In Vitro Drug Release Testing of Veterinary Pharmaceuticals

  • Shannon Higgins-Gruber
  • Michael J. Rathbone
  • Jay C. Brumfield
Chapter
Part of the Advances in Delivery Science and Technology book series (ADST)

Abstract

In vitro drug release testing for veterinary pharmaceuticals is a regulatory requirement to aid in the understanding of the in vivo performance of a dosage form. The in vitro release test is used throughout development for formulation and process characterization and post-approval to ensure product quality and therapeutic effect. The current recommended in vitro test equipment and conditions are better suited for mimicking human gastric system physiology but not that of the patients being dosed with veterinary pharmaceuticals. Veterinary dosage forms and delivery systems tend to be more complex and varied because of the diversity of species, size of the animals, and prevalence of unconventional excipients often not used in human health drug products. Therefore, the development of in vitro release tests specific for use with veterinary medicines can be challenging and unconventional with respect to the expectations from the regulatory agencies. Regardless of the analytical approach to development, the final in vitro release test is expected to be ­discriminating with respect to the impact of critical quality attributes on in vivo behavior and easily performed in quality control environments.

References

  1. 1.
    United States Pharmacopeia 34—National Formulary 29 (2011) <1088> In vitro and in vivo evaluation of dosage forms. United States Pharmacopeia Convention, Rockville, MD, pp 612–617Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    United States Pharmacopeia 34—National Formulary 29 (2011) <711> Dissolution. United States Pharmacopeia Convention, Rockville, MD, pp 278–284Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Siewart M, Dressman J, Brown C, Shah V (2003) FIP/AAPS guidelines for dissolution/in vitro release testing of novel/special dosage forms. Dissolution Technol 10(1):6–15Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Brown WE (2005) Compendial requirements of dissolution testing – European pharmacopoeia, United States pharmacopeia. In: Dressman J, Krämer J (eds) Pharmaceutical Dissolution Testing, 1st edn. Taylor & Francis, New York pp, pp 69–80CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Kramer J, Grady LT, Gajendran J (2005) Historical development of dissolution testing. In: Dressman J, Krämer J (eds) Pharmaceutical Dissolution Testing, 1st edn. Taylor & Francis, New York pp, pp 1–37Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Abdou HM (1989) Mechanism of drug absorption. In: Gennaro A, Migdalof B, Hassert GL, Medwick T (eds) Dissolution, Bioavailability, and Bioequivalence, 1st edn. Mack Publishing Company, Pennsylvania pp, pp 303–314Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Martinez M, Amidon G, Clarke L, Jones WW, Mitra A, Riviere J (2002) Applying the biopharmaceutics classification system to veterinary pharmaceutical products, part II: physiological considerations. Adv Drug Deliv Rev 54:825–850PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    United States Food and Drug Administration (2000) Guidance for industry. Waiver of in vivo bioavailability and bioequivalence studies for immediate-release solid oral dosage forms based on a biopharmaceutics classification system. Center for Drug Evaluation and Research (CDER), Rockville, MDGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Reddy BB, Karunakar A (2011) Biopharmaceutics classification system: a regulatory approach. Dissolution Technol 18(1):31–37Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Martinez M, Augsburger L, Johnston T, Jones WW (2002) Applying the biopharmaceutics classification system to veterinary pharmaceutical products, part I: biopharmaceutics and formulation considerations. Adv Drug Deliv Rev 54:805–824PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Parker J, Gray V (2006) Highlights of the AAPS workshop on dissolution testing for the 21st Century. Dissolution Technol 13(3):26–31Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    D’Souza SS, Lozano R, Mayock S, Gray V (2010) AAPS workshop on the role of dissolution in QbD and drug product life cycle: a commentary. Dissolution Technol 17(4):41–45Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    United States Food and Drug Administration (1997) Guidance for industry. Dissolution testing of immediate release solid oral dosage forms. Center for Drug Evaluation and Research (CDER), Rockville, MDGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Brown CK (2005) Dissolution method development: an industry perspective. In: Dressman J, Krämer J (eds) Pharmaceutical Dissolution Testing, 1st edn. Taylor & Francis, New York pp, pp 351–372CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Gray VA (2005) Compendial testing equipment: calibration, qualification, and sources of error. In: Dressman J, Krämer J (eds) Pharmaceutical dissolution testing, 1st edn. Taylor & Francis, New York, pp 39–67CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    European Pharmacopoeia 7.0 (2011) 2.9.4 Dissolution test for transdermal patches: 263–265Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    European Pharmacopoeia 7.0 (2011) 2.9.25 Dissolution test for medicated chewing gums: 289–290Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    European Pharmacopoeia 7.0 (2011) 2.9.42 Dissolution test for lipophilic solid dosage forms: 319–321Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Rohrs BR, Burch-Clark DL, Witt MJ (1995) USP dissolution apparatus 3 (reciprocating cylinder): instrument parameters effects on drug release from sustained release formulations. J Pharm Sci 84:922–926PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Lonney TJ (1996) USP apparatus 4 (flow through method) primer. Dissolution Technol 3(2):10–12Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Emami J (2006) In vitro-in vivo correlation: from theory to applications. J Pharm Sci 9(2):31–51Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Abdou HM (1989) Theory of dissolution. In: Gennaro A, Migdalof B, Hassert GL, Medwick T (eds) Dissolution, bioavailability, and bioequivalence, 1st edn. Mack Publishing Company, Easton, PA, pp 11–36Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    United States Pharmacopeia 34—National Formulary 29 (2011) <1092> The dissolution procedure. United States Pharmacopeia Convention, Rockville, MD, pp 624–630Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    European Pharmacopoeia 7.0 (2011) 5.17.1 Recommendations on dissolution testing: 665–667Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    Marques M (2004) Dissolution media simulating fasted and fed states. Dissolution Technol 11(2):16Google Scholar
  26. 26.
    Baggot JD, Brown SA (2010) Basis for selection of the dosage form. In: Hardee GE, Baggot JD (eds) Development and formulation of veterinary dosage forms, vol 88, Drugs and the Pharmaceutical Sciences. Informa Healthcare, New York, pp 7–144Google Scholar
  27. 27.
    Fleischer S, Sharkey M, Mealey K, Ostrander EA, Martinez M (2008) Pharmacogenetic and metabolic differences between dog breeds: their impact on canine medicine and the use of the dog as a preclinical animal model. AAPS J 10(1):110–119PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Martinez MN, Papich MG (2009) Factors influencing the gastric residence of dosage forms in dogs. J Pharm Sci 98(3):844–860PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Sagawa K, Fasheng L, Liese R, Sutton SC (2009) Fed and fasted gastric pH and gastric residence time in conscious Beagle dogs. J Pharm Sci 98(7):2494–2500PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Sutton SC (2004) Companion animal physiology and dosage form performance. Adv Drug Deliv Rev 56:1383–1398PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Vandamme TF, Ellis KJ (2004) Issues and challenges in developing ruminal drug delivery systems. Adv Drug Deliv Rev 56:1415–1436PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Wu SHW, Papas A (1997) Rumen-stable delivery systems. Adv Drug Deliv Rev 28:323–334PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Fahmy R, Marnane W, Bensley D, Hollenbeck RG (2002) Dissolution test development for complex veterinary dosage forms: oral boluses. AAPS Pharm Sci 4(4):1–8CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    Fahmy R, Marnane W, Bensley D, Hollenbeck RG (2001) Dissolution testing of veterinary products: dissolution testing of aspirin boluses. Dissolution Technol 8(1):1–4Google Scholar
  35. 35.
    Fahmy R, Marnane W, Bensley D, Hollenbeck RG (2001) Dissolution testing of veterinary products: dissolution testing of tetracycline boluses. Dissolution Technol 8(1):1–3Google Scholar
  36. 36.
    Zingerman JR, Cardinal JR, Chern RT, Holste J, Williams JB, Eckenhoff B, Wright J (1997) The in vitro and in vivo performance of an osmotically controlled delivery system—IVOMEC SR® bolus. J Control Release 47:1–11CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. 37.
    Brown CK, Friedel HD, Barker AR, Buhse LF, Keitel S, Cecil TL, Kraemer J, Morris JM, Reppas C, Stickelmeyer MP, Yomota C, Shah VP (2011) FIP/AAPS joint workshop report: dissolution/in vitro release testing of novel/special dosage forms. AAPS Pharm Sci Technol 12(2):782–794CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. 38.
    Martinez M, Rathbone M, Burgess D, Huynh M (2008) In vitro and in vivo considerations associated with parenteral sustained release products: a review based upon information presented and points expressed at the 2007 Controlled Release Society Annual Meeting. J Control Release 129:79–87PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. 39.
    Iyer SS, Barr WH, Karnes TH (2006) Profiling in vitro drug release from subcutaneous implants: a review of current status and potential implications on drug development. Biopharm Drug Dispos 27(4):157–170PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. 40.
    Dor PJM, Fix JA (2000) In vitro determination of disintegration time of quick-dissolve tablets using a new method. Pharm Dev Technol 5(4):575–577PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. 41.
    Marroum PJ (2008) Setting meaningful in vitro dissolution specifications. Available via the American Pharmaceutical Review website. http://americanpharmaceuticalreview.com/ViewArticle.aspx?ContentID=3210. Accessed 06 Oct 2011
  42. 42.
    Rathbone MJ, Shen J, Ogle CR, Burggraaf S, Bunt CR (2000) In vitro drug release testing of controlled release veterinary drug products. In: Rathbone MJ, Gurny R (eds) Controlled Release Veterinary Drug Delivery: Biological and Pharmaceutical Considerations, 1st edn. Elsevier, New York pp, pp 311–332CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. 43.
    Ahmed I, Kasraian K (2002) Pharmaceutical challenges in veterinary product development. Adv Drug Deliv Rev 54:871–882PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. 44.
    Rathbone MJ, Martinez MN, Huynh M, Burgess D (2009) CRS/AAPS joint workshop on critical variables in the in vitro and in vivo performance of parenteral sustained-release products. Dissolution Technol 16(2):55–56Google Scholar
  45. 45.
    Shah V (2005) Establishing dissolution specification current CMC practice. Advisory Committee for Pharmaceutical Sciences. Available via FDA website. http://www.fda.gov/ohrms/dockets/ac/05/slides/2005-4137S1_04_Shah.ppt. Accessed 06 Oct 2011
  46. 46.
    Burgess DJ, Crommelin DJA, Hussain AS, Chen M (2004) Assuring quality and performance of sustained and controlled release parenterals: EUFEPS workshop report. AAPS Pharm Sci 6(1):1–12CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. 47.
    United States Food and Drug Administration (2008) Guidance for industry. Orally disintegrating tablets. Center for Drug Evaluation and Research (CDER), Rockville, MDGoogle Scholar
  48. 48.
    The European Agency for the Evaluation of Medicinal Products (2004) Note for guidance on the quality of modified release dosage forms for veterinary use. The European Agency for the Evaluation of Medicinal Products, LondonGoogle Scholar
  49. 49.
    Sunkara G, Chilukuri DM (2003) IVIVC: an important tool in the development of drug delivery systems. Drug Deliv Technol 3(4). Accessed via journal website. http://www.drugdeliverytech.com/ME2/dirmod.asp?sid=4306B1E9C3CC4E07A4D64E23FBDB232C&nm=Back+Issues&type=Publishing&mod=Publications%3A%3AArticle&mid=8F3A7027421841978F18BE895F87F791&tier=4&id=B240FEB1DF9D435BA313EFF2E91F5AD7. Accessed 06 Oct 2011
  50. 50.
    Uppoor VRS (2001) Regulatory perspectives on in vitro (dissolution)/in vivo (bioavailability) correlations. J Control Release 72:127–132PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. 51.
    Karalis V, Magklara E, Shah VP, Macheras P (2010) From drug delivery systems to drug release, dissolution, IVIVC, BCS, bioequivalence and biowaivers. Pharm Res 27:2018–2029PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. 52.
    Gillespie WR (1997) Convolution-based approaches for in vitro-in vivo correlation modeling In, In Vitro-In Vivo Correlations, 1st edn. Plenum Press, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  53. 53.
    Rathbone MJ, Bunt CR, Ogle CR, Burggraaf S, Ogle C, Macmillan KL, Burke CR, Pickering KL (2002) Reengineering of a commercially available.bovine intravaginal insert (CIDR insert) containing progesterone. J Control Release 85:105–115PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. 54.
    Rathbone MJ, Macmillan KL, Bunt CR, Burggraaf S, Burke C (1997) Conceptual and commercially available intravaginal veterinary drug delivery systems (invited review). Adv Drug Deliv Rev 28:363–392PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. 55.
    Rathbone MJ, Macmillan KL, Inskeep K, Day M, Burggraaf S, Bunt CR (1997) Fertility ­regulation in cattle (invited review). J Control Release 54:117–148CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  56. 56.
    Rathbone MJ, Macmillan KL, Jöchle W, Boland M, Inskeep K (1998) Controlled release products for the control of the estrous cycle in cattle, sheep, goats, deer, pigs and horses (invited review). Crit Rev Ther Drug Carrier Syst 15:285–380PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  57. 57.
    Rathbone MJ, Kinder JE, Fike K, Kojima F, Clopton D, Ogle CR, Bunt CR (2001) Recent advances in bovine reproductive endocrinology and physiology and their impact on drug delivery system design for the control of the estrous cycle in cattle. Adv Drug Deliv Rev 50:277–320PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  58. 58.
    Rathbone MJ, Macmillan KL (2004) Applications of controlled release science and technology: progesterone. Cont Rel Newsl 21:8–9Google Scholar
  59. 59.
    Hanson WA (1982) Handbook of Dissolution Testing. Pharmaceutical Technology Publications, Springfield, USAGoogle Scholar
  60. 60.
    Banakar UV (1991) Factors that Influence Dissolution Testing. In: Banakar UV (ed) Pharmaceutical Dissolution Testing, Chapter 5. Marcel Dekkar, Inc., New York, USA, pp 133–187Google Scholar
  61. 61.
    Ogle CR. (1999) Design, development and optimisation of veterinary intravaginal controlled release drug delivery systems. PhD Thesis, University of WaikatoGoogle Scholar
  62. 62.
    Rathbone MJ, Bunt CR, Ogle CR, Burggraaf S, Ogle C, Macmillan KL, Pickering KL (2002) Development of an injection molded poly (ε-caprolactone) intravaginal insert for the delivery of progesterone to cattle. J Control Release 85:61–71PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  63. 63.
    Bunt CR, Rathbone MJ, Burggraaf S, Ogle CR (1997) Development of a QC release assessment method for a physically large veterinary product containing a highly water insoluble drug and the effect of formulation variables upon release. Proc Int Symp Control Release Bioact Mater 24:145–146Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Controlled Release Society 2013

Authors and Affiliations

  • Shannon Higgins-Gruber
    • 1
  • Michael J. Rathbone
    • 2
  • Jay C. Brumfield
    • 1
  1. 1.Merck Animal HealthSummitUSA
  2. 2.International Medical UniversityKuala LumpurMalaysia

Personalised recommendations