Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
Review
. 2016 May;18(3):612-8.
doi: 10.1208/s12248-016-9877-2. Epub 2016 Mar 4.

BCS Biowaivers: Similarities and Differences Among EMA, FDA, and WHO Requirements

Affiliations
Review

BCS Biowaivers: Similarities and Differences Among EMA, FDA, and WHO Requirements

Barbara M Davit et al. AAPS J. 2016 May.

Abstract

The Biopharmaceutics Classification System (BCS), based on aqueous solubility and intestinal permeability, has enjoyed wide use since 1995 as a mechanism for waiving in vivo bioavailability and bioequivalence studies. In 2000, the US-FDA was the first regulatory agency to publish guidance for industry describing how to meet criteria for requesting a waiver of in vivo bioavailability and bioequivalence studies for highly soluble, highly permeable (BCS Class I) drugs. Subsequently, the World Health Organization (WHO) and European Medicines Agency (EMA) published guidelines recommending how to obtain BCS biowaivers for BCS Class III drugs (high solubility, low permeability), in addition to Class I drugs. In 2015, the US-FDA became better harmonized with the EMA and WHO following publication of two guidances for industry outlining criteria for obtaining BCS biowaivers for both Class I and Class III drugs. A detailed review and comparison of the BCS Class I and Class III criteria currently recommended by the US-FDA, EMA, and WHO revealed good convergence of the three agencies with respect to BCS biowaiver criteria. The comparison also suggested that, by applying the most conservative of the three jurisdictional approaches, it should be possible for a sponsor to design the same set of BCS biowaiver studies in preparing a submission for worldwide filing to satisfy US, European, and emerging market regulators. It is hoped that the availability of BCS Class I and Class III biowaivers in multiple jurisdictions will encourage more sponsors to request waivers of in vivo bioavailability/bioequivalence testing using the BCS approach.

Keywords: bioavailability; bioequivalence; biopharmaceutics classification system; in vitro dissolution; regulatory guidance.

PubMed Disclaimer

Similar articles

Cited by

References

    1. Liberti L, Breckenridge A, Eichler HG, Peterson R, McAuslane N, Walker S. Expediting patients’ access to medicines by improving the predictability of drug development and the regulatory approval process. Clin Pharmacol Ther. 2010;87:27–31. doi: 10.1038/clpt.2009.179. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Handoo S, Arora V, Khera D, Nandi PK, Sahu SK. A comprehensive study on regulatory requirements for development and filing of generic drugs globally. Int J Pharm Investig. 2012;2:99–105. doi: 10.4103/2230-973X.104392. - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. US Food and Drug Administration. Title 21 code of federal regulations part 320 bioavailability and bioequivalence requirements. 2015. http://www.accessdata.fda.gov/scripts/cdrh/cfdocs/cfcfr/cfrsearch.cfm?cf.... Accessed 3 Dec 2015
    1. Amidon GL, Lennernäs H, Shah VP, Crison JR. A theoretical basis for a biopharmaceutic drug classification: the correlation of in vitro drug product dissolution and in vivo bioavailability. Pharm Res. 1995;12:413–20. doi: 10.1023/A:1016212804288. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Chen ML, Amidon GL, Benet LZ, Lennernäs H, The YLX, BCS BDDCS, and regulatory guidances. Pharm Res. 2011;28:1774–8. doi: 10.1007/s11095-011-0438-1. - DOI - PubMed

MeSH terms

Substances