Bioavailability and bioinequivalence of drug formulations in small animals*

Publisher Website
Google Scholar
Abstract
Differences in bioavailability of many drugs from their various dosage forms have been shown to be relatively common in human medicine. Although comparable bioavailability (‘bioequivalence’) is thought to ensure comparable clinical effectiveness and safety (‘therapeutic equivalence’), the relationship between bioinequivalence and therapeutic inequivalence is less clear. Thus the prevalence of clinically important differences in bioavailability is unknown. While similar concerns have arisen about drug products used in small animal practice, there have been few investigations and some earlier reports are incomplete. However, there are indications of bioinequivalence with enteral formulations of ampicillin, aspirin, chloramphenicol, digoxin, rnitotane, oxytet‐racycline, penicillin V and theophylline. Other studies have suggested bioequivalence with enteral formulations of chloramphenicol, digoxin, phenytoin, oxytetracycline and thyroxine. Limited data for injectable preparations showed bioinequivalence with chloramphenicol and possibly oxytetracycline. There is no reason to expect formulation‐related bioinequivalence to be less prevalent in veterinary than in human medicine. Indeed, it may be more common in veterinary practice because other potential influences on bioavailability (food, diseases, other drugs, etc.) are frequently ignored, and cheaper generic products are often favoured for economic reasons.

This publication has 18 references indexed in Scilit: