Advertisement

Characterization of Inert Cores for Multiparticulate Dosage Forms

  • Richard Sidwell
  • Jason Hansell
  • Manish Rane
  • Ali R. Rajabi-SiahboomiEmail author
Chapter
Part of the Advances in Delivery Science and Technology book series (ADST)

Abstract

For many multiparticulate products, the process begins with an inert core. As the starting material, the characteristics of an inert core influence each successive step including the end-product performance. Identifying the critical to quality attributes (CQA) of an inert core and how they influence a product is essential throughout the development, scale-up, and manufacturing stages. In this chapter, various characteristics such as surface area, particle size distribution, various density, shape, surface morphology, robustness and processability, hardness and tensile strength, and friability are discussed. These tests are beyond the pharmacopeial tests of standard and purity and usually do not appear on most of the inert core excipient manufacturers’ certificate of analysis. Understanding these characteristics helps in developing a robust product and also understands any unforeseen variability between different and the same batch of final multiparticulate dosage form.

Keywords

Inert cores Sugar sphere Pellets Beads Multiparticulates Particle size Friability 

References

  1. 1.
    Tschopp P. Starting pellets: materials, manufacturing methods, and applications. Tablets & Capsules. 2015;(13)5:10–3.Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Werner D. Sugar spheres: a versatile excipient for oral pellet medications with modified release kinetics. Pharm Technol Eur. 2006;18(4):35. http://www.pharmtech.com/sugar-spheres-versatile-excipient-oral-pellet-medications-modified-release-kinetics. Accessed 18 Aug 2015.
  3. 3.
    Nürnberg E, Wunderlich. Manufacturing pellets by extrusion and spheronization (part I). Pharm Technol Eur. 1999;11(2):41–7.Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Venkatesh GM. Development of controlled-release SK&F 82526-J buffer bead formulations with tartaric acid as the buffer. Pharm Dev Technol. 1998;3(4):477–85.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Sheehan C. Understanding the role of excipient functional category & performance-related tests in a quality-by-design framework, drug dev & del, September online issue. 2012. http://www.drug-dev.com/Main/Back-Issues/Understanding-the-Role-of-Excipient-Functional-Cat-340.aspx. Accessed 18 Aug 2015.
  6. 6.
    Colorcon Executive Summary Report. 2010. Process validation internal document no. STO-2010-1665.Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Wu Y, Levons J, Narang A, Raghavan K, Rao V. Reactive impurities in excipients: profiling, identification and mitigation of drug–excipient incompatibility. AAPS PharmSciTech. 2011;12(4):1248–63.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Scattergood L, Fegely F, Rege P, Ferrizi D Rajabi-Siahboomi A. Comparative study of theoretical versus actual weight gain for a Surelease barrier membrane on coated pellets. AAPS annual meeting and exposition, Boston; 2004.Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Colorcon Product Information Brochure. Suglets. 2013. http://www.colorcon.com/literature/marketing/ex/Suglets%C2%AE/136612%20Colorcon%20Suglets%20PIB%20Proof2.pdf. Accessed 18 Aug 2015.
  10. 10.
    USP 38/ NF 33 General chapters: <786> Particle size distribution estimation by analytical sieving. 543/547.Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Ozturk A, Ozturk S, Palsson B, Wheatley T, Dressman J. Mechanism of release from pellets coated with an ethyl cellulose-based film. J Control Release. 1990;14:203–13.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Brittain H. Particle size distribution, part III: determination by analytical sieving. Pharm Tech. 2002;(26)12:56–64.Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Bolton S, Bon C, editors. Pharmaceutical statistics. Practical and clinical applications. 4th ed. New York: Marcel and Dekker Inc.; 2004.Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Horiba Instruments Inc., Camsizer – dynamic image analyzer for particle size and shape. Brochure 980.2003/E-10-2014.Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Bruno D. Tracking process and product performance using the CAMSIZER, presented on October 16th, 2014 at Multiparticulate (MP) Formulation School, at Colorcon Inc., Harleysville; 2014.Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    ISO 13322-1:2004 static image analysis.
  17. 17.
  18. 18.
    Moore J, Flanner H. Mathematical comparison of dissolution profiles. Pharm Tech. 1996;20:64–74.Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Sudsakorn K, Turton R. Non-uniformity of particle coating on a size distribution of particles in a fluidized bed coater. Powder Technol. 2000;110:37–43.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Webb P. Volume and density determinations for particle technologists, Micromeritics Instrument Corporation:1–16. 2001. http://www.micromeritics.com/Repository/Files/Volume_and_Density_determinations_for_Particle_Technologists_0.pdf. Accessed 18 Aug 2015.
  21. 21.
    Rowe R, Sheskey P, Quinn M. Handbook of pharmaceutical excipients. 6th ed. London/Washington, DC: Pharmaceutical Press/American Pharmacists Association; 2009.Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Lightfoot D. Answers to 10 common questions about capsule filling, Tablets & Capsules, January: Back-page. 2007.Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    Engels S, Hoskinson J. Discussion of processes which utilize conical rotor technology (spheronization or spherical granulation, powder layering of actives or polymer, conventional solution/suspension application of actives of polymers) Associazione Farmaceutici Industria symposium, Rimini; 2009.Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    Vertommen J, Kinget R. The influence of five selected processing and formulation variables on the particle size, particle size distribution, and friability of pellets produced in a rotary processor. Drug Dev Ind Pharm. 1997;23:39–46.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    European pharmacopoeia 8.0, 2.9.41 Friability of granules and spheroids, p. 359–61.Google Scholar
  26. 26.
    Vass S, Cunningham C, Rajabi-Siahboomi A. Evaluation of a process relevant method for determining the robustness of sugar spheres as a drug layering substrate, AAPS annual meeting and exposition, San Diego; 2014.Google Scholar
  27. 27.
    Christiansen C, Müller B. Friability of granules – evaluation of different test methods. Pharm Ind. 2002;64(4):390–7.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Controlled Release Society 2017

Authors and Affiliations

  • Richard Sidwell
    • 1
  • Jason Hansell
    • 2
  • Manish Rane
    • 2
  • Ali R. Rajabi-Siahboomi
    • 3
    Email author
  1. 1.Recro Pharma Inc.GainesvilleUSA
  2. 2.Colorcon Inc.HarleysvilleUSA
  3. 3.Colorcon Inc.HarleysvilleUSA

Personalised recommendations