Importance of Bioequivalence Studies for Enhancing Pharmacokinetic Parameters

Keywords

Bioequivalence, Bioavailability, Clinical trials, Prodrug

Bioequivalence

Bioequivalence studies are essential for the improvement of a pharmaceutical readiness in the pharmaceutical business. Their justification is the observing of pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic parameters after the organization of tried medications. The objective of such study is to assess the remedial similarity of tried medications (pharmaceutical counterparts or pharmaceutical options). The significance of bioequivalence studies is expanding likewise because of the substantial development of the generation and utilization of non specific items [1 - 4].

These days, the utilization of generic drug medication items increments to minimize the human services cost. With expanded accessibility and utilization of nonexclusive medication items, social insurance experts are experienced with an extensive number of multisource items from which they need to choose remedially identical items. Generic substitution is of concern for human services experts as well as for pharmaceutical commercial ventures [5 - 9].

Be that as it may, the utilization of non specific items has more like anticipated. One of the motivations to clarify the truth may be that concerns exist about switchability from a trend-setter item to a non specific item or among bland items due to inclination in bioequivalence [10 - 14]. In particular, faltering about the distinction in quality between bland items and trailblazer items, especially in bioequivalence because of contrasts in the assembling procedure and pharmaceutical innovation, exists among experts in medicinal practice. The bioequivalence study to ensure that a non specific item is bioequivalent to a trailblazer item regarding viability and security is most vital in guaranteeing the nature of bland items. There are different particulars and study systems to demonstrate bioequivalence which contrast somewhat starting with one then onto the next in diverse nations [15 - 19].

For the reasons of medication endorsement, the compatibility of a nonexclusive medication and the relating brand-name medication is in light of the foundation of "key comparability," which obliges that the non specific medication have the same sum and kind of dynamic rule, the same course of organization, and the same restorative adequacy as the first medication, as exhibited by a bioequivalence study. Notwithstanding, bioequivalence and restorative viability are not so much the same [20 - 24].

Since the acquaintance of generic drugs medications with the pharmaceutical market an occasionally enthusiastic civil argument exists whether they are very much explored and of high caliber. There is some vulnerability about whether confirmation of bioequivalence is sufficient to ensure adequacy and security of nonexclusive medications. A few doctors pose the question if skilled powers have the capacity to learn that the pharmaceutical nature of generics is satisfactory. Specialists and patients now and again are apprehensive about the compatibility of trailblazer and generic drugs on specific items. This article depicts how the European Union enactment guarantees that a generic drugs medication is just endorsed in the event that its hazard advantage relationship is positive and that it is basically like the pioneer item. In this connection pharmacokinetic parameters are acknowledged as surrogates for clinical results in light of the fact that bioequivalence imply remedial equality too [25 - 29]. For most medications, current bioequivalence testing by and large empowers clinicians to routinely substitute bland for trend-setter items. Distributed discoveries, on the other hand, propose that specific medications may not be preferably suited for bland substitution when a patient is now on that medication. These are the alleged discriminating measurements therapeutic items (drugs with a limited restorative extent). At the point when beginning another treatment with any generic drugs medication, notwithstanding, its likeness to the trailblazer sedate as far as viability, wellbeing and quality is ensured.

On the off chance that two drugs are bioequivalent there is no clinically huge distinction in their bioavailability. In spite of the fact that bioequivalence is most generally talked about in connection to nonexclusive pharmaceuticals, it is vital to note that bioequivalence studies are additionally performed for trailblazer solutions in a few circumstances, for example, in the middle of ahead of schedule and late clinical trial definitions or between the plans utilized as a part of clinical trials and the item to be promoted for new medications when changes in definition have happened after a pioneer item has been endorsed, for instance an adjustment in one or more excipients (latent fixings) Bioequivalence studies are a surrogate marker for clinical viability and security information as it would not typically be down to earth to rehash clinical studies for bland items [30 - 34]. It is acknowledged that if plasma amassings of the dynamic element of the nonexclusive and trailblazer solutions are the same, then their fixation at the site of activity and thusly their security and viability will be the same. Notwithstanding being bioequivalent, a non specific drug must adjust to top notch principles as far as the system for assembling and the virtue of the last pharmaceutical form.

At the point when a pioneer drug is produced, proof is needed of its pharmacokinetic properties, viability and security in solid volunteers and also the objective patient populace. In any case, bioequivalence studies are ordinarily just performed in sound volunteers so as to diminish the variability not identified with contrasts between items [35 - 39].

