Challenges for switching central nervous system and psychiatric medication products: A review of the literature.

IF 4.5 3区 医学 Q1 CLINICAL NEUROLOGY Journal of Psychopharmacology Pub Date : 2025-02-01 Epub Date: 2025-01-31 DOI:10.1177/02698811241301219
Ric M Procyshyn, Martin A Katzman, Howard C Margolese, Ofer Agid, Pierre M Blier
{"title":"Challenges for switching central nervous system and psychiatric medication products: A review of the literature.","authors":"Ric M Procyshyn, Martin A Katzman, Howard C Margolese, Ofer Agid, Pierre M Blier","doi":"10.1177/02698811241301219","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Switching between versions of medication products happens commonly despite challenges in achieving bioequivalence and therapeutic equivalence. Central nervous system and psychiatric drugs, especially those that are technically demanding to manufacture and have complex pharmacokinetic properties, such as long-acting injectables (LAIs), pose particular challenges to bioequivalence and safe and efficacious drug switching.</p><p><strong>Aims: </strong>To assess whether drugs deemed \"bioequivalent\" are truly interchangeable in drug switching.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We assessed the published literature from January 2017 through June 2023 on PubMed using the MeSH terms \"drugs, generic\" OR \"equivalency, generic\" combined with terms for different psychiatric drug classes.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>While most of the published studies returned in the search found that switching drug products was safe and clinically comparable, data on most drug classes other than those primarily indicated in the treatment of seizure disorder were sparse. Some studies also provided evidence that real-world outcomes such as adherence and hospitalizations may also be affected by switching. In addition, a review of bioequivalence testing guidance showed inconsistency across agencies and a lack of product-specific guidance from Health Canada, which raises questions about potential claims of bioequivalence for more complex products such as LAIs.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Overall, given the difficulty in treating mental health disorders, prescribers should be cautious when switching products and formulations in a patient who has been stabilized on a drug.</p>","PeriodicalId":16892,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Psychopharmacology","volume":" ","pages":"81-91"},"PeriodicalIF":4.5000,"publicationDate":"2025-02-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11831866/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Psychopharmacology","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/02698811241301219","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2025/1/31 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"CLINICAL NEUROLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: Switching between versions of medication products happens commonly despite challenges in achieving bioequivalence and therapeutic equivalence. Central nervous system and psychiatric drugs, especially those that are technically demanding to manufacture and have complex pharmacokinetic properties, such as long-acting injectables (LAIs), pose particular challenges to bioequivalence and safe and efficacious drug switching.

Aims: To assess whether drugs deemed "bioequivalent" are truly interchangeable in drug switching.

Methods: We assessed the published literature from January 2017 through June 2023 on PubMed using the MeSH terms "drugs, generic" OR "equivalency, generic" combined with terms for different psychiatric drug classes.

Results: While most of the published studies returned in the search found that switching drug products was safe and clinically comparable, data on most drug classes other than those primarily indicated in the treatment of seizure disorder were sparse. Some studies also provided evidence that real-world outcomes such as adherence and hospitalizations may also be affected by switching. In addition, a review of bioequivalence testing guidance showed inconsistency across agencies and a lack of product-specific guidance from Health Canada, which raises questions about potential claims of bioequivalence for more complex products such as LAIs.

Conclusions: Overall, given the difficulty in treating mental health disorders, prescribers should be cautious when switching products and formulations in a patient who has been stabilized on a drug.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Journal of Psychopharmacology
Journal of Psychopharmacology 医学-精神病学
CiteScore
8.60
自引率
4.90%
发文量
126
审稿时长
3-8 weeks
期刊介绍: The Journal of Psychopharmacology is a fully peer-reviewed, international journal that publishes original research and review articles on preclinical and clinical aspects of psychopharmacology. The journal provides an essential forum for researchers and practicing clinicians on the effects of drugs on animal and human behavior, and the mechanisms underlying these effects. The Journal of Psychopharmacology is truly international in scope and readership.
期刊最新文献
A three-stage strategy for conducting an experimental investigation: A recommendation to improve the reproducibility of reported conclusions. Lifetime classic psychedelic use and headaches: A cross-sectional study. Effects of positive mGlu5 modulation on D2 signaling and nicotine-conditioned place preference: Mechanisms of epigenetic inheritance in a transgenerational model of drug abuse vulnerability in psychosis. Nighttime safety of daridorexant: Evaluation of responsiveness to an external noise stimulus, postural stability, walking, and cognitive function. Habitual caffeine intake, genetics and cognitive performance.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1