AAPS PharmSciTech

, Volume 14, Issue 3, pp 1178–1189 | Cite as

Controlled Release of Ropinirole Hydrochloride from a Multiple Barrier Layer Tablet Dosage Form: Effect of Polymer Type on Pharmacokinetics and IVIVC

  • Nikhil MalewarEmail author
  • Makarand Avachat
  • Varsha Pokharkar
  • Shirish Kulkarni
Research Article


The purpose of the present study was to control in vitro burst effect of the highly water-soluble drug, ropinirole hydrochloride to reduce in vivo dose dumping and to establish in vitroin vivo correlation. The pharmacokinetics of two entirely different tablet formulation technologies is also explored in this study. For pharmacokinetics study, FDA recommends at least 10% difference in drug release for formulations to be studied but here a different approach was adopted. The formulations F8A and F9A having similar dissolution profiles among themselves and with Requip® XL™ (f 2 value 72, 77, 71 respectively) were evaluated. The C max of formulation F8A comprising hypromellose 100,000 cP was 1005.16 pg/ml as compared to 973.70 pg/ml of formulation F9A comprising hypromellose 4000 cP irrespective of T max of 5 and 5.75 h, respectively. The difference in release and extent of absorption in vivo was due to synergistic effect of complex RH release mechanism; however, AUC0–t and AUC0–∞ values were comparable. The level A correlation using the Wagner–Nelson method supported the findings where R 2 was 0.7597 and 0.9675 respectively for formulation F8A and F9A. Thus, in vivo studies are required for proving the therapeutic equivalency of different formulation technologies even though f 2 ≥ 50. The technology was demonstrated effectively at industrial manufacturing scale of 200,000 tablets.


controlled release polymer in vitroin vivo correlation (IVIVC) multiple barrier layer tablets pharmacokinetics ropinirole hydrochloride (RH) 



Authors are thankful to Lupin Bioresearch Centre, Pune, India for their contribution in pharmacokinetic studies.

Declaration of interest

The authors report no conflicts of interest. The authors alone are responsible for the content and writing of this paper.


  1. 1.
    Lanao JM, Maderuelo C, Zarzuelo A. Critical factors in the release of drugs from sustained release hydrophilic matrices. J Control Release. 2011;154:2–19.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Macheras P, Dokoumetzidis A. IVIVC of controlled release formulations: physicochemical-dynamical reasons for their failure. J Control Release. 2008;129:76–8.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Physicians desk reference. PDR Network, LLC, 2012: 1301–14.Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Efentakis M, Naseef H, Vlachou M. Two and three layer tablet drug delivery systems for oral sustained release of soluble and poorly soluble drugs. Drug Dev Ind Pharm. 2010;36:903–16.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Shajahan A, Poddar S. A flexible technology for modified release of drugs: multi layered tablets. J Control Release. 2004;97:393–405.Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Seong Hoon J, Jun Sang P, Ji Yeon S, Jung Soo P, Young Wook C. A novel three-layered tablet for extended release with various layer formulations and in vitro release profiles. Drug Dev Ind Pharm. 2011;37:664–72.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Mandal TK, Dakshinamurthy D, Graves R, Pamujula S. Controlled release multiple layer coatings. Drug Dev Ind Pharm. 2010;36:200–8.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Tatavarti A, Mehta K, Augsburger L, Hoag S. Influence of methacrylic acrylic acid polymers on the release performance of weakly basic drugs from sustained release hydrophilic matrices. J Pharm Sci. 2004;93:2319–31.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Streubel A, Siepmann J, Dashevsky A, Bodmeier R. pH independent release of a weakly basic drug, from water-insoluble and soluble matrix tablets. J Control Release. 2000;67:101–10.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Gutsche S, Krause M, Kranz H. Strategies to overcome pH-dependant solubility of weakly basic drugs by using different types of alginates. Drug Dev Ind Pharm. 2008;34:1277–84.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Timmins P, Delargy A, Howard J. Optimization and characterization of a pH-independent extended release hydrophilic matrix tablets. Pharm Dev Technol. 1997;2:25–31.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Fassihi R, Turner S, Federici C, Hite M. Formulation development and human in vitro in vivo correlation for a novel, monolithic controlled release matrix system of high load and highly soluble drug niacin. Drug Dev Ind Pharm. 2004;30:797–807.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Fassihi R, Ritschel W. Multiple-layer, direct compression controlled release system: in vitro and in vivo evaluation. J Pharm Sci. 1993;82:750–4.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Fujisaki Y, Tadashi T, Funyu M, Tadashi U. Development of sustained release tablets containing sodium valproate: in vitro and in vivo correlation. Drug Dev Ind Pharm. 2006;32:207–17.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Avachat A, Bornare P, Dash R. Sustained release microspheres of ropinirole hydrochloride: effect of process parameters. Acta Pharm. 2011;61:363–76.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Vergnault G, Grenier P, Lauretta M, Conte U. Hydrophilic/lipophilic polymeric matrix dosage formulation. US Patent No. 7927624. April 19, 2011.Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Vaya N, Sasmal B, Giradkar P. Sustained release pharmaceutical compositions of ropinirole and process for preparation thereof. WO Patent Application No. 2010015911.Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Pollock PE, Westrup J, Yates DJ. Novel formulation of Ropinirole .US Patent Application No.2007/0059365 A1. March 15, 2007.Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Upadhay A, Bang G, Malewar N, Avachat M. Novel controlled release compositions of ropinirole. WO 2010/023693A2 March 04, 2010Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Conte U, Arsizio B, Manna A, Colombo P. System for the controlled-rate release of active substances. US Patent No. 4,839,177; June 13,1989.Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Conte U, Arsizio B, Manna A, Colombo P. Tablets with controlled-rate release of active substances. US Patent No. 5,422,123; June 6,1995.Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Gohel M, Bariya S. Advanced formulation design of venlafaxine hydrochloride coated and triple-layer tablets containing hypromellose. Pharm Dev Technol. 2009;14:650–8.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Rabiskova M, Dvorackova K, Masteikova R, Muselik J, Krejcova K. Soluble filler as a dissolution profile modulator for slightly soluble drugs in matrix tablets. Drug Dev Ind Pharm. 2009;35:930–40.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Levina M, Siahboomi AR. The influence of excipients on drug release from hydroxylpropyl methylcellulose matrix. J Pharm Sci. 2004;93:2746–54.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Mitchell S, Balwinski K. Investigation of hypromellose particle size effects on drug release from sustained release hydrophilic matrix tablets. Drug Dev Ind Pharm. 2007;33:952–8.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Moore J, Flanner H. Mathematical comparison of dissolution profiles. Pharm Technol. 1996;20:64–74.Google Scholar
  27. 27.
    Guidance for industry–waiver of in vivo bioavailability and bioequivalence studies for immediate release solid oral dosage forms based on biopharmaceutics classification system. USFDA, CDER, August 2000.Google Scholar
