Sampling Considerations

  • Dawen Kou
  • Hua Ma
  • Edmund J. Bishop
  • Shangdong Zhan
  • Hitesh P. Chokshi
Chapter

Abstract

Accurate analytical data for pharmaceutical dosage forms are dependent on adequate sample preparation and appropriate sample analysis methods. In addition, in order for the results to truly reflect the quality of the overall batch, the sample tested must be representative of the batch. Sampling is the first step and a critical aspect of the overall analysis process. Many analysts, however, are not as familiar with sampling techniques and principles as they are with analytical techniques or even sample preparation techniques. This chapter covers some fundamental sampling considerations and strategies relevant to pharmaceutical dosage forms. Both the theoretical aspects and applications in the development, manufacture, and quality control of pharmaceutical products are discussed. Examples of issues caused by sampling bias/errors are also given.

Keywords

Shipping Assure Defend Rounded Berman 

References

  1. 21CFR Parts 210 and 211 (1996) Current good manufacturing practice: amendment of certain requirements for finished pharmaceuticals: proposed rule. Federal Register 61(87):20104–20105Google Scholar
  2. Allen T (1997) Particle size measurement powder sampling and particle size measurement, 5th edn. Chapman & Hall, London, pp 1–4Google Scholar
  3. American Society for Quality (2008a) ANSI/ASQ Z1.4 Sampling procedures and tables for inspection by attributes. ASQ, Milwaukee, WIGoogle Scholar
  4. American Society for Quality (2008b) ANSI/ASQ Z1.9 sampling procedures and tables for inspection by variables for percent nonconforming. ASQ, Milwaukee, WIGoogle Scholar
  5. American Society for Testing and Materials (2009) ASTM E2709-09 standard practice for demonstrating capability to comply with a lot acceptance procedure. ASTM, West Conshohocken, PAGoogle Scholar
  6. Bergum JS (1990) Constructing acceptance limits for multiple stage tests. Drug Dev Pharm 16(14):2153–2166CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Bergum JS, Li H (2007) Acceptance limits for the new ICH USP 29 content-uniformity test. Pharm Tech, October 2, 2007, www.pharmtech.com
  8. Bergum JS, Utter ML (2000) Process validation. In: Chow SC (ed) Encyclopedia of biopharmaceutical statistics. Marcel Dekker, New York, pp 422–439Google Scholar
  9. Bergum JS, Utter ML (2003) Statistical methods for uniformity and dissolution testing. In: Nash RA, Watchter AH (eds) Pharmaceutical process validation. Marcel Dekker, New York, pp 667–697. doi: 667 Google Scholar
  10. Berman J (2001) The compliance and science of blend uniformity analysis. PDA J Pharm Sci Tech 55(4):209–222Google Scholar
  11. Berman J, Planchard JA (1995) Blend uniformity and unit dose sampling. Drug Dev Ind Pharm 21(11):1257–1283CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Berman J, Schoeneman A, Shelton JT (1996) Unit dose sampling – a tale of two thieves. Drug Dev Ind Pharm 22(11):1121–1132CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Breunig HL, King EP (1962) Acceptance sampling of finished pharmaceutical products. J Pharm Sci 51(12):1187–1194PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Chang RK, Shukla J, Buehler J (1996) An evaluation of a unit-dose compacting sample thief and a discussion of content uniformity testing and blending validation issues. Drug Dev Ind Pharm 22(9&10):1031–1035CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Cochran WG (1977) Sampling techniques, 3rd edn. Wiley, New York, NYGoogle Scholar
  16. Garcia T, Elsheimer B, Tarczynshi F (1995) Examination of components of variance for a production scale, low dose powder blend and resulting tablets. Drug Dev Ind Pharm 21(18):2035–2045CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Garcia TP, Taylor MK, Pande GS (1998) Comparison of the performance of two sample thieves for the determination of the content uniformity of a powder blend. Pharm Dev Tech 3(1):7–12CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Green RL, Thurau G, Pixley NC, Mateos A, Reed RA, Higgins JP (2005) In-line monitoring of moisture content in fluid bed dryers using near-IR spectroscopy with consideration of sampling effects on method accuracy. Anal Chem 77:4515–4522PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Gy PM (1950) Formule donnant la masse minimale d’echantillon (A formula for the minimum sample mass), unpublished paperGoogle Scholar
  20. Gy PM (1979) Sampling of particulate materials – theory and practice. Elsevier, AmsterdamGoogle Scholar
  21. Gy PM (1998) Sampling for analytical purposes. Wiley, New York, NYGoogle Scholar
  22. Gy PM (2004a) Sampling of discrete materials – a new introduction to the theory of sampling I: quantitative approach. Chemo and Intel Lab Sys 74:7–24Google Scholar
  23. Gy PM (2004b) Sampling of discrete materials II: quantitative approach – sampling of zero-dimensional objects. Chemo and Intel Lab Sys 74:25–38Google Scholar
  24. Gy PM (2004c) Sampling of discrete materials III: quantitative approach – sampling of one-dimensional objects. Chemo and Intel Lab Sys 74:39–47Google Scholar
  25. Gy PM (2004d) Part IV: 50 years of sampling theory – a personal history. Chemo and Intel Lab Sys 74:49–60CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Gy PM (2004e) Part V: annotated literature compilation of Pierre Gy. Chemo and Intel Lab Sys 74:61–70CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Harwood CF, Ripley T (1977) Errors associated with the thief probe for bulk powder sampling. J Powder Bulk Solids Tech 11:20–29Google Scholar
