GENERICS : NEED FOR CLINICAL CONCERN ?

REFERENCES

• Pharmaceutical scoreboards - Pharmaceutical prescriptions in the outpatient sector. 2006.
   Google Scholar
• SHRANK W H, HOANG T, ETTNER SL et al. The Implications of Choice. Prescribing Generic or Preferred Pharmaceuticals Improves Medication Adherence for Chronic Conditions. Arch Intern Med 2006; 166:332–37.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• VAN WIJK B LG, KLUNGEL O H, HEERDINK ER et al. Generic Substitution of Antihypertensive Drugs: Does It Affect Adherence? Ann Pharmacother 2006; 40:15–20.
   Google Scholar
• MONNET D L, FERECH M, FRIMODT-M�LLER N et al. The More Antibacterial Trade Names, The More Consumption of Antibacterials: A European Study. Clin Infect Dis 2005; 41:114–7.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• HELLSTR�M J and RUDHOLM N. Side effects of generic competition? Eur J Health Econom 2004; 5:203–8.
   Google Scholar
• SCHIODT F V, ROCHLING F A, CASEY D L et al. Acetamino-phen toxicity in an urban county hospital. N Engl J Med 1997;
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• BRENNA TA and LEE T H. Allergic to Generics. Ann Intern Med 2004; 141:126–30.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• WILDER B J, LEPPIK I, HIETPAS TJ et al. Effect of food on absorption of Dilantin Kapseals and Mylan extended phenytoin sodium capsules. Neurology 2001; 57:582–9.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• MAKUS K G. Generic Substitution of Antiepileptic Drugs: Preliminary Observational Reports of Lamotrigine Switching in Canada. Epilepsia 2005; 46:279.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• WILNER A N. Therapeutic equivalency of generic antiepileptic drugs: results of a survey. Epilepsy & Behavior 2004; 5:995–8.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• KR�MER G, STEINHOFF BJ, FEUCHT M et al. Experience with Generic Drugs in Epilepsy Patients: An Electronic Survey of Members of the German, Austrian and Swiss Branches of the ILAE. Epilepsia 2007; 48:609–11.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• BERG MJ, GROSS RA, TOMASZEWSKI KJ et al. Generic substitution in the treatment of epilepsy : case evidence of breakthrough seizures. Neurology 2008; 71:525–30.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• BIRABEN A, DE TOFFOL B, SEMAH F et al. Utilisation des m�dicaments g�n�riques des anti-�pileptiques en France : r�sultats d�une enqu�te aupr�s des neurologues et revue de la litt�rature. Rev Neurol 2007 ; 163 :455–61.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• URKHARDT R T, LEPPIK I E, BLESI K et al. Lower phenytoin serum levels in persons switched from brand to generic phenytoin. Neurology 2004; 63:1494–96.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• DHANARA J, JAYAVELU A. Non-equivalence of bioavailability between generic and branded form of Sodium valproate. Neurology India 2004; 52:398.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• CRAWFORD P, FEELY M, GUBERMAN A et al. Are there potential problems with generic substitution of antiepileptic drugs? A review of issues. Seizure 2006; 15:165–76.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• REIFFEL J A and KOWEY P R. Generic antiarrhythmics Are not Therapeutically Equivalent for the Treatment of Tachyarrhythmias. Amer J Cardiol 2000; 85:1151–53.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• CATTANEO D, PERICO N and REMUZZI G. Generic cyclosporine formulations: more open questions than answers. Transplant International 2005; 18:371–8.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• VIDELA C and GODOY C. Converting to a Generic Formulation of Mycophenolate Mofetil in Stable Kidney Transplant Recipi-ents : 1 Year of Drug Surveillance and Outcome. Transplanta-tion Proceedings 2007; 39: 602–5.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• PASQUALOTTO A C, and DENNING D W. Generic substitution of itraconazole resulting in subtherapeutic levels and resis-tance. Journal of Antimicrobial Agents 2007; 30: 93–100.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• BORGHERINI G. The bioequivalence and therapeutic efficacy of generic versus brand-name psychoactive drugs. Clin Ther 2003; 25:1578–92.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• YU B P, CHONG Y S, MAGUIRE GA. Is generic fluoxetine effec-tive?. JAffect Disord 2004; 81:185–6.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• MOFSEN R and BALTER J. Case Reports of the Reemergence of Psychotic Symptoms After Conversion from Brand-Name Clo-zapine to a Generic Formulation. Clin Ther 2001; 23:1720–31.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• VAN AMERINGEN M et al. Symptom relapse following switch from Celexa to generic citalopram : an anxiety disorders case series. Journal of Psychopharmacology 2007; 21:472–476.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• ZARGZRZADEH AH, EMAMI MH and HOSSEIN! F. Drug-related hospital admissions in a generic pharmaceutical system. Clin Exp Pharmacol Physiol 2007; 34:494–98.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• PEREIRA J A, HOLBROOK A M, DOLOVICH L et al. Are Brand-Name and Generic Warfarin Interchangeable? Multiple N-of-1 Random-ized, Crossover Trials. Ann Pharmacother 2005; 39:1188–93.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• PATERSON J M, MAMDANI M, JUURLINK D N et al. Clinical Consequences of Generic Warfarin Susbstitution: An ecological study. JAMA 2006; 296, 1969–72.