新的抗惊厥药:互换性问题和通用抗惊厥药在临床实践中的使用

V. Arkhipov, E. Sokova, G. I. Gorodetskaya, O. A. Demidova, T. Aleksandrova
{"title":"新的抗惊厥药:互换性问题和通用抗惊厥药在临床实践中的使用","authors":"V. Arkhipov, E. Sokova, G. I. Gorodetskaya, O. A. Demidova, T. Aleksandrova","doi":"10.30895/1991-2919-2019-9-2-101-107","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"This article looks into interchangeability and therapeutic equivalence of innovator and generic anticonvulsants — the first-generation and new antiepileptic drugs (AEDs). The results of a number of clinical trials assessing therapeutic equivalence of generic AEDs support the opinion that these medicines could only be substituted provided an ultra-cautious approach is used, even if the case involves only one International Nonproprietary Name, including, but not limited to different dosage forms of one and the same product. The aim of the study was to analyse factors leading to incorrect assessment of therapeutic equivalence of new and generic anticonvulsant drugs, and to improve methodological approaches to conducting clinical trials of these products. The paper cites data from Russian and foreign sources which state that the substitution of AEDs in some patients in full remission may result in adverse reactions or relapse of seizures. The analysis of the experience of scientific, expert, and regulatory institutions made it possible to develop a course of actions to be used when substituting AEDs and conducting clinical trials that assess therapeutic equivalence of new and generic anticonvulsants. The proposed methodology will help minimise potential health risks brought about by various factors that result in incorrect assessment of AEDs therapeutic equivalence and interchangeability.","PeriodicalId":22286,"journal":{"name":"The Bulletin of the Scientific Centre for Expert Evaluation of Medicinal Products","volume":"27 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2019-06-05","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"New Anticonvulsants: Interchangeability Issues and the Use of Generic Anticonvulsants in Clinical Practice\",\"authors\":\"V. Arkhipov, E. Sokova, G. I. Gorodetskaya, O. A. Demidova, T. Aleksandrova\",\"doi\":\"10.30895/1991-2919-2019-9-2-101-107\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"This article looks into interchangeability and therapeutic equivalence of innovator and generic anticonvulsants — the first-generation and new antiepileptic drugs (AEDs). The results of a number of clinical trials assessing therapeutic equivalence of generic AEDs support the opinion that these medicines could only be substituted provided an ultra-cautious approach is used, even if the case involves only one International Nonproprietary Name, including, but not limited to different dosage forms of one and the same product. The aim of the study was to analyse factors leading to incorrect assessment of therapeutic equivalence of new and generic anticonvulsant drugs, and to improve methodological approaches to conducting clinical trials of these products. The paper cites data from Russian and foreign sources which state that the substitution of AEDs in some patients in full remission may result in adverse reactions or relapse of seizures. The analysis of the experience of scientific, expert, and regulatory institutions made it possible to develop a course of actions to be used when substituting AEDs and conducting clinical trials that assess therapeutic equivalence of new and generic anticonvulsants. The proposed methodology will help minimise potential health risks brought about by various factors that result in incorrect assessment of AEDs therapeutic equivalence and interchangeability.\",\"PeriodicalId\":22286,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"The Bulletin of the Scientific Centre for Expert Evaluation of Medicinal Products\",\"volume\":\"27 1\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2019-06-05\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"The Bulletin of the Scientific Centre for Expert Evaluation of Medicinal Products\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.30895/1991-2919-2019-9-2-101-107\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"The Bulletin of the Scientific Centre for Expert Evaluation of Medicinal Products","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.30895/1991-2919-2019-9-2-101-107","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

本文探讨了创新抗惊厥药和仿制抗惊厥药的互换性和治疗等效性——第一代抗癫痫药和新型抗癫痫药。许多评估非专利aed治疗等效性的临床试验结果支持这样一种观点,即这些药物只有在使用超谨慎方法的情况下才能被替代,即使病例只涉及一个国际非专利名称,包括但不限于同一产品的不同剂型。本研究的目的是分析导致新药和仿制药治疗等效性评估不正确的因素,并改进这些产品进行临床试验的方法学方法。该论文引用了来自俄罗斯和国外的数据,这些数据表明,在一些完全缓解的患者中,替代aed可能会导致不良反应或癫痫发作复发。通过对科学、专家和监管机构的经验分析,有可能制定出一套行动方案,用于替代aed,并进行临床试验,评估新型和非专利抗惊厥药的治疗等效性。建议的方法将有助于减少各种因素带来的潜在健康风险,这些因素会导致对aed治疗等效性和互换性的错误评估。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
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
New Anticonvulsants: Interchangeability Issues and the Use of Generic Anticonvulsants in Clinical Practice
This article looks into interchangeability and therapeutic equivalence of innovator and generic anticonvulsants — the first-generation and new antiepileptic drugs (AEDs). The results of a number of clinical trials assessing therapeutic equivalence of generic AEDs support the opinion that these medicines could only be substituted provided an ultra-cautious approach is used, even if the case involves only one International Nonproprietary Name, including, but not limited to different dosage forms of one and the same product. The aim of the study was to analyse factors leading to incorrect assessment of therapeutic equivalence of new and generic anticonvulsant drugs, and to improve methodological approaches to conducting clinical trials of these products. The paper cites data from Russian and foreign sources which state that the substitution of AEDs in some patients in full remission may result in adverse reactions or relapse of seizures. The analysis of the experience of scientific, expert, and regulatory institutions made it possible to develop a course of actions to be used when substituting AEDs and conducting clinical trials that assess therapeutic equivalence of new and generic anticonvulsants. The proposed methodology will help minimise potential health risks brought about by various factors that result in incorrect assessment of AEDs therapeutic equivalence and interchangeability.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Analysis of the Medicinal Products for Human Use Authorised in the Russian Federation Diffusion-Ordered NMR Spectroscopy Application for Analysis of Polysaccharides Determination of Heavy Metals, Arsenic, and Aluminum Content in Pumpkin Seed Herbal Substance and Native Products, by Inductively Coupled Plasma Mass Spectrometry The Use of Spectroscopic Methods for Structural Elucidation of Individual Secondary Metabolites Isolated from the Aerial Parts of Corydalis bracteata NMR as Used in the Russian and Foreign Pharmacopoeias for Quality Control of Medicinal Products
×
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