| Literature DB >> 32423051 |
Eun Ha Jang1, Yun Sang Park2, Min-Soo Kim3, Du Hyung Choi1.
Abstract
In the pharmaceutical industry, it is a major challenge to maintain consistent quality of drug products when the batch scale of a process is changed from a laboratory scale to a pilot or commercial scale. Generally, a pharmaceutical manufacturing process involves various unit operations, such as blending, granulation, milling, tableting and coating and the process parameters of a unit operation have significant effects on the quality of the drug product. Depending on the change in batch scale, various process parameters should be strategically controlled to ensure consistent quality attributes of a drug product. In particular, the granulation may be significantly influenced by scale variation as a result of changes in various process parameters and equipment geometry. In this study, model-based scale-up methodologies for pharmaceutical granulation are presented, along with data from various related reports. The first is an engineering-based modeling method that uses dimensionless numbers based on process similarity. The second is a process analytical technology-based modeling method that maintains the desired quality attributes through flexible adjustment of process parameters by monitoring the quality attributes of process products in real time. The third is a physics-based modeling method that involves a process simulation that understands and predicts drug quality through calculation of the behavior of the process using physics related to the process. The applications of these three scale-up methods are summarized according to granulation mechanisms, such as wet granulation and dry granulation. This review shows that these model-based scale-up methodologies provide a systematic process strategy that can ensure the quality of drug products in the pharmaceutical industry.Entities:
Keywords: PAT-based modeling; engineering-based modeling; pharmaceutical granulation; physics-based modeling; scale-up
Year: 2020 PMID: 32423051 PMCID: PMC7284585 DOI: 10.3390/pharmaceutics12050453
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Pharmaceutics ISSN: 1999-4923 Impact factor: 6.321
Commonly used dimensionless numbers related to machine operation, heat transfer and mass transfer.
| Type | Name | Equation | Nomenclature |
|---|---|---|---|
| Mechanical unit operation | Reynolds, Re |
| |
| Froude, Fr |
| ||
| Newton, Ne |
| ||
| Heat transfer | Nusselt, Nu |
| |
| Fourier, Fo |
| ||
| Prandtl, Pr |
| ||
| Mass transfer | Sherwood, Sh |
| |
| Schmidt, Sc |
| ||
| Bodenstein, Bo |
|
Figure 1Summary of the approach to control the pharmaceutical manufacturing process using the process analytical technology tool [34]. The figure was modified, with permission from Elsevier.
Figure 2(a) Measuring principle of focused beam reflectance measurement (FBRM) [62]; (b) measuring principle of acoustic-resonance spectrometry (ARS) [63]. Slightly modified, with permission from Elsevier and Springer, respectively.
Figure 3Application of physics-based modeling method for pharmaceutical scale-up process: (a) Discrete element method (DEM) predictions (particle velocity and collision fields) in a high-shear granulator (1 L and 16 L) [64]; (b) Computational fluid dynamics (CFD) simulation in three scale of fluidized bed granulator [78]; (c) FEM simulation for compared contact pressure with cheek plates and rimmed-roll [79]. The figures were slightly modified, with permission from Elsevier.
Process parameters and quality attributes (QAs) of granule by granulator type.
| Type | Process Parameters | QAs of Granule |
|---|---|---|
| High-shear, | Order of addition | Content, |
| Twin-screw | Screw speed | |
| Fluidized bed |
Blending time |
Summary of engineering-based modeling method applied in wet granulation process.
