Substitution of Theophylline Slow-Release Formulations According to the Rebate Contracts in the German Statutory Health Insurance

Abstract

On the basis of the rebate contracts between individual statutory health insurance funds and pharmaceutical enterprises, the generic substitution of prescribed medications is economically attractive and is advocated for statutory health insurees in Germany. In addition to the drugs whose substitution can be considered to be uncritical, rebate contracts also include controversial substances such as the bronchodilator theophylline (CAS 58-55-9), which has a narrow therapeutic range and should only be substituted under certain conditions.

The objective of this article was to check the safety of the substitution of theophylline by means of a comparative evaluation of bioequivalence studies carried out on theophylline slow-release preparations.

A systematic literature search was carried out in the MEDLINE database. The search terms used were combinations of the following key words: theophylline, generics, bioequivalence, substitution, brand and non-brand. In addition, a manual search was performed in the reference lists of the relevant articles. Only articles that were published between January 1, 1988 and August 30, 2008 were to be included.

Five studies conformed to the inclusion and exclusion criteria. Two of the studies came to the conclusion that the preparations analysed were bioequivalent. In the remaining three studies there was no bioequivalence found between the preparations and the reference product. Because of the heterogeneity of study outcomes no metanalysis could be performed.

On the basis of the studies analysed the conclusion can be drawn that a theophylline slow-release preparation should only be substituted under close monitoring by a physician because of the many factors which can adversely affect serum levels, such as the narrow therapeutic range of the active ingredient, the patient’s metabolisation rate or the different galenics of the preparations. Nevertheless, the question remains as to whether the costs saved by the rebate contracts would not be significantly outweighed.

Key words

Bioequivalence - CAS 58-55-9 - Generic substitution - Rebate contracts - Theophylline

• References

• 1 http://www.buzer.de/gesetz/7655/index.htm . Accessed September 21 2008
• 2 http://www.dphg.de/lib/dphg_leitlinie01_gsp_02-1.pdf Accessed June 6 2008
• 3 http://www.aok-gesundheitspartner.de/rla/arzneimittel/rabatt/index_13350.html?bl=rln . Accessed September 21 2008
• 4 http://www.aok-gesundheitspartner.de/wl/arzneimittel/rabatt/index_13350.html?bl=wl . Accessed September 21 2008.
• 5 Herrmann G, Aynesworth MB, Martin J. Successful treatment of persistent dyspnea in “status asthmaticus”. J Lab Clin Med. 1937; 23: 135-48
• 6 Ellis EF, Koysooko R, Levy G. Pharmacokinetics of theophylline in children with asthma. Pediatrics. 1976; 58 (4) 542-7
• 7 Weinberger M, Hendeles L. Theophylline in asthma. N Engl J Med. 1996; 334 (21) 1380-8
• 8 Glynn-Barnhart A, Hill M, Szefler SJ. Sustained release theophylline preparations. Practical recommendations for prescribing and therapeutic drug monitoring. Drugs. 1988; 35 (6) 711-26
• 9 Baker JR, Moessner H, Gonzalez U, Grabenstein J, Renard R, DeNapoli T et al. Clinical relevance of the substitution of different brands of sustained-release theophylline. J Allergy Clin Immunol. 1988; 81 (4) 664-73
• 10 The European Agency for the Evaluation of Medicinal Products. CPMP/EWP/QWP/1401/98 (26 July 2001). Note for guidance on the investigation of bioavailibility and bio-equivalence.
• 11 http://www.naturalstandards.com/explanation_columns.html Accessed September 6 2008
• 12 Hendeles L, Breton AL, Beaty R, Harman E. Therapeutic equivalence of a generic slow-release theophylline tablet. Pharmacotherapy. 1995; 15 (1) 26-35
• 13 Contreras J, Pérez N, González R, Ontivero E, López M. Single dose study of the bioequivalence of two sustained-release theophylline formulations. Arzneimittelforschung. 1998; 48: 259-62
• 14 Kanthawatana S, Tontayapiwat A, Tonsuwannot W, Manorot M. A Single-dose comparsion of three slow-release theophylline oral preparations in healthy Thai volunteers. Asian Pac J Allergy Immunol. 1996; 14 (1) 13-8
• 15 Vergin H, Mahr G, Winterhalter B, Wigand R. Relative bioavailibility and bioequivalence study of theophylline sustained release formulations. Arzneimittelforschung. 2003; 53: 635-9
• 16 http://www.aok-gesundheitspartner.de/wl/arzneimittel/rabatt/index_13350.html?bl=wl&hersteller=&wirkstoff=Theophyllin&pzn=&arzneimittel=&submit=Suchen . Accessed October 8, 2008
• 17 Laegemiddel Danish Medicines Agency (2006). Bioequivalence and labelling of medicinal products with regard to generic substitution. www.dkma.dk . Accessed October 08 2008
• 18 Karim A, Burns T, Wearley L, Streicher J, Palmer M. Food-induced changes in theophylline absorption from controlled-release formulations. Part I. Substantial increased and decreased absorption with Uniphyl tablets and Theo-Dur Sprinkle. Clin Pharmacol and Ther. 1985; 38 (1) 77-83
• 19 Schwabe U, Paffrath D. Arzneiverordnungsreport 2008. 1st ed Heidelberg: Springer Verlag;; 2008. p 461-467