Abstract Bioequivalence (BE) assessment of topical drug products is a long-standing challenge. Agencies such as the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) and the European Medicines Agency (EMA) have published several drafts in recent years suggesting different approaches as alternative to evaluate the BE. A proposed Topical Classification System (TCS) has even been discussed. Given the above, the objective of this research was to use in vitro and in vivo BE approaches to evaluate Brazilian marketed mupirocin (MPC) ointments, previously classified as TCS class The in vitro permeation test (IVPT) was performed by applying formulations to pig skin by Franz cells. The in vivo methodology was dermatopharmacokinetic (DPK). These approaches (in vivo tape stripping and IVPT) demonstrated capability of distinguishing among different formulations, thus making them useful methodologies for BE evaluation.

ABSTRACT BACKGROUND: The World Health Organization has declared that a pandemic situation exists in relation to the disease caused by the new coronavirus, COVID-19. So far, the absence of a vaccine against the new coronavirus has led people worldwide to seek various therapeutic alternatives, including use of cholecalciferol. DESIGN AND SETTING: Narrative review developed by a research group at a public university in Recife (PE), Brazil. METHODS: We searched the literature on the use of cholecalciferol for prevention or treatment of COVID-19, using the MEDLINE and LILACS databases, with the keywords “vitamin D”, “cholecalciferol”, “SARS-CoV-2”, “COVID-19” and “coronavirus”, from January 1, 2020, to June 10, 2020. Narrative reviews, cohort studies and ecological studies were selected. RESULTS: We retrieved 32 references, of which 8 were considered eligible for intensive review and critical analysis. These comprised five narrative reviews, two observational studies and one protocol proposal. Most of the studies selected reported positive effects from use of vitamin D for prevention or treatment of COVID-19. However, there was little quantitative data to assess the real impact of using this vitamin as an intervention against this disease. CONCLUSIONS: Current studies on vitamin D used for purposes other than bone health promotion cannot be taken as support to justify its use in a disease as recent as COVID-19. Studies of greater robustness, with higher levels of clinical evidence, need to be conducted. Rational use of this vitamin needs to be ensured, thereby minimizing the impacts on the patient and the public healthcare system.