This paper is only available as a PDF. To read, Please Download here.
Abstract
Background: The use of dry-powder inhalers (DPIs) to administer respiratory medicines is increasing,
and new DPIs are likely to be developed because of expiring patents. However, there
is considerable debate concerning the extent to which DPIs are interchangeable without
altering disease control or the safety profile of the treatment.
Objective: This study was designed to compare the pharmacokinetic (PK), pharmacodynamic (PD),
efficacy, and safety data for 2 DPIs delivering a combination of salmeterol 50 μg
plus fluticasone propionate (FP) 250 μg (SFC 50/250) to investigate assumptions of
bioequivalence.
Methods: Three studies compared SFC 50/250 delivery using a reservoir powder inhalation device
(RPID) and a Diskus® multiple-dose inhaler: an in vitro assessment of fine-particle-mass
(FPM) profiles of the emitted doses; a PK/PD study of SFC 50/250 administered in two
14-day crossover treatment periods to 22 adults with moderate, persistent asthma to
determine the equivalence of the RPID and Diskus inhaler in terms of drug delivery
and systemic exposure; and a 12-week clinical efficacy and safety study of SFC 50/250
in 270 patients ≥12 years of age with moderate, persistent asthma to assess the equivalence
of the RPID and Diskus inhaler based on peak expiratory flow (PEF) rates. FPM was
summed from the quantity of active pharmaceutical ingredient deposited on stages 1
to 5 of a cascade impactor, representing an aerodynamic particle size range of 0.8
to 6.2 μm. Systemic exposure to SFC 50/250 was declared no greater with RPID than
with the Diskus inhaler if the upper limit of the 90% CI for the ratio of FP AUC for
the 2 devices was below the upper limit of the equivalence range (ie, <1.25). Adverse
events, clinical laboratory test results, and vital signs were recorded throughout
the 2 clinical studies.
Results: In vitro, mean FPM values for the RPID and Diskus inhaler, respectively, were 13.1
and 12.8 μg/dose for salmeterol (P = NS) and 66.8 and 66.2 μg/dose for FP (P = NS). The only notable differences were mean FP for particle sizes 2.3 to 3.2 μm
(21.4 μg/dose for RPID, 25.6 μg/dose for Diskus) and for sizes 4.0 to 6.2 μm (17.3
μg/dose for RPID, 11.7 μg/dose for Diskus). In the PK/PD study, there were 22 patients
(16 men and 6 women), most (86%) of whom were white. Mean (SD) age was 26.0 (5.0)
years (range, 19-35 years), and mean (SD) weight was 67.3 (8.9) kg. The 2 inhalers
did not meet the criteria for declaring bioequivalence: estimated ratios (RPID:Diskus)
were 2.00 (90% CI, 1.56 to 2.55) for FP AUC up to the time point of next dosing and
1.92 (90% CI, 1.64 to 2.25) for salmeterol maximum observed plasma concentration at
the end of the dosing interval (at steady state). Urine cortisol (0–24 hours) was
significantly lower for the RPID than for the Diskus inhaler (ratio, 0.74 [95% CI,
0.57 to 0.96]; P = 0.026); no significant difference in plasma cortisol was noted between the 2 inhalers
(ratio, 0.85 [95% CI, 0.7 to 1.04]). A small but statistically significant increase
in maximum heart rate (5 beats/min) was noted in the RPID group (ratio, 1.05 [95%
CI, 1.01 to 1.10]; P = 0.029). No notable differences in other PD end points were observed. Drug-related
adverse events occurred in both groups (2 [dysphagia and tremor] in the RPID group
and 3 [2 cases of dysphonia, 1 case of mucous-membrane irritation] in the Diskus group).
There were 270 patients (136 females, 134 males) in the clinical efficacy and safety
study, most (94%) of whom were white; mean (SD) age was 37.2 (17.0) years (range,
11–77 years) in the RPID group and 35.4 (17.2) years (range, 12–77 years) in the Diskus
group. The RPID and the Diskus inhaler met the predefined equivalence criteria (±15
L/min) in terms of mean change in morning PEF from baseline: 3.9 L/min (95% CI, -3.1
to 11.0). The 2 SFC 50/250 inhalers were well tolerated; the most frequently reported
adverse event was bronchitis, reported by 12% of the patients in the RPID group and
9% of those in the Diskus group. The only serious adverse event, which occurred in
the RPID group and was related to bronchial infection, was considered unrelated to
treatment.
Conclusions: In vitro particle size distribution data were potentially superimposable for the
RPID and the Diskus inhaler. The 2 devices were considered to be clinically equivalent
in terms of mean morning PEF but were not considered equivalent in terms of PK systemic
exposure. The 2 SFC 50/250 inhalers were well tolerated and had comparable safety
profiles; no serious adverse events were attributed to the study product.