Bioequivalence studies are cross-over studies in which every subject goes about as their own control. This model, (in vivo sound volunteers) is viewed as sufficient to recognize definition contrasts. The outcomes acquired permit extrapolation to populaces in which the reference item is endorsed (e.g. the elderly youngsters, patients with renal or liver impedance) [40 - 44].

Bioequivalence studies are intended to look at the in vivo execution of a test pharmaceutical item (multi-source) contrasted with a reference pharmaceutical item. A typical outline for a bioequivalence study includes organization of the test and reference items on two events to volunteer subjects, with every organization isolated by a washout period. The washout period is decided to guarantee that medication given in one treatment is altogether dispensed with before organization of the following treatment. Only before organization, and for a suitable period a short time later, blood and/or pee tests are gathered and examined for the convergance of the medication substance and/or one or more metabolites. The ascent and fall of these fixations after some time in every subject in the study give an appraisal of how the medication substance is discharged from the test and reference items and retained into the body. To permit correlations between the two items, these blood (to incorporate plasma or serum) and/or pee focus time bends are utilized to compute certain bioequivalence measurements of hobby [45 - 49].

In a few occurrences plasma focus time-profile information are not suitable to survey bioequivalence between two plans. Though in a portion of the cases pharmacodynamic studies can be a suitable device for building up comparability, in different occurrences this kind of study can't be performed due to absence of important pharmacodynamic parameters which can be measured and a similar clinical trial must be performed with a specific end goal to show equality between two details. Notwithstanding, If a clinical study is considered as being attempted to demonstrate proportionality, the same measurable standards apply with respect to the bioequivalence studies [50 - 55]. The quantity of patients to be incorporated in the study will rely on upon the variability of the objective parameters and the acknowledgement run, and is generally much higher than the quantity of subjects in bioequivalence studies.

When Bioequivalence Studies are Essential and Types of Studies Required

In vivo studies

For certain drugs and dose frames, in vivo documentation of proportionality, through either a bioequivalence study, a similar clinical pharmacodynamics study, or a near clinical trial, is viewed as imperative. These include: Oral quick discharge drug plans with systemic activity when one or a greater amount of the accompanying criteria apply: demonstrated for genuine conditions obliging guaranteed restorative reaction; slender remedial window/security edge; steep dose‐ reaction bend; pharmacokinetics entangled by variable or inadequate ingestion or retention window, nonlinear pharmacokinetics, pre‐systemic disposal/high firstpass digestion system >70%; unfavorable physicochemical properties, e.g., low solvency, flimsiness metastable changes, poor porousness, etc. documented proof for bioavailability issues related to the medication or medications of comparable substance structure [56 - 60].

Bioequivalence documentation

Early and late clinical trial definitions, plans utilized as a part of clinical trials and strength studies, if distinctive, clinical trial details and to be promoted medication product.

When bioequivalence studies are not necessary

In taking after definitions and circumstances, bioequivalence between a new drug and the reference item might be considered self‐evident with no further prerequisite for documentation: When new drugs will be to be managed parenterally (e.g., intravenous, intramuscular, subcutaneous, intrathecal organization and so forth.) as fluid arrangements and contain the same dynamic substance(s) in the same fixation and the same excipients in practically identical fixations; When the new medication is an answer for oral utilize, and contains the dynamic substance in the same focus, and does not contain an excipient that is known or suspected to influence gastrointestinal travel or retention of the dynamic substance [61 - 65].

Applications of Bioavailability/Bioequivalence Studies

Comparative bioavailability: A universal approach

Most bioavailability studies, whether for a new or non-specific item, have a basic subject. A test will be conveyed to recognize the quantitative nature of a particular item examination. This examination for a new drug might be, for case, to survey the execution of an oral definition with respect to that of an intravenous dosage, or maybe the execution of a modified‐release detailing in correlation to a traditional container. For a non-specific item, it is commonly an examination of an aggressive detailing with a reference item. Such shared characteristic encompassing relative bioavailability studies proposes a widespread exploratory methodology [66 - 69]. Near bioavailability studies for new medications (NDA) The introductory oral plan for a new drug will be much of the time utilized to direct early human investigations of wellbeing and viability. Regularly, early oral bioavailability data about the drug (and this beginning detailing) will be gotten by implies of studies contrasting it and an intravenous dose [70 - 76].

