• <tr id="yyy80"></tr>
  • <sup id="yyy80"></sup>
  • <tfoot id="yyy80"><noscript id="yyy80"></noscript></tfoot>
  • 99热精品在线国产_美女午夜性视频免费_国产精品国产高清国产av_av欧美777_自拍偷自拍亚洲精品老妇_亚洲熟女精品中文字幕_www日本黄色视频网_国产精品野战在线观看 ?

    A strategy for population pharmaceutical quality assessment based on quality by design

    2021-11-11 13:37:48YuZhoChngqinHuShngchenYoLihuiYinXiomeiLing
    Journal of Pharmaceutical Analysis 2021年5期

    Yu Zho , Chngqin Hu , Shngchen Yo , Lihui Yin , Xiomei Ling

    a NMPA Key Laboratory for Quality Research and Evaluation of Chemical Drugs, National Institutes for Food and Drug Control, Beijing,102629, China

    b Acedemy for Advanced Interdisciplinary Studies, Peking University, Beijing,100088, China

    c Peking University Health Science Center, Peking University, Beijing,100191, China

    Keywords:Population pharmaceutical quality Quality by design (QbD)Crucial evaluation attributes (CEAs)Process indicators (PIs)Improved statistical process control (SPC)Risk assessment

    ABSTRACT From a regulatory perspective, drug quality consistency evaluation must concern different processes used for the same drug. In this study, an assessment strategy based on quality by design (QbD) was developed for population pharmaceutical quality evaluation. A descriptive analysis method based on QbD concept was first established to characterize the process by critical evaluation attributes (CEAs).Then quantitative analysis method based on an improved statistical process control (SPC) method was established to investigate the process indicators (PIs) in the process population, such as mean distribution, batch-to-batch difference and abnormal quality probability. After that rules for risk assessment were established based on the SPC limitations and parameters.Both the SPC parameters of the CEAs and the risk of PIs were visualized according to the interaction test results to obtain a better understanding of the population pharmaceutical quality. Finally, an assessment strategy was built and applied to generic drug consistency assessment, process risk assessment and quality trend tracking. The strategy demonstrated in this study could help reveal quality consistency from the perspective of process control and process risk, and further show the recent development status of domestic pharmaceutical production processes. In addition, a process risk assessment and population quality trend tracking provide databased information for approval. Not only can this information serve as a further basis for decisionmaking by the regulatory authority regarding early warnings, but it can also reduce some avoidable adverse reactions. With continuous addition of data, dynamic population pharmaceutical quality is meaningful for emergencies and decision-making regarding drug regulation.

    1. Introduction

    Due to the cost and time investment necessary for new drug research and development, a large gap is always present between the demand for brand-name drugs and the purchasing power of patients, which gives generic drugs an enormous an market potential [1]. Furthermore, the economic benefits of generic drugs,such as reducing national medical expenditures, have attracted government attention.Therefore,countries and regions worldwide,including the US,the European Union(EU)and Japan,are generally promoting the use of generic drugs[2].China is a large generic drug market that primarily relies on domestic generic pharmaceutical products. In addition, the volume and potential of generic drug exports should not be underestimated [3]. Undoubtedly, the rapid development of generic drugs has created new challenges for regulation,particularly for the drug review and evaluation system.

    Since China joined the International Council for Harmonization of Technical Requirements for Pharmaceuticals for Human Use(ICH) in June 2017, the pharmaceutical industry in China has been required to conform with international standards. Thus, both the drug regulatory authorities and research and development institutions in the pharmaceutical industry must gradually transform their processes and implement the highest international technical standards and guidelines.Since 2016,the Chinese government has issued a series of regulations and drafts concerning generic drug consistency evaluation that aim to effectively enhance the innovation capability and international competitiveness of the domestic pharmaceutical industry [4].

    In the past 10 years, the Chinese government has invested millions of RMB each year in sampling and evaluating listed drugs according to the current quality standards; this effort is known as the National Evaluation Sampling and Test Project (NESTP). The purpose of NESTP is to evaluate the quality status of domestic medicines,analyze the main product quality problems,identify the relevant process problems and improve the current quality standard, such as monographs in the Chinese Pharmacopeia (ChP).NESTP can be said to be the most comprehensive and timely drug quality information source currently available in China. According to its annual report,although the pass rate for chemical drugs was high (above 98%), many types of problems were found during the project studies, particularly in production processes and process control. This indicates that the gaps between domestic generic drugs and drugs imported from the EU and the US stem from the process control level, which is reflected in differences between batches and sometimes even within a batch[5]. Therefore, a focus on process when assessing quality consistency is necessary and crucial.

    Both the EU and the US have implemented process analytical technology (PAT)-based process validation and real-time release(RTR) testing in continuous manufacturing process, which allow production of better-quality final products[6,7].However,in China,batch mode is the mainstream, and PAT is not widely used in the pharmaceutical industry, and currently there is no RTR testing protocol that is supported by policy.From a regulatory perspective,quality consistency evaluation must characterize different processes for the same product. How should we assess products that are produced both with and without PAT? Fortunately, since the current Good Manufacturing Practice (cGMP) standards were launched,the current quality standards are based on the quality by design(QbD)concept instead of quality by test(QbT).QbD requires manufacturers to fully understand their own processes and ensure continuous improvement in the quality of final products [8,9].There is a wealth of information related to the processes in the readily measurable attributes (e.g., assay, impurities and dissolution) of final products. From the regulation point of view, the evolution is a process of seeking common ground while reserving differences, where the quality attributes are the common ground and process parameters are the differences. Thus, we need to find universal indicators and methods to characterize different processes used for the same product.

    Recently, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (USFDA) proposed the knowledge-aided assessment and structured application(KASA) system to improve the consistency and objectivity of regulatory assessments [10]. Statistical methods, such as six sigma theory and statistical process control (SPC), have been more and more applied to process monitoring in the pharmaceutical industry[11,12].In addition to process monitoring,statistics are also widely applied in annual review of drug quality. T^orres et al. [13] used multivariate statistical process control (MSPC) method to analyze the historical quality data of hydrochlorothiazide tablets in 2009 and 2013,and evaluated the process correction in the past 11 years.Kharbach et al. [14] used six process indicators from the annual product review data to perform principal component analysis(PCA)based MSPC analysis, found the interaction of process indicators,and detected abnormal products by Hotelling T2. Different from process monitoring and annual review, population quality evaluation is to find out the distribution of process levels. Although PCA based MSPC can well characterize the population process level,the evaluation is not directional,poor in interpretability,and cannot be traced back to individual process indictors [15].

    Furthermore,unlike the original drugs pharmaceutical research and manufacturing[16],generic drug evaluation has the advantage that most safety and efficiency information is known. When evaluating the generic drug,attention should also be paid to the quality controllability related to process amplification as well as safety and efficiency. This kind of indirect evaluation could facilitate obtainment of certain forward-looking trends based on retrospective data, which make up for the lack of direct evaluation of clinical practice such as expensive,hindsight and individualized difference.Our study was created to fill the gap.

    In this study,an assessment strategy focusing on evaluating the quality controllability based on population pharmaceutical quality data was established to explore commonality of generic drugs process evaluation. Critical evaluation attribute (CEA) was defined and an improved SPC method for population quality based on CEAs was developed to determine the limitations and parameters closely related to the process performance. Ceftriaxone sodium for injection and aztreonam for injection were taken as examples to demonstrate the strategy application for quality consistency evaluation.

    2. Materials and methods

    2.1. Data and programs

    All data and information were collected from NESTP and relavent literature. The data on ceftriaxone sodium for injection included 551 batches from 48 manufacturers for process assessment,and the data on aztreonam for injection included 233 batches from 27 manufacturers; all the data were collected over two nonconsecutive years for an annual review assessment of process consistency.

    The programs for computation were developed using the MATLAB platform (Version 2018a).

    2.2. Descriptive analysis method

    In our study, the objects were population pharmaceutical quality of a certain drug instead of individual quality of a certain product. The drug quality standard was the regulation of various inspection items, indicators, limits and ranges, etc. to ensure the quality of drugs, which comprehensively reflect the purity, impurities, hydrogen, sterility and even physicochemical properties of the drug. In traditional pharmaceutical analysis and evaluation system, all the items are evaluated with the fixed limitation in quality standard one by one, where the variation and links are always neglected.It is precisely these variation and links that reflect the quality of the production processes. Therefore, to describe a population quality, the main point is to describe the quality of production process.

    From a QbD regulation perspective, although the production processes are complex and diverse,our concept is to describe final products of different process parameters by common quality elements-quality target, quality variation and risks (Fig.1), where the variation is controllable, and risk is uncontrollable. For a population of production processes used for the same product, the mean distribution,batch-to-batch difference and abnormal quality probability well represented the elements of QbD and were defined as process indicators (PIs) in our study.

    2.3. Quantitative analysis method

    Fig.1.The quality of pharmaceutical processes from the QbD regulation perspective based on end product characteristics.

    SPC technology is the most efficient method for process analysis and control, which continues to be an important and indispensable tool for quality management, research and healthcare improvement [17]. The principle [18] is to preplan the sampling interval and sample capacity to obtain real-time process data under the premise that the sample population follows a normal distribution with an upper control limit(UCL),lower control limit(LCL),centerline(CL)and a sequence of sample statistic values.In industry,thecontrol chart and the R control chart are commonly used to detect abnormal points in the process, and they are also the most widely used methods in process monitoring and quality annual review. However, the population data collected from NESTP are retrospective data rather than real-time process data,and the sampling interval and sample capacity are random and uncontrollable. Furthermore, the range R in the R control chart,which reflects the degree of data dispersion,has the disadvantage of fatal dependence on the sample size,reliance on a tiny amount of information and susceptibility to individual outliers and thus cannot completely characterize batch-to-batch differences.Therefore, the classic SPC method commonly used in process monitoring and quality annual review is not applicable for the quantitative analysis of population quality and thus an improved SPC method was developed for the quantitative analysis of the population process distribution and the individual processes relative to the population distribution (mean distribution), the batch-to-batch difference distribution (difference distribution)and the abnormal product probability (abnormal probability).

    2.3.1. Mean distribution

    Generally, for a specific drug product, domestic production processes are at a similar level, and the process characteristics of the population, despite its variety, are in line with the normality assumption. If the number of NESTP samples (processes) is sufficiently representative,the population processes can be considered to follow a normal distribution with an unknown μ and σ. Due to the severe heterogeneity in sample size(the number of batches of each product), in the present study, the median of the process samples was used to characterize the individual process levels and estimate the μ and σ of the normal population process distribution.The average median of each process sample was used to estimate the μ of the population process, and the median deviation of each process was used to estimate the σ of the population process.

    Suppose there aremprocess samples with sample sizes ofni(i=1,2,…, m), and the median of each process sample can be calculated using Formula (1):

    Then, the mean value μ of the population process can be estimated using Formula (2):

    The population process standard deviation σ is estimated using the median of the average absolute deviation (MAAD) [19] according to Formula (3):

    and when tα/2 = 3, the 3σ level is defined as the good quality process control limit A0[LCL0,UCL0],and when tα/2=6,the 6σ level is defined as the population quality process control limit A1[LCL1,UCL1].The pharmacopeia control limit[LCLp,UCLp]is defined as U.If the attribute is one-sided, such as with impurity content, LCL0and LCL1should be forced to equal LCLp. In addition, the relationship between A1and U provides information on the suitability of the actual current quality standard to the current process control level.

