The concept of therapeutic equivalence (TE) in drugs with multiple indications is complex. A generic drug may be therapeutically equivalent to a brand-name product for one specific indication, but this doesn't necessarily mean it's equivalent for all other indications. Evidence of TE in one patient group and bioequivalence shown in healthy volunteers can support—but not confirm—TE for other indications. However, definitive proof requires individual clinical studies for each indication due to the variable characteristics of drugs and their impact on different patient populations. For instance, a drug may dissolve quickly and be fully absorbed in patients with a normal GI tract pH, rendering particle size and formulation changes irrelevant to bioavailability. However, the same drug may have different bioavailability in cancer patients due to slower dissolution in the GI tract, which has a higher pH. So, when a drug treats multiple conditions, we can only assume it’s bioequivalent across all of them if supported by rigorous clinical studies.
The validity of extrapolating therapeutic equivalence, or TE, from one drug indication to another must be verified.
A generic drug may be therapeutically equivalent to a branded product for one indication, but it may not apply to other indications.
Demonstrating TE in one patient population and bioequivalence in healthy volunteers provides strong evidence of it in other indications.
However, only clinical studies for each indication can provide conclusive answers, as different drug characteristics generate varied outcomes in different patient groups.
For instance, a drug might undergo rapid dissolution and absorb fully in one patient group with a normal GI tract pH.
So, particle size and formulation changes may not affect this group’s bioavailability.
However, the same drug may show altered bioavailability in cancer patients. This difference is caused by the higher pH of their GI tract, which slows drug dissolution.
繁體中文