| Equipment Type | Model | Scale and Parameter Conditions | Dimensionless Number | Measured QAs | Ref. |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| High shear/ | Eirich R02 | Spray nozzle: 0.3, 0.5 and 1.2 mm | Spray flux | Particle size distribution | [ |
| Cyclomix high-shear granulators | Vessel size: 1, 5, 10, 250 and 500 L | Constant Froude number | Strength of granules | [ | |
| SPG | Vessel size: 2–112 L | Impeller tip speed | Particle flow and collision energy determined from DEM | [ | |
| MiPro | Vessel size: 1.9 and 66 L | Modified dimensionless torque number relevant of Froude number, fill ratio and, impeller clearance at the vessel base | Observation of the surface velocity of the powder bed. | [ | |
| TRIAXE system | Vessel size: 48 L | Modified Froude and Power numbers | Power consumption | [ | |
| Diosna P1–6 (Diosna Dierks und Söhne GmbH, Osnabrück, Germany) | Vessel size: 1.23–100 L | Constant impeller tip speed | Size distribution of the granules | [ | |
| Collette Gral (GEA-Colette, Wommelgem, Belgium) | Vessel size: 8, 25, 75 and 600 L | Dimensionless power relationships | Consistency in a commercial mixer torque rheometer | [ | |
| MP 20, 90, MPH 200 | Vessel size: 5–200 L | Dimensionless numbers of Power, Reynolds and Froude number | Power consumption | [ | |
| Fielder PMA | Vessel size: 25, 100 and 600 L | Dimensionless numbers of Power, Reynolds and Froude number | Power consumption | [ | |
| Fielder PMA | Vessel size: 10, 65, 150 and 300 L | Constant impeller tip speed | Percent loss on drying, granule size distribution, bulk and tap densities | [ | |
| Ploughshare Mixer | Vessel size: 40 and 140 L | Constant Froude number | Granule bulk density, sphericity, packing coefficient | [ | |
| Collette Gral | Vessel size: 8, 75 and 300 L | Constant Froude number | Power consumption, temperature of the mass | [ | |
| SPG-10, 25, 200, 400 | Vessel size: 9.8, 25.7, 205.9 and 401.8 L | Constant tip speed | Strength, size distribution and compressibility of granules | [ | |
| Ribbon granulator | S-50 mixer | Vessel size: 0.5 and 100 ft3 | Adjusting the rotation speed to have the same number of Froude in each vessel size | Content uniformity | [ |
| Helical double-ribbon impeller blender | Fill level: 8–50% | Correlation between the power number and the cohesion number | Power consumption | [ | |
| Fluidized bed | NQ-125. 230, 500 | Vessel diameter: 125, 230 and 500 mm | The constant ratio of kinetic energy by agitator rotation | Moisture content | [ |
| Twin-screw | - | Feed rate: 10, 15 and 20 kg/h | Dimensionless number about mean residence time and mean time delay | Residence time, mean residence time, fill level | [ |
Figure 4Scale-up studies using the engineering-based modeling method: (a) particle size distribution according to bowl size (P1–P100) to maintain the same impeller tip speed: 3.8 and 7.5 m/s [99]; (b) relationship of Froude number with temperature and end point [100]. The figures were slightly modified, with permission from Elsevier.
Summary of PAT-based modeling method applied in wet granulation process.
| Equipment Type | Model | PAT Tool | Detail | Measured QAs | Ref. |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| High-shear/ | MiPro | Power consumption | Impeller torque was measuring at bench-scale | Impeller torque | [ |
| Image analysis | Measuring the powder surface velocity using high speed camera | Particle surface velocity | |||
| PharmaConnect™ (GEA, Düsseldorf, Germany) | Power consumption | Measurement range of ± 3 N | Impeller torque | [ | |
| Fielder PMA | Power consumption | Measures impeller torque when rotating at 50 rpm | Impeller torque | [ | |