  28. 28.
    Food and Drug Administration; USA Accessed on 29 July 2008.
  29. 29.
    Siepmann J, Muschert S, Siepmann F, Leclercq B. Dynamic and static curing of ethyl cellulose:PVA-PEG graft copolymer film coatings. Eur J Pharm Biopharm. 2011;78:455–61.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Custred M, Vesey C, Siahboomi R. The influence of post coating thermal treatment on film properties and drug release from ethylcellulose barrier membrane coating systems. Poster reprint of colorcon at AAPS annual meeting, November 2008. Accessed on 7 April 2013
  31. 31.
    Miller R, Vadas E. The physical stability of tablets coated using an aqueous dispersion of ethylcellulose. Drug Dev Ind Pharm. 1984;10:1565–85.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Sakellariou P, Rowe R. Interactions in cellulose derivative films for oral drug delivery. Prog Polym Sci. 1995;20:889–942.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Porter S. Controlled release film coatings based on ethylcellulose. Drug Dev Ind Pharm. 1989;15:1495–521.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    Sakellariou P, Rowe R, White E. A study of the leaching/retention of water-soluble polymers in blends with ethylcellulose using torsional braid analysis. J Control Release. 1988;7:147–57.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. 35.
    Dias V, Ambudkar V, Steffenino R, Farrell T, Siahboomi R. The influence of pore-former on drug release from ethylcellulose coated multiparticulates. Technical bulletin published by Colorcon asia pvt. Ltd. Verna, Goa, India 403722 and Colorcon, Harleysville, PA, 19438,USA, 2010. Accessed on 7April 2013.
  36. 36.
    Durig T, Harcum W, Kinsey B, Tewari D, Habash S, Magee C. Water-soluble cellulose ethers as release modulators for ethylcellulose coatings on multiparticulates. Ashland specialty ingredients PTR-036-1:2011Google Scholar
  37. 37.
    Levina M, Vuong H, Siahboomi R. The effect of hypromellose as a pore- former on drug release from aqueous ethylcellulose film-coated dipyridamole-loaded non-pareil beads. Poster reprint controlled release society July 2007. Accessed on 7 April 2013
  38. 38.
    Wilson K, Crossman E. The influence of tablet shape and pan speed on intra-tablet film coating uniformity. Drug Dev Ind Pharm. 1997;23:1239–43.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. 39.
    Shen E, Farrell T, Siahboomi . Effects of core tablet size on the functionality of aqueous delayed release coatings as measured by SEM and LIBS. Technical bulletin published by Colorcon Inc. Global headquarters , 275 Ruth road, Harleysville, PA, 19438, USA.2010. Accessed on 7April 2013
  40. 40.
    Tiwari S, Rajabi- Siahboomi AR. Extended release oral drug delivery technologies: monolithic matrix systems. Edited by Jain K. Humana press 2008;437: 217–243.Google Scholar
  41. 41.
    Wan L, Heng P, Wong L. The effect of hydroxypropylmethylcellulose on water penetration into a matrix system. Int J Pharm. 1991;73:111–6.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. 42.
    Miranda A, Millan M, Caraballo I. Study of the critical points of hydroxypropylmethylcellulose matrices for controlled drug delivery. Int J Pharm. 2006;311:75–81.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. 43.
    Colombo P, Bettini R, Peppas N. Observation of swelling process and diffusion front position during swelling in hydroxypropylmethylcellulose matrices containing a soluble drug. J Control Release. 1999;61:83–91.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. 44.
    Gao P, Skoug J, Nixon P, Ju R, Stemm N, Sung K. Swelling of hydroxypropylmethylcellulose matrix tablets. 2. Mechanistic study of the influence of the formulation variables on matrix performance and drug release. J Pharm Sci. 1996;85:732–40.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. 45.
    Tahara K, Yamamoto K, Nishihata T. Overall mechanism behind matrix sustained release (SR) tablets prepared with hydroxypropylmethylcellulose 2910. J Control Release. 1995;35:59–66.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. 46.
    Colombo P, Bettini R, Santi P, Peppas N. Swellable matrices for controlled drug delivery: gel-layer behavior, mechanisms and optimal performance. Pharm Sci Technol Today. 2000;3:198–204.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. 47.
    Todd P, Hote-Gaston J, Sheick M. Comparison of swelling, erosion and gel strength of polyethylene oxide and hypromellose. Poster presented at 2008 annual meeting and exposition of AAPS, Atlanta, Georgia, November 16–20, 2008).'Hote-Gaston_Technical_Paper_2008-11-13.pdf. Accessed on 7 April 2013.
  48. 48.
    Guidance for industry–extended release oral dosage forms: development, evaluation, and application of in vitro /in vivo correlations USFDA, CDER, September 1997.Google Scholar
  49. 49.
    Wagner J, Nelson E. Kinetic analysis of blood levels and urinary excretion in the absorption phase after single doses of drugs. J Pharm Sci. 1964;53:1392–403.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© American Association of Pharmaceutical Scientists 2013

Authors and Affiliations

  • Nikhil Malewar
    • 1
    Email author
  • Makarand Avachat
    • 1
  • Varsha Pokharkar
    • 2
  • Shirish Kulkarni
    • 2
  1. 1.Lupin Ltd. (Research Park)PuneIndia
  2. 2.Department of Pharmaceutics, Poona College of PharmacyBharati Vidyapeeth UniversityPuneIndia

Personalised recommendations