Advertisement

Ethylcellulose Applications in Multiparticulate Systems

  • Ali R. Rajabi-SiahboomiEmail author
  • Raxit Y. Mehta
  • Vaibhav Ambudkar
  • Viena Dias
  • Sandip Tiwari
Chapter
Part of the Advances in Delivery Science and Technology book series (ADST)

Abstract

Ethylcellulose is a cellulose ether commonly used for barrier membrane coating of multiparticulates for modified release applications. Various attributes of ethylcellulose polymer and formulation factors may influence drug release from multiparticulate systems. Degree of substitution and viscosity grade (molecular weight) of ethylcellulose and solvent systems used for the coating process affect the resulting film properties. The formulation factors such as choice and level of plasticizer, pore former, and particle size of the substrates affect drug release characteristics. Coating process conditions such as product temperature, air flow, spray properties, and humidity of the inlet air all individually or interactively affect properties of the barrier membrane film and, therefore, functionality of the coated multiparticulates. This chapter provides an insight into the use and applications of ethylcellulose in barrier membrane coatings of multiparticulates.

Keywords

Ethylcellulose Multiparticulates Controlled release Extended release Coatings Barrier membrane Drug release 

References

  1. 1.
    ETHOCEL Ethylcellulose polymers technical handbook, Dow Cellulosic, Available at: http://www.dow.com/dowwolff/en/pdf/192-00818.pdf. Accessed May 2016.
  2. 2.
    Rekhi G, Jambhekar S. Ethylcellulose – a polymer review. Drug Dev Ind Pharm. 1995;21(1):61–77.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Porter SC. Controlled release film coatings based on ethylcellulose. Drug Dev Ind Pharm. 1989;15(10):1495–521.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Surelease, Ethylcellulose Dispersion Type B NF, Product information. Available at: http://www.colorcon.com/literature/marketing/mr/Extended%20Release/Surelease/English/pi_surelease_prod_info_v3_2016.pdf. Accessed May 2016.
  5. 5.
    Rowe RC. Molecular weight studies on ethyl cellulose used in film coating. Acta Pharm Suec. 1982;19:157–60.Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    USP/NF, United States Pharmacopeia/National Formulary, monograph “ethylcellulose” and general chapter <911>, United States Pharmacopeial Convention, Inc., 12601 Twinbrook Parkway, Rockville, MD 20852.Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Aquacoat ECD Technical Data. FMC BioPolymer. 2007.Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Lecomte F, Siepmann J, Walther M, MacRae R, Bodmeier R. Polymer blends used for the coating of multiparticulates: comparison of aqueous and organic coating techniques. Pharm Res. 2004;21(5):882–90.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Onions A. Films from water – based colloidal dispersions. Manuf Chem. 1986;3:55–9 & 4, 66–7.Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Steward PA, Hearn J, Wilkinson MC. An overview of polymer latex film formation and properties. Adv Colloid Interf Sci. 2000;865:195–267.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Wheatley TA, Steuernagel CR. Latex emulsions for controlled drug delivery. In: JW MG, editor. Aqueous polymeric coatings for pharmaceutical dosage forms. New York: Marcel Dekker Inc.; 1997. p. 1–54.Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Ozturk AG, Ozturk SS, Palsson BO, Wheatley TA, Dressman JB. Mechanism of release from pellets coated with an ethylcellulose-based film. J Control Release. 1990;14:203–13.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Iyer U, Hong W-H, Das N, Ghebre-Sellassie I. Comparative evaluation of three organic solvent and dispersion-based ethylcellulose coating formulations. Pharm Technol. 1990;14(9):68–86.Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Zhang G, Schwartz JB, Schnaare RL. Bead coating. I. Change in release kinetics (and mechanism) due to coating level. Pharm Res. 1991;8(3):331–5.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Rekhi GS, Porter SC, Jambhekar SS. Factors affecting the release of propranolol hydrochloride from beads coated with aqueous polymeric dispersions. Drug Dev Ind Pharm. 1995;21(6):709–29.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Linsstedt B, Ragnarsson G, Hjartstam J. Osmotic pumping as a release mechanism for membrane coated drug formulations. Int J Pharm. 