SELECTION AND VALIDATION OF CASCADE IMPACTOR TEST METHODS
|
|
- Martin Maxwell
- 6 years ago
- Views:
Transcription
1 Respiratory Drug Delivery IX, 2004 Byron et al. SELECTION AND VALIDATION OF CASCADE IMPACTOR TEST METHODS Peter R. Byron, 1 R. Harris Cummings, 2 Steven C. Nichols, 3 Guirag Poochikian, 4 Michael J. Smurthwaite, 5 Stephen W. Stein, 6 and Keith G. Truman 7 1 School of Pharmacy, Virginia Commonwealth University, Richmond, VA; 2 Cardinal Health, RTP, NC; 3Aventis, Holmes Chapel, UK; 4 Food and Drug Administration, Rockville, MD; 5 Westech Instrument Services, Peterborough, UK; 6 3M Drug Delivery Systems, St. Paul, MN; 7 GlaxoSmithKline, Ware, UK KEYWORDS: cascade impaction, inhaler testing, pharmacopeial tests, particle size distribution, PSD profiles, validation SUMMARY Regulatory insistence on improved methods to determine in vitro aerodynamic particle size distribution (PSD) profiles for the aerosol drug doses delivered from inhalers has stimulated considerable debate. For product QC purposes, segregation of the entire delivered dose of drug into different aerodynamic size ranges must now be accomplished by cascade impaction routinely, and shown to conform to agreed specifications. Analysts are confronted by the need to choose a type of cascade impactor, qualify a number of these impactors for use, then develop and validate test methods during the drug development process. ese methods must be sufficiently reproducible to discriminate between good and bad product batches. is article seeks to describe the issues and to stimulate debate; to assure the availability of fully accredited instruments and test methods with which these may be (a) qualified (and re-qualified); and (b) used to determine PSD profiles for batch release of inhalers prior to marketing. INTRODUCTION In the late 1980s in the USA, as inhaler and aerosol drug patents expired, industry and FDA recommended the inclusion of several innovator-developed impingement or impaction devices into the pharmacopeias (1). ese simple devices, like the twin stage impinger (1), were designed to cut an aerosol cloud into two or three fractions on the basis of both the aerodynamic diameter of its particles and droplets, and the plume or cloud velocity as it left the inhaler. As such, they were used to assure the quality of a given product for release into the marketplace, and to assess product performance through its shelf life. For a single product, these simple devices were often adequate for routine QC purposes. However, once alerted to the difficulties of assessing the equivalence of emitted size distributions from innovator and generic inhalers, FDA, and many in the industry, became convinced that improved cascade impaction techniques were needed with greater discriminating power; both to those seeking to control the quality of inhalers in the 169
2 170 Selection and Validation of Cascade Impactor Test Methods Byron et al. marketplace, and those seeking to show that a generic inhaler or line extension produced a similar size distribution to the devices used in the clinical tests performed during drug development. As a result, we now have a menu of impactors in both USP and EP (2,3) which are considerably better than the early impingers which held sway through the late 1970s and 1980s. Even though these new devices are presented with apparently standard methods in the compendia (Table 1; the NGI is presently proposed for inclusion in the pharmacopeias), there is sufficient latitude and a series of unresolved problems which create problems for the analyst. He or she must select an impactor rationally; then the chosen impactor(s) must be qualified for use and then used to develop and validate a final method capable of reliably determining the PSD of the delivered drug dose from a specific inhaler. In addition, critical dimensions of the impactor should be re-measured periodically to ensure that impactors remain within specification and fit for purpose. is article seeks to cast a broad perspective on these issues, as well as stimulate debate on some of the major problems which require general resolution. Table 1 Cascade impactors and test methods a described in USP (2). Inhaler Impactor Flow rates (+5%) Size range b # of bins c MDI Andersen Mk II 28.3 L/min Next generation Pharmaceutical Impactor (NGI) 30 L/min e DPI Marple-Miller Model L/min Andersen Mk II with preseparator d as defined during Debatable d 6 d Multi stage liquid impinger delivered dose NGI with preseparator uniformity testing e a Aerosol entrance conditions into each impactor have been standardized and harmonized across the pharmacopeias b Range of effective cutoff diameters (ECD values in um); topmost to bottom impaction stage; DPI values are at 30 and 100 L/min (see text for calibration ranges) c Number of clearly definable size categories; note that deposition has an undefined upper size limit unless instrument is used with a calibrated preseparator with a known ECD value d Andersen is also available commercially with additional stages (-0 and -1) for DPI testing at higher flows; these are not recommended in USP where multiflow calibration data has not been presented, even for the regular stages. It is also necessary to bore out the Andersen exit to the vacuum pump and omit stages 6 and 7 at flow rates > 60 L/min). e The NGI has an additional collection surface for use with or without a final filter. This is the Micro Orifice Collector (MOC) PURPOSE OF CASCADE IMPACTION TESTING One aspect of cascade impactor testing that is often the cause of substantial disagreement relates to the philosophical question, What is the purpose of the test, once selected? Is the purpose to enable the deposition of the aerosolized drug to be estimated in the patient? If so, we must ensure that in vivo/in vitro correlations (IVIVC) are established which are sound. Alternately, we may ask Is the test strictly a quality control tool to assure aerosol formation