| Lodige granulator (Gebrüder Lödige Maschinenbau GmbH, Paderborn, Germany) | FBRM 1 and parsumTM | Measured in the 790 nm | Particle size distribution | [ | |
| Loedige M5 high-shear mixer | Power consumption | Power consumption is calculated by the actual current consumption of the motor |
Power consumption | [ | |
| Jacketed beken duples mixer | Power consumption | Torque measurement after 3–5 min of mixing | Impeller torque | [ | |
| MiPro | NIR 3 | Measured in the range of 1100–2500 nm | Moisture content | [ | |
| SPG25 | Power consumption | Torque of impeller and chopper measured |
Particle size distribution | [ | |
| Image analysis | Use of high energy Xenon lamps flashing in 1us intervals | ||||
| SPG25, 200 and 400 | Power consumption | Calculation of agitation power per unit volume using shaft torque. | Shaft torque | [ | |
| MiPro | Raman | Center of the measurement range was settled at 1100 cm−1
| Distribution of binder within the granules | [ | |
| Collette Gral-10 (GEA-Colette, Wommelgem, Belgium), | NIR | Laser wavelength was the 785 nm line from a 785 nm | Content uniformity | [ | |
| Raman | Measured in the range of 12,500–4000 cm−1 with 8 cm−1 resolution | ||||
| Fluidized bed | ConsiGma™ system | FBRM |
Probe including a scraper unit | Particle size distribution | [ |
| Glatt GPCG 30/50 | NIR | Measured in the range of 1100–2500 nm every 2.5 min | Moisture content | [ | |
| FD-3S | NIR | The 1990 nm wavelength for water detection | Moisture content | [ | |
| Custom apparatus | |||||
| NQ-160 | Image analysis | Use of air purge to prevent visual disturbances due to powder attachment |
Particle size distribution, | [ | |
| GPCG 3 granulator | ParsumTM |
The sensor was installed at three different insertion depths | Particle size distribution | [ | |
| AGM-2A-PJ | Acoustic emissions | The receptor used had a resonance point of 140 kHz | Particle fluidization | [ | |
| Twin-screw | ConsiGma-25 Unit | Raman |
400 mW laser source at 785 nm. | Solid-state behavior | [ |
| NIR | Measured in the range of 4500–10,000 cm−1 with 16 cm−1 resolutions. | ||||
| In-line Spatial Filter Velocimetry probe | Semiconductor laser diode probe radiating visible light at a wavelength of 670 nm. | Particle size distribution | |||
| Thermo Scientific™ Pharma 11 twin-screw granulator (Thermo Fisher Scientific, Karlsruhe, Germany) | Eyecon™ | The integration time was 60 s | Particle size distribution | [ | |
| TS16 Quick Extruder | Raman | Measured in the range of 200–1890 cm−1 with a 4 cm−1 resolution | Content uniformity of powder and tablet | [ |
1 FBRM: focused beam reflectance measurement; 2 DFF: drag flow force; 3 NIR: near-infrared spectroscopy; 4 CCD: charge-coupled device.
Figure 5(a) Ratio between hydroxypropyl cellulose (HPC) peak (850 cm−1) and metformin peak (938 cm−1) in granules with 5% and 12.5% water and the dry mixture. Strong magnification of the peak at 850 cm−1 (inset graph) shows the intensity of the HPC band; (b) Raman intensity mapping image [38]. The figures were slightly modified, with permission from SAGE journals.
Figure 6(a) Schematic diagram of image probe. A/D conv. is analog-to-digital converter; (b) the relationship between the moisture content and the median diameter of granules; (c) the results of yield for each granule size measured during the granulation process. Circles represent a particle size of less than 106 μm, squares represent particle sizes of 160–500 μm and triangles represent particle sizes of 500 μm or more [39]. The figures were slightly modified, with permission from Elsevier.
Summary of physics-based modeling methods applied in the wet granulation process.