1989;56:261–8.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Muschert S, Siepmann F, Leclerq B, Carlin B, Siepmann J. Prediction of drug release from ethylcellulose coated pellets. J Control Release. 2009;135:71–9.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Rowe RC. The effect of the molecular weight of ethyl cellulose on the drug release properties of mixed films of ethylcellulose and hydroxypropyl methylcellulose. Int J Pharm. 1986;29:37–41.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Rowe RC. Molecular weight dependence of the properties of ethylcellulose and hydroxypropyl methylcellulose films. Int J Pharm. 1992;88:405–8.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Dias VD, Ambudkar V, Vernekar P, Steffenino R, Rajabi-Siahboomi AR. The influence of molecular weight on drug release from ethylcellulose barrier membrane multiparticulates. Copenhagen: Controlled Release Society Annual Meeting and Exposition; 2009. Copenhagen, Denmark.Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Hjartstam J, Borg K, Lindstedt B. The effect of tensile stress on permeability of free films of ethylcellulose containing hydroxypropyl methylcellulose. Int J Pharm. 1990;61:101–7.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Jones D, Medlicott N. Casting solvent controlled release of chlorhexidine from ethylcellulose films prepared by solvent evaporation. Int J Pharm. 1995;114:257–61.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Kent DJ, Rowe RC. Solubility studies on ethylcellulose used in film coating. J Pharm Pharmacol. 1978;30:808–10.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Arwidsson H, Nicklasson M. Application of intrinsic viscosity and interaction constant as a formulation tool for film coating. I. Studies on ethyl cellulose 10 cps in organic solvents. Int J Pharm. 1989;56:187–93.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Arwidsson H, Nicklasson M. Application of intrinsic viscosity and interaction constant as a formulation tool for film coating. II. Studies on different grades of ethylcellulose in organic solvent systems. Int. J. Int J Pharm. 1990;58:73–7.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Narisawa S, Yoshino H, Hirakawa Y, Noda K. Porosity-controlled ethylcellulose film coating. II. Spontaneous porous film formation in the spraying process and its solute permeability. Int J Pharm. 1993;104:95–106.Google Scholar
  27. 27.
    Guo JH. Investigating the effect of water on the porosity of polymer film for controlled drug delivery. Drug Dev Ind Pharm. 1994;20(16):2467–77.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Dias VD, Ambudkar V, Fegely KA, Rajabi-Siahboomi AR. The influence of solvent type on extended release coating with ethylcellulose barrier membrane. New York: Controlled Release Society Annual Meeting and Exposition; 2008.Google Scholar
  29. 29.
    Lindholm T, Huhtikangas A, Saarikivi P. Organic solvent residues in free ethylcellulose films. Int J Pharm. 1984;21:119–21.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Sakellariou P, Rowe RC, White EFT. An evaluation of the interaction and plasticizing efficiency of the polyethylene glycols in ethyl cellulose and hydroxypropyl methylcellulose films using torsional braid pendulum. Int J Pharm. 1986;31:55–64.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Vesey CF, Farrell T, Rajabi-Siahboomi AR. Evaluation of alternative plasticizers for Surelease®, an aqueous ethylcellulose dispersion for modified release film coating. Miami: Controlled Release Society Annual Meeting and Exposition; 2005.Google Scholar
  32. 32.
    Rowe RC, Sheskey PJ, Owen SC, editors. Handbook of pharmaceutical excipients. London: Pharmaceutical Press; 2006.Google Scholar
  33. 33.
    Hyppölä R, Husson I, Sundholm F. Evaluation of physical properties of plasticized ethyl cellulose films cast from ethanol solution part I. Int J Pharm. 1996;133:161–70.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    Dias VD, Ambudkar V, Vernekar P, Steffenino R, Rajabi-Siahboomi AR. Influence of plasticizer type and level on drug release from ethylcellulose barrier membrane multi-particulates. Copenhagen: Controlled Release Society Annual Meeting and Exposition; 2009.Google Scholar
  35. 35.
    Ye Z, Rombout P, Remon JP, Vervaet C, Van den Mooter G. Correlation between the permeability of metoprolol tartrate through plasticized isolated ethylcellulose/hydroxypropyl methylcellulose films and drug release from reservoir pellets. Eur J Pharm Biopharm. 2007;67:485–90.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  36. 36.
    Sakellariou P, Rowe RC, White EFT. The thermomechanical properties and glass transition temperatures of some cellulose derivatives used in film coatings. Int J Pharm. 1985;27:267–77.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. 37.
    Bodmeir R, Paeratakul O. The distribution of plasticizers between aqueous and polymer phases in aqueous colloidal polymer dispersions. Int J Pharm. 1994;103:47–54.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. 38.
    Iyer U, Hong W, Das N, Ghebre-Sellassie I. Comparative evaluation of three organic solvent and dispersion-based ethylcellulose coating formulations. Pharm Tech. 1990;14:68–86.Google Scholar
  39. 39.
    Lippold BC, Lippold BH, Sutter BK, Gunder W. Properties of aqueous, plasticizer containing ethylcellulose dispersions and prepared films in respect to the production of oral extended release formulations. Drug Dev Ind Pharm. 1990;16(11):1725–47.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. 40.
    Wesseling M, Bodmeier R. Influence of plasticization time, curing conditions, storage time, and core properties of the drug release from Aquacoat-coated pellets. Pharm Dev Technol. 2001;6(3):325–31.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  41. 41.
    Bodmeir R, Paeratakul O. Leaching of water-soluble plasticizers from polymeric films prepared from aqueous colloidal polymer dispersions. Drug Dev Ind Pharm. 1992;18(17):1865–82.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. 42.
    Frohoff-Hulsmann MA, Lippold BC, McGinity JW. Aqueous ethyl cellulose dispersion containing plasticizers of different water solubility and hydroxypropyl methyl-cellulose as coating material for diffusion pellets II: properties of sprayed films. Eur J Pharm Biopharm. 1999;48:67–75.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  43. 43.
    Hutchings D, Sakr A. Influence of pH and plasticizers on drug release from ethylcellulose pseudolatex coated pellets. J Pharm Sci. 1994;83(10):1386–90.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  44. 44.
    Munday DL, Fassihi AR. Controlled release delivery: effect of coating composition on release characteristics of mini-tablets. Int J Pharm. 1988;52:109–14.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. 45.
    Lindholm T, Juslin M. Controlled release tablets- part 3: ethylcellulose coats containing surfactants and powdered matter. Pharm Ind. 1982;44(9):937–41.Google Scholar
  46. 46.
    Hjärtstam J, Hjertberg T. Swelling of pellets coated with a composite film containing ethylcellulose and hydroxypropyl methylcellulose. Int J Pharm. 1998;161:23–8.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. 47.
    Dias VD, Ambudkar V, Stefennino R, Farrell T, Siahboomi AR. The influence of pore-former on drug release from ethylcellulose coated multiparticulates. Portland: Controlled Release Society Annual Meeting and Exposition; 2010.Google Scholar
  48. 48.
    Lindholm T, Lindholm B-A, Niskanen M, Koskiniemi J. Polysorbate 20 as a drug release regulator in ethyl cellulose film coatings. J Pharm Pharmacol. 1986;38:686–8.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  49. 49.
    Siew LF, Basit AW, Newton JM. The properties of amylose-ethylcellulose films cast from organic-based solvents as potential coatings for colonic drug delivery. Eu J Pharm Sci. 2000;11:133–9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. 50.
    Siew LF, Basit AW, Newton JM. The potential of organic-based amylose-ethylcellulose film coatings as oral colon-specific drug delivery systems. AAPS Pharm SciTech. 2000;1(3):E22.Google Scholar
  51. 51.
    Sakellariou P, Rowe RC. The morphology of blends of ethylcellulose with hydroxypropyl methylcellulose as used in film coating. Int J Phar. 1995;125:289–96.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. 52.
    Sakellariou P, Rowe RC, White EFT. Polymer/polymer interaction in blends of ethylcellulose with both cellulose derivatives and polyethylene glycol 6000. Int J Pharm. 1986;34:93–103.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. 53.
    Rowe RC. The prediction of compatibility/incompatibility in blends of ethylcellulose with hydroxypropyl methylcellulose or hydroxypropylcellulose using 2- dimensional solubility parameter maps. J Pharm Pharmacol. 1986;38:214–5.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  54. 54.
    Sadeghi F, Ford JL, Rubinstein MH, Rajabi-Siahboomi AR. Study of drug release from pellets coated with Surelease containing hydroxypropyl methylcellulose. Drug Dev Ind Pharm. 2000;27(5):419–30.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. 55.
    Tang L, Schwartz JB, Porter SC, Schanaare RL, Wigent RJ. Drug release from film-coated chlorpheniramine maleate nonpareil beads: effect of water-soluble polymer, coating level, and soluble core material. Pharm Dev Tech. 2000;5(3):383–90.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  56. 56.
    Yuen KH, Deshmukh AA, Newton JM. Development and in-vitro evaluation of a multiparticulate sustained release theophylline formulation. Drug Dev Ind Pharm. 1993;19(8):855–74.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  57. 57.
    Milojevic S, Newton JM, Cummings JH, Gibson G, Botham RL, Ring SG, Allwood M, Stockham M. In vitro and in vivo evaluation of amylase coated pellets for colon specific drug delivery. Washington, DC: Proceed. Intern. Symp. Control. Rel. Bioact. Mater. Controlled Release Society; 1993.Google Scholar
  58. 58.
    Rohera BD, Parikh NH. Influence of type and level of water-soluble additives on drug release and surface and mechanical properties of Surelease films. Pharm Dev and Tech. 2002;7(4):421–32.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  59. 59.
    Larsson M, Hjärtstam J, Berndtsson J, Stading M, Larsson A. Effect of ethanol on the water permeability of controlled release films composed of ethyl cellulose and hydroxypropyl cellulose. Eur J Pharm Biopharm. 2010;76(3):428–32.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  60. 60.
    Appel LE, Zentner GM. Use of modified ethylcellulose lattices for microporous coating of osmotic tablets. Pharm Res. 1991;8(5):600–4.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  61. 61.
    Lecomte F, Siepmann J, Walther M, MacRae RJ, Bodmeier R. Polymer blends used for the aqueous coating of solid dosage forms: importance of the type of plasticizer. J Control Release. 2004;99:1–13.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  62. 62.
    Siepmann F, Hoffmann A, Leclercq B, Carlin B, Siepmann J. How to adjust desired drug release patterns from ethylcellulose-coated dosage forms. Int J Pharm. 2007;119(2):182–9.Google Scholar
  63. 63.
    Young C, Dietzsch C, Fegely K, Rajabi-Siahboomi A. The Influence of a pH dependent pore former on acid protection from tablets coated with an aqueous ethyl cellulose barrier membrane. Vienna: Controlled Release Society Annual Meeting and Exposition; 2006.Google Scholar
  64. 64.
    Macleod GS, Fell JT, Collett JH. Studies on the physical properties of mixed pectin/ethylcellulose films intended for colonic drug delivery. Int J Pharm. 1997;157:53–60.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  65. 65.
    Ong KT, Rege PR, Rajabi-Siahboomi AR. Effect of hypromellose as a poreformer in aqueous ethylcellulose dispersion: characterization of dispersion properties. Vienna: Annual Meeting of the Controlled Release Society; 2006.Google Scholar
  66. 66.
    Wong D, Bodmeier R. Flocculation of an aqueous colloidal ethyl cellulose dispersion (Aquacoat) with a water-soluble polymer, hydroxypropyl methylcellulose. Eur J Biopharm. 1994;42(1):12–5.Google Scholar
  67. 67.
    Ong K, Rege PR, Rajabi-Siahboomi AR. Hypromellose as a pore former in aqueous ethylcellulose dispersion: stability and film properties. San Antonio: Annual Meeting of the American Association of Pharmaceutical Scientists; 2006.Google Scholar
  68. 68.
    Bodmeier R, Guo X, Paeratakul O. Process and formulation factors affecting the drug release from pellets coated with the ethylcellulose-pseudolatex Aquacoat. In: JW MG, editor. Aqueous polymeric coatings for pharmaceutical dosage forms. New York: Marcel Dekker Inc.; 1997. p. 55–80.Google Scholar
  69. 69.
    Frohoff-Hülsmann MA, Schmitz A, Lippold BC. Aqueous ethylcellulose dispersions containing plasticizers of different water solubility and hydroxypropyl methylcellulose as coating material for diffusion pellets. I Drug release from coated pellets. Int J Pharm. 1999;177:69–82.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  70. 70.
    Rajabi-Siahboomi AR, Fegely K, Ong KT. Compatibility of polymeric pore-formers with an aqueous ethylcellulose (EC) dispersion and their effects on film and drug release properties. Diego: Annual Meeting of the American Association of Pharmaceutical Scientists; 2007.Google Scholar
  71. 71.
    Chan LW, Ong KT, Heng PWS. Novel film modifiers to alter the physical properties of composite ethylcellulose films. Pharm Res. 2005;22(3):476–89.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  72. 72.
    Opadry EC. Ethylcellulose Organic Coating System, Colorcon, Inc. Available at: http://www.colorcon.com/literature/marketing/fc/Opadry%20EC/8523%20-%20Opadry%20EC%20Brochure%20V11%20web%20ready.pdf. Accessed on May 2016.
  73. 73.
    Martin L, Teckoe J, Rajabi-Siahboomi AR. Effect of coating weight gain and pore-former level on drug release with a fully formulated ethylcellulose barrier membrane coating system. Orlando: American Association of Pharmaceutical Scientist Annual Meeting and Exposition; 2015.Google Scholar
  74. 74.
    Sadeghi F, Ford JL, Rajabi-Siahboomi A. The influence of drug type on the release profiles from Surelease-coated pellets. Int J Pharm. 2003;254(2):123–35.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  75. 75.
    Nesbitt R, Mahjour M, Mills NL, Fawzi MB. Effect of substrate on mass release from ethylcellulose latex coated pellets. J Control Release. 1994;32(1):71–7.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  76. 76.
    Porter SC, Ghebre-Sellassie I. Key factors in the development of modified-release pellets. In: Ghebre-Sellassie I, editor. Multiparticulate oral drug delivery: Informa Healthcare; 1994. p. 217–84.Google Scholar
  77. 77.
    Steffenino R, Rajabi-Siahboomi AR, Grasman N, Larsen P, Rogers T, Shrestha U, Wallick D. The Influence of coating system type on acetaminophen release from ethylcellulose barrier membrane coated multiparticulates. Portland: Annual Meeting of the Controlled Release Society; 2010.Google Scholar
  78. 78.
    Yang ST, Ghebre-Sellassie I. The effect of product bed temperature on the microstructure of Aquacoat-based controlled release coatings. Int J Pharm. 1990;60:109–24.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  79. 79.
    Yang ST, Van Savage G, Weiss J, Ghebre-Sellassie I. The effect of spay mode and chamber geometry of fluid-bed coating equipment and other parameters on an aqueous-based ethylcellulose coating. Int J Pharm. 1992;86:247–57.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  80. 80.
    Ragnarsson G, Joansson MO. Coated drug cores in multi-unit preparations- influence of particle size. Drug Dev Ind Pharm. 1988;14(15–17):2285–97.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  81. 81.
    Jones DM. Factors to consider in fluid-bed processing. Pharm Technol. 1985;9(4):50–62.Google Scholar
  82. 82.
    Chang RK, Hsiao CH, Robinson JR. A review of aqueous coating techniques and preliminary data on release from a theophylline product. Pharm Technol. 1987;3:56–68.Google Scholar
  83. 83.
    Lippold BH, Sutter BK, Lippold BC. Parameters controlling drug release from pellets coated with aqueous ethyl cellulose dispersion. Int J Pharm. 1989;54:15–25.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  84. 84.
    Gilligan CA, Po ALW. Factors affecting drug release from a pellet system coated with an aqueous colloidal dispersion. Int J Pharm. 1991;73:51–68.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  85. 85.
    Arwidsson H, Hjelstuen O, Ingason D, Graffner C. Properties of ethylcellulose films from extended release; III. Influence of process factors when using aqueous dispersions. Acta Pharm Nord. 1991;3(4):223–8.Google Scholar
  86. 86.
    Vesey CF, Rizzo M, Rajabi-Siahboomi AR. Identification and influence of critical coating process parameters on drug release from a fully formulated aqueous ethylcellulose dispersion. San Diego: Annual Meeting and exposition of American Association of Pharmaceutical Society; 2007.Google Scholar
  87. 87.
    Arwidsson H. Properties of ethylcellulose films for extended release I. Influence of process factors when using organic solutions. Acta Pharm Nord. 1991;3(1):25–30.Google Scholar
  88. 88.
    Scattergood LK, Fegely KA, Rege PR, Ferrizzi DM, Rajabi-Siahboomi AR. Comparative study of theoretical versus actual weight gain for a Surelease barrier membrane on coated pellets. Baltimore: Annual Meeting and Exposition of American Association of Pharmaceutical Society; 2004.Google Scholar
  89. 89.
    Rekhi G, Mendes RW, Porter SC, Jambhekar SS. Aqueous polymeric dispersions for controlled drug delivery- Wurster process. Pharm Technol. 1989;3:112–25.Google Scholar
  90. 90.
    Yang QW, Flament MP, Siepmann F, Busignies V, Leclerc B, Herry C. Curing of aqueous polymeric film coatings: importance of the coating level and type of plasticizer. Eur J Pharm Biopharm. 2010;74:362–70.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  91. 91.
    Hutchings D, Kuzmak B, Sakr A. Processing considerations for an EC latex coating system: influence of curing time and temperature. Pharm Res. 1994;11(10):1474–8.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  92. 92.
    Bodmeier R, Paeratakul O. The effect of curing on drug release and morphological properties of ethylcellulose pseudo-latex coated beads. Drug Dev Ind Pharm. 1994;20(9):1517–33.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  93. 93.
    Bodmeir R, Paeratakul O. Process and formulation variables affecting the drug release from chlorpheniramine maleate-loaded beads coated with commercial and self-prepared aqueous ethyl cellulose pseudolatexes. Int J Pharm. 1991;70:59–68.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  94. 94.
    Wesseling M, Bodmeier R. Drug release from beads coated with an aqueous colloidal ethylcellulose dispersion, Aquacoat or an organic ethylcellulose solution. Eur J Pharm Biopharm. 1999;47:33–8.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  95. 95.
    Ong K, Rege PR, Rajabi-Siahboomi AR. Hypromellose as a pore-former in aqueous ethylcellulose dispersion: stability and film properties. Meeting of the American Association of Pharmaceutical Scientists, San Antonio. 2006.Google Scholar
  96. 96.
    Fu Y, Yang S, Jeong SH, Kimura S, Park K. Orally fast disintegrating tablets: developments, technologies, taste-masking and clinical studies. Crit Rev Ther Drug Carrier Syst. 2004;21(6):433.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  97. 97.
    Sohi H, Sultana Y, Khar RK. Taste masking technologies in oral pharmaceuticals: recent developments and approaches. Drug Dev Ind Pharm. 2004;30(5):429–48.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  98. 98.
    Zisowsky J, Krause A, Dingemanse J. Drug development for pediatric populations: regulatory aspects. Pharmaceutics. 2010;2(4):364–88.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  99. 99.
    Ayenew Z, Puri V, Kumar L, Bansal AK. Trends in pharmaceutical taste masking technologies: a patent review. Recent Pat Drug Deliv Formul. 2009;3(1):26–39.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  100. 100.
    Thompson KC, Kaighn KN, Mukherjee IN, Diimmler CE, Weisser HT, Marncinelli C, inventors; Merck, Sharp & Dohme corp., assignee. Taste-masked formulation of raltegravir. United States patent application US20140242178 A1. 2014.Google Scholar
  101. 101.
    Mehta RY, Cunningham CR, Rajabi-Siahboomi AR. Evaluation of acetaminophen particle size and crystal morphology on taste-masking performance from coated granules and chewable tablets. Edinburgh: Control Released Society Annual Meeting and Exposition; 2015.Google Scholar
  102. 102.
    Pearnchob N, Bodmeier R. Coating of pellets with micronized ethylcellulose particles by a dry powder coating technique. Int J Pharm. 2003;268(1):1–1.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  103. 103.
    Pearnchob N, Bodmeier R. Dry polymer powder coating and comparison with conventional liquid-based coatings for Eudragit RS, ethylcellulose and shellac. Eur J Pharm Biopharm. 2003;56(3):363–9.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  104. 104.
    Kablitz CD, Urbanetz NA. Characterization of the film formation of the dry coating process. Eur J Pharm Biopharm. 2007;67(2):449–57.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Controlled Release Society 2017

Authors and Affiliations

  • Ali R. Rajabi-Siahboomi
    • 1
    Email author
  • Raxit Y. Mehta
    • 2
  • Vaibhav Ambudkar
    • 2
  • Viena Dias
    • 3
  • Sandip Tiwari
    • 4
  1. 1.Colorcon Inc.HarleysvilleUSA
  2. 2.Colorcon Inc.HarleysvilleUSA
  3. 3.Indoco Remedies Ltd.VernaIndia
  4. 4.Teva Pharmaceutical Industries Ltd. (Actavis)Fort LauderdaleUSA

Personalised recommendations