and delivery consistency? Clearly, the same test may be required to provide both types of information and thus the answers to these questions have significant implications in the discussion of the way cascade impaction is practiced. Consistency, for example, can sometimes be assessed using tests with flow rates which bear no relationship to those used by patients. If in vivo relevance is sought however, decisions must often be made concerning the additional questions: Which inlet is most appropriate? How many actuations should be used? What airflow rate should be used? ese and other factors influence the PSD profiles which are collected and they require standardization. While in vivo relevance is certainly important, the following discussion will focus solely on the use of cascade impaction as a quality control tool, whereby the analyst seeks to assure the reliability of an inhaler through its shelf-life.
3 Respiratory Drug Delivery IX, 2004 Byron et al. 171 SELECTING AN IMPACTOR Table 2 shows a series of frequently asked questions which have been presented to one of the authors (PRB) at different venues. Some of these should certainly be answered before finally committing to the purchase and use of a single type of cascade impactor. e four major instruments proposed for USP (Table 1), along with their minor method variations for MDIs and DPIs, have been included in the official compendium because of the need to offer standard test methods for use during the development and quality control of inhalers. Table 2 Some FAQs which may be important during the cascade impactor selection process. a Is it accurate? - How easy is it to (a) mensurate, and (b) calibrate? Are commercial calibrator companies available for hire? Is there a standard aerosol product I can test it with (from USP)? Will the second and third impactors provide comparable results to the first; what is the variability? How many size groupings do I need to separate my aerosol into? Can I omit or pool drug from different stages? Will each impactor suit my inhaler product; which is best for DPI, MDI, nebulizer, etc? Will it discriminate between good and bad product reliably? Will it be acceptable to regulators? How variable are results (a) between instruments, (b) beween minor method variations, and (c) between analysts? Is total variability likely to be less than that between inhalers? How easy is it to recover 100% of my drug dose (mass balance)? How many doses should I collect for each test? How easy is it to deal with interstage drug deposition (wall losses)? How easy is it to use: (a) if I do not coat the stages, or (b) if I do coat the stages? What will it cost (a) to buy, and (b) to keep going? Is the impactor manufactured and tested to acceptable quality standards? Will I be able to perform periodic stage mensuration? Will the manufacturer be able to supply well-qualified instruments on demand, over the long haul? How many impactions per day will each analyst be able to perform? Can the impactor be automated? a Answering many of these questions requires an accurate, precise, and robust drug assay and a clear understanding of the test inhaler characteristics Accuracy From the perspective of accuracy, even a perfectly calibrated cascade impaction device can only claim to provide an estimate of a drug product s aerodynamic size distribution (the true value is never determined). Moreover, this estimate is heavily influenced by a number of factors which continue to cast doubt on the validity of the reported results. Among these factors are: (a) dynamic changes in particle size and momentum of aerosol clouds during cloud segregation (especially for MDI clouds and droplet aerosols); (b) discontinuous flow profiles used during the testing of dry powder inhalers (instrument calibrations assume steady state flow); and (c) the assumption that each stage can be represented by an absolute aerodynamic cutoff diameter (collection efficiency of any impaction stage is a probabilistic function of aerodynamic diameter and the sharpness of cutoff is dependent on stage design). Nevertheless, the NGI (2) and all of the instruments in the present USP (3), with the exception of Andersen Mk II, were accepted only after the manufacturer or designer had provided full steady state calibration and mensuration details to the pharmacopeia. Unlike many other cascade impactors which have been described in the literature and offered for sale, the MMI, MSLI, and NGI were calibrated using state-of-the-art methods with calibrationquality, charge-neutralized, monodisperse non-volatile aerosols. e collection efficiency of each
4 172 Selection and Validation of Cascade Impactor Test Methods Byron et al. stage of these impactors was quantified over a range of aerosol sizes and steady-state air flow rates over the (MMI and MSLI) and (NGI) L/min ranges. us, the MSLI and NGI have reliable public mensuration data (critical dimensions) available to support their USP published calibrations (Effective cutoff diameter (ECD) values for charge-neutralized aerosols) within these ranges (Table 1). e MMI is an instrument with proprietary mensuration specifications and a publicly available calibration over the same range as MSLI; the instrument s engineering specifications are supported by a single manufacturer r that provides essential mensuration details or services on request. us, in these three cases, correctly mensurated devices may be confidently employed as accurate aerosol measurement devices for aerosols which do not display dynamic size changes with time, and which can be tested during steady-state flow; that is, they are as accurate as we can expect any cascade impactors to be, given the circumstances associated with testing pharmaceutical inhalers. e issue facing the prospective purchaser is to decide which supplier can best be relied upon to provide instruments conforming to pharmacopeial specifications. In the case of Andersen, however, the