Lainesse, C., Gehring, R., Pasloske, K., Smith, G., Soback, S., Wagner, S., Whittem, T. Challenges associated with the demonstration of bioequivalence of intramammary products in ruminants. J. vet. Pharmacol. Therap . 35 (Suppl. 1), 65–79. This article explores the numerous challenges encountered when the goal is to demonstrate bioequivalence (BE) between test and reference intramammary (IMM) products in ruminants. Numerous pathophysiological factors of mastitis and physicochemical properties of IMM formulations are implicated in the difficulties in confirming BE for this dosage form. Advantages and disadvantages of current BE study designs are discussed, and alternative perspectives are outlined. Ongoing and future research increasing our knowledge of the pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics of antimicrobial drugs delivered through this route is crucial to better understanding the implications of clinically significant formulation differences in the demonstration of BE and may also help in developing more effective IMM formulations for ruminants.

The purpose of this article is to discuss the numerous species-specific and route-specific factors that can influence the peak and extent of exposure of an active pharmaceutical ingredient as they relate to the demonstration of bioequivalence between veterinary drug products (test and reference formulations). Evaluation of potential circumstances when species-to-species or route-to-route extrapolations of bioequivalence data could be considered is provided, together with suggestions for alternative statistical analysis. It is concluded that further research is much needed in this area to establish an appropriate scientific basis for across-species and across-route comparisons.

Bermingham, E., del Castillo, J. R. E., Lainesse, C., Pasloske, K., Radecki, S. Demonstrating bioequivalence using clinical endpoint studies. J. vet. Pharmacol. Therap. 35 (Suppl. 1), 31–37. For drug products not amenable to blood level studies, clinical endpoint studies have been used as an indirect measure of formulation difference in bioavailability between test and reference products. However, clinical endpoint studies are not as sensitive in detecting formulation differences as blood level studies and offer numerous challenges to both regulatory authorities and sponsors. The objective of this article is not to suggest new regulatory policies, but to explore new methodologies and alternative solutions to clinical endpoint bioequivalence (BE) studies, which are used when a blood level study is not considered to be appropriate. To achieve this objective, this article identifies situations where a clinical endpoint study might be appropriate, lists the advantages and disadvantages of this type of study design, and discusses possible alternative solutions. It is concluded that future evidence‐based research is needed to explore new methodologies such as clinical trial simulations of various study designs, new statistical methods, and new in vitro methods to demonstrate BE.

Journal of Veterinary Pharmacology and TherapeuticsVolume 34, Issue 2 p. 105-107 MEETING REPORT The 2010 AAVPT/EAVPT/ECVPT bioequivalence workshop M. MARTINEZ, M. MARTINEZ FDA/CVM, HFV-130, Standish Place, Rockville, MD, USASearch for more papers by this authorR. P. HUNTER, R. P. HUNTER FDA/CVM, HFV-130, Standish Place, Rockville, MD, USASearch for more papers by this authorR. BAYNES, R. BAYNES FDA/CVM, HFV-130, Standish Place, Rockville, MD, USASearch for more papers by this authorE. BERMINGHAM, E. BERMINGHAM FDA/CVM, HFV-130, Standish Place, Rockville, MD, USASearch for more papers by this authorR. CLAXTON, R. CLAXTON FDA/CVM, HFV-130, Standish Place, Rockville, MD, USASearch for more papers by this authorC. COLE, C. COLE FDA/CVM, HFV-130, Standish Place, Rockville, MD, USASearch for more papers by this authorJ. Del CASTILLO, J. Del CASTILLO FDA/CVM, HFV-130, Standish Place, Rockville, MD, USASearch for more papers by this authorR. GEHRING, R. GEHRING FDA/CVM, HFV-130, Standish Place, Rockville, MD, USASearch for more papers by this authorK. HARSHMAN, K. HARSHMAN FDA/CVM, HFV-130, Standish Place, Rockville, MD, USASearch for more papers by this authorC. LAINESSE, C. LAINESSE FDA/CVM, HFV-130, Standish Place, Rockville, MD, USASearch for more papers by this authorA. LUCAS, A. LUCAS FDA/CVM, HFV-130, Standish Place, Rockville, MD, USASearch for more papers by this authorS. MODRIC, S. MODRIC FDA/CVM, HFV-130, Standish Place, Rockville, MD, USASearch for more papers by this authorJ. ROBINSON, J. ROBINSON FDA/CVM, HFV-130, Standish Place, Rockville, MD, USASearch for more papers by this author M. MARTINEZ, M. MARTINEZ FDA/CVM, HFV-130, Standish Place, Rockville, MD, USASearch for more papers by this authorR. P. HUNTER, R. P. HUNTER FDA/CVM, HFV-130, Standish Place, Rockville, MD, USASearch for more papers by this authorR. BAYNES, R. BAYNES FDA/CVM, HFV-130, Standish Place, Rockville, MD, USASearch for more papers by this authorE. BERMINGHAM, E. BERMINGHAM FDA/CVM, HFV-130, Standish Place, Rockville, MD, USASearch for more papers by this authorR. CLAXTON, R. CLAXTON FDA/CVM, HFV-130, Standish Place, Rockville, MD, USASearch for more papers by this authorC. COLE, C. COLE FDA/CVM, HFV-130, Standish Place, Rockville, MD, USASearch for more papers by this authorJ. Del CASTILLO, J. Del CASTILLO FDA/CVM, HFV-130, Standish Place, Rockville, MD, USASearch for more papers by this authorR. GEHRING, R. GEHRING FDA/CVM, HFV-130, Standish Place, Rockville, MD, USASearch for more papers by this authorK. HARSHMAN, K. HARSHMAN FDA/CVM, HFV-130, Standish Place, Rockville, MD, USASearch for more papers by this authorC. LAINESSE, C. LAINESSE FDA/CVM, HFV-130, Standish Place, Rockville, MD, USASearch for more papers by this authorA. LUCAS, A. LUCAS FDA/CVM, HFV-130, Standish Place, Rockville, MD, USASearch for more papers by this authorS. MODRIC, S. MODRIC FDA/CVM, HFV-130, Standish Place, Rockville, MD, USASearch for more papers by this authorJ. ROBINSON, J. ROBINSON FDA/CVM, HFV-130, Standish Place, Rockville, MD, USASearch for more papers by this author First published: 17 February 2011 https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2885.2011.01281.xCitations: 3 Dr Marilyn Martinez, FDA/CVM, HFV-130, 7500 Standish Place, Rockville, MD 20855, USA. E-mail: [email protected] Read the full textAboutPDF ToolsRequest permissionExport citationAdd to favoritesTrack citation ShareShare Give accessShare full text accessShare full-text accessPlease review our Terms and Conditions of Use and check box below to share full-text version of article.I have read and accept the Wiley Online Library Terms and Conditions of UseShareable LinkUse the link below to share a full-text version of this article with your friends and colleagues. Learn more.Copy URL Share a linkShare onFacebookTwitterLinkedInRedditWechat Citing Literature Volume34, Issue2April 2011Pages 105-107 RelatedInformation

The objectives of this in vitro study were to describe cytochrome-dependent metabolism of clomipramine in canine and feline microsomes, compare metabolic profiles between cats, rats and dogs, and investigate a potential gender-related difference in metabolic activity between male and female cats. Pooled liver microsomes were incubated with clomipramine, where species and gender-specific reactions were initiated by the addition of a nicotinamide adenine dinucleotide phosphate regenerating system and quenched with methanol at 0, 5, 15, 30, 45 and 60 min, and 0, 30, 60, 90, 120, 180, 240 and 360 min respectively. Liquid chromatography tandem mass spectrometry was used to measure clomipramine and its metabolites. Preliminary results showed that cat microsomes biotransformed clomipramine slower and less efficiently than rat and dog microsomes. Moreover, gender differences in metabolic profiles suggested that male cat microsomes may be less efficient demethylators and hydroxylators than female cat microsomes. As gender metabolic differences may carry clinical significance for this antidepressant, further studies are warranted.

A one-step method for catheterising the jugular vein of cats for taking multiple blood samples was developed, with the aid of radiography, to determine an appropriate internal catheter length for adult cats. The effects of multiple blood sampling and heparin flushes on the cats' haematocrit and blood total solids were also assessed. Seven healthy adult cats were used. A total of 128 of 132 (97 per cent) blood samples were collected successfully through a 19 G, 30.5 cm catheter introduced as a central venous catheter and maintained in place during two periods of 48 hours. The haematocrit and total solids were significantly decreased in all the cats, but no clinically significant blood loss or coagulation disorders were observed.

This study was conducted to confirm an interindividual variability in pharmacokinetic parameters of clomipramine in a large population of cats and to identify potential covariables that would explain the presence of such pharmacokinetic variability after a single dose of Clomicalm. Clomipramine hydrochloride was administered orally according to a weight-dose chart from 0.32 to 0.61 mg/kg, to 76 cats and five blood samples were then taken by direct venipuncture at 1, 3, 6, 12, and 24 h. Plasma concentrations of clomipramine and desmethylclomipramine (DCMP) were measured by LC-MS/MS. The Standard Two-Stage technique was used to assess differences and detect correlations between pharmacokinetic parameter estimates and individual covariables. A large interindividual variability in all pharmacokinetic parameters (CV% 64-124) was detected. Statistically significant gender-related differences were detected in MR and Cl/F, where female cats had a higher mean MR (0.53) and faster Cl/F (0.36 L/h.kg) than males (0.36 and 0.21 L/h.kg, respectively). No correlation could be found between clomipramine AUC0-24 h or DCMP AUC0-24 h and sedation scores. Further feline studies are required to assess these findings after multiple dosing of clomipramine and DCMP to allow clinical extrapolation.

A cross-over study was performed in six adult spayed cats to determine the pharmacokinetics of clomipramine and its metabolite, desmethylclomipramine (DCMP) after intravenous (0.25 mg/kg) and oral (0.5 mg/kg) single-dose administrations. Plasma clomipramine and DCMP were measured by high-performance liquid chromatography at regular intervals for up to 30 h. Intravenous clomipramine best fit a two-compartmental model yielding an elimination rate constant of 0.037-0.09 h(-1) from which a mean half-life of 12.3 h was calculated. Mean clomipramine AUC(0--infinity) (ngxh/mL), clearance (L/hxkg), V(ss) (L/kg) and MRT (h) values were 652.5, 0.393, 5.0, and 13.5, respectively. Compartmental modeling for clomipramine, after oral administration, and DCMP after both administrations, produced wide parameter estimates and plots of residuals indicated poor goodness of fit. Noncompartmental analysis yielded mean AUC(0--30 h) (ngxh/mL), C(max) (ng/mL) and T(max) (h) of 948.3, 87.5 and 6.2 for clomipramine, and 613.8, 34.8, and 12.8 for DCMP respectively after oral administration. Clomipramine bioavailability was 90%. The present study showed marked pharmacokinetic variability for clomipramine and DCMP through biphasic absorption and potential genetic variability in clomipramine metabolism. It was concluded that population pharmacokinetics would allow better characterization of clomipramine variability that may explain the variability in clinical response noted in cats.