Bj. Dong et al., BIOEQUIVALENCE OF GENERIC AND BRAND-NAME LEVOTHYROXINE PRODUCTS IN THE TREATMENT OF HYPOTHYROIDISM, JAMA, the journal of the American Medical Association, 277(15), 1997, pp. 1205-1213
Objective.-To compare relative bioavailability of Synthroid, Levoxine
(Levoxine has been renamed Levoxyl), and 2 generic levothyroxine sodiu
m preparations. Design.-Single-blind (primary investigators blinded),
randomized, 4-way crossover trial. Setting.-Ambulatory care. Patients.
-Twenty-two women with hypothyroidism who were clinically and chemical
ly euthyroid and were receiving levothyroxine sodium, 0.1 or 0.15 mg.
Interventions.-All patients received each of the 4 levothyroxine produ
cts for 6-week periods in the same dosage as their prestudy regimen wi
th no washout period. The order of the drug sequences was randomly det
ermined before study initiation. Main Outcome Measures.-Area under the
curve, time to peak serum concentrations, and peak serum concentratio
ns of thyroxine, triiodothyronine, and free thyroxine index for all 4
products. Results.-All data analyses were completed prior to unblindin
g of the product codes. No significant differences between the 4 produ
cts were found in area under the curve or peak serum concentrations of
total thyroxine, total triiodothyronine, or free thyroxine index, Alt
hough Synthroid produced a more rapid rise in total serum triiodothyro
nine concentration and a higher total peak serum triiodothyronine conc
entration than the other products, these differences were not statisti
cally significant (P=.08). The Food and Drug Administration criterion
for relative bioequivalence within 90% confidence intervals (0.8-1.25)
was demonstrated (P<.05) for all pairs of products, Relative bioequiv
alence of 0.95 to 1.07 was demonstrated, tighter than the current bioe
quivalence criterion for oral formulations. Conclusions.-The 4 generic
and brand-name levothyroxine preparations studied are different but a
re bioequivalent by current Food and Drug Administration criteria and
are interchangeable in the majority of patients receiving thyroxine re
placement therapy. Further investigation is required to determine whet
her our results are equally applicable to all existing levothyroxine p
reparations.