Comparative drug products (ANDA) bioavailability for generic

At the point when a maker in this way wishes to increase helpful equality by bringing a focused non specific item into the commercial center, it will be not important to transmit the full exhibit of trials required for the first(innovative) item. In the event that identicalness has been illustrated, agreeing to endorsed study prerequisites properly decided measurements the nonexclusive item by deduction is viewed as remedially comparable to the inventive medication item [77 - 81].

Bioavailability is utilized to portray the division of a directed measurement of solution that achieves the systemic dissemination, one of the vital properties of the medication. By definition, when the medication is directed intravenously, its bioavailability is 100%. However when a medicine is controlled by means of different courses, (for example, by mouth), its bioavailability diminishes (because of fragmented assimilation and first-pass digestion system). Bioavailability is one of the fundamental instruments in pharmacokinetics, as bioavailability must be considered when figuring measurement for non-intravenous course of organization [82 - 87].

On account of new dynamic substances (new compound elements) expected for systemic activity the pharmacokinetic portrayal will need to incorporate the determination of the systemic accessibility of the substance in its planned pharmaceutical shape in the correlation with intravenous organization. On the off chance that this is impractical the bioavailability in respect to a suitable oral arrangement or institutionalized suspension ought to be resolved [88 - 93]. On account of a prodrug the intravenous reference arrangement ought to ideally be the helpful moiety. The measurement suggestions for the business sector type of another dynamic substance ought to be approved by a relative bioavailability [94 - 95] study against the structures utilized as a part of the clinical trials, particularly those utilized as a part of the measurements discovering studies, unless its nonattendance can be supported by palatable in vitro information [96 - 100].

