproate). Regarding the new AED we found only one poster presentation related to lamotrigine substitution. The level of evidence is, generally, weak, based on case-series and expert opinion without explicit critical appraisal (except in phenytoin with level of evidence moderate, based on some analytical studies). We may allow the use of generics for epilepsy treatment. However, this opens the possibility of successive substitution of different formulations which may even be life threatening.

Assuntos