The DOI matches its Crossref record.
A Provisional Biopharmaceutical Classification of the Top 200 Oral Drug Products in the United States, Great Britain, Spain, and Japan
Abstract
Orally administered, immediate-release (IR) drug products in the top 200 drug product lists from the United States (US), Great Britain (GB), Spain (ES), and Japan (JP) were provisionally classified based on the Biopharmaceutics Classification System (BCS). The provisional classification is based on the aqueous solubility of the drugs reported in readily available reference literature and a correlation of human intestinal membrane permeability for a set of 29 reference drugs with their calculated partition coefficients. Oral IR drug products constituted more that 50% of the top 200 drug products on all four lists, and ranged from 102 to 113 in number. Drugs with dose numbers less than or equal to unity are defined as high-solubility drugs. More than 50% of the oral IR drug products on each list were determined to be high-solubility drugs (55-59%). The provisional classification of permeability is based on correlations of the human intestinal permeabilities of 29 reference drugs with the calculated Log P or CLogP lipophilicity values for the uncharged chemical form. The Log P and CLogP estimates were linearly correlated (r2 = 0.79) for 187 drugs. Metoprolol was chosen as the reference compound for permeability and Log P or CLogP. A total of 62-69.0% and 56-60% of the drugs on the four lists exhibited CLogP and Log P estimates, respectively, greater than or equal to the corresponding metoprolol value and are provisionally classified as high-permeability drugs. We have compared the BCS classification in this study with the recently proposed BDDCS classification based on fraction dose metabolism. Although the two approaches are based on different in vivo processes, fraction dose metabolized and fraction dose absorbed are highly correlated and, while depending on the choice of reference drug for permeability classification, e.g., metoprolol vs cimetidine or atenolol, show excellent agreement in drug classification. In summary, more than 55% of the drug products were classified as high-solubility (Class 1 and Class 3) drugs in the four lists, suggesting that in vivo bioequivalence (BE) may be assured with a less expensive and more easily implemented in vitro dissolution test.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cited by
The Essential Medicinal Chemistry of Curcumin
Nelson, K. M., Dahlin, J. L., Bisson, J., Graham, J., Pauli, G. F., & Walters, M. A. (2017) · Journal of Medicinal Chemistry · doi:10.1021/acs.jmedchem.6b00975 · Cited by 1,956
The BCS, BDDCS, and Regulatory Guidances
Chen, M.-L., Amidon, G. L., Benet, L. Z., Lennernas, H., & Yu, L. X. (2011) · Pharmaceutical Research · doi:10.1007/s11095-011-0438-1 · Cited by 93
Self-citationAmidon, K. S., Langguth, P., Lennernäs, H., Yu, L., & Amidon, G. L. (2011) · Clinical Pharmacology & Therapeutics · doi:10.1038/clpt.2011.109 · Cited by 44
Self-citationCook, J. (2015) · Dissolution Technologies · doi:10.14227/dt220215p6 · Cited by 8
Kanfer, I. (2015) · Dissolution Technologies · doi:10.14227/dt220215p58 · Cited by 3
Metadata
- Authors
- Takagi, T., Ramachandran, C., Bermejo, M., Yamashita, S., Yu, L. X., & Amidon, G. L.
- Venue
- Molecular Pharmaceutics
- Publisher
- American Chemical Society (ACS)
- Published
- 2006-10-03
- Volume
- 3
- Issue
- 6
- Pages
- 631-643
- ISSN
- 1543-8384 (ISSN-L)
- 1543-8392
- OpenAlex
- W2112722416
- Cited by
- 606
- References
- 0
- FWCI
- 9.49
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.