Kinetic Sensitivity Research Articles

Sensitivity of empirical metrics of rate of absorption in bioequivalence studies.

The sensitivity and effectiveness of indirect metrics proposed for the assessment of comparative absorption rates in bioequivalence studies [Cmax, Tmax, partial AUC (AUCp), feathered slope (SLf), intercept metric (I)] were originally tested by assuming first-order absorption. The present study re-evaluates their sensitivity performances using the more realistic inverse Gaussian (IG) model characterizing the input process for oral drug administration. Simulations were performed for both the first-order or exponential model (EX) which is determined by only one parameter, the mean absorption time (MAT = 1/k(a)), and the IG model, which additionally contains a shape parameter, the relative dispersion of absorption time distribution (CV2A). Kinetic sensitivities (KS) of the indirect metrics were evaluated from bioequivalence trials (error free data) generated with various ratios of the true parameters (MAT and CV2A) of the two formulations. The behavior of the metrics was similar with respect to changes in MAT ratios with both models: KS was low with Cmax, moderate with SLf and AUCp, and high with I and Tmax following correction for apparent lag time (Tlag). Changes of the shape parameter CV2A, however, were not detectable by Cmax, Tmax, SLf, and AUCp. Changes in both MAT and CV2A were well reflected by I with CV2A - ratio > 1. I exhibited approximately full KS also with CV2A - ratio < 1 when a correction was first applied for the apparent lag time. The time profile of absorption rates is insufficiently characterized by only one parameter (MAT). Indirect metrics which are sensitive enough to detect changes in the scale and shape of the input profile could be useful for bioequivalence testing. Among the tested measures, I is particularly promising when a correction is applied for Tlag.

Metrics comparing simulated early concentration profiles for the determination of bioequivalence.

To compare the effectiveness of various metrics which evaluate bioequivalence in the early phase of concentration-time profiles. Two-period crossover trials were simulated with increasing assumed ratio of the true absorption rate constants of the two formulations, and with various kinetic models. Kinetic sensitivities (KS) and standard errors (SE) of the various metrics were recorded and the percentage of trials accepting bioequivalence (the statistical power) was evaluated. The principal metrics included the partial AUC(AUCP), the intercept obtained by linear extrapolation of the ratios of the lower over higher concentrations (C) measured for the two formulations (I L/H), and the ratios of intercepts extrapolated from logarithmic C/ time values of the two products (MLOG). For comparison, also properties of CMAX and an ideally evaluated measure (Id) were determined. MLOG showed generally the highest statistical power and KS, and also the largest SE, closely followed by I L/H. Partial AUC exhibited lower power and KS, but also smaller SE than the intercept procedures. The three methods had much higher power, KS and SE than CMAX. These comparisons were maintained over various kinetic conditions and experimental designs. The effective evaluation of bioequivalence in the early phase of studies is assured with 3 (or more) measurements until the population average peak of the reference formulation. The three principal methods assess bioequivalence very effectively in the early phase of a concentration-time profile. MLOG had the highest statistical power, closely followed by I L/H and then by partial AUC.