Discussion of EMA Draft Guideline on Quality and Equivalence of Topical Products Based on Comparison of Approved Mometasone Furoate Drugs

Abstract

Abstract Introduction Today, the approval for a generic topical product includes the presentation of therapeutic equivalence to the originator based on clinical trials. To facilitate this procedure, in 2018 the European Medicines Agency (EMA) published a draft guideline on quality and equivalence of topical products, which includes request parameters regarding the quality of the newly developed generic product and test protocols for the implementation of equivalence tests regarding efficacy. Methods To date, no data are available on the quality and evidence of the proposed test conditions. In this study, we performed an in vitro penetration test (IVPT) following the terms of the EMA draft guideline on two authorized topical products for which therapeutic equivalence was already proven during the approval process. Results The complex biometric data processing revealed that in vitro equivalence could not be observed for all skin sections for either originator or generic product. Moreover, the necessity of the negative control proposed in the draft guideline is more than questionable. From the results presented, there were indications that a reduced number of skin donors would be sufficient to achieve statistically significant equivalence in the comparison of all applied formulations. Here, n = 7 donors was proposed instead of n $$\ge$$ ≥ 12 as the EMA draft guideline demands, decreasing the degree of biodiversity simultaneously. Moreover, a higher number of independent replicates (n > 2) was proposed for proper statistics. Conclusion This bioequivalence study shows insufficient parameters, which should be discussed together with the EMA draft guideline.

Keywords

• Topical bioequivalence
• In vitro penetration test (IVPT)
• EMA draft guideline on quality and equivalence of topical products
• Mometasone furoate