    2.3.2. Difference distribution

    We used the semi-interquartile range (Rq), which is half of the difference between the third quartile and the first quartile or the 75th percentile and the 25th percentile (Formula (5)), to describe the batch-to-batch difference for each process sample.Here,we did not use the range (R=xmax- xmin) as the normal control chart becauseRqis not susceptible to interference by individual anomalous data and is superior in characterizing variation in the population process.

    The mean and standard deviation ofRqcan be calculated with Formulas (6) and (7):

    Then, the 100 (1-α) % confidence interval B ofcan be calculated using Formula (8):

    and when tα/2=3,the 3σ level is defined as the good quality interbatch difference B0[RqLCL0, RqUCL0], and when tα/2 = 6, the 6σ level is defined as the population batch-to-batch difference control limit B1[RqLCL1, RqUCL1].

    2.3.3. Abnormal probability

    The distribution of products within each process is expressed by the probability of being within the control limit of A1.We define the probability of exceeding A0as the abnormal quality probability,and it includes two cases:those that exceed A0but still fall below A1are around-corner products, whose probability is recorded as Pac(Formula (9)); those that are outside A1are substandard products,whose probability is recorded as Pss(Formula(10)).Obviously,the abnormal quality probability has a negative relationship with the quality of the process.

    The abnormal product probability of binary indicators is the percentage of the number of substandard products(ns)in the total number of samples (ni) of the process, recorded as Psi(Formula(11)).

    2.4. Interaction test

    An interaction test is developed to find representative of the chosen CEAs. The more orthogonal they are, the more representative of the population quality it is. Singular value decomposition(SVD) algorithm based PCA was applied to calculate orthonormal principal component coefficient of each quality attribute(QA).SVD has a less rounding error and effectively reduces the error of PCA information reconstruction.The principal component variances are the eigenvalues of the covariance matrix of CEAs. When variables are represented in the principal component space by a vector, the direction and length of the vector indicate the interaction of CEAs,which is a very important basis of visualization of both population parameters and risk distribution space.

    2.5. Risk assessment method

    Based on the SPC results,the process risk scoring was performed under the rules shown in Table 1. Grades 0, 0.5 and 1 were set to score the risk based on the distribution in the 3σ level,between the 3σ and 6σ level or outside the6σ level,respectively.Finally,the risk scores of each item were summed to obtain the risk assessment for each process.The smaller the risk score is,the better the process is.

    2.6. Assessment strategy

    The strategy for assessing population quality of pharmaceutical processes [20] is shown in Fig. 2. First of all, CEAs were selected.Generally, data from each manufacturer were considered valid when at least three batches were included. CEAs can be either the known critical quality attributes (CQAs) obtained from PAT or selected from attributes in the quality standard [21], such as identification, active pharmaceutical ingredient (API) content, impurities and specific formulation-related test items, according to experience. Secondly, CEAs were classified. CEAs might be measured on different scales, such as continuous or binary responses. Binary attributes, such as traits, identification, pyrogen and sterility, were added as additional attributes in the characterization only if positive attributes (FR≠0) appeared in the overall data. Of note, for the binary CEAs, the abnormal probability was calculated only when necessary. Thirdly, PIs were investigated by the descriptive and quantitative methods developed above. Then,data visualization can aid in obtaining a better understanding of both the process space and abnormal distribution and the synthesis process risk grade. When there were fewer than three CEAs representative PIs, a spatial vector was used for visualization in 2-or 3-dimensional space. When there were four or more chosen representative processes, either a dimension-reduction algorithm or a glyph plot was available.

    3. Results and discussion

    Two examples of an antibiotic injection were utilized to demonstrate the application of the strategy in two cases. As an example of a case in which a reference listed drug (RLD) was available, we performed a quality consistency assessment on generic ceftriaxone sodium injections, while to present a case in which an RLD was not available, we performed a process risk assessment and population quality trend tracking on generic aztreonam injections.

    3.1. Application of quality consistency assessment

    Ceftriaxone is a broad-spectrum cephalosporin launched by Roche under the brand name Rocephin in 1982 [22]. In China,dozens of manufacturers produce generic ceftriaxone.Rocephin,as well as the generic drugs, is a sterile powder injection containing ceftriaxone sodium (API). Therefore, Rocephin is the listed RLD. A clinical survey showed that the gaps between generic ceftriaxone and Rocephin are directly reflected in a slow clinical effect and the clarity of the solution [23,24]. The former is due to the low salt formation rate,and the latter is primarily related to the crystallinity[25]. Ceftriaxone sodium (Fig. 3) is a crystalline powder with a molecular formula that contains two sodium ions and 3.5 water molecules. The theoretical value of ceftriaxone and water in wet products should be 83.8%and 9.5%,respectively,and the theoretical ceftriaxone content in anhydrous ceftriaxone sodium can be calculated as 92.7%. Theoretically, an anhydrous ceftriaxone content of more than 92.7%indicates insufficient salt formation,while a water content less than 9.5% indicates insufficient crystallinity.Thus, the anhydrous ceftriaxone content and water content are closely related to the quality of ceftriaxone sodium for injection production process.

    In our study, we took these two attributes as the CEAs to perform the process assessment strategy. According to ChP, the anhydrous ceftriaxone content should not be less than 84.0%. We set an upper limit according to both theoretical value and the upper limit of European Pharmacopeia. Thus, the UAPIof the anhydrous ceftriaxone content [APILCLP,APIUCLP] is [84.0%, 94.6%]. While the water content should be in the range of 8.0%-11.0% according to ChP,and thus,the Uwaterof the water content[WaterLCLP,WaterUCLP]is [8.0%,11.0%]. Population parameters of domestic generic ceftriaxone sodium for injection were calculated using the quality data of 551 batches from 48 manufacturers,as shown in Table 2.The mean distribution of the water content was 8.75% (CLwater), with a 6σ level moving a little beyond theWaterLCLP,which indicates that thecrystallinity process needs to be improved. The mean distribution of the anhydrous ceftriaxone content was 91.25%, with a 6σ level moving far beyond theAPIUCLP, which indicates that there are universal problems in salt formation process of domestic products.Moreover, the batch-to-batch differences were appropriate and abnormal product probability (Pab) was around 10% of both CEAs.

    Table 1 Process risk scoring rules for CEAs.

    Fig.2.Flow chart showing the population quality assessment strategy.

    Fig. 4A shows a weak interaction of CEAs; therefore, both population parameter and risk distribution can be visualized in an orthogonal space(Fig.4B).As shown in Fig.4B,a 2D boxplot of the Rocephin process is also included in the space for comparison.The population parameter A0(green dash rectangle) covered the Rocephin process distribution(pink 2D boxplot),which proves that A0is consistent with RLD, although there is an obvious gap in process control levels compared with Rocephin. For some manufacturers such as M13,M26,M28,M35 and M42,the salt formation rates are seriously insufficient.Individual outliers appeared in M10,M11, M27 and M28, which indicates the risk of product failure.

    Fig.3.Molecular structure of ceftriaxone sodium.

    The process risk assessment was performed based on the PI values and risk scores, where the risk scores of the anhydrous ceftriaxone content captured the risk of salt formation and the risk scores of water content showed the risk of crystallinity (Table S1).As Fig. 5 shows, the ceftriaxone production process distribution space is divided into three risk grades: low-risk for a risk score below 1,mid-risk for a risk score between 1 and 2,and high-risk for a risk score greater than 2.And each process is described by vectors with coordinates of the assessment parameters. Most domestic processes are at risk grades 1 and 2,and those at risk grade 1 have a better process control level than those at risk grade 2. In addition,the risk assessment can also indicate the shortest plank requiring improvement for an individual process. For instance, the risk assessment of M24 is zero for the salt formation process but 1.0 for the crystallinity process, which indicates that this manufacturer should pay close attention to the crystallinity when raw materials are produced or purchased;the risk assessment of M26 is less than 0.5 for the crystallinity process but 2 for the salt formation process,suggesting that M26 should pay more attention to the latterprocess. Furthermore, for those close to the high-risk line, such as M28, the risk assessment calls attention to both processes.

    Table 2 Population parameters of domestic generic ceftriaxone sodium for injection.

    Fig.4.Interaction of CEAs and SPC graph of API and water content in generic ceftriaxone sodium injections.(A)The blue arrow lines are the CEA variable vectors and red points are the raw data distributing in the principal component space;(B)the red rectangle is U,the blue dashed rectangle is A1,the green dashed rectangle is A0,the pink 2D boxplot presents the data for Rocephin, the colored markers are the abnormal batches from different manufacturers, and those varied beyond U are marked.

    3.2. Process risk assessment and population quality trend tracking

    Aztreonam is a β-lactam antibiotic against gram-negative bacteria that was marketed by Squibb in 1986 under the brand name Azactam;it is a 25%(m/V)aqueous solution.Due to polymerization in water, the current formulation of aztreonam is a sterile powder injection containing aztreonam and arginine.Therefore,there is no RLD available for consistency evaluation. There are two types of production processes used for domestic generic aztreonam injection: a mixed powder process and a freeze-drying process. According to the NESTP report, although all the samples were qualified, the quality of the raw materials, the arginine feeding process control,and the freeze-drying and filling processes are the main factors affecting product quality. Thus, a production process assessment seems necessary and important.

    We used the anhydrous and arginine-free aztreonam content,average loading of the aztreonam content and total impurity content as CEAs to evaluate the process consistency. First, the anhydrous and arginine-free aztreonam content was calculated based on the aztreonam content, water content, and arginine content in the product,which could characterize the consistency of the mixed materials (MC). Second, the labeled amount of aztreonam content was calculated from the aztreonam content and the average loading, which reflects the stability of preparation production process(PS).Finally,according to previous research,impurities and degradants are the main quality factors that cause adverse reactions, and thus, the total impurity content was used to characterize the consistency of the API raw material(RC).

    According to ChP,both the API content and the impurities can be measured by HPLC, which stipulates that the anhydrous and arginine-free aztreonam content should be 91.0%-103.0%, the labeled amount content should be 90.0%-105%, and the impurity content should not be greater than 5%. Therefore, theMCU of anhydrous and arginine-free aztreonam content[MCLCLP,MCUCLP]is[91.0%,103%],thePSU of the labeled amount content[PSLCLP,PSUCLP]is[90.0%,105.0%]and theRCU of the total impurity content[RCLCLP,RCUCLP] is [0%, 5.0%].

    PIs were calculated from the processes of the 27 manufacturers of generic aztreonam for injection for the two years(Table 3).The mean distribution of anhydrous and arginine-free aztreonam content indicates that there were some issues with the MC process between 2012 and 2018 due to the formula change.The mean distribution of the labeled amount content indicates that although the PS process had been extensively improved by 2018,certain problems remained for future improvement.The mean distribution of the total impurity content indicates that the RC process had been improved from 2012 to 2018. The most recent PIs of batch-to-batch difference and abnormal probability showed the current status of a quality variation problem for the MC process and a high out-of-control risk for the PS process.

    Fig.5.Risk assessment for processes and the process vector distribution of generic ceftriaxone sodium injections. (The colored vectors distributed in the space represent each process of 48 manufacturers.)

    Table 3 2-year population parameters of domestic generic aztreonam for injection.

    Fig.6.SPC cube and abnormal batches distribution in the process space for generic aztreonam injections. (A) Abnormal batches distribution of 2012 NESTP, and (B) abnormal batches distribution of 2018 NESTP. The red cube is U, the blue cube is A1, the green cube is A0, and the colored markers are the batches out of A0.

    Fig.7.Annual comparison of process vector distribution of generic aztreonam injections. (A) 2012, and (B) 2018. (The colored vectors distributed in the space represent the comprehensive process control levels for each manufacturer.)

    CEAs are orthogonal in the interaction test, and the SPC parameter A0in the latest year was used as a reference(green cube in Fig.6).In Fig.6,the current ChP and latest SPC limitations were put into a 3D process space of CEAs. The abnormal batches distribution showed an obvious optimization of all CEAs. However,significant process problems were also observed,such as RC of M2 and M24, PS of M4, and both RC and PS of M5.

    The process risk assessments for the years 2012 and 2018 are illustrated in Fig. 7, where the PIs of risk for MC, PS and RC were used to construct a 3D quarter-spherical risk distribution space.We found that the risk distribution moved toward the lower risk direction from 2012 to 2018,which indicates an improvement in the overall process control trend. Although the overall process control trend is optimistic, the trend in individual processes varies. Some products, such as those from M2 and M17, showed an obvious increase in process control. M7 greatly improved the PS process but had a negative trend for RC. For M5, the risk for RC was slightly decreased, while that for both PS and MC increased. Thus, these manufacturers should focus on the relevant process problems and determine which factors lead to the risk increase in process control.Furthermore,it is worth noting that risk distribution assessment is useful for both process changes and process improvements with relative data supplementation for approval.

    4. Conclusions

    The advantages of the strategy we established for population pharmaceutical quality assessment are 1) a kind of processevaluation mechanism based on the QbD was established using structured drug quality data; 2) it offers a universal approach for assessing different industrial production processes for the same drug; 3) it can be applied to generic drugs consistency evaluation,process risk assessment and quality trend tracking, which can provide data-based information for approval.

    The established assessment strategy, which mines the process information related to population quality and investigates intrinsic links between QbD elements,provides a scientific tool for objectively and comprehensively evaluating quality consistency and promoting the regulation status of domestic generic drugs. Not only does this approach reflect the commonality in the different processes, but it also shows the development status of domestic pharmaceutical production processes over the past few years. From the regulatory perspective, it also reveals the gap between the quality target and the current process level. With continuous addition of information and data, dynamic trends of the population pharmaceutical quality could be observed for emergencies and for decision-making related to drug regulation based on the QbD concept.

    Declaration of competing interest

    The authors declare that there are no conflicts of interest.

    Acknowledgments

    The National Major Scientific and Technological Special Project for ‘Significant New Drugs Development’ (Grant No.:2017ZX0901001-007) provides support for this study.

    Appendix A. Supplementary data

    Supplementary data to this article can be found online at https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jpha.2020.11.001.

    一进一出抽搐gif免费好疼| 国产精品一区二区三区四区久久| netflix在线观看网站| 国产激情久久老熟女| 99久久国产精品久久久| 99riav亚洲国产免费| 亚洲欧美一区二区三区黑人| 国产一区二区激情短视频| 国产成年人精品一区二区| 久久精品aⅴ一区二区三区四区| 日韩欧美一区二区三区在线观看| 国内揄拍国产精品人妻在线| 九色成人免费人妻av| 亚洲aⅴ乱码一区二区在线播放| 国产精品美女特级片免费视频播放器 | 黄色片一级片一级黄色片| 久久久久精品国产欧美久久久| 无限看片的www在线观看| 999精品在线视频| 亚洲美女视频黄频| 日日干狠狠操夜夜爽| 黄色片一级片一级黄色片| 脱女人内裤的视频| 欧美乱色亚洲激情| 久久久久免费精品人妻一区二区| 亚洲中文字幕一区二区三区有码在线看 | 久久中文看片网| АⅤ资源中文在线天堂| 两个人视频免费观看高清| 免费看a级黄色片| 人人妻,人人澡人人爽秒播| 国产成人精品久久二区二区免费| 久久久久免费精品人妻一区二区| 一二三四在线观看免费中文在| 久久国产精品影院| 国产午夜福利久久久久久| 老汉色∧v一级毛片| 少妇丰满av| 在线永久观看黄色视频| 五月伊人婷婷丁香| 男女床上黄色一级片免费看| 国产黄色小视频在线观看| 天天躁日日操中文字幕| 欧美xxxx黑人xx丫x性爽| 别揉我奶头~嗯~啊~动态视频| 国产亚洲欧美98| 91麻豆av在线| 九色国产91popny在线| 一卡2卡三卡四卡精品乱码亚洲| 国产97色在线日韩免费| 久久性视频一级片| 亚洲精品中文字幕一二三四区| 国产欧美日韩一区二区三| 国产伦一二天堂av在线观看| 啦啦啦观看免费观看视频高清| 中文字幕久久专区| 天堂网av新在线| 免费在线观看日本一区| 怎么达到女性高潮| 日日夜夜操网爽| 看片在线看免费视频| 中文字幕av在线有码专区| 好看av亚洲va欧美ⅴa在| 免费无遮挡裸体视频| 色老头精品视频在线观看| 免费在线观看日本一区| av中文乱码字幕在线| 9191精品国产免费久久| 精品一区二区三区av网在线观看| 久久久久久久久免费视频了| 99热这里只有是精品50| 脱女人内裤的视频| 热99re8久久精品国产| 岛国在线免费视频观看| 欧美激情在线99| 日韩欧美免费精品| 欧美xxxx黑人xx丫x性爽| 亚洲成人久久爱视频| 午夜成年电影在线免费观看| 伦理电影免费视频| 国产黄片美女视频| www日本黄色视频网| 精品国产乱码久久久久久男人| 在线免费观看不下载黄p国产 | 在线观看一区二区三区| 午夜福利在线观看吧| 亚洲国产中文字幕在线视频| 日韩国内少妇激情av| 男女午夜视频在线观看| 露出奶头的视频| 免费观看的影片在线观看| 麻豆成人午夜福利视频| 色视频www国产| 久久久久久大精品| 午夜福利在线观看吧| 高清毛片免费观看视频网站| 欧美3d第一页| 一本一本综合久久| 亚洲精品一区av在线观看| 91老司机精品| 夜夜夜夜夜久久久久| 日韩欧美三级三区| 精品电影一区二区在线| 一级黄色大片毛片| 好看av亚洲va欧美ⅴa在| 好看av亚洲va欧美ⅴa在| av福利片在线观看| 两个人的视频大全免费| 757午夜福利合集在线观看| 中文字幕av在线有码专区| 色老头精品视频在线观看| 国产精品野战在线观看| 两个人看的免费小视频| 日韩大尺度精品在线看网址| 亚洲自偷自拍图片 自拍| 在线十欧美十亚洲十日本专区| 欧美大码av| 在线观看舔阴道视频| 国内久久婷婷六月综合欲色啪| 国产成人一区二区三区免费视频网站| 国产成人欧美在线观看| 国产淫片久久久久久久久 | 免费看日本二区| 欧美3d第一页| 狂野欧美激情性xxxx| 最新在线观看一区二区三区| 国产激情久久老熟女| 久久精品亚洲精品国产色婷小说| 国内精品美女久久久久久| 婷婷精品国产亚洲av在线| 我的老师免费观看完整版| 999久久久精品免费观看国产| 亚洲天堂国产精品一区在线| 亚洲成人久久爱视频| 成年女人毛片免费观看观看9| 亚洲五月婷婷丁香| 18禁裸乳无遮挡免费网站照片| 久99久视频精品免费| 首页视频小说图片口味搜索| av片东京热男人的天堂| 99久国产av精品| 成人18禁在线播放| 久久久国产成人精品二区| 欧美黑人巨大hd| 欧美性猛交╳xxx乱大交人| 男人舔女人下体高潮全视频| 一进一出抽搐gif免费好疼| 日韩中文字幕欧美一区二区| www日本在线高清视频| 国产精品永久免费网站| 在线观看美女被高潮喷水网站 | 午夜精品一区二区三区免费看| 午夜激情欧美在线| 一夜夜www| 亚洲中文av在线| 久久精品国产亚洲av香蕉五月| 日韩欧美国产一区二区入口| 婷婷精品国产亚洲av| 国产伦精品一区二区三区四那| 日本三级黄在线观看| 久久草成人影院| 国产欧美日韩精品一区二区| 免费无遮挡裸体视频| 色综合亚洲欧美另类图片| tocl精华| 欧美绝顶高潮抽搐喷水| 久久亚洲精品不卡| 操出白浆在线播放| 精品福利观看| 午夜福利免费观看在线| 亚洲国产中文字幕在线视频| 成年女人看的毛片在线观看| 性色av乱码一区二区三区2| 亚洲男人的天堂狠狠| 在线观看免费视频日本深夜| or卡值多少钱| 日本三级黄在线观看| 欧美日韩黄片免| 一个人免费在线观看的高清视频| 国产高清videossex| 不卡一级毛片| 18禁美女被吸乳视频| 国产av一区在线观看免费| 久久精品91蜜桃| 国产精品爽爽va在线观看网站| 成人鲁丝片一二三区免费| 婷婷精品国产亚洲av| 亚洲熟妇中文字幕五十中出| 成年女人毛片免费观看观看9| 三级男女做爰猛烈吃奶摸视频| 精品乱码久久久久久99久播| 色视频www国产| h日本视频在线播放| 亚洲av成人av| 精品99又大又爽又粗少妇毛片 | av欧美777| 亚洲五月婷婷丁香| 9191精品国产免费久久| 1024香蕉在线观看| 国产麻豆成人av免费视频| 欧美乱色亚洲激情| 国产高清视频在线观看网站| xxxwww97欧美| 