  28. Izenman FC (2001) Statistical and legal aspects of the forensic study of illicit drugs. Stat Sci 16(1):35–57CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Kratochvil B, Wallace D, Taylor JK (1984) Sampling for chemical analysis. Anal Chem 56:113R–129RCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Li W, Johnson AC, Bruce R, Rasmussen H, Worosila GD (2007) The effect of beam size on real-time determination of powder blend homogeneity by an on-line near infrared sensor. J Pharm Biomed Anal 43:711–717PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Ma H, Anderson CA (2008) Characterization of powder blends by NIR chemical imaging. J Pharm Sci 97(8):3305–3320PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. MIL-STD-105E (1989) Military standard sampling procedures and tables for inspection by attributes. Supt. of Documents, US Government Printing Office, Washington, DCGoogle Scholar
  33. MIL-STD-144 (1957) Military standard sampling procedures and tables for inspection by variables for percent defective. Supt. of Documents, US Government Printing Office, Washington, DCGoogle Scholar
  34. Minkkinen P (2004) Practical applications of sampling theory. Chemo and Intel Lab Sys 74:85–94CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Murray M, Uraizee S, Sakr A (1995) Preliminary investigation of the suitability of the USP uniformity of dosage units tests for evaluating the uniformity of powder blends and their corresponding tablets. Pharm Ind 57:256–262Google Scholar
  36. Muzzio FJ, Roddy M, Brone D, Alexander AW, Sudah O (1999) An improved powder-sampling tool. Pharm Tech 23(4):92–110Google Scholar
  37. Muzzio FJ, Goodridge CL, Alexander A, Arratia P, Yang H, Sudah O, Mergen G (2003) Sampling and characterization of pharmaceutical powders and granular blends. Int J Pharm 250:51–64PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Petersen L, Minkkinen P, Esbensen KH (2005) Representative sampling for reliable data analysis: theory of sampling. Chemo and Intel Lab Sys 77:261–277Google Scholar
  39. Portillo P, Muzzio FJ, Ierapetritou MG (2006) Characterizing powder mixing processes utilizing compartment models. Int J Pharm 320:14–22PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Quackenbush FW, Rund RC (1967) The continuing problem of sampling. J Assoc Off Anal Chem 50:997–1006Google Scholar
  41. Saranadasa H (2003) The square root of N plus one sampling rule – how much confidence do we have? Pharm Tech 27(5):50–62Google Scholar
  42. The United States of America vs. Barr Laboratories, et al. (1993) 812, F. Supp. 458, District of New JerseyGoogle Scholar
  43. Torbeck LD (2005) In defense of USP singlet testing. Pharm Tech 29(2):105–106Google Scholar
  44. Torbeck LD (2009) Statistical solutions: square root of (N) + 1 sampling plan. Pharm Tech 33(10):108Google Scholar
  45. Tsong Y, Hammerstrom T, Lin K, Ong TE (1995) Dissolution test acceptance sampling plans. J Biopharm Stat 5(2):171–183PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. United States FDA (2010) Investigations operations manual, collection technique, Sect. 4.3.7.2 Random sampling http://www.fda.gov/ICECI/Inspections/IOM/ucm122525.htm#4.3.7.2. Accessed 8 Aug 2010
  47. United States Pharmacopeia 32 – National Formulary 27 (2009) US Pharmacopeial Convention, Rockville, MD, http://www.uspnf.com/uspnf/pub/index?usp=32&nf=27&s=2&officialOn=December%201,%202009. Accessed 8 Aug 2010
  48. US FDA (1994) Division of field investigations, guide to inspections of oral solid dosage forms pre/post approval issues for development and validation. United States FDA, Silver Spring, MDGoogle Scholar
  49. US FDA (1999) CEDR, Office for generic drugs, draft guidance for industry ANDAs: blend uniformity analysis (withdrawn in 2002). United States FDA, Silver Spring, MDGoogle Scholar
  50. US FDA (2003) CEDR, Draft guidance for industry: powder blends and finished dosage units - stratified in-process dosage unit sampling and assessment. United States FDA, Silver Spring, MDGoogle Scholar
  51. US FDA (2006) CEDR, Guidance for industry: investigating out-of-specification (OOS) test results for pharmaceutical production. United States FDA, Silver Spring, MDGoogle Scholar
  52. USP <601> Aerosols, nasal sprays, metered-dose inhalers, and dry powder inhalers (2009) United States Pharmacopeia 32 – National Formulary 27, http://www.uspnf.com/uspnf/pub/index?usp=32&nf=27&s=2&officialOn=December%201,%202009. Accessed 8 Aug 2010
  53. USP <711> Dissolution (2009) United States Pharmacopeia 32 – National Formulary 27, http://www.uspnf.com/uspnf/pub/index?usp=32&nf=27&s=2&officialOn=December%201,%202009. Accessed 8 Aug 2010
  54. USP <905> Uniformity of dosage units (2009) United States Pharmacopeia 32 – National Formulary 27, http://www.uspnf.com/uspnf/pub/index?usp=32&nf=27&s=2&officialOn=December%201,%202009. Accessed 8 Aug 2010

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC 2011

Authors and Affiliations

  • Dawen Kou
    • 1
  • Hua Ma
    • 2
  • Edmund J. Bishop
    • 3
  • Shangdong Zhan
    • 2
  • Hitesh P. Chokshi
    • 2
  1. 1.Pharmaceutical and Analytical R&DHoffmann La-Roche Inc.NutleyUSA
  2. 2.Pharmaceutical and Analytical R&DHoffmann-La Roche Inc.NutleyUSA
  3. 3.Quality Laboratory OperationsCelgene CorporationSummitUSA

Personalised recommendations