| Equipment Type | Simulation Tool | Summary | Predicted Attributes | Ref. |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| High-shear/ Low-shear | DEM | Parameter study of particle shape and impeller geometries | Blade-bed stress and bed surface velocities | [ |
| PBM–DEM | Wet granulation processes were simulated by the coupled model of PBM and DEM | Particle size distributions and collision rate functions | [ | |
| DEM | Granulator (SPG, Fuji Paudal Co., Ltd.) was used | Internal particle flow | [ | |
| DEM | Comparison kinematic and dynamic similarities of different vessel sizes (1.0, 3.4, 8.1 and 16.0 L) | Particle collision energy (dynamic similarity) | [ | |
| DEM | Granulator (Mycromix, Bosch Packaging Technology) was used | Shear forces | [ | |
| DEM | Granulator (Hosokawa Micron B.V.) was used | Velocity fields of granules | [ | |
| DEM | Identification of parameters affecting granule production using DEM | Velocity fields of granules | [ | |
| DEM | Effect of mixer size (1–300 L) and fill level (17%, 32% and 46%) | Granule of flow patterns | [ | |
| DEM | Comparative study of particle behavior using PEPT 1 and DEM | Internal flow fields and blending patterns | [ | |
| DEM | The effects of blade rake angle and blade speed | Velocity fields of particles | [ | |
| Fluidized bed | CFD–DEM–PBM | CFD–DEM–PBM coupled model for predicting fluidized bed granulation behavior | Average particle size | [ |
| CFD | Predicting the behavior of fluidized bed granulators with different batch sizes (150 g, 2 kg and 45 kg) | Particle volume fraction | [ | |
| DEM–CFD | Modified DEM–CFD model using model for particle wetting. | The residence time distribution | [ | |
| CFD–DEM–PBM | Development and validation of a coupled CFD–DEM–PBM model | Particle velocities, temperature and collision frequencies form DEM | [ | |
| DEM–CFD | Particle motion and collision dynamics simulation using the coupled DEM–CFD model | Particle velocity | [ | |
| Twin-screw | DEM-PBM | Evaluate the effect of viscosity and amount of binder, as well as screw speed and type on granules using the coupled DEM-PBM model | Porosity and size distribution, liquid content for PBM | [ |
| DEM-PBM | Granulator (16 mm Prism EuroLab TSG 2, Thermo Fisher Scientific) was used | Size distribution, liquid distribution and porosity of granules | [ | |
| DEM | Granulator (16 mm Prism EuroLab TSG, Thermo Fisher Scientific) was used | Surface velocities of dry and wet powders | [ |
1 PEPT: positron emission particle tracking; 2 TSG: twin-screw granulator.
Figure 7Scale-up process simulation using a physics-based modeling method: (a) shear force comparison according to the different blade type [6]; (b) CFD–DEM coupled simulation: particle velocity, airflow velocity, residence time inside and particle temperatures [82]. The figures were slightly modified, with permission from Elsevier.
Figure 8Comparison of three fluidized bed granulators (Top-spray, Wurster-coater and Spouted bed): (a) simulation snapshots under the same process conditions, particle flow and particle velocity fields were captured; (b) profiles of the particle-particle and particle-wall collision velocities within the stable fluidization regime (during a simulation time of 5–6 s) [134]. The figures were slightly modified, with permission from Elsevier.
Figure 9(a) Simulation result of collision frequency predictions at 60 and 90 rpm impeller speeds; (b) particle size distribution after 180 s depending on the constant collision frequencies (0.01 and 0.005) and impeller speeds (30–90 rpm) compared with the initial particle size distribution [84]. The figures were slightly modified, with permission from Elsevier.
Figure 10Schematic of the roller compaction process.
Figure 11Plot of density against pressure applied using a presser and roller compactor [147]. The figure was slightly modified, with permission from Elsevier.
Figure 12Comparison of the relative ribbon density of model predictions and experimental results on two roller compactors (Gerteis and L.B. Bohle compactors) [17]: the formulations used were (a) microcrystalline cellulose (MCC); (b) a 50% mixture of MCC and mannitol; and (c) mannitol. The figures were slightly modified, with permission from Elsevier.
Summary of engineering-based modeling method applied in dry granulation process.
