Bioequivalence between test and reference formulations, both in terms of rate and extension of absorption, under fasting conditions was concluded according to European guidelines. Both formulations were well tolerated.

Bioequivalence between test and reference formulations, both in terms of rate and extension of absorption, under fasting conditions was concluded according to European guidelines. Both formulations were well tolerated. The conclusion of bioequivalence was also supported using the truncated AUCs approach.

In order to assess the bioequivalence of 2 different formulations of montelukast, a pivotal trial for the montelukast 10 mg film-coated tablets formulation and a pivotal trial for the montelukast 5 mg chewable tablets formulation were conducted.For the 10 mg study, 34 healthy subjects were enrolled in a single centre, randomised, single-dose, open-label, 2-way crossover study, with a minimum washout period of 7 days, while for the 5 mg study, 42 healthy subjects were included in another study with a similar design. For both studies, plasma samples were collected up to 24 h post-dosing and drug levels were determined by reverse liquid chromatography and detected by tandem mass spectrometry detection.Pharmacokinetic parameters used for bioequivalence assessment, area under the concentration-time curve from time zero to time of last non-zero concentration (AUC0-t) and from time zero to infinity (AUC0-inf) and maximum observed concentration (Cmax), were determined from the drug concentration data using non-compartmental analysis.In the 10 mg study, the 90% confidence intervals obtained by analysis of variance were 99.62-120.51% for Cmax, 102.25-117.37% for AUC0-t and 101.96-116.67% for AUC0-inf, which were within the predefined acceptable range of 80.00-125.00%.In the 5 mg study, the 90% confidence intervals were 91.14-98.46% for Cmax, 93.02-98.42% for AUC0-t and 93.09-98.63% for AUC0-inf, which were within the predefined acceptable range of 80.00-125.00%.Bioequivalence between formulations was concluded both in terms of rate and extent of absorption for both strengths.

Escitalopram, CAS registry number 128196-01-0 is an orally administrated selective serotonin reuptake inhibitor (SSRI).The objective of this trial was to assess bioequivalence between an escitalopram formulation manufactured by Grupo Tecnimede and that of a European reference formulation, while evaluating both formulations' tolerability as a secondary objective.24 healthy subjects were enrolled in a single centre, randomised, single-dose, open-label, 2-way crossover study. Drug levels were determined by reverse liquid chromatography and detected by tandem mass spectrometry detection, LC-MS/MS method. Pharmacokinetic parameters used for bioequivalence assessment were determined from the drug concentration data using non-compartmental analysis.Mean±Standard deviation (SD) Cmax values were 18.89±5.06 ng/mL and 18.45±5.05 ng/mL for reference and test, respectively. AUClast was 577.16±196.20 ng · h/mL after the administration of the reference and 577.69±220.88 ng · h/mL for the test. AUCinf was 595.66±203.80 ng · h/mL after the administration of the reference 596.19±235.47 ng · h/mL for the test.The 90% confidence intervals obtained by analysis of variance were 92.38-103.38% for Cmax, 94.10-104.37% for AUClast and 93.80-104.09% for AUCinf, which were within the predefined acceptable range of 80.00-125.00%. Both formulations were well tolerated, with no major side effects and no relevant differences in safety profiles observed between the preparations.The design of the study was adequate to determine the pharmacokinetic parameters of the test and the reference formulations. Bioequivalence between formulations was concluded both in terms of rate and extent of absorption.

AimsThis bioequivalence study aimed to compare rate and extent of absorption of a generic medicinal product of ibandronic acid 150-mg film-coated tablet versus Bonviva®.MethodsThis was a single-centre, open-label, randomized, three-way, three-sequence, reference-replicated, crossover bioequivalence study, under fasting conditions. A single oral dose of ibandronic acid as one 150-mg film-coated tablet was administered in each study period. Each washout period lasted 14 days. Blood samples were collected according to a predefined sampling schedule and up to 48.0 hours after administraton in each period. Plasma concentrations of ibandronic acid were measured using a liquid chromatograph–mass spectrometry/mass spectrometry method. Bioequivalence between generic and reference medicinal products is acceptable if the 90 % confidence intervals (CI) of ratio of least-squares means between the test and the reference product of ln-transformed area under the serum concentration–time curve from time zero to time of last measurable concentration (AUC0–t) is within the 80.00–125.00 % interval. Prospectively, a scaled average bioequivalence approach for maximum serum concentration (Cmax) was established.Results153 healthy volunteers were enrolled and randomized. After the test formulation (T) and first and second Bonviva® (R) dosing, the Cmax was 96.71 ± 90.19 ng/mL, 92.67 ± 91.48 ng/mL and 87.94 ± 60.20 ng/mL and the AUC0–t was 390.83 ± 287.27 ng·h/mL, 388.54 ± 356.76 ng·h/mL and 383.53 ± 246.72, respectively. Ratios of T/R and 90 % CI were 100.92 % (94.35–107.94) for AUC0–t, 100.90 % (94.37–107.88) for AUC0–inf and 102.56 % (95.05–110.67) for Cmax.ConclusionsTest formulation of ibandronic acid is bioequivalent in rate and extent of absorption to Bonviva® following a 150-mg dose, under fasting conditions.