Donor-specific transfusion under the new cyclosporine A formulation Consupren versus azathioprine, Imuran

Prograf five milligrams versus Tacrolimus medis in healthy volunteers: a bioequivalence study

For FDA approval, bioequivalence of a generic version of Tacrolimus must be demonstrated in a randomized, two-treatments, two-periods, two-sequences, single-dose crossover study in healthy adult volunteers. Currently there are at least 3 differents generic equivalent for Tacrolimus, that are approved by the EMA and the FDA, with a USA market share of nearly 50%. However, the market share of generic immunosuppressive drugs in the Middle East region is still very low due to the reluctance of the physician to accept Tacrolimus generics, considered to be a narrow therapeutic window drug, that are approved using the standard bioequivalence criteria of 80% to 125%. Herein we present a bioequivalence study of a new Tacrolimus generic, Tacrolimus Medis 5 mg developed by Medis Tunisia batch number 12G3003 compared with Prograf® 5 mg batch number 7202 manufactured by Astellas Toyama Co., Ltd. Japan and HIKMA Pharmaceuticals, Amman-Jordan in healthy adult volunteers using the 90%-111% criteria recommended for drugs with narrow therapeutic window. The study was, balanced, randomized, two-treatments, two-periods, two-sequences, single dose, crossover, comparative oral bioavailability study in healthy adult human volunteers. The study was carried out in accordance with the Basic Principles defined in the U.S. 21 CFR Part 312.20, the principles enunciated in the Declaration of Helsinki (World Medical Association Declaration of Helsinki). Thirty six non-smoking healthy, as determined by medical history, volunteers, 18 years and older, were included. Following randomization using a computer software (pharma solution) the volunteers were given a single oral dose of 5 milligrams following a 12 hour fast with a wash out period of 7 days. Pharmacokinetics profile with blood levels at: 0, 0.5, 1, 1.5, 2, 2.5, 3, 4, 6, 8, 10, 12, and 24 hours were performed following each dose. Tacrolimus plasma level was determined using an HPLC validated method (Transmedical For Life S.A.R.L. Beirut Lebanon), for accuracy, suitability, reproducibility, precision , long-term stability and robustness. Physical examinations, hematology, urine analysis and serum chemistry tests were performed at screening and before dosing in each period and at end of the study. Volunteers were monitored for safety and adverse events throughout the study. Both products were bioequivalent at the entire pharmacokinetic parameters tested. The LSM were 95.31%-101.21% for AUC, 94.65%-101.11% for AUC0-inf, 97.15%-100.02% for Cmax and 91.54%-103.75% for Half-life. Respectively all of which are within the EU and FDA approval limits (90-111%) indicating that the 2 products are equivalent and switchable.

The pharmacokinetics of equoral versus neoral in stable renal transplant patients: a multinational multicenter study

We studied the pharmacokinetics (PKs) of the new generic cyclosporine formulation, Equoral capsules, after the switch from original formulation Neoral capsules in stable renal transplant patients. The study was carried out in accordance with the basic principles defined in the US 21 CFR Part 312.20 and the principles of the Declaration of Helsinki. The study included clinically stable first renal transplant patients maintained on cyclosporine with no rejection episode during the past 6 months. Hematology, biochemistry, and urine chemistry were determined on day 7, and day 21. The patients were all switched to Neoral (lot number 416MFD0601) on day 0 when the first sparse sampling PK was performed. On day 14 a 12-hour PK profile included predose, 30 minutes; 1 hour; 1 hour 30 minutes; 2 hours; 3 hours; 4 hours; 5 hours; 6 hours; 8 hours; 10-hours and 12-hour samples. Cyclosporine levels were determined using a CYA kit (Abbott TDx). On day 15 the patients were switched from Neoral capsules to Equoral capsules (lot 5T111014) at an equivalent dosage (mg/mg). The second sparse sampling PK was performed on day 21 and a 12-hour PK was performed on day 28. On the morning of day 29 patients were switched from Equoral capsules to Neoral capsules at an equivalent dosage (mg/mg). Additional concentrations were measured on days -7, 18, and 35. Safety parameters were monitored at each visit. The pharmacokinetics of both formulations were equivalent. The mean AUC for Neoral and Equoral was 2856 and 2892, respectively. The ratios of LSM and the 90% confidence intervals for the in-transformed parameters (AUC o-t, AUC inf, and Cmax) of Equoral and Neoral SGC were 98% and 95%, respectively, suggesting that Equoral and Neoral SGC are bioequivalent.