device was recommended by FDA for use in the early 1990s so as to provide draft guidance information to generic companies wishing to develop off-patent drugs. Since much of the available data on drug products was generated using the Andersen, the instrument has been grandfathered into USP despite the fact that it has been shown to suffer from manufacturing variability leading to interlaboratory differences in results (4). e Andersen has also been criticized for its high interstage ( wall ) losses, poor design for pharmaceutical testing purposes (difficult assembly and tendency to suffer from inter-stage gas leakage), as well as low impaction stage Reynold s numbers and overly small values for the ratio of (nozzle-to-plate distance)/(nozzle diameter), leading to overlapping stage collection efficiency curves (5). Most importantly however, Andersen suffers from non-standard, ill-defined mensuration parameters (6). e instrument is also now produced to different specifications by several manufacturers, leading to the question When is an Andersen not an Andersen? All of these issues have been blamed to differing degrees for their production of results claimed to distort and add to the variability of PSD profiles. How Many Stages Do I Need? While there is usually no good scientific reason for needing more than the four or five aerosol size subdivisions offered by MSLI and MMI (7), FDA expressed preference for more, and in some cases more appropriate stages, because (a) more size bins are most likely to segment the major mode(s) of different PSDs from different products, and (b) more such bins should offer a greater ability to discriminate between products. In general, and across products, it is difficult to refute such an argument in vitro. In vivo, of course, there is no biologic or clinical literature which implies that drug mass in the very small aerosol size bins (created by Andersen or NGI s various stages) is segregated differently by the human lung. Nevertheless, MMI and MSLI can be rejected unreasonably by companies and their analysts, when their stage cutoffs at the selected flow rate provide good classification and subdivision of the aerosol size distribution of a chosen product, in spite of their possessing some excellent technical characteristics. Not surprisingly therefore, the industry s commission of a new impactor design to replace Andersen has produced the NGI; this has a similar number of stages and cut points to Andersen, but is believed to overcome many of that impactor s difficulties. (5, 8-10). In general, an impactor should be chosen which subdivides the delivered dose into at least five major size categories. Furthermore, the selection of an instrument which, by virtue of its cutoff diameters fails to segment the test product s PSD into an adequate number of categories, is likely to be viewed as inadvisable.
5 Respiratory Drug Delivery IX, 2004 Byron et al. 173 NGI, Andersen Mk II, or Another Multi-Staged Cascade Impactor? For the reasons above, and most analysts unwillingness to reinvent the wheel, companies are presently confronted with a choice between Andersen or NGI. Both offer a surfeit of stages, but only NGI presently offers a state-of-the-art calibration and published mensuration details. It is obvious, however, from the recent data emerging from industry and academe (9-11), in which these two instruments have been compared, that much of the industry s dissatisfaction (4) with the high variability of Andersen data has now been resolved, principally by improved instrument manufacturing and the use of strictly controlled test methods. Figure 1 shows typical MDI cascade impactor data in which newly commissioned Andersen and NGI impactors were (a) used to validate the analytical methods and (b) compare the apparent PSDs from single puffs of the same marketed MDI. Irrespective of the improved and demonstrated calibration of NGI, and its claimed design features (5,8), it is clear from this figure that at 28.3 L/min, the Andersen produced a PSD profile that effectively overlaid that from the NGI, operated at 30 L/min. is data, and that of others in which different aerosol products have been tested (9-11), can be looked at in one of two ways. Assuming for a moment, that both instruments are equally easy to qualify for service in the QC laboratory (e.g., mensurate or calibrate), then it is either possible to switch to the analyst-preferred instrument (by providing regulators with bridging data to justify minor changes in product specifications) or there is no need to change instruments at all, because both instruments provide comparable data with similar variability (Figure 1). erefore, the major issues appear to relate to the ease with which these devices can be qualified into service, the reproducibility impactor to impactor, and their ease of use (e.g., potential for automation) during routine QC testing. % Cumulative Mass under Size 100 Data : mean ± SD (n=6) NGI; coated ACI; coated Aerodynamic Diameter ( m) Figure 1. Typical drug size distributions (cumulative % undersize ± sample standard deviations) for beclomethasone dipropionate reaching the Andersen Mk II or the NGI impactor following USP testing and data treatments. PSDs are shown for single actuations into silicone-oil stagecoated impactors in both cases. Interpolated data at identical aerodynamic diameters showed overlapping error bars. Data plotted from reference 9. CASCADE IMPACTOR MENSURATION AND METHOD VALIDATION Table 2 shows some of the important questions to be asked during the process of instrument selection. Many of these are related to the issues in Table 3 which are grouped to facilitate discussion of the validation process. Overall, the key to method validation for cascade impaction of marketed products is to ensure that method variability is much smaller than that due to the product itself. To do this, it is logical to reduce predictable method variability as much as possible.