| Equipment Model | Scale and Parameters Conditions | Dimensionless Number | Measured QAs and Predicted QAs | Ref. |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Mini-Pactor | Roll forces: 3.0–7.5 kN/cm | Johanson’s model | Ribbon density | [ |
| Gerteis | Roll width: 25 and 100 mm | Reynolds model is applied to scale-up the process | Ribbon relative density. | [ |
| WP 120 Pharma | Roll pressure: 40, 60 and 80 bar | Johanson’s model | Ribbon porosity | [ |
| WP 120 Pharma | Roll width: 40 and 100 mm | Modified Bingham number | Ribbon density | [ |
| WP 120 Pharma, WP 200 Pharma (Alexanderwerk, Remscheid, Germany) | Roll pressure: 40, 55 and 70 bar | Modified Johanson’s model | Ribbon density | [ |
| Chilsonator IR-220, IR-520 | Roll pressure: 3–12 kN/cm | Joint-Y partial least squares (JYPLS) | Ribbon density | [ |
| WP 120 Pharma, WP 200 Pharma (Alexanderwerk, Germany) | Roll width: 25, 40 and 75 mm | Maintain the ratio between the roller gap and the roller diameter | Ribbon density | [ |
| Mini-Pactor | Roller speed: 1, 2 and 3 rpm | Johanson’s model | Ribbon density | [ |
| WP 200 Pharma (Alexanderwerk, Remscheid, Germany) | Minimum gap width: 2 and 4 mm | A study to modify the Johanson’s model compared to FEM simulation | Maximum roll pressure and ribbon relative density predicted | [ |
| WP 120 Pharma | Roll speed: 4 and 12 rpm | Relationships between ribbon porosity, roll speed, roll pressure, screw speed, true density and roll diameter | Ribbon porosity | [ |
| Chilsonator IR 220 | Roll speed: 3 and 9 rpm | |||
| WP 120 Pharma, WP 200 Pharma (Alexanderwerk, Remscheid, Germany) | Roll pressure: 50–70 bar | Establish relationship between roller compaction parameters and ribbon thickness and density | Granules QAs: flow, bulk density and particle size distribution | [ |
1 VFS: vertical screw speed; HFS: horizontal screw speed.
Figure 13Near infrared (NIR) spectrum measurement of density made at various pressures (15, 25 and 45 bar) [156]: (a) in-line setup in roller compactor; (b) spectrum obtained at 1100–2205 nm. The figures were slightly modified, with permission from Springer.
Figure 14Predicted values estimated from NIR data at a relative humidity of 24% (blue), 45% (red) and 65% (green). Active pharmaceutical ingredient (API) concentrations determined using UV analysis are represented as triangles (24% RH), squares (45% RH) or diamonds (65% RH). The roll speed was changed every 4 min [157]: (a) API concentration (%); (b) relative ribbon density. The figures were slightly modified, with permission from Elsevier.
Figure 15Summary of the use of NIR in roller compaction and tableting processes. Principal component analysis (PCA) and Partial least squares (PLS) were used to monitor the porosity and content uniformity of the ribbons and tablets, respectively [158]. The figure was slightly modified, with permission from Elsevier.
Figure 16Application of non-destructive ultrasonic waves to predict ribbon characteristics [159]: (a) experimental setup; (b) acoustic waveforms obtained according to the position of the ribbon. Blue, black and red lines represent the scan at the upside, middle and the downside of ribbon, respectively. These results are for powder with no lubrication. The figures were slightly modified, with permission from Springer.
Figure 17Photo-montage of integrated X-ray micro-CT images [160]: (a) measurement principle; (b) integrated micro-CT images of the ribbon samples. The figures were slightly modified, with permission from Elsevier.
Summary of PAT-based modeling method applied in dry granulation process.