References

1. Karwa M, et al. Recent Regulatory Amendment in Schedule Y: Impact on Bioequivalence Studies Conducted In India. J BioequivAvailab 2013;5: 174-176.
2. Pohl O, et al. Metabolic Disposition of [14C] Ulipristal Acetate in Healthy Premenopausal Women. J BioequivAvailab 2013; 5: 177-184.
3. Gališinová J, et al. Study of Local Anaesthetics. Part 203*. Micellization of Heptacainium Chloride Studied By Spectral Methods in Aqueous Solution. J BioequivAvailab 2013; 5: 161-164.
4. Allen A, et al. The Pharmacokinetics of Fluticasone Furoate and Vilanterol Following Single Inhaled Administration in Combination and Intravenous Administration of Individual Components in Healthy Subjects. J BioequivAvailab 2013;5: 165-173.
5. Pradeep KV, et al. Importance of ADME and Bioanalysis in the Drug Discovery. J BioequivAvailab2013;5: e31.
6. Damle B, et al. Bioequivalence of Alprazolam Sublingual Tablet Formulation and Alprazolam Immediate Release Tablet in Healthy Volunteers. J BioequivAvailab 2013;5: 149-153.
7. De Rosa G, et al. New Therapeutic Opportunities from Old Drugs: The Role of Nanotechnology? J BioequivAvailab 2013;5: e30.
8. Wang LH, et al. Determination of Fragrance Allergens in Essential Oils and Evaluation of theirin vitroPermeation from Essential Oil Formulations through Cultured Skin. J BioequivAvailab 2010;2: 072-076.
9. Olliaro P, et al. Pharmacokinetics and Comparative Bioavailability of Artesunate and Mefloquine Administered Separately or as a Fixed Combination Product to Healthy Volunteers and Patients with UncomplicatedPlasmodium FalciparumMalaria. J BioequivAvailab 2010;2: 059-066.
10. Hussain S, et al. Assessment of Bioavailability of Rifampicin as a Component of Anti-tubercular Fixed Dose Combination Drugs Marketed in Pakistan. J BioequivAvailab 2010;2: 067- 071.
11. Shakya R, et al. Comparative Bioavailability of Two Brands of Ofloxacin in Healthy Human Volunteers. J BioequivAvailab 2010;2: 055-058.
12. Shakeel F, et al. Solubility and Dissolution Improvement of Aceclofenac using Different Nanocarriers. J BioequivAvailab 2009;1: 039-043.
13. Babu B, et al. Pharmacokinetic Evaluation of Metolazone Tablets using Healthy Human Volunteers. J BioequivAvailab 2010;2: 015-017.
14. alma-Aguirre JA, et al. Bioavailability of Two Oral Tablet Formulations of citalopram 20 mg: Single-Dose, Open-Label, Randomized, Two-Period Crossover Comparison in Healthy Mexican Adult Subjects. J BioequivAvailab 2010; 2: 018-022.
15. Bapuji AT, et al. A Bioequivalence Study Comparing Two Formulation of Emtricitabine Capsules. J BioequivAvailab 2010;2: 011-014.
16. Ghnimi S, et al. Fruit Nutraceuticals Seeking Clinical Evidence and Technological Exploitations. J BioequivAvailab 2015;7: e64.
17. Baldo MN, et al. Bioequivalence Evaluation of Two Brands of Ketoprofen 50 Mg Capsules . 2015;
18. Gajbhiye KR, et al. Targeted Brain Delivery of Bioactive Molecules Using Nanocarriers. J BioequivAvailab 2015;7: 112-122.
19. Naveed S, et al. Awareness of Jaundice among Pharmacy Undergraduates at, Karachi, Pakistan. J BioequivAvailab 2015;7: 127-130.
20. Khorshid AF, et al. Novel Coated Wires Sensors with Flow- Injection for Potentiometric Determination of Neostigmine in Bulk, Amostigmine and Human Urine. J BioequivAvailab 2015;7: 131-139.
21. Hendawy OM, et al. Effect of Atorvastatin and Vitamin D on Freund’s Adjuvant-Induced Rheumatoid Arthritis in Rat. J BioequivAvailab 2015;7: 090-094.
22. Voziyan PA, et al. Reactive Oxygen Species. J BioequivAvailab 2014;6: e57.
23. Murugesan SMN, et al. Evaluation of Inter-Occasion Variability on Trospium Pharmacokinetics in Healthy Human Subjects using Non-Compartment Methods. J BioequivAvailab 2014;6: 202-205.
24. Muhammad IN, et al. Pharmacokinetic and Bioequivalence Studies of Oral Cefuroxime Axetil 250 mg Tablets in Healthy Human Subjects. J BioequivAvailab 2014; 6: 149-152.
25. Butnariu M, et al. Therapeutic Properties of Vegetable. J BioequivAvailab 2014;6: e55
26. Zhang J, et al. Pharmacokinetics and Bioequivalence Comparison of 600 mg Single-Dose Linezolid Oral Suspension and Tablet Formulation in Healthy Chinese Subjects. J BioequivAvailab 2014; 6: 153-157.
27. Zhao Q, et al. Bioequivalence of Omeprazole Delayed-release Capsules in Healthy Filipino Subjects. J BioequivAvailab 2014;6: 144-149.
28. Bedada SK, et al. Resveratrol Enhances the Bioavailability of Fexofenadine in Healthy Human Male Volunteers: Involvement of P-Glycoprotein Inhibition. J BioequivAvailab 2014;6: 158-163.
29. Butnariu M, et al. Vegetal Metabolomics to Seeds ofGaliumAparine. J BioequivAvailab 2013;5: e45.
30. Naveed S, et al. An Overview of Analytical Determination of Captopril in Active Pharmaceutical Ingredients. 2013;
31. Xu W, et al. AnIn vitroCell-Based LDL Uptake Model for Screening PCSK 9 Modulators. J BioequivAvailab 2013;5: 248-252.
32. Zafar F, et al. Need for the Rational Use of Antibacterial in Paediatric Population. J BioequivAvailab 2013;5: 260-263.
33. Alice Nichols I, et al. Pharmacokinetics, Pharmacodynamics, and Safety of Desvenlafaxine, a Serotonin-Norepinephrine Reuptake Inhibitor. J BioequivAvailab 2013;5: 022-030.
34. Zhao Q, et al. Relative Bioavailability of a Fixed-Combination Tablet Formulation of Azithromycin and Chloroquine in Healthy Adult Subjects. J BioequivAvailab 2013;5: 001-005.
35. Al-Ghananaeem A, et al. Sublingual and Nasal Transmucosal Drug Delivery for Breakthrough Pain: A Frontier in Cancer Therapy. J BioequivAvailab 2013;5: e29.
36. Harahap Y, et al. Bioequivalence of Trimetazidine Modified Release Tablet Formulations Assessed in Indonesian Subjects. J BioequivAvailab 2013;5: 117-120.
37. Sur G, et al. Super-Antigens and Human Pathology: Always an Interesting Topic. J BioequivAvailab 2013;5: 125-128.
38. Ayrapetyan S, et al. Cell Dehydration as a Mechanism of Ketamine Analgesic and Anesthetic Effects. J BioequivAvailab 2013;5: 136-141.
39. Abu-Basha EA, et al. Pharmacokinetics of Gentamicin C 1, C1a, C2and C2ain Broiler Chickens after IV, IM, SC and Oral Administration. J BioequivAvailab 2013; 5: 129-135.
40. Vassilis K, et al. Transperineal Implementation of Biocompatible Balloon in Patients Treated With Radiotherapy for Prostate Carcinoma: Feasibility and Quality Assurance Study in Terms of Anatomical Stabilization Using Image Registration Techniques. J BioequivAvailab 2013;5: 142-148.
41. Butnariu M, et al. Aspects Relating to Mechanism of the Capsaicinoids Biosynthesis. J BioequivAvailab 2013;5: e32.
42. Yazlovitskaya EM, et al. Mouse Models of Radiosensitivity. J BioequivAvailab 2013;5: e36.
43. Pillay V, et al. Oral Bioavailability and Neuro- Availability vs. “Neuro-Transmittability�: A Figment of Imagination in the Conundrum of Neuronal Intervention. J BioequivAvailab 2013;5: e34.
44. Naveed S, et al. Prevalence and Consequences of PHOBIAS, Survey Based Study in Karachi. J BioequivAvailab 2015;07: 140-143.
45. Mendes GD, et al. Pharmacokinetic Evaluation of Administration of Losartan with Aspirin in Healthy Volunteers. J BioequivAvailab 2015;7: 144-149.
46. Atkinson HC, et al. A Pharmacokinetic Analysis of a Novel Fixed Dose Oral Combination of Paracetamol and Ibuprofen, with Emphasis on Food Effect. J BioequivAvailab 2015;7: 150-154.
47. Genel S, et al. Metabolic Syndrome - A Bomb with Delayed Reaction. J BioequivAvailab 2015;7: 155-157.
48. Ananthula S, et al. Bioavailability and Bioequivalence Issues Associated With Oral Anticancer Drugs and Effect on Drug Market. J BioequivAvailab 2014;6: e56.
49. Tamayo GM, et al. Bioavailability of Two Tablet Formulations of a Single Dose of Moxifloxacin 400 mg: An Open-Label, Randomized, Two-Period Crossover Comparison in Healthy Mexican Adult Volunteers. J BioequivAvailab 2014; 6: 197-201.
50. Devineni D, et al. Bioequivalence of Canagliflozin/Metformin Immediate Release Fixed-Dose Combination Tablets Compared with Concomitant Administration of Single Components of Canagliflozin and Metformin in Healthy Fed Participants. J BioequivAvailab 2014;6: 164-173.
51. Malhotra B, et al. Relative Bioavailability Study of an Abuse-Deterrent Formulation of Extended-Release Oxycodone with Sequestered Naltrexone . 2014;
52. Mukthinuthalapati MA, et al. Simultaneous Determination of Rosuvastatin and Ezetimibe in pharmaceutical formulations by Stability Indicating Liquid Chromatographic Method. J BioequivAvailab 2014;6: 174-180.
53. Zhang X, et al. Bioequivalence Study of Two 30 Mg Tolvaptan Tablets Formulations in Healthy Chinese under Fed Condition. J BioequivAvailab 2014; 6: 181-185.
54. Voziyan PA, et al. Reactive Oxygen Species. J BioequivAvailab 2014;6: e57.
55. Zafar F, et al. Need for the Rational Use of Antibacterial in Paediatric Population. J BioequivAvailab 2013;5: 260-263.
56. Nichols AI, et al. An Open-Label Evaluation of the Effect of CoadministeringDesvenlafaxine 100 mg on the Pharmacokinetics of Aripiprazole in Healthy Subjects. J BioequivAvailab 2013;5: 253-259.
57. Glavas-Dodov M, et al. Particulate Carriers for Local Colon Drug Delivery. J BioequivAvailab 2013;5: e25.
58. Yazlovitskaya EM, et al. Radioprotectors and Mitigators: Current Status. J BioequivAvailab 2013;5: e26.
59. Nichols A, et al. An Evaluation of the Potential of Cytochrome P 450 3A4-Mediated Drug-Drug Interactions with Desvenlafaxine Use. J BioequivAvailab 2013; 5: 053-059.
60. Araneda C, et al. Single and Multiple Pharmacokinetics of Enrofloxacin and Ciprofloxacin in Pigs. J BioequivAvailab 2013;5: 041-046.
61. Li X, et al. Genetically Modified Medicagotruncatula Lacking Calcium Oxalate has Increased Calcium Bioavailability and Partially Rescues Vitamin D Receptor Knockout Mice Phenotypes. J BioequivAvailab 2013;5: 047-052.
62. Ayrapetyan SN, et al. Na+/K+ Pump a 3 Isoform is a Universal Membrane Sensor for Weak Environmental Signals. J BioequivAvailab 2013; 5: 031-040.
63. Wagh N, et al. A Bioequivalence Study of Two Finofibrate Tablet Formulations in Indian Healthy Subjects. J BioequivAvailab 2013;5: 016-021.
64. Alice Nichols I, et al. Pharmacokinetics, Pharmacodynamics, and Safety of Desvenlafaxine, a Serotonin-Norepinephrine Reuptake Inhibitor. J BioequivAvailab 2013;5: 022-030.
65. Derakhshandeh K, et al. Oral Bioavailability and Pharmacokinetic Study of Clarithromycin in Different Dosage Forms in Iranian Healthy Volunteers. J BioequivAvailab 2014;6: 206-211.
66. Yoshiba S, et al. Pharmacokinetics of Laninamivir after a Single Administration of its Prodrug, LaninamivirOctanoate, a Long-Acting Neuraminidase Inhibitor, Using an Easy-to-Use Inhaler in Healthy Volunteers. J BioequivAvailab 2011;3: 001-004.
67. Nanjwade BK, et al. Development and Characterization of Solid-Lipid Microparticles of Highly Insoluble Drug Sirolimus. J BioequivAvailab 2011;3: 011-015.
68. AbibJr E, et al. Evaluation of the Pharmacokinetic Interaction between Candesartan Cilexetil andFelodipine. J BioequivAvailab 2011;3: 005-010.
69. Ghosh C, et al. Estimation of Nevirapine from Human Plasma by ESI-LC-MS/MS: a Pharmacokinetic Application. J BioequivAvailab 2011;3: 020-025.
70. Sunkara G, et al. Assessment of Ethnic Differences in the Pharmacokinetics and Pharmacodynamics of Valsartan. J BioequivAvailab 2010;2: 120-124.
71. Junior EA, et al. Bioequivalence of Two Oral Contraceptive Drugs Containing Ethinylestradiol and Gestodene in Healthy Female Volunteers. J BioequivAvailab 2010;2: 125-130.
72. Shafaati A, et al. Rapid and Sensitive Determination Of Montelukast in Human Plasma by High Performance Liquid Chromatographic Method Using Monolithic Column: Application to Pharmacokinetic Studies. J BioequivAvailab 2010;2: 135-138.
73. Zhang L, et al. Simulation Database System of the Active Ingredients in Compound Decoction of Chinese Medicine. J BioequivAvailab 2010;2: 131-134.
74. Khattak S, et al. Comparative Bioavailability Assessment of Newly Developed Flurbiprofen Matrix Tablets and Froben SR® Tablets in Healthy Pakistani Volunteers. J BioequivAvailab 2010;2: 139-144.
75. Shakya R, et al. Comparative Bioavailability of Two Brands of Ofloxacin in Healthy Human Volunteers. J BioequivAvailab 2010;2: 055-058.
76. CenturiónOA , et al. Therapeutic Management in the Idiopathic Ventricular Fibrillation: Is there Still a Place for Pharmacological Treatment? J BioequivAvailab 2014;6: 128-133.
77. Devi S , et al. Use of Informatics in Identification of Adverse Drug Reactions. J BioequivAvailab 2014;6: e54.