99视频精品全部免费 在线 | 成人高潮视频无遮挡免费网站| 色噜噜av男人的天堂激情| 亚洲aⅴ乱码一区二区在线播放| 中国美女看黄片| e午夜精品久久久久久久| 国产单亲对白刺激| 国产精品永久免费网站| 亚洲av中文字字幕乱码综合| 手机成人av网站| 一二三四在线观看免费中文在| 女人高潮潮喷娇喘18禁视频| 久久99热这里只有精品18| 成在线人永久免费视频| 亚洲五月婷婷丁香| 精品无人区乱码1区二区| 欧美大码av| 超碰成人久久| 女人高潮潮喷娇喘18禁视频| 久久精品综合一区二区三区| 国产真实乱freesex| 亚洲av片天天在线观看| 精品国产美女av久久久久小说| 久久九九热精品免费| netflix在线观看网站| 婷婷六月久久综合丁香| 久99久视频精品免费| 亚洲va日本ⅴa欧美va伊人久久| 在线视频色国产色| 一个人免费在线观看的高清视频| 免费观看的影片在线观看| 精品午夜福利视频在线观看一区| 精品一区二区三区av网在线观看| 亚洲国产精品合色在线| 我的老师免费观看完整版| 99久久精品热视频| 免费看美女性在线毛片视频| 免费观看的影片在线观看| 国产亚洲欧美98| 亚洲国产欧美网| 又紧又爽又黄一区二区| 在线永久观看黄色视频| 一边摸一边抽搐一进一小说| 国产97色在线日韩免费| 成人亚洲精品av一区二区| 可以在线观看毛片的网站| 日本熟妇午夜| 成人三级黄色视频| 91在线精品国自产拍蜜月 | 不卡av一区二区三区| 国产伦精品一区二区三区视频9 | 一a级毛片在线观看| 日本免费a在线| 国产真实乱freesex| 亚洲精品乱码久久久v下载方式 | 午夜日韩欧美国产| 亚洲专区中文字幕在线| 国产成人福利小说| 禁无遮挡网站| 丰满人妻熟妇乱又伦精品不卡| 成人国产综合亚洲| 日韩欧美精品v在线| 久久久水蜜桃国产精品网| 国产成人精品无人区| 欧美黄色淫秽网站| 99热这里只有是精品50| 国产精品98久久久久久宅男小说| 97超视频在线观看视频| 1024手机看黄色片| 午夜精品一区二区三区免费看| 成人av一区二区三区在线看| 亚洲精品美女久久久久99蜜臀| 18禁黄网站禁片午夜丰满| 少妇的逼水好多| av在线蜜桃| 19禁男女啪啪无遮挡网站| 午夜激情欧美在线| 99国产精品99久久久久| 精品国产亚洲在线| 久久天堂一区二区三区四区| 久久精品国产清高在天天线| 1000部很黄的大片| 亚洲熟妇中文字幕五十中出| av女优亚洲男人天堂 | 搞女人的毛片| 丁香欧美五月| 日本免费a在线| 欧美3d第一页| 国产成人av教育| 最近最新免费中文字幕在线| 国产亚洲欧美98| 一级黄色大片毛片| 欧美一区二区国产精品久久精品| 欧美黄色淫秽网站| 亚洲色图av天堂| 欧美一级毛片孕妇| 全区人妻精品视频| 国产精品九九99| 午夜福利成人在线免费观看| 久久香蕉精品热| 一个人免费在线观看的高清视频| 国产久久久一区二区三区| 成人特级黄色片久久久久久久| 麻豆国产97在线/欧美| 两人在一起打扑克的视频| 国产精品亚洲美女久久久| 人人妻,人人澡人人爽秒播| 舔av片在线| 成人三级做爰电影| 熟妇人妻久久中文字幕3abv| 国内精品美女久久久久久| 国产蜜桃级精品一区二区三区| 亚洲狠狠婷婷综合久久图片| 在线观看美女被高潮喷水网站 | 在线a可以看的网站| 日韩国内少妇激情av| 国产精品乱码一区二三区的特点| 久久久久久久久中文| 真人做人爱边吃奶动态| 亚洲在线观看片| 国内精品一区二区在线观看| 欧美日本亚洲视频在线播放| 亚洲狠狠婷婷综合久久图片| 欧美中文综合在线视频| 国产精品98久久久久久宅男小说| 天堂√8在线中文| 两性夫妻黄色片| 欧美一级毛片孕妇| 一a级毛片在线观看| 男人的好看免费观看在线视频| 欧美不卡视频在线免费观看| 亚洲av日韩精品久久久久久密| 亚洲 欧美一区二区三区| 无遮挡黄片免费观看| 男女视频在线观看网站免费| 国产精品亚洲美女久久久| 黄色女人牲交| e午夜精品久久久久久久| 伊人久久大香线蕉亚洲五| 久久久久久久精品吃奶| 国产精品99久久99久久久不卡| 深夜精品福利| 日本黄色片子视频| 最好的美女福利视频网| 国产亚洲精品久久久com| 黑人操中国人逼视频| 国产三级黄色录像| 日本在线视频免费播放| 波多野结衣高清无吗| 成人性生交大片免费视频hd| 欧美另类亚洲清纯唯美| 国产三级在线视频| www.www免费av| 好看av亚洲va欧美ⅴa在| 曰老女人黄片| 日本黄大片高清| 色哟哟哟哟哟哟| 日韩欧美国产一区二区入口| 国产精品香港三级国产av潘金莲| 九九热线精品视视频播放| 一边摸一边抽搐一进一小说| 亚洲九九香蕉| 国产淫片久久久久久久久 | 国产精品影院久久| 亚洲性夜色夜夜综合| 国产真实乱freesex| 亚洲在线自拍视频| 身体一侧抽搐| 美女大奶头视频| 亚洲色图 男人天堂 中文字幕| svipshipincom国产片| 老熟妇乱子伦视频在线观看| 中文字幕熟女人妻在线| 非洲黑人性xxxx精品又粗又长| 中文字幕av在线有码专区| 一进一出好大好爽视频| 国产日本99.