9.3
Bioavailability Study Design: Absolute Versus Relative Bioavailability
Bioavailability is a crucial pharmacokinetic parameter that quantifies the proportion of an administered drug that reaches the systemic circulation an…
The bioavailability data measured by the area under the drug plasma concentration-versus-time plot is mandatory for regulatory submissions.
These studies provide absolute and relative bioavailability.
Absolute bioavailability measures the proportion of active drug in the systemic circulation after an extravascular administration compared to the intravenous route, which represents 100% bioavailability.
It is the ratio of dose-corrected extravascular drug AUC to the intravenous drug AUC. For oral drugs, Fabs is computed as follows. Here, an Fabs range of 0 to 1 represents a systemic absorption rate of 0 to 100%.
Relative bioavailability assesses the systemic exposure of a drug in a test formulation against a reference formulation. Frel compares the area under the curves of both formulations as seen in the equation.
Such studies ensure new formulations have consistent systemic drug bioavailability compared to approved formulations already in use.
Additionally, they characterize food effects and drug-drug interactions by determining the oral drug’s bioavailability with and without food or the interacting drug.
View the full transcript and gain access to JoVE Core videos
Q1: What is the difference between absolute and relative bioavailability?
Absolute bioavailability (Fabs) measures the proportion of active drug reaching systemic circulation after extravascular administration, such as oral dosing, compared to intravenous administration, which represents 100% bioavailability. Relative bioavailability (Frel) compares systemic drug exposure between a test formulation and a reference formulation. Both are calculated as dose-normalized ratios of their respective area under the curve values.
Q2: How is absolute bioavailability calculated for oral drugs?
Absolute bioavailability for oral drugs is computed as the dose-corrected ratio of extravascular drug area under the curve to intravenous drug area under the curve. The resulting Fabs value ranges from 0 to 1, representing systemic absorption rates from 0% to 100%. This calculation accounts for differences in administered doses between routes to provide an accurate comparison of drug absorption efficiency.
Q3: Why are relative bioavailability studies important for new drug formulations?
Relative bioavailability studies ensure new formulations maintain consistent systemic drug bioavailability compared to approved reference formulations already in clinical use. These studies are essential for assessing generic drugs and alternative delivery systems, confirming therapeutic equivalence between formulations. They help maintain clinical efficacy and safety profiles while supporting regulatory submissions and approval processes.
Q4: What role does the area under the curve play in bioavailability assessment?
The area under the drug plasma concentration-versus-time curve (AUC) is the mandatory measurement for regulatory bioavailability submissions. AUC quantifies total systemic drug exposure and serves as the basis for calculating both absolute and relative bioavailability values. Comparing dose-normalized AUC values between different administration routes or formulations determines the proportion of active drug reaching systemic circulation.
Q5: How do bioavailability studies assess food and drug interactions?
Bioavailability studies characterize food effects and drug-drug interactions by measuring oral drug bioavailability under different conditions: with and without food, or with and without interacting drugs. These evaluations determine how concurrent substances influence systemic drug availability. Results guide dosing recommendations and co-administration practices, optimizing therapeutic outcomes and minimizing adverse effects in clinical settings.
Q6: What does an Fabs value of 0.5 indicate about drug absorption?
An Fabs value of 0.5 indicates that 50% of the administered oral dose reaches systemic circulation compared to intravenous administration. Since Fabs ranges from 0 to 1, representing 0% to 100% systemic absorption, a value of 0.5 reflects moderate bioavailability through the oral route. This suggests that first-pass metabolism, permeability limitations, or other physicochemical factors reduce the proportion of active drug entering systemic circulation.
Q7: Why is intravenous administration considered the reference standard for bioavailability studies?
Intravenous administration is the reference standard because it delivers 100% of the drug directly into systemic circulation, bypassing absorption barriers and first-pass metabolism. This provides a baseline for comparing systemic exposure achieved through other routes. All extravascular bioavailability calculations are normalized against intravenous AUC values, making it the gold standard for assessing drug delivery efficiency through alternative administration routes.