78. AnanthulaS , et al. Bioavailability and Bioequivalence Issues Associated With Oral Anticancer Drugs and Effect on Drug Market. J BioequivAvailab 2014;6: e56.
79. Voziyan PA, et al. Reactive Oxygen Species. J BioequivAvailab 2014;6: e57.
80. Zhang X, et al. Bioequivalence Study of Two 30 Mg Tolvaptan Tablets Formulations in Healthy Chinese under Fed Condition. J BioequivAvailab 2014; 6: 181-185.
81. Mukthinuthalapati MA, et al. Simultaneous Determination of Rosuvastatin and Ezetimibe in pharmaceutical formulations by Stability Indicating Liquid Chromatographic Method. J BioequivAvailab 2014;6: 174-180.
82. Shedage A, et al. Comparative Steady State Cross-Over Bioequivalence Study of 35mg Trimetazidine Extended-Release Tablets. J BioequivAvailab 2014; 6: 192-196.
83. Malhotra B, et al. Relative Bioavailability Study of an Abuse-Deterrent Formulation of Extended-Release Oxycodone with Sequestered Naltrexone . 2014;
84. Murugesan SMN, et al. Evaluation of Inter-Occasion Variability on Trospium Pharmacokinetics in Healthy Human Subjects using Non-Compartment Methods. J BioequivAvailab 2014;6: 202-205.
85. Tamayo GM, et al. Bioavailability of Two Tablet Formulations of a Single Dose of Moxifloxacin 400 mg: An Open-Label, Randomized, Two-Period Crossover Comparison in Healthy Mexican Adult Volunteers. J BioequivAvailab 2014; 6: 197-201.
86. Derakhshandeh K, et al. Oral Bioavailability and Pharmacokinetic Study of Clarithromycin in Different Dosage Forms in Iranian Healthy Volunteers. J BioequivAvailab 2014;6: 206-211.
87. Pillay V, et al. Oral Bioavailability and Neuro- Availability vs. “Neuro-Transmittability�: A Figment of Imagination in the Conundrum of Neuronal Intervention. J BioequivAvailab 2013;5: e34.
88. Zhang A, et al. Statistical Considerations in Biosimilar Assessment Using Biosimilarity Index. J BioequivAvailab 2013;5: 209-214.
89. Nunez DA, et al. Comparison of Two Formulations of Sodium Divalproate Plasma Concentrations after a Single 500 mg Oral Dose in Healthy Subjects, and Stochastic Sub-analysis of the Individual “ClinicalPerceptible� Levels. J BioequivAvailab 2013; 5: 197-200.
90. Mistry P, et al. Haemolysis Effect Estimation of Doxycycline Hyclate 150 mg Delay Release Tablet in Bio-analysis . 2013;
91. Suresh Kumar R, et al. Self Nanoemulsifying Drug Delivery System of Olanzapine for Enhanced Oral Bioavailability: In vitro,In vivoCharacterisation andIn vitro-In vivoCorrelation. J BioequivAvailab 2013;5: 201-208.
92. Mukthinuthalapati MA, et al. A Validated Stability-indicating Liquid Chromatographic Method for Determination of Cabazitaxel-A Novel Microtubule Inhibitor. J BioequivAvailab 2014;6: 134-138.
93. Jawhari D, et al. Bioequivalence of a New Generic Formulation of Erlotinib Hydrochloride 150 mg Tablets versus Tarceva in Healthy Volunteers under Fasting Conditions. J BioequivAvailab 2014; 6: 119-123.
94. Vargas M, et al. Bioequivalence Study of Two 50 mg Desvenlafaxine Extended Release Formulations: A Randomized, Single-Dose, Open-Label, Two Periods, Crossover Study. J BioequivAvailab 2014; 6: 115-118.
95. Naveed S, et al. Degradation Study of Metronidazole in Active and Different Formulation by UV Spectroscopy. J BioequivAvailab 2014;6: 124-127.
96. RajeswaraRao P, et al. Intra Subject Variability of Progesterone 200 mg Soft Capsules in Indian Healthy Adult Postmenopausal Female Subjects under Fasting Conditions. J BioequivAvailab 2014; 6: 139-143.
97. Lu Y, et al. In vivoandIn vitroBioequivalence Testing. J BioequivAvailab 2014;6: 067-074.
98. Devarakonda K, et al. Single-Dose Pharmacokinetics of MNK- 795, an Extended-Release Oxycodone and Acetaminophen Combination Analgesic: Results from 2 Active Comparator Studies. J BioequivAvailab 2014; 6: 038-045.
99. Jawhari D, et al. Bioavailability of a New Generic Formulation of ImatinibMesylate 400mg Tablets Versus Glivec in Healthy Male Adult Volunteers. J BioequivAvailab 2011; 3: 161-164.
100. Chan OH, et al. Physicochemical and drug-delivery considerations for oral drug bioavailability. Drug Discov Today. 1996;1: 461-473.