| Equipment | PAT Tool | Detail | Measured QA | Ref. |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Laboratory-scale roller compactor | CDI non-contact diffuse reflectance spectrometer (SNIR 278, Control Development Inc. South Bend, IN) | Measured in the range of 1305–2205 nm | Ribbon density | [ |
| WP 120 Pharma (Alexanderwerk, Remscheid, Germany) | In-line NIR 1 | Measured in the range of 4555–6600 cm−1 | Ribbon density | [ |
| Off-line NIR | Measured in the range of 4000–7800 cm−1 with a resolution of 2 cm−1
| |||
| Image analysis | Measure particle size by capturing the color of the particle surface by shining red, green and blue LED on the particle | |||
| Raman | 250 mW laser source at 785 nm. | |||
| Die and punch set | NIR | Measured in the range of 1100–2200 cm−1 with a resolution of 4.4 nm | Content uniformity | [ |
| Chilsonator IR 220 | NIR | Measured in the range of 1100–2200 nm with 1 nm intervals | Ribbon density | [ |
| Chilsonator IR 220 | NIR | Used 35 kW tungsten-halogen light source | Moisture content | [ |
| Pharmapaktor L200/30P (Hosokawa Bepex, Leingarten, Germany) | NIR | Measured in the range of 980–1900 nm with 1 nm resolution | Content uniformity | [ |
| WP 120 Pharma (Alexanderwerk, Remscheid, Germany) | NIR-CI 2 | Measured in the range of 1100–1700 nm with a resolution of 7 nm | Ribbon porosity distribution | [ |
| WP 120 Pharma (Alexanderwerk, Remscheid, Germany) | NIR | Spectrum was obtained of 64 scans | Moisture content | [ |
| Microwave resonance | Operating at 2.5 GHz | |||
| Chilsonator IR-520 | Microwave resonance | Pulse repetition frequency was 1 kHz with 100 ns intervals | Young’s modulus | [ |
| X-ray micro-CT | The spatial resolution was 14.8 μm/pixel | Ribbon density | ||
| Mini-Pactor | X-ray micro-CT | Scanned at a resolution of 80 mm per voxel | Ribbon porosity | [ |
| laboratory-scale instrumented roller compactor | X-ray | Voltage and current were 50 kV and 98 μA | Ribbon density distribution | [ |
| Mini-Pactor | thermographic camera | Monitoring frequency was 32 frames per second | Ribbon density distribution | [ |
1 NIR: near-infrared spectroscopy; 2 NIR-CI: near-infrared chemical imaging.
Figure 18(a) Material velocity field using a finite element method (FEM) simulation, the dashed-line indicates the location of nip angle in Johanson’s model; (b) relative density as functions of powder-roll friction coefficient at three models; FEM, modified Johanson and Johanson model [18]. The figures were slightly modified, with permission from Elsevier.
Figure 19Predicted result by FEM simulation [166]: (a) powder velocity distribution at 0.12 m/s roll; (b) ribbon density distributions using inlet stress and roll gap were 164 kPa and 2.32 mm. α is roll tilt. The figures were slightly modified, with permission from Elsevier.
Figure 20Roller compaction process simulation using FEM [167]: predicted density distribution along the width of the ribbon constant feed pressure (left) and feed velocity (right). The 0 on the x-axis means center in the width of the ribbon. The figures were slightly modified, with permission from Elsevier.
Figure 21Komarek B050H roll compactor [23]: (a) set up of the experiment; (b) snapshot of simulation using DEM. The figures were slightly modified, with permission from Elsevier.
Summary of physics-based modeling method applied in dry granulation process.
| Equipment Model | Simulation | Summary | Predicted Attributes | Ref. |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| WP 200 Pharma (Alexanderwerk, Remscheid, Germany) | FEM | FEM simulation was evaluated in comparison with the Johanson’s model | Normal stress | [ |
| Komarek B050PH laboratory press | FEM | Comparative study of density distribution of ribbon by FEM and light transmission | Principal stress and density across the width of the strip. | [ |
| Gerteis roll compactor: Mini-pactor 250/25 | FEM | Investigate the effect of sealing system design on the density distribution of ribbon using FEM | Ribbon density distribution | [ |
| Komarek B050H Laboratory Press | DEM-FEM | Study on the effect of screw feed rate using DEM-FEM coupling approach | Roll pressure | [ |
| WP 120 Pharma (Alexanderwerk, Remscheid, Germany) | FEM | Comparison of the results of ribbon density with experimental measurements of FEM simulations | Ribbon density | [ |
| RC100 | FEM | Investigate ribbon characteristics according to various process parameters with FEM | Roll pressure | [ |
| WP 200 Pharma (Alexanderwerk, Remscheid, Germany) | FEM | Improvement of prediction accuracy of predicted ribbon density at Johanson’s roll compaction model using FEM | Roll pressure | [ |
| Komarek B050PH laboratory press | FEM | Study the mechanism of powder transport and ribbon density by predicting the pressure distribution between particles and roller | Roll pressure distribution, shear stress and nip angle | [ |