This Article  • Full text  • PDF  • Send to a friend  • Save in My Folder  • Save to citation manager  • Permissions  Citing Articles  • Citing articles on HighWire  • Contact me when this article is cited  Related Content  • Similar articles in JAMA  Social Bookmarking   What's this?

JAMA. 1999;282:1995.

	Since this article does not have an abstract, we have provided the first 150 words of the full text and any section headings.

Questions have been raised recently about the ethics, safety, and effectiveness of generic substitutes for brand-name products. To address this issue, the FDA has examined all 127 in vivo bioequivalence studies in the 273 generic drug applications approved in 1997. The examinations focused on data that are used to evaluate the therapeutic equivalence of a generic and innovator drug.

Three measures were reviewed: the area under the plasma drug concentration–time curve from time 0 to time t (AUC [0-t]), the AUC from time 0 to infinity (AUC [0-Inf]), and the highest drug concentration (Cmax). The observed mean difference between the innovator's product and the generic product for AUC (0-t) was ± 3.47% (SD, 2.84), for AUC (0-Inf) it was ±3.25% (SD, 2.97), and for Cmax it was ± 4.29% (SD, 3.72).

These findings confirm the results of a similar FDA review of 224 in vivo studies in applications for generic . . . [Full Text of this Article]

CiteULike    Connotea    Del.icio.us    Digg    Reddit    Technorati    Twitter     What's this?

THIS ARTICLE HAS BEEN CITED BY OTHER ARTICLES

Comparing Generic and Innovator Drugs: A Review of 12 Years of Bioequivalence Data from the United States Food and Drug Administration
Davit et al.
The Annals of Pharmacotherapy 2009;43:1583-1597.
ABSTRACT | FULL TEXT