Have a personal or library account? Click to login
A Statistical Approach for Comparative Assessment of the Effect of Smoke Exposure in In Vivo Experiments: A Case Study of an OECD 90-Day Inhalation Study Including 3R4F and 1R6F Reference Cigarettes Cover

A Statistical Approach for Comparative Assessment of the Effect of Smoke Exposure in In Vivo Experiments: A Case Study of an OECD 90-Day Inhalation Study Including 3R4F and 1R6F Reference Cigarettes

Open Access
|Jan 2025

References

  1. Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD): Test No. 413: Subchronic Inhalation Toxicity: 90-Day Study; OECD Guidelines for the Testing of Chemicals, Section 4, OECD, Paris, France, 2018. DOI: 10.1787/9789264070806-en
  2. Belushkin, M., G. Jaccard, and A. Kondylis: Considerations for Comparative Tobacco Product Assessments Based on Smoke Constituent Yields; Regul. Toxicol. Pharmacol. 73 (2015) 105–113. DOI: 10.1016/j.yrtph.2015.06.017
  3. Eldridge, A., T.R. Betson, M.V. Gama, and K. McAdam: Variation in Tobacco and Mainstream Smoke Toxicant Yields from Selected Commercial Cigarette Products; Regul. Toxicol. Pharmacol. 71 (2015) 409–427. DOI: 10.1016/j.yrtph.2015.01.006
  4. Verron, T., X. Cahours, and S. Colard: Extension of Critical Difference for Product Comparison. Application to Tobacco Products; Beitr. Tabakforsch. Int.. 28 (2019) 310–316. DOI: 10.2478/cttr-2019-0012
  5. U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA), Center for Tobacco Products (CTP): Guidance for Industry and FDA Staff, Section 905(j) Reports: Demonstrating Substantial Equivalence for Tobacco Products; FDA, Silverspring, MD, USA, 2011, 14 pp. Available at: https://www.federalregister.gov/documents/2011/01/06/2011-35/guidance-for-industry-and-food-and-drug-administration-staff-section-905j-reports-demonstrating
  6. Dangi, Y.S., M.L. Soni, and K.P. Namdeo: Highly Variable Drugs: Bioequivalence Requirements and Regulatory Perspectives; Int. J. Curr. Pharm. Res. 3 (2010) 24–28.
  7. Endrenyi, L. and L. Tothfalusi: Bioequivalence for Highly Variable Drugs: Regulatory Agreements, Disagreements, and Harmonization; J. Pharmacokinet. Pharmacodyn. 46 (2019) 117–126. DOI: 10.1007/s10928-019-09623-w
  8. Endrenyi, L. and L. Tothfalusi: Regulatory and Study Conditions for the Determination of Bioequivalence of Highly Variable Drugs; J. Pharm. Pharm. Sci. 12 (2009) 138–149. DOI: 10.18433/j3zw2c
  9. Sakai, Y., S. Mori, M. Yanagimachi, T. Takahashi, K. Shibuya, A. Kumagai, S. Ishikawa, S. Ito, and T. Fukushima: Inter-Laboratory Reproducibility and Interchangeability of 3R4F and 1R6F Reference Cigarettes in Mainstream Smoke Chemical Analysis and In Vitro Toxicity Assays; Contrib. Tob. Nicotine Res. 29 (2020) 119–135. DOI: 10.2478/cttr-2020-0011
  10. Miller, R.G.: Simultaneous Statistical Inference; Springer, New York, NY, USA, 1981, 299 pp., ISBN: 9780387905488
  11. Kim, J. and H. Bang: Three Common Misuses of P Values; Dent. Hypotheses 7 (2016) 73–80. DOI: 10.4103/2155-8213.190481
  12. Brereton, R.G.: The Use and Misuse of P Values and Related Concepts; Chemometr. Intell. Lab. Syst. 195 (2019) 103884. DOI: 10.1016/j.chemolab.2019.103884
  13. Schervish, M.J.: P values: What They Are and What They Are Not; Am. Stat. 50 (1996) 203–206. DOI: 10.2307/2684655
  14. Wasserstein, R.L. and N. A. Lazar: The ASA Statement on p-Values: Context, Process, and Purpose; Am. Stat. 70 (2016) 129–133. DOI: 10.1080/00031305.2016.1154108
  15. Anderson-Cook, C.M. and C.M. Borror: The Difference between “Equivalent” and “Not Different”; Qual. Eng. 28 (2016) 249–262. DOI: 10.1080/08982112.2015.1079918
  16. Barros, J.A.O.: Report on Indirect Method to Obtain Stress-Strain Response of Fiber-Reinforced Concrete (FRC); American Concrete Institute (ACI), Farmington Hills, MI, USA, 2016, 4 pp.
  17. U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA): Guidance for Industry on Statistical Approaches to Establishing Bioequivalence, Availability; FDA, Silver Spring, MD, USA, 2001, Federal Register, 66, No.23, 8805–8806.
  18. Chow, S.C. and J.P. Liu: Recent Statistical Developments in Bioequivalence Trials - A Review of the FDA Guidance; Drug Inf. J. 28 (1994) 851–864. DOI: 10.1177/009286159402800321
