Search

Background/Objectives: For locally applied, locally acting generic drug products, comparison to an originator product based on systemic exposure is usually not feasible due to low plasma concentrations and inadequate reflection of local exposure at the site of action. Where a validated PD model exists, a comparative clinical study can be performed in healthy subjects; where no surrogate endpoint is available, patients with the relevant indication need to be enrolled, with all the associated factors which could result in lack of sensitivity. Even though the need for alternative in vitro approaches has been acknowledged by both industry and regulatory bodies, the complexity of in vivo drug delivery processes makes the development of guidance documents particularly difficult. Our objective was to present in vitro approaches less classically used and to address in vivo relevance of the selected tests. Methods: This article analyses current regulatory approaches in Europe and the U.S., and highlights the key advantages of in vitro tests in terms of their sensitivity, reliability, reproducibility and in vivo relevance using locally applied flurbiprofen in various formulations. Results: The in vitro esophageal retention (IVOR) model demonstrates that the first 6–10 min after application of different flurbiprofen formulations is important for their comparison and also offers the best correlation with in vivo data using the partial area under the concentration-time curves (pAUCs). Rheological evaluations further demonstrated that the mucoadhesive properties of the gel spray formulation are based on interaction with mucin. Conclusions: Designing a relevant in vitro test requires adequate evaluation of the complexity of the drug substance, drug product, dosing conditions and delivery processes. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]