AAPS PharmSciTech

, Volume 19, Issue 5, pp 2068–2076 | Cite as

Roll Compaction and Tableting of High Loaded Metformin Formulations Using Efficient Binders

  • Oscar-Rupert Arndt
  • Peter KleinebuddeEmail author
Research Article


Metformin has a poor tabletability and flowability. Therefore, metformin is typically wet granulated with a binder before tableting. To save production costs, it would be desirable to implement a roll compaction/dry granulation (RCDG) process for metformin instead of using wet granulation. In order to implement RCDG, the efficiency of dry binders is crucial to ensure a high drug load and suitable properties of dry granules and tablets. This study evaluates dry granules manufactured by RCDG and subsequently tableting of high metformin content formulations (≥ 87.5%). Based on previous results, fine particle grades of hydroxypropylcellulose and copovidone in different fractions were compared as dry binders. The formulations are suitable for RCDG and tableting. Furthermore, results can be connected to in-die and out-of-die compressibility analysis. The addition of 7% of dry binder is a good compromise to generate sufficient mechanical properties on the one hand, but also to save resources and ensure a high metformin content on the other hand. Hydroxypropylcellulose was more efficient in terms of granule size, tensile strength and friability. Three percent croscarmellose was added to reach the specifications of the US Pharmacopeia regarding dissolution. The final formulation has a metformin content of 87.5%. A loss in tabletability does not occur for granules compressed at different specific compaction forces, which displays a robust tensile strength of tablets independent of the granulation process.


dry binder roll compaction tablet granule metformin 



The authors are grateful to, BASF SE (Germany), JRS (Germany) and Nippon Soda (Japan) for donation of raw materials. Nippon Soda funded this project.


  1. 1.
    Kleinebudde P. Roll compaction/dry granulation: pharmaceutical applications. Eur J Pharm Biopharm. 2004;58(2):317–26. Scholar
  2. 2.
    Miller RW. Handbook on pharmaceutical granulation. In: Parikh DM, Parikh CK, editors. Roller compaction technology. New York: Marcel Dekker; 1997. p. 99–150.Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Vervaet C, Remon JP. Continuous granulation in the pharmaceutical industry. Chem Eng Sci. 2005;60(14):3949–57. Scholar
  4. 4.
    Leane M, Pitt K, Reynolds G. A proposal for a drug product manufacturing classification system (MCS) for oral solid dosage forms. Pharm Dev Technol. 2015;20(1):12–21. Scholar
  5. 5.
    Sun CC, Kleinebudde P. Mini review: mechanisms to the loss of tabletability by dry granulation. Eur J Pharm Biopharm. 2016;106:9–14. Scholar
  6. 6.
    Malkowska S, Khan KA. Effect of re-conpression on the properties of tablets prepared by dry granulation. Drug Dev Ind Pharm. 1983;9(3):331–47. Scholar
  7. 7.
    Sun C, Himmelspach MW. Reduced tabletability of roller compacted granules as a result of granule size enlargement. J Pharm Sci. 2006;95(1):200–6. Scholar
  8. 8.
    Herting MG, Kleinebudde P. Studies on the reduction of tensile strength of tablets after roll compaction/dry granulation. Eur J Pharm Biopharm. 2008;70(1):372–9. Scholar
  9. 9.
    Mosig J, Kleinebudde P. Critical evaluation of root causes of the reduced compactability after roll compaction/dry granulation. J Pharm Sci. 2015;104(3):1108–18. Scholar
  10. 10.
    Mangal H, Kirsolak M, Kleinebudde P. Roll compaction/dry granulation: suitability of different binders. Int J Pharm. 2016;503(1–2):213–9. Scholar
  11. 11.
    Arndt O-R, Kleinebudde P. Influence of binder properties on dry granules and tablets. Powder Technol. 2017;
  12. 12.
    Moroni A. A novel copovidone binder for dry granulation and direct-compression tableting. Pharm Technol. 2001;25(9 SUPPL):8–12.Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Herting MG, Klose K, Kleinebudde P. Comparison of different dry binders for roll compaction/dry granulation. Pharm Dev Technol. 2007;12(5):525–32. Scholar
  14. 14.
    King P, Peacock I, Donnelly R. The UK prospective diabetes study (UKPDS): clinical and therapeutic implications for type 2 diabetes. Br J Clin Pharmacol. 1999;48(5):643–8. Scholar
  15. 15.
    G U O Aşhar, N. Nitik, M. Adiyaman. Dry granulation process for producing tablet compositions of metformin and compositions thereof, EP 2938362 B1, Zentiva Sağlik Ürünleri San. Ve. Tic. A.Ş. 2016.Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Fell JT, Newton JM. Determination of tablet strength by the diametral-compression test. J Pharm Sci. 1970;59(5):688–91. Scholar
  17. 17.
    Sonnergaard JM. A critical evaluation of the Heckel equation. Int J Pharm. 1999;193(1):63–71. Scholar
  18. 18.
    Sun C, Grant DJ. Influence of elastic deformation of particles on Heckel analysis. Pharm Dev Technol. 2001;6(2):193–200. Scholar
  19. 19.
    Klevan I, Nordström J, Bauer-Brandl A, Alderborn G. On the physical interpretation of the initial bending of a Shapiro–Konopicky–Heckel compression profile. Eur J Pharm Biopharm. 2009;71(2):395–401. Scholar
  20. 20.
    Takasaki H, Yonemochi E, Ito M, Wada K, Terada K. The importance of binder moisture content in metformin HCL high-dose formulations prepared by moist aqueous granulation (MAG). Results Pharma Sci. 2015;5:1–7. Scholar

Copyright information

© American Association of Pharmaceutical Scientists 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Institute of Pharmaceutics and BiopharmaceuticsHeinrich Heine UniversityDuesseldorfGermany

Personalised recommendations