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• NIV Y. Comparison of Proton Pump Inhibitor-Based Triple Ther-apy with Losec and the Generic Drug, Omepradex, for Efficacy of Helicobacter pylori Eradication. Dig Dis Sc 2005; 50:623–25.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• CICERO T J, INCIARDI J A, ADAMS E H et al. Rates of abuse of tramadol remain unchanged with the introduction of new branded and generic products: results of an abuse monitoring system, 1994-2044. Pharmacoepidemiology and Drug Safety 2005; 14:851–59.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• CHEETHAM T C, CHAN J, BENSON V et al. Successful Con-version of Patients With Hypercholesterolemia From a Brand Name to a Generic Cholesterol-Lowering Drug. Am] Manag Care 2005; 11:546–52.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• BILLUPS Si, PLUSHNER S L, OLSON K L et al. Clinical and Eco-nomic Outcomes of Conversion of Simvastatin to Lovastatin in a Group-Model Health Maintenance Organization.] Manag Care Pharm 2005; 11:681–86.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• SOTO J, VALDA-RODRIQUEZ L et al. Comparison of generic to branded pentavalent antimony for treatment of new world cutaneous leishmaniasis. Am] Trop Med Hyg 2004; 71:577–81.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• AMIT G, ROSEN A, WAGSHAL A B et al. Efficacy of Substituting Innovator Propafenone for Its Generic Formulation in Patients With Atrial Fibrillation. Am] Cardiol 2004; 93:1558–60.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• LAURENT C, KOUANFACK C, KOULLA-SHIRO S et al. Long-term safety, effectiveness and quality of a generic fixed-dose combination of nevirapine, stavudine and lamivudine. AIDS 2007; 21:768–71.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• LAMBERT P A, CONWAY B R. Pharmaceutical Quality of Cef-triaxone Generic Drug Products Compared with Rocephin®. J Chemotherapy 2003; 15:357–68.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• HERMENTIN P, CUESTA-LINKER T, WEISSE J et al. Comparative analysis of the activity and content of different streptokinase preparations. Eur Heart' 2005; 26:933–40.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• TAHMASSIAN R, VAN DER ZEE PH. De patient had toch gelijk. Pharm Weekbl. 2005; 26/27:877–78.
   Google Scholar
• THOMAS K, KOELWEL C, MACHEI U et al Three Generations of Cydosporine A Formuktions: An In Vitro Comparison. Drug Development and Industrial Pharmacy 2005; 31:357–66.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• TROTTET L, OWEN H, HOLME P et al Are ali acidovir cream formuktions bioequiva[ent?. International Journal of Pharma-ceutics 2005; 304:63–71.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• WEIR R E, ZAIDI F H, CHARTERIS DG et al Variability in the content of Indian generic ciprofloxacin eye drops. BrJ Ophthal-mol 2005; 89:1094–96.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• KOVALESKI J, KRAUT B, MATTIUZ A et al Impurities in generic pharmaceuticaE deve[opment. Advanced Drug Delivery Reviews 2007; 59:56–63.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• SPINO M, TSANG Y C, POP R. DissoEution and in vivo evidence of differencies in reference products: impact on deve[opment of generic drugs. Eur J Drug Metabolism and pharmacokinetics 2000; 25:18–24.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• KISHIMOTO TK et al Contaminated Heparin Associated with Adverse CEinicaE Events and Activation of the Contact System. N EngIJ Med 2008; 358:2457–67.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• SCHWARTZ L B. Heparin Comes CEean. N Engl J Med 2008; 358:358–23.
   Google Scholar
• EDITORIAL. Combating counterfeit drugs. The Lancet 2008; 371:1551.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• PRACTICAL ISSUES AND UPDATES. Improved guidelines wiEE optimize efficacy and minimize adverse effects of biosimiiar drugs. Drugs Ther Perspect 2008; 24:24–26.
   Google Scholar
• COVIC A, et al Biosimikrs and biopharmaceuticak: what the nephrobgists need to know-a position paper by the ERA-EDTA CounciL Nephrol Dial Transplant 2008; 23: 3731–3737.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• BERNS SB et al HemogEobin variability in epoetin-treted he-modiaEysis patients. Kidney Int 2003; 64:1514–1521.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• YANG W et al HemogEobin Variability and Mortality in ESRD. J Am Soc Nephrol 2007; 18:3164–3170.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• EMEA Committee for MedicinaE Products for Human Use. Guidelines on simikr bio[ogicaE products containing biotech-no[ogy-derived proteins as active substance: non-dinicaE and dinicaE issues.London, 2006. AvaikbEe at http://www.emea. eu.int/
   Google Scholar
• EMEA Committee for MedicinaE Products for Human Use. Guidelines on simikr bio[ogicaE products containing biotech-no[ogy-derived proteins as active substance:quality issues. London, 2006. Avai[abEe at http://www.emea.eu.int/
   Google Scholar
• BROCKMOLLER J, TZETKOV MV. Pharmacogenetics : data con-cepts and took to improve drug discovery and drug treatment. EurJ Clin Pharmacol 2008; 64:133–157.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• ALFIREVIC A, PIRMOHAMED M. Adverse Drugs Reactions and Pharmacogenomics: Recent Advances. Personalized Medicine 2008;5:11–23.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar