| Literature DB >> 29689061 |
Paloma Flórez Borges1,2, Encarna García-Montoya1, Pilar Pérez-Lozano1, Enric Jo2, Montserrat Miñarro1, Albert Manich3, Josep Maria Suñé-Negre1.
Abstract
A preformulation study of an oral lyophilisate with cetirizine dihydrochloride (CTZ) as active ingredient, mannitol and PVP K30 as bulking agents is presented. CTZ shown a humidity content of 0.150% and a spontaneous hygroscopicity of 0.200% (both determined by SeDeM diagram), demonstrating an adequate stability behavior in solid form. A design of experiments (DoE) performed with both mannitol and PVP K30, followed by a simple factorial design (32) has determined the optimum combination of excipients and CTZ, and showed that a higher proportion of PVP K30 was able to prevent metastable forms generated by mannitol.Entities:
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2018 PMID: 29689061 PMCID: PMC5916852 DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0196049
Source DB: PubMed Journal: PLoS One ISSN: 1932-6203 Impact factor: 3.240
Parameters and equations used in SeDeM methodology.
| Incidence | Parameter | Symbol | Unit | Equation |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Bulk density | Da | g/ml | Da = P/V | |
| Tapped density | Dc | g/ml | Dc = P/V | |
| Inter-particle porosity | Ie | - | Ie = Dc-Da/Dc x Da | |
| Carr index | IC | % | IC = (Dc–Da/Dc) 100 | |
| Cohesion index | IcD | N | Experimental | |
| Hausner ratio | IH | - | IH = Dc/Da | |
| Angle of repose | (α) | ° | Tgα = h/r | |
| Powder flow | t ‘‘ | s | Experimental | |
| Loss on drying | %HR | % | Experimental | |
| Hygroscopicity | %H | % | Experimental | |
| Particles < 50 μm | %Pf | % | Experimental | |
| Homogeneity index | (Iϴ) | - | Eq (1) |
a Hardness (N) of the tablets obtained with the product in question, alone or blended with lubricants if highly abrasive.
b Determines particle size. In accordance with the percentages of the different particle-size fractions by applying Eq (1).
c Eq (1) = Iϴ
Fm: percentage of particles in the majority range.
Fm-1: Percentage of particles in the range immediately below the majority range
Fm+1: Percentage of particles in the range immediately above the majority range
n: Order number of the fraction under study, within a series, with respect to the majority fraction
dm: Mean diameter of the particles in the majority fraction
dm-1: Mean diameter of the particles in the fraction of the range immediately below the majority range
dm+1: Mean diameter of the particles in the fraction of the range immediately above the majority range
Parameters and equations used in SeDeM methodology.
| Incidence | Parameter | Limit value | Radius (r) | Factor applied to |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Bulk density | 0–1 g/ml | 0–10 | 10 | |
| Tapped density | 0–1 g/ml | 0–10 | 10 | |
| Inter-particle porosity | 0–1.2 | 0–10 | 10 | |
| Carr index | 0–50 (%) | 0–10 | ||
| Cohesion index | 0–200 (N) | 0–10 | ||
| Hausner ratio | 1–3 | 10–0 | 5(3- | |
| Angle of repose | 50–0 (°) | 0–10 | 10-( | |
| Powder flow | 20–0 (s) | 0–10 | 10-( | |
| Loss on drying | 0–10 (%) | 10–0 | 10- | |
| Hygroscopicity | 20–0 (%) | 0–10 | 10-( | |
| Particles < 50 μm | 50–0 (%) | 0–10 | 10-( | |
| Homogeneity index | 0–2 x 10−2 | 0–10 | 500 |
a Same equation than (30-10v)/2,but simplified.
Factorial design 32.
| Solution | % Mannitol | % PVP K30 |
|---|---|---|
| A | 2.0 | 3.0 |
| B | 4.5 | 3.0 |
| C | 7.0 | 3.0 |
| D | 2.0 | 5.0 |
| E | 4.5 | 5.0 |
| F | 7.0 | 5.0 |
| G | 2.0 | 1.0 |
| H | 4.5 | 1.0 |
| I | 7.0 | 1.0 |
*W/v
FDM cycle.
| Rate | temperature | holding time |
|---|---|---|
| 10° C/min | TA a -60°C | 3 min (vacuum beginning) |
| 10° C/min | -60°C a– 40° C | 0 min |
| 5° C/min | -40°C a 20°C | 0 min |
Fig 1SeDeM diagram of CTZ.
SeDeM results of CTZ.
| Incidence | Parameter | Signs | Unity | Experimental values (v) | (r) | Average incidence |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Dimension | Bulk density | Da | g/ml | 0.207 | 2.07 | 2.42 |
| Tapped density | Dc | g/ml | 0.276 | 2.76 | ||
| Compressibility | Inter-particle porosity | Ie | - | 1.208 | 10.00 | 5.00 |
| Carr index | IC | % | 25.000 | 5.00 | ||
| Cohesion Index | Icd | N | 0.000 | 0.00 | ||
| Flowability/powder flow | Hausner ratio | IH | - | 1.333 | 8.34 | 2.78 |
| Angle of repose | (α) | ° | 82.804 | 0.00 | ||
| Powder flow | t | sec | Not apply | 0.00 | ||
| Lubricity/stability | Loss on drying | %HR | % | 0.150 | 9.85 | 9.88 |
| Hygroscopicity | %H | % | 0.200 | 9.90 | ||
| Lubricity/dosage | Particles < 50 μm | %Pf | μ | 0.501 | 9.90 | 6.22 |
| Homogeneity index | (Iθ) | 0.0051 | 2.55 | |||
| Parameter index (IP) | 0.42 | |||||
| Parameter profile index (IPP) | 5.03 | |||||
| Good compression index (IGC) | 4.79 | |||||
Fig 2Nuclear magnetic resonance of CTZ.
Fig 3PRDX, UV-Vis and IR of CTZ.
Fig 3a PRDX, 3b UV-Vis and 3c IR, respectively.
First FDVT in PVC molds.
| X (formula) | ml = 10 mg dose | CTZ % (W/v) | Mannitol % (W/v) | PVP K30% (W/v) | alveolus shape mold | alveolus dimensions mold | Final aspect (cracked/not cracked) |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| X1 | 1 | 1.0 | 2.0 | 5.0 | Round | 5 mm high x 15 mm diameter | Cracked |
| Oval | 10 mm high x 15 mm long | Not cracked | |||||
| X2 | 0.2 | 5.0 | 2.0 | 5.0 | Round | 4 mm high x 10 mm diameter | Cracked |
| X3 | 0.5 | 2.0 | 2.0 | 5.0 | Round | 5 mm high x 12 mm diameter | Not cracked |
Fig 4DSC of CTZ, mannitol and PVPK30.
Fig 4A and Fig 4C without metastable forms, Fig 4B with metastable forms.
Determination of Tg’ and metastable forms of CTZ and excipients by DSC.
| Sample | Metastable forms (presence/absence) | Tg’ (°C) |
|---|---|---|
| CTZ 2.0% | Absence | |
| MNT 2.0% | Presence | |
| MNT 4.5% | Presence | |
| MNT 7.0% | Presence | |
| PVP K30 1.0% | Absence | |
| PVP K30 3.0% | Absence | |
| PVP K30 5.0% | Absence |
32 Factorial design results of DSC and FDM.
| Solution | % Mannitol | % PVP K30 | Metastable form (Absence/Presence) | Tg’°C (DSC) | TCO°C (FDM) | Second lyophilisation viability test (Yes/No) |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| A | 2.0 | 3.0 | Absence | -29.1 | -29.0 | Yes |
| B | 4.5 | 3.0 | Presence | -36.0 | -34.0 | No |
| C | 7.0 | 3.0 | Presence | -30.4 | -29.0 | No |
| D | 2.0 | 5.0 | Absence | -27.3 | -31.0 | Yes |
| E | 4.5 | 5.0 | Absence | -32.2 | -31.0 | Yes |
| F | 7.0 | 5.0 | Presence | -33.2 | -39.0 | No |
| G | 2.0 | 1.0 | Presence | -34.0 | -36.0 | No |
| H | 4.5 | 1.0 | Presence | - 29.9 | -25.0 | No |
| I | 7.0 | 1.0 | Presence | -29.5 | -35.0 | No |
*(W/v).
Fig 5DSC of solutions F and E.
Fig 5A shows a DSC of Solution F with metastable forms, and Fig 5B shows a DSC of Solution E, without metastable forms.
Fig 6FDM of solutions E and F (a and b, respectively).