Key words:
To read this article in full you will need to make a payment
Purchase one-time access:
Academic & Personal: 24 hour online accessCorporate R&D Professionals: 24 hour online accessOne-time access price info
- For academic or personal research use, select 'Academic and Personal'
- For corporate R&D use, select 'Corporate R&D Professionals'
Subscribe:
Subscribe to Clinical TherapeuticsAlready a print subscriber? Claim online access
Already an online subscriber? Sign in
Register: Create an account
Institutional Access: Sign in to ScienceDirect
References
- The Diskus: A review of its position among dry powder inhaler devices.Int J Clin Pract. 2007; 61: 1022-1036
- Dry powder inhalers (DPIs)—a review of device reliability and innovation.Int J Pharm. 2008; 360: 1-11
- Therapeutic equivalence of inhaled corticosteroids—Workshop on regional differences in regulatory requirements.Respiratory Drug Delivery. 2008; 1: 133-150
- Can we move toward harmonized requirements for bioequivalence of inhalers?.Respiratory Drug Delivery Europe. 2007; 1: 151-158
- In vitro bioequivalence of particle size distributions: A commentary on FDA's draft guidance.Respiratory Drug Delivery VIII. 2002; 1: 145-154
- Quality by design (QbD): What type of in vivo- in vitro correlations are feasible?.Respiratory Drug Delivery. 2008; 1: 125-132
- Proving inhaled corticosteroid equivalence: What are the clinically acceptable differences in performance?.Respiratory Drug Delivery. 2008; 1: 101-108
- Preparations for inhalation.European Pharmacopoeia. 2001; : 2.9.18
- Guidance for Industry: Metered dose inhaler (MDI) and dry powder inhaler (DPI) drug products. Chemistry, manufacturing, and controls documentation. US Food and Drug Administration, US Department of Health and Human Sciences, Center for Drug Evaluation and Research. Rockville, Md1998
- Guideline on the requirements for clinical documentation for orally inhaled products (OIP) including the requirements for demonstration of therapeutic equivalence between two inhaled products for use in the treatment of asthma and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). Doc Ref. CPMP/ EWP/4151/00 Rev 1. October 18, 2007 (Accessed January 29, 2009)
Drugs and Health Products. Release of Draft Guidance Document: Submission Requirements for Subsequent Market Entry Inhaled Corticosteroid Products for Use in the Treatment of Asthma
- (Accessed August 27, 2008)
US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) Federal Register: June 5, 2008 (Volume 73, Number 109), Advisory Committee for Pharmaceutical Science and Clinical Pharmacology; Notice of Meeting [FDA Web site]
- (Accessed January 29, 2009)
- In vitro/in vivo comparisons in pulmonary drug delivery.J Aerosol Med Pulm Drug Deliv. 2008; 21: 77-84
- Particle deposition measurements and numerical simulation in a highly idealized mouth-throat.J Aerosol Science. 2004; 35: 789-803
- A comparision of in-vitro drug delivery from salbutamol Diskus and terbutaline Turbohaler inhalers.J Pharm Med. 1996; 6: 35-48
- The determination of drugs for the treatment of asthma in plasma by automated solid phase extraction and LC-MS-MS.in: Proceedings of the 45th ASMS Conference on Mass Spectrometry and Allied Topics. 1997: 560 (Palm Springs, Calif; June 1-5)
- Determination of the glucocorticoid fluticasone propionate in plasma by automated solid-phase extraction and liquid chromatography-tandem mass spectrometry.J Chromatog B Biomed Sci Appl. 1998; 718: 243-250
GlaxoSmithKline Clinical Trials Register. The systematic pharmacodynamic effects and pharmacokinetics of salmeterol and fluticasone propionate when given alone and in combination, after repeat dosing from Diskus™ inhalers in healthy volunteers
- (Accessed August 27, 2008)
US Food and Drug Administration. Guidance for Industry: Bioavailability and bioequivalence studies for orally administered drug products-general considerations
- (Accessed January 29, 2009)
- Trials to assess equivalence: The importance of rigorous methods [published correction appears in BMJ. 1996;313:550].BMJ. 1996; 313: 36-39
GlaxoSmithKline Clinical Study Register. A phase I, monocentric, randomised, double-blind, double-dummy, cross-over study to compare the pharmacokinetics and the pharmacodynamic effects of Seretide 50 μg/250 μg bid after repeat dosing,delivered by Diskus™ versus RPID in patients with moderate asthma
- (Accessed January 29, 2009)
GlaxoSmithKline Clinical Study Register. A multicentre, randomised, double-blind, double-dummy, parallel-group study to establish equivalence of the salmeterol/fluticasone propionate combination product (50/250μg) via either the reservoir powder inhalation device (RPID) or via the Diskus™ inhaler over 12 weeks in adolescents and adults
- (Accessed January 29, 2009)
- Bioavailability of orally administered micronised fluticasone propionate.Clin Pharmacokinet. 2000; 39: 9-15
- Impact of oropharyngeal deposition on inhaled dose.J Aerosol Med. 1998; 11: S112-S115
- Development and preliminary validation studies with an ex-vivo oropharyngeal model.Respiratory Drug Delivery VI. 1998; 1: 389-392
- Particle deposition in a cast of human oral airways.Aerosol Sci Technol. 1999; 31: 286-300
- Studies of the human oropharyngeal airspaces using magnetic resonance imaging IV–the oropharyngeal retention effect for four inhalation delivery systems.J Aerosol Med. 2007; 20: 269-281
- Mouthpiece diameter affects deposition efficiency in cast models of the human oral airways.J Aerosol Med. 2001; 14: 335-341
- DPI powder adhesion properties: The power of centrifugal particle detachment (CPD).Respiratory Drug Delivery VIII. 2002; 1: 277-284
- Innovations in Dry Powder Inhalation Systems, in Dry Powder Inhalers in The Treatment of Asthma: A Continuing Education Monograph for Physicians, Nurses, Pharmacists, Physician Assistants and Respiratory Therapists. 2002: 10-18 (Meniscus, USA.)
Article info
Publication history
Accepted:
December 22,
2008
Identification
Copyright
© 2009 Excerpta Medica Inc. All rights reserved. Published by Elsevier Inc.
