Could inhalational drugs be interchangeable?
https://doi.org/10.18093/0869-0189-2017-27-4-529-536
Abstract
Clinical efficacy of an inhalational drugs depends on proper inhalation technique and aerodynamic properties of aerosol including the respirable fraction. Investigations of systemic pharmacokinetics of inhalational drugs could not always estimate their pharmacological equivalence so as relationships between the inhaled dose, the systemic concentration and the topic activity of an inhalational drug are not fully investigated. Therefore, identical formulation and similar route of administration are not sufficient to estimate pharmacological interchangeability. Possibility to interchange inhalational agents has still been controversial. As such, equal efficacy and safety of inhalational drugs with the same active substance could be estimated in real clinical practice according to results of postmarketing trials and pharmacological surveillance. Spontaneous messages are a tool for gathering information about unwanted reactions or drug inefficacy and possible risks of substitution of drugs within the same international nonproprietary name.
In summary, it is necessary to estimate pharmacological equivalence and interchangeability of inhalational drugs carefully. This approach could improve efficacy and safety of treatment of patients with asthma and COPD.
About the Authors
S. K. Zyryanov
The Peoples' Friendship University of Russia;
City Clinical Hospital No.24, Moscow Healthcare Department
Russian Federation
Russian Federation
Doctor of Medicine, Professor, Head of Department of General and Clinical Pharmacology, ul. Miklukho-Maklaya 6, Moscow, 117198;
Deputy Director for Therapy, ul. Pistsovaya 10, Moscow, 127015
K. E. Zatolochina
The Peoples' Friendship University of Russia;
Federal Scientific Center of Expertise of Medical Agents, Healthcare Ministry of Russia
Russian Federation
Russian Federation
Candidate of Medicine, Assistant Lecturer, Department of General and Clinical Pharmacology, ul. Miklukho-Maklaya 6, Moscow, 117198;
Head of Scientific and Analytical Division, Center of Expertise and Safety of Drugs, Petrovskiy bul'var 8/2, Moscow, 127051
V. V. Cheltsov
The Peoples' Friendship University of Russia
Russian Federation
Russian Federation
Doctor of Medicine, Professor, Department of General and Clinical Pharmacology,
ul.Miklukho-Maklaya 6, Moscow, 117198
References
1. Zyryanov S.K. and Aisanov Z.R. Generic inhalational medications: how to assess their properties? Pul'monologiya. 2012; (3): 115–118. DOI: 10.18093/0869-0189-2012-0-3-115-118 (in Russian).
2. Daley-Yates P.T., Parkins D.A. Establishing bioequivalence for inhaled drug; weighing the evidence. Expert Opin. Drug Deliv. 2011; 8 (10): 1297–1308. DOI: 10.1517/17425247.2011.592827.
3. European Medicines Agency. Committee for Medicinal Products for Human Use (CHMP). 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) in adults and for use in the treatment of asthma in children and adolescents. Doc. Ref. CPMP/EWP/4151/00 Rev. 1. 2009. London, 22 January, 2009. Available at: http://www.ema.europa.eu/docs/en_GB/document_library/Scientific_guideline/2009/09/WC500003504.pdf
4. Price D., Haughney J., Sims E. et al. Effectiveness of inhaler types for real-world asthma management: retrospective observational study using the GPRD. J. Asthma Allergy. 2011; 4: 37–47. DOI: 10.2147/JAA.S17709.
5. Newman S.P. Principles of metered-dose inhaler design. Respir. Care. 2005; 50 (9): 1177–1190.
6. Hochrainer D., Hölz H., Kreher C. et al. Comparison of the aerosol velocity and spray duration of Respimat Soft Mist inhaler and pressurized metered dose inhalers. J. Aerosol Med. 2005; 18 (3): 273–282. DOI: 10.1089/jam.2005.18.273.
7. Ninbovorl J., Sawatdee S., Srichana T. Factor affecting the stability and performance of ipratropium bromide; fenoterol hydrobromide pressurized-metered dose inhalers. AAPS PharmSci-Tech. 2013; 14 (4): 1294–1302. DOI: 10.1208/s12249-013-0024-4.