免费观看| 国产男靠女视频免费网站| 十八禁人妻一区二区| 国产aⅴ精品一区二区三区波| 婷婷精品国产亚洲av在线| 亚洲九九香蕉| 美女扒开内裤让男人捅视频| 欧美日韩综合久久久久久 | 免费看光身美女| 亚洲真实伦在线观看| 午夜a级毛片| 搡老熟女国产l中国老女人| 最近在线观看免费完整版| 毛片女人毛片| 一本一本综合久久| 亚洲精华国产精华精| 又大又爽又粗| 久久午夜亚洲精品久久| 欧美3d第一页| 精品99又大又爽又粗少妇毛片 | 制服人妻中文乱码| 少妇的逼水好多| 精品一区二区三区视频在线观看免费| 久久国产乱子伦精品免费另类| av片东京热男人的天堂| 色哟哟哟哟哟哟| 啪啪无遮挡十八禁网站| 黄色成人免费大全| 淫秽高清视频在线观看| 欧美一级a爱片免费观看看| 深夜精品福利| 国产激情久久老熟女| 日韩欧美一区二区三区在线观看| 美女 人体艺术 gogo| 日韩中文字幕欧美一区二区| 麻豆国产av国片精品| 国产乱人伦免费视频| 九九热线精品视视频播放| 中文资源天堂在线| 在线视频色国产色| 欧美日韩一级在线毛片| 伦理电影免费视频| 中文字幕人妻丝袜一区二区| 国产精品美女特级片免费视频播放器 | 亚洲成人久久性| 欧美在线一区亚洲| 99久久99久久久精品蜜桃| 欧美性猛交╳xxx乱大交人| 啦啦啦观看免费观看视频高清| 女生性感内裤真人,穿戴方法视频| 日韩有码中文字幕| 日韩中文字幕欧美一区二区| 1024手机看黄色片| 亚洲中文字幕日韩| 高清毛片免费观看视频网站| 成人国产综合亚洲| 久久久久久大精品| 亚洲第一电影网av| 一二三四社区在线视频社区8| 日本三级黄在线观看| 97超视频在线观看视频| 亚洲国产精品久久男人天堂| 国产一区在线观看成人免费| 狂野欧美白嫩少妇大欣赏| 欧美日韩黄片免| 亚洲国产精品成人综合色| 黑人欧美特级aaaaaa片| 日本黄大片高清| 成人欧美大片| 国产一级毛片七仙女欲春2| 九九久久精品国产亚洲av麻豆 | 波多野结衣高清无吗| 国产成人福利小说| 国产成人影院久久av| 成人国产综合亚洲| 精品无人区乱码1区二区| 69av精品久久久久久| 男女那种视频在线观看| 久久香蕉精品热| or卡值多少钱| 国内久久婷婷六月综合欲色啪| 欧美高清成人免费视频www| 黑人操中国人逼视频| 免费在线观看影片大全网站| 色在线成人网| 欧美黑人欧美精品刺激| 久久中文字幕一级| 久久久久国内视频| 亚洲人成伊人成综合网2020| 特大巨黑吊av在线直播| 免费观看精品视频网站| 国产精品国产高清国产av| 国产一级毛片七仙女欲春2| 国产精品亚洲一级av第二区| 亚洲熟女毛片儿| 久久欧美精品欧美久久欧美| 日韩欧美精品v在线| 亚洲激情在线av| 性色av乱码一区二区三区2| 亚洲精华国产精华精| 免费在线观看成人毛片| 国产av麻豆久久久久久久| 99热只有精品国产| 亚洲精品乱码久久久v下载方式 | 欧美激情久久久久久爽电影| 欧美日韩乱码在线| 日韩欧美在线乱码| 国产精品香港三级国产av潘金莲| 男人和女人高潮做爰伦理| 精品午夜福利视频在线观看一区| 国产精品一区二区三区四区免费观看 | 最新在线观看一区二区三区| 国产精品国产高清国产av| 色综合亚洲欧美另类图片| 热99re8久久精品国产| 老司机深夜福利视频在线观看| 18禁国产床啪视频网站| 青草久久国产| 中文亚洲av片在线观看爽| or卡值多少钱| 国产亚洲精品综合一区在线观看| 国产亚洲欧美在线一区二区| 亚洲人成网站高清观看| 村上凉子中文字幕在线| 午夜激情欧美在线| 亚洲国产高清在线一区二区三| 最新中文字幕久久久久 | 免费大片18禁| 麻豆一二三区av精品| 国产蜜桃级精品一区二区三区| 国产av一区在线观看免费| 国产一区在线观看成人免费| 天堂影院成人在线观看| 91麻豆精品激情在线观看国产| 一级毛片精品| 久久久水蜜桃国产精品网| 欧美乱色亚洲激情| 亚洲精品美女久久av网站| 亚洲va日本ⅴa欧美va伊人久久| 69av精品久久久久久| 日本成人三级电影网站| 成人av在线播放网站| 一区二区三区高清视频在线| 国产97色在线日韩免费| 国产精品久久久久久亚洲av鲁大| www.熟女人妻精品国产| 国产一区二区激情短视频| www.熟女人妻精品国产| 欧美午夜高清在线| 欧美黄色淫秽网站| 午夜两性在线视频| 两性夫妻黄色片| 成人国产综合亚洲| 搡老妇女老女人老熟妇| 91老司机精品| 啦啦啦免费观看视频1| 亚洲欧美激情综合另类| 亚洲国产精品合色在线| 久久精品综合一区二区三区| 真人做人爱边吃奶动态| 亚洲激情在线av| 一本精品99久久精品77| 久久久久亚洲av毛片大全| 精品日产1卡2卡| 草草在线视频免费看| 久久久久性生活片| 亚洲乱码一区二区免费版| 99在线视频只有这里精品首页| 午夜福利在线观看免费完整高清在 | 99riav亚洲国产免费| 嫩草影视91久久| 国产成人av教育| 久久久成人免费电影| 少妇的逼水好多| 亚洲狠狠婷婷综合久久图片| 国产精品久久久久久久电影 | 亚洲欧美日韩卡通动漫| 亚洲成人久久性| 成人三级做爰电影| 99久久精品热视频| netflix在线观看网站| 最近视频中文字幕2019在线8| 国产亚洲精品久久久久久毛片| 亚洲精华国产精华精| 中文亚洲av片在线观看爽| 亚洲精品中文字幕一二三四区| 欧美高清成人免费视频www| 美女黄网站色视频| aaaaa片日本免费| 天天躁狠狠躁夜夜躁狠狠躁| 国产亚洲精品久久久com| 成人国产综合亚洲| 18禁美女被吸乳视频| 一级毛片高清免费大全| 99久久精品热视频| 亚洲一区高清亚洲精品| 999精品在线视频| 热99re8久久精品国产| 亚洲人成网站在线播放欧美日韩| 日本免费a在线| 亚洲一区二区三区不卡视频| 久久久久久久久久黄片| 少妇的丰满在线观看| 国内精品美女久久久久久| 色综合站精品国产| 亚洲午夜理论影院| 亚洲av成人av| 欧洲精品卡2卡3卡4卡5卡区| 免费在线观看影片大全网站| 国产黄色小视频在线观看| 欧美日韩瑟瑟在线播放| 国产高清视频在线观看网站| 国产v大片淫在线免费观看| 国产高清视频在线播放一区| 三级毛片av免费| 亚洲成人久久性| 女警被强在线播放| 我的老师免费观看完整版| 亚洲人成伊人成综合网2020| 午夜视频精品福利| 桃色一区二区三区在线观看| 国产精品综合久久久久久久免费| 国产成人一区二区三区免费视频网站| 亚洲成人久久性| 久久这里只有精品19| 日本免费一区二区三区高清不卡| 女警被强在线播放| 1000部很黄的大片| 一本一本综合久久| 亚洲国产精品合色在线| 一个人观看的视频www高清免费观看 | 嫁个100分男人电影在线观看| 久久精品国产综合久久久| 黄色视频,在线免费观看| 亚洲 欧美一区二区三区| 欧美一区二区国产精品久久精品|