Article

Generic and Brand-Name L-Thyroxine Are Not Bioequivalent for Children With Severe Congenital Hypothyroidism

Harvard University, Cambridge, Massachusetts, United States
The Journal of Clinical Endocrinology and Metabolism (Impact Factor: 6.31). 12/2012; 98(2). DOI: 10.1210/jc.2012-3125
Source: PubMed

ABSTRACT Context:In the United States, generic substitution of levothyroxine (l-T(4)) by pharmacists is permitted if the formulations are deemed to be bioequivalent by the Federal Drug Administration, but there is widespread concern that the pharmacokinetic standard used is too insensitive.Objective:We aimed to evaluate the bioequivalence of a brand-name l-T(4) (Synthroid) and an AB-rated generic formulation (Sandoz, Princeton, NJ) in children with severe hypothyroidism.Design:This was a prospective randomized crossover study in which patients received 8 weeks of one l-T(4) formulation followed by 8 weeks of the other.Setting:The setting was an academic medical center.Patients:Of 31 children with an initial serum TSH concentration >100 mU/L, 20 had congenital hypothyroidism (CH), and 11 had autoimmune thyroiditis.Main Outcome Measures:The primary endpoint was the serum TSH concentration. Secondary endpoints were the free T(4) and total T(3) concentrations.Results:The serum TSH concentration was significantly lower after 8 weeks of Synthroid than after generic drug (P = .002), but thyroid hormone levels did not differ significantly. Subgroup analysis revealed that the difference in TSH was restricted to patients with CH (P = .0005). Patients with CH required a higher l-T(4) dose (P < .0004) and were younger (P = .003) but were not resistant to thyroid hormone; 15 of 16 CH patients had severe thyroid dysgenesis or agenesis on imaging. The response to generic vs brand-name preparation remained significant when adjusted for age.Conclusions:Synthroid and an AB-rated generic l-T(4) are not bioequivalent for patients with severe hypothyroidism due to CH, probably because of diminished thyroid reserve. It would therefore seem prudent not to substitute l-T(4) formulations in patients with severe CH, particularly in those <3 yr of age. Our results may have important implications for other severely hypothyroid patients in whom precise titration of l-T(4) is necessary.

0 Followers
 · 
95 Views
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Background A number of recent advances in our understanding of thyroid physiology may shed light on why some patients feel unwell while taking levothyroxine monotherapy. The purpose of this committee was to review the goals of levothyroxine therapy, the optimal prescription of conventional levothyroxine therapy, the sources of dissatisfaction with levothyroxine therapy, the evidence on treatment alternatives, and the relevant knowledge gaps. We wished to determine whether there are sufficient new data generated by well-designed studies to provide reason to pursue such therapies and change the current standard of care. Methods Committee members identified 24 questions relevant to the treatment of hypothyroidism. The clinical literature relating to each question was then reviewed. Clinical reviews were supplemented, when relevant, with related mechanistic and bench research literature reviews, performed by our team of translational scientists. Ethics reviews were provided, when relevant, by a bioethicist. The responses to questions were formatted, when possible, in the form of a formal clinical recommendation statement. When responses were not suitable for a formal clinical recommendation, a summary response statement without a formal clinical recommendation was developed. For clinical recommendations, the supporting evidence was appraised, and the strength of the clinical recommendations was assessed, using the American College of Physicians (ACP) system. Results We reviewed the following therapeutic categories: i) levothyroxine therapy, ii) non-levothyroxine based thyroid hormone therapies, and iii) use of thyroid hormone analogs. The second category included thyroid extracts, synthetic combination therapy, triiodothyronine therapy, and compounded thyroid hormones. Conclusions We concluded that levothyroxine should remain the standard of care for treating hypothyroidism. We found no consistently strong evidence for the superiority of alternative preparations (eg. levothyroxine-liothyronine combination therapy, or thyroid extract therapy, or others) over monotherapy with levothyroxine, in improving health outcomes. Some examples of future research needs include: development of superior biomarkers of euthyroidism to supplement TSH measurements, mechanistic research on serum triiodothyronine levels (including effects of age and disease status, relationship with tissue concentrations, as well as potential therapeutic targeting), and long-term outcome clinical trials testing combination therapy or thyroid extracts (including sub-group effects) Additional research is also needed to develop thyroid hormone analogs with a favorable benefit to risk profile.
    Thyroid: official journal of the American Thyroid Association 09/2014; DOI:10.1089/thy.2014.0028 · 3.84 Impact Factor
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Objective: The aim was to formulate practice guidelines for the diagnosis and management of congenital hypothyroidism (CH). Evidence: A systematic literature search was conducted to identify key articles relating to the screening, diagnosis, and management of CH. The evidence-based guidelines were developed with the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) system, describing both the strength of recommendations and the quality of evidence. In the absence of sufficient evidence, conclusions were based on expert opinion. Consensus Process: Thirty-two participants drawn from the European Society for Paediatric Endocrinology and five other major scientific societies in the field of pediatric endocrinology were allocated to working groups with assigned topics and specific questions. Each group searched the literature, evaluated the evidence, and developed a draft document. These papers were debated and finalized by each group before presentation to the full assembly for further discussion and agreement. Recommendations: The recommendations include: worldwide neonatal screening, approaches to assess the cause (including genotyping) and the severity of the disorder, the immediate initiation of appropriate L-T4 supplementation and frequent monitoring to ensure dose adjustments to keep thyroid hormone levels in the target ranges, a trial of treatment in patients suspected of transient CH, regular assessments of developmental and neurosensory functions, consulting health professionals as appropriate, and education about CH. The harmonization of diagnosis, management, and routine health surveillance would not only optimize patient outcomes, but should also facilitate epidemiological studies of the disorder. Individuals with CH require monitoring throughout their lives, particularly during early childhood and pregnancy. © 2014 S. Karger AG, Basel and The Endocrine Society.
    Hormone Research in Paediatrics 02/2014; 81(2):80-103. DOI:10.1159/000358198 · 1.71 Impact Factor
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Widespread use of generic drugs is considered to be indispensable if reductions in total health care costs are to be achieved, but the market share of such drugs remains low. In general, generic drugs have the same active ingredients as brand-name drugs, but this is not always the case. Thus, toxicity profiles may vary when brand-name and generic drugs are compared. We retrospectively investigated the incidence of hyponatremia in patients receiving brand-name cisplatin (CDDP) and a generic counterpart thereof. We reviewed the medical records of patients treated with brand-name CDDP (n=53) and a generic formulation (n=26), and compared the incidences of hyponatremia and renal toxicity. Toxicities were graded using the Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events, version 4.0. Differences between groups were evaluated using the Student's t-test, and the odds ratio for hyponatremia was estimated via logistic regression analysis. Serum creatinine levels after chemotherapy increased significantly in both the brand-name and generic CDDP groups; no significant difference was evident between the two groups. Hyponatremia of grade 3 or above developed in 30.7% of the generic CDDP group compared to 15.1% of the brand-name CDDP group (P=0.011). Multivariate analysis showed that the use of generic CDDP increased the incidence of hyponatremia (odds ratio =5.661, 95% confidence interval =1.403-22.839; P=0.015). Oncologists should be aware that use of a generic CDDP might be associated with more hyponatremia than would use of brand-name CDDP.
    Drug Design, Development and Therapy 01/2014; 8:2401-8. DOI:10.2147/DDDT.S71419 · 3.03 Impact Factor