  19. Guimarães Morais, J.A. and M. do Rosário Lobato: The New European Medicines Agency Guideline on the Investigation of Bioequivalence; Basic Clin. Pharmacol. Toxicol. 106 (2010) 221–225. DOI: 10.1111/j.1742-7843.2009.00518.x
  20. European Union: Directive 2014/40/EU of the European Parliament and of The Council of 3 April 2014 on the Approximation of the Laws, Regulations and Administrative Provisions of the Member States Concerning the Manufacture, Presentation and Sale of Tobacco and Related Products and Repealing Directive 2001/37/EC; Off. J. Eur. Union (2014) L127/1–L127/38.
  21. Schuirmann, D.J.: A Comparison of the Two One-Sided Tests Procedure and the Power Approach for Assessing the Equivalence of Average Bioavailability; J. Pharmacokinet. Biopharm. 15 (1987) 657–680. DOI: 10.1007/BF01068419
  22. Chow, S.-C. and J.-P. Liu: Design and Analysis of Bioavailability and Bioequivalence Studies; 1st edition, Marcel Dekker, New York, NY, USA, 1992, 416 pp. ISBN: 9780824786823
  23. Berger, R.L. and J.C. Hsu: Bioequivalence Trials, Intersection-Union Tests and Equivalence Confidence Sets; Stat. Sci. 11 (1996) 283–319. DOI: 10.1214/ss/1032280304
  24. Hsu, J.C., J.T. Gene Hwang, H.K. Liu, and S.J. Ruberg: Confidence Intervals Associated with Tests for Bioequivalence; Biometrika 81 (1994) 103–114. DOI: 10.2307/2337054
  25. National Advisory Committee for Laboratory Animal Research (NACLAR): NACLAR Guidelines. 2004; Available at: https://www.nparks.gov.sg/avs/animals/animals-in-scientific-research/naclar-guidelines/naclar-guidelines (accessed November 2024).
  26. National Research Council 2011. Guide for the Care and Use of Laboratory Animals: 8th edition, The National Academies Press, Washington, DC, USA, 220 pp. DOI: 10.17226/12910
  27. Wong, E.T., U. Kogel, E. Veljkovic, F. Martin, Y. Xiang, S. Boue, G. Vuillaume, P. Leroy, E. Guedj, G. Rodrigo, N.V. Ivanov, J. Hoeng, M.C. Peitsch, and P. Vanscheeuwijck: Evaluation of the Tobacco Heating System 2.2. Part 4: 90-Day OECD 413 Rat Inhalation Study with Systems Toxicology Endpoints Demonstrates Reduced Exposure Effects Compared with Cigarette Smoke; Regul. Toxicol. Pharmacol. 81 Suppl 2 (2016) S59–S81. DOI: 10.1016/j.yrtph.2016.10.015
  28. Oviedo, A., S. Lebrun, U. Kogel, J. Ho, W.T. Tan, B. Titz, P. Leroy, G. Vuillaume, M. Bera, F. Martin, G. Rodrigo, M. Esposito, R. Dempsey, N.V. Ivanov, J. Hoeng, M.C. Peitsch, and P. Vanscheeuwijck: Evaluation of the Tobacco Heating System 2.2. Part 6: 90-Day OECD 413 Rat Inhalation Study with Systems Toxicology Endpoints Demonstrates Reduced Exposure Effects of a Mentholated Version Compared with Mentholated and Non-mentholated Cigarette Smoke; Regul. Toxicol. Pharmacol. 81 Suppl. 2 (2016) S93–S122. DOI: 10.1016/j.yrtph.2016.11.004
  29. Phillips, B.W., W.K. Schlage, B. Titz, U. Kogel, D. Sciuscio, F. Martin, P. Leroy, G. Vuillaume, S. Krishnan, T. Lee, E. Veljkovic, A. Elamin, C. Merg, N.V. Ivanov, M.C. Peitsch, J. Hoeng, and P. Vanscheeuwijck: A 90-Day OECD TG 413 Rat Inhalation Study with Systems Toxicology Endpoints Demonstrates Reduced Exposure Effects of the Aerosol from the Carbon Heated Tobacco Product version 1.2 (CHTP1.2) Compared with Cigarette Smoke. I. Inhalation Exposure, Clinical Pathology and Histopathology; Food Chem. Toxicol. 116 (2018) 388–413. DOI: 10.1016/j.fct.2018.04.015
  30. Jaccard, G., D.T. Djoko, A. Korneliou, R. Stabbert, M. Belushkin, and M. Esposito: Mainstream Smoke Constituents and In Vitro Toxicity Comparative Analysis of 3R4F and 1R6F Reference Cigarettes; Toxicol. Rep. 6 (2019) 222–231. DOI: 10.1016/j.toxrep.2019.02.009
Language: English
Page range: 26 - 33
Submitted on: Jul 5, 2024
|
Accepted on: Nov 8, 2024
|
Published on: Jan 30, 2025
In partnership with: Paradigm Publishing Services
Publication frequency: 4 issues per year

© 2025 Athanasios Kondylis, Ulrike Kogel, Jenny Ho, EeTsin Wong, Blaine Phillips, Julia Hoeng, Patrick Vanscheeuwijck, published by Institut für Tabakforschung GmbH
This work is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 License.