8. Skachilova S.Ya., Chuchalin A.G., Shilova E.V. et al. Factors affecting the respirable fraction of inhalational anti-asthmatic agents. Razrabotka i registratsiya lekarstvennykh sredstv. 2013; (2): 41–45 (in Russian).
9. Berger W. Aerosol devices and asthma therapy. Curr Drug Deliv. 2009; 6 (1): 38–49.
10. Lenney J., Innes J.A., Crompton G.K. Inappropriate inhaler use: assessment of use and patient preference of seven inhalation devices. EDICI. Respir. Med. 2000; 94 (5): 496–500.
11. Giraud V., Roche N. Misuse of corticosteroid meter-dose inhaler is associated with decrease asthma stability. Eur. Respir. J. 2002; 19 (2): 246–251.
12. Nimmo C.J., Chen D.N., Martinusen S.M. et al. Assessment of patient acceptance and inhalation technique of a pressurized aerosol inhaler and two breath-actuated devices. Ann. Pharmacother.1993; 27 (7–8): 922–927. DOI: 10.1177/106002809302700721.
13. Usmani O.S., Biddiscombe M.F., Barnes P.J. Regional lung deposition and bronchodilator response as a function of beta2-agonist particle size. Am. J. Respir. Crit. Care Med. 2005, 172 (12): 1497–1504. DOI: 10.1164/rccm.200410-1414OC.
14. Stepanyan I.E. Spiriva Respimat as a novel medication. Russkiy meditsinskiy zhurnal. 2012; 20 (6): 324–328 (in Russian).
15. Laube B.L., Janssens H.M., de Jongh F.H et al. What the pulmonary specialist should know about the new inhalation therapies. Eur. Respir. J. 2011; 37 (6): 1308–1331. DOI: 10.1183/09031936.00166410.
16. Arkhipov V.V., Arkhipova D.E., Lazareva N.B. New devices for inhalational therapy of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease. Pul'monologiya. 2016; 26 (3): 352–356. DOI: 10.18093/0869-0189-2016-26-3-352-356 (in Russian).
17. Patton J.S., Byron P.R. Inhaling medicines: delivering drugs to the body through the lungs. Nat. Rev. Drug Discov. 2007; 6 (1): 67–74. DOI: 10.1038/nrd2153.
18. Lawrence M., Wolfe J., Webb D.R. et al. Efficacy of inhaled fluticasone propionate in asthma results from topical and not from systemic activity. Am. J. Respir. Crit. Care Med. 1997; 156: 744–751.
19. Clearie K.I., Williamson P.A., Vaidyanathan S. et al. Systemic bioavailability of hydrofluoroalkane formulation of fluticasone/salmeterol in healthy volunteers via pMDI alone and spacer. Br. J. Clin. Pharmacol. 2010; 69 (6): 637–644. DOI: 10.1111/j.1365-2125.2010.03655.x.
20. Pasternak E.Yu., Zatolochina K.E., Alyautdin R.N. et al. Spontaneous message method as a tool for control of interchangeable commonly used medications. Vrach. 2016; 9: 2–5 (in Russian).
21. Global Initiative for Chronic Obstructive Lung Disease. Global Strategy for the Diagnosis, Management, and Prevention of Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease. Revised 2017. Available at: www.goldcopd.com
22. Tashkin D.P., Celli B., Senn S. et al. A 4-year trial of tiotropium in chronic obstructive pulmonary disease. N. Engl. J. Med. 2008; 359 (15): 1543–1554. DOI: 10.1056/NEJMoa0805800.
23. Bateman E.D., Tashkin D., Siafakas N. et al. A one-year trial of tiotropium Respimat plus usual therapy in COPD patients. Respir. Med. 2010; 104 (10): 1460–1472. DOI: 10.1016/j.rmed.2010.06.004.
Review
For citations:
Zyryanov S.K., Zatolochina K.E., Cheltsov V.V. Could inhalational drugs be interchangeable? PULMONOLOGIYA. 2017;27(4):529-536. (In Russ.) https://doi.org/10.18093/0869-0189-2017-27-4-529-536
Views:
662
Email this article 