Bioequivalence study of Cipol-N (cyclosporine microemulsion preparation) in healthy adults

Assessment of the bioequivalence of a generic cyclosporine A by a randomized controlled trial in stable renal recipients

BACKGROUND

The aim of this study was to determine the bioequivalence of Cysporin, a generic cyclosporine A, compared with Neoral in stable renal transplant recipients.

METHODS

Study design consisted of an open label, two-way crossover, randomized controlled trial of Cysporin versus Neoral in stable renal transplant recipients. In all, 33 patients were enrolled; 31 were randomized and 28 were evaluable. AUCs(0-12) were done on day 14 and 28; C(0) and C(2) were done on days 0, 7, 21 and 35. Dose conversion was 1:1. Outcome measures for serum cyclosporin A concentrations expressed as the mean+/-SD were AUC(0-12) (microg x hr/L), C(max) (microg/L), C(2) (microg/L), T(max) (hr) and T(1/2) (hr). Mean and 90% CI of the ratio Cysporin/Neoral of log-transformed data were calculated using a general linear model.

RESULTS

The main pharmacokinetic features were: AUC(0-12): Cysporin 3495+/-1319, Neoral 3853+/-1378 (P<0.05); C(max): Cysporin 755+/-301, Neoral 881+/-368 (P<0.05); C(2): Cysporin 613+/-235, Neoral 672+/-255 (P>0.05); T(max): Cysporin 1.9+/-0.8, Neoral 1.4+/-0.6 (P<0.005); and T1/2: Cysporin 8.8+/-4.3, Neoral 8.7+/-6.2 (P>0.05). Estimated ratios of Cysporin/Neoral were: AUC 0.93 (90% CI 0.88-0.98; P<0.05); C(max) 0.88 (90% CI 0.80-0.97; P<0.05); and T(max) 1.32 (90% CI 1.14-1.53; P<0.005).

CONCLUSIONS

Both the extent and rate of absorption of Cysporin are significantly less than those of Neoral. The 90% CI for the ratios of Cysporin/Neoral for AUC and C(max) lie within 0.80-1.25. Hence in this clinical context Cysporin is pharmacologically bioequivalent with Neoral. This study illustrates the importance of testing bioequivalence of generic cyclosporine A products in transplant recipients not healthy volunteers.

Switchover to generic cyclosporine in stable renal transplant recipients: a single unit experience

BACKGROUND

The introduction of the immunosuppressant cyclosporine has significantly improved renal transplant survival. It is an expensive drug and generic alternatives may offer cost advantages. However, generic alternatives must be shown to provide equivalent therapeutic efficacy and safety. This study reports our experience of a switch from the microemulsion formulation of cyclosporine, Neoral (Novartis), to the generic equivalent, Cysporin (Mayne Pharma).

METHOD

A two-period, single-sequence, cross-over study was done to compare cyclosporine blood levels and the area under the curve (AUC) of Neoral with Cysporin 2 weeks after a 1:1 dose switch. cyclosporine blood levels were measured at time points 0, 2, 4 and 8 h (C0, C2, C4, C8) after the switch. The cyclosporine AUC at 0-4 h and 0-12 h were calculated using the trapezoidal method. The two formulations were considered to result in equivalent blood levels if the 95% confidence interval (CI) of the ratio of the two levels was within 0.8-1.25.

RESULTS AND CONCLUSION

A total of 38 stable renal transplant patients aged 49.79 +/- 11.38 years (mean +/- SD), who were 7.84 +/- 3.97 years postrenal transplantation, were studied. The Neoral dose at the time of the switch was 2.38 +/- 1.21 mg per kg bodyweight. At all measured time points the 95% CI for the cyclosporine drug level ratio was between 0.9 and 1.15. There were no significant adverse events during the period of study. We conclude that the generic formulation of cylosporin, Cysporin, after a 1:1 switch from Neoral results in equivalent blood levels in stable renal transplant recipients. After switchover cyclosporine levels at C0 or C2 can continue to be monitored as per the institution's current monitoring practice.

Testing switchability of a new microemulsion formulation of cyclosporine

We assessed the bioavailability of cyclosporine (CyA) in the test formulation (Cap Arpimune ME) relative to the reference formulation (Cap Sandimmune Neoral) to ascertain the switchability between the two formulations in patients. The study population included 30 patients on maintenance hemodialysis awaiting renal transplantation. The study adopted a randomized open-label, two-way, two-period, two-sequence crossover design. The dose administered was 8 mg/kg/d in two divided doses for 5 days in each study period with a washout period of 1 week between the two periods. A five-point blood sampling (at 0, 1, 2, 3, and 4 hours postdose) was done on the last day of each study period for CyA level monitoring. The study measures included C(max) (maximum blood concentration), AUC (area under the blood CyA concentration versus time curve, 0 to 4 hours) and actual time concentrations at individual sampling times. The differences in mean values for all parameters and the least significant differences were less than 20% of reference mean. Assessment of bioequivalence using log-transformed data showed that the point estimate (ratio test: reference) for C(max) was 0.9717 with a 90% confidence interval (CI) of 0.88 to 1.06 and that for AUC was 1.0053 with a 90% CI of 0.90 to 1.12. The bioequivalence obtained suggests that the test formulation can replace the reference formulation in patients who require CyA therapy.

Recommendations for bioequivalence testing of cyclosporine generics revisited

The immunosuppressant cyclosporine is generally considered a critical-dose drug. The validity of standard criteria to establish bioequivalence between cyclosporine formulations has recently been challenged. Recommendations included establishment of individual bioequivalence rather than average bioequivalence, establishment of bioequivalence in transplant patients and in subgroups known to be poor absorbers, as well as long-term efficacy and safety studies in transplant patients. However, at the moment individual bioequivalence is a theoretical concept, the practical benefits of which have not statistically been proven. The proposed patient pharmacodynamic studies can be expected to require an unrealistically high number of subjects to achieve sufficient statistical power. It is well established that the common practice of blood-concentration-guided dosing of cyclosporine efficiently compensates for interindividual and intraindividual variability and allows for safely switching cyclosporine formulations as bioinequivalent as Sandimmune and Neoral. Recent studies comparing the generic cyclosporine formulation SangCya with Neoral, including individual bioequivalence, bioequivalence in transplant patients, and long-term safety after switching from Sandimmune to SangCya, confirmed that it was valid to conclude bioequivalence of both cyclosporine formulations based on standard average bioequivalence criteria. Present FDA guidelines for approving bioequivalence can be considered adequate and sufficient for generic cyclosporine formulations.