6 174 Selection and Validation of Cascade Impactor Test Methods Byron et al. Table 3 Method validation (reducing test method variability). Mensuration - Select a well-specified and manufactured instrument Ensure its critical dimensions are in agreement with specifications a Re-mensurate regularly b Chemical analysis - Validate your assay with LOQ small enough to reliably quantify drug deposited on each stage Assure that your drug can be quantitatively recovered from the stages (and walls) of the instrument c Understand how many impactions can be performed before wall losses and thorough washing becomes essential Data processing - Define the variables to be measured (mass on each stage?) Method performance - Ensure that instrument set up is without problems (avoid leaks, assure volumetric flow rate, stage order, etc.) Ensure that likely inter-laboratory changes have minimal effects or are standardized (temperature, humidity) Assess the effects of stage coating (type and thickness should be considered) if it matters, do it! Assess the effects of multiple actuations and duration of flow into the impactor Assess the impact of flow profile variability (particularly important for DPIs) Assess the effects of different analysts and instruments Reference Standard - Periodically evaluating a known low-variability product (with a similar PSD to yours) is worth considering a Compendial specifications or those defined within your own company and NDA b The effects of routine use and wear, as well as cleaning, should be determined. Some products may have abrasive effects; others may contain compounds that block nozzles and be difficult to remove. c Solvent choice and duration are often important. Spiking, both with drug and formulation is appropriate; assess recovery with and without stage coating material(s). Good drug recovery data and proof of mass balance is essential (12). Mensuration is now firmly established as the preferred method for admitting or qualifying cascade impactors for use in the laboratory. e difficulties of producing monodisperse aerosols reliably, and then using these aerosols to calibrate the individual stages of a cascade impactor are well known. e description of this process, as it relates to NGI, is an excellent example of the present state-of-the-art, and its complexity (8). In the authors opinion, as a means of assuring reproducible results, calibration of all of these devices is much less precise than mensuration. us, similarly mensurated impactors (those with the same critical dimensions), when used at the same flow rates under well-standardized conditions (12), can be expected to produce comparable, low variability PSD profiles, when they are used to test low variability inhalers (e.g., Figure 1). It should be obvious from the first three points in Table 3 that mensuration requires both a method, and knowledge of the acceptable ranges for the instrument s critical dimensions. Stein and Olson (4) used microscopy to measure chords across the apparent center of a sample of theoretically circular nozzles, on each stage of their Andersen impactors. ey converted their average measurements into nozzle diameters and compared these to the manufacturer s specifications. Nichols (6), again using sampling, reported values from Graseby-Andersen themselves (when that company still existed), who created a video image and enlarged hole display for each stage. Measurements were taken using an unspecified method to generate the quoted nozzle diameters (6). Other companies are known to be employing Mitutoyo computerized optical measurement technology (13) to measure all l of the nozzles on all l of the plates at specified intervals to reduce method variance. Clearly, there is no consensus on exactly how the process of mensuration can be accomplished although it is to be hoped that the compendia can assist with the standardization of techniques for those instruments in Table 1. It must be remembered, of course, that when defining nozzle diameter specifications (or perhaps nozzle area specifications), engineering tolerances need to be considered as well as taking into account the accuracy of the optical measurement system used during the mensuration process. In the case of Andersen, no compendial mensuration specifications presently exist and these must presently be defined within your own company and NDA if you are to ensure that you avoid the problems