Equivalence testing and equivalence limits of metered-dose inhalers and dry powder inhalers measured by in vitro impaction

被引:4
|
作者
Weda, M
Geuns, ERM
Vermeer, RCR
Buiten, NRA
Hendriks-de Jong, K
Bult, A
Zanen, P
Barends, DM
机构
[1] Natl Inst Publ Hlth & Environm, Lab Qual Control Med, NL-3720 BA Bilthoven, Netherlands
[2] Univ Utrecht, Fac Pharm, Utrecht, Netherlands
[3] Hart Lung Ctr Utrecht, Utrecht, Netherlands
关键词
equivalence; dry powder inhalers; metered-dose inhalers; impaction; twin impinger;
D O I
10.1016/S0939-6411(00)00064-3
中图分类号
R9 [药学];
学科分类号
1007 ;
摘要
In this study, criteria for the acceptability of comparative in vitro equivalence testing are proposed. Furthermore, the following equivalence limits for in vitro impaction methods are postulated: the 90% confidence interval (CI) of the in vitro deposition ratio of the test product and the reference product should lie within 0.80-1.20. The aim of this study was to challenge these limits by applying them to in vitro impaction results of several groups of pressurized metered-dose inhalers and dry powder inhalers containing salbutamol and beclomethasone dipropionate. The deposition results were obtained with the Twin Impinger. All products had a marketing authorization in the Netherlands and were considered therapeutically equivalent within each group. The postulated equivalence limits/group were challenged by fictitiously assigning a preparation as a test product or reference product and calculating the 90% CI of the deposition ratio of the test and reference products. All possible combinations of products within a group were tested. The products were considered equivalent if the 90% CI of the quotient lay within 0.80-1.20. In most cases, the quotient of the test product and reference product remains within 0.80-1.20, but due to a high variability in the deposition results of several products, the 90% CI of the quotient sometimes falls outside the proposed equivalence limits. It is concluded that the equivalence limits postulated are rather conservative, with respect to accepting equivalence. The limits can therefore serve as a prudent predictor of equivalence within the acceptability criteria proposed, but have to be further validated. (C) 2000 Elsevier Science B.V. All rights reserved.
引用
收藏
页码:295 / 302
页数:8
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [1] Dry powder inhalers are environmentally preferable to metered-dose inhalers
    Wintemute, Kimberly
    Miller, Fiona
    CANADIAN MEDICAL ASSOCIATION JOURNAL, 2020, 192 (29) : E846 - E846
  • [2] Equivalence testing of salbutamol dry powder inhalers: in vitro impaction results versus in vivo efficacy
    Weda, M
    Zanen, P
    de Boer, AH
    Gjaltema, D
    Ajaoud, A
    Barends, DM
    Frijlink, HW
    INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF PHARMACEUTICS, 2002, 249 (1-2) : 247 - 255
  • [3] Dose equivalence between metered-dose inhalers and nebulisers: A systematic review
    Brocklebank, D
    Ram, F
    Wright, J
    THORAX, 2000, 55 : A62 - A62
  • [4] METERED-DOSE INHALERS
    MOORE, A
    BRITISH MEDICAL JOURNAL, 1993, 307 (6917): : 1498 - 1498
  • [5] Do patients prefer dry powder inhalers or metered-dose inhalers? A retrospective, combined analysis
    Morice, AH
    Adler, LM
    Ellis, S
    Hewitt, A
    CURRENT THERAPEUTIC RESEARCH-CLINICAL AND EXPERIMENTAL, 2002, 63 (08): : 496 - 506
  • [6] REUSABLE SOFT MIST INHALERS HAVE AN IMPROVED CARBON FOOTPRINT COMPARED WITH DRY POWDER INHALERS AND PRESSURISED METERED-DOSE INHALERS
    Janson, C.
    Platz, Hernando J.
    Soulard, S.
    Langham, S.
    Nicholson, L.
    Hartgers-Gubbels, E. S.
    VALUE IN HEALTH, 2022, 25 (12) : S273 - S273
  • [7] METERED-DOSE INHALERS - COMMENT
    WILLIAMS, DM
    PLEASANTS, RA
    DICP-THE ANNALS OF PHARMACOTHERAPY, 1989, 23 (10): : 815 - 816
  • [8] METERED-DOSE INHALERS - COMMENT
    SELF, TH
    DICP-THE ANNALS OF PHARMACOTHERAPY, 1991, 25 (03): : 321 - 321
  • [9] Using metered-dose inhalers
    Moore, KA
    ANNALS OF EMERGENCY MEDICINE, 1996, 27 (02) : 271 - 272
  • [10] POWER REQUIREMENT OF PRESSURIZED METERED-DOSE AND DRY POWDER INHALERS (pMDIs AND DPIs)
    Haidl, Peter
    Pohlmann, Gerhard
    Cloes, Rolf-Michael
    JOURNAL OF AEROSOL MEDICINE AND PULMONARY DRUG DELIVERY, 2015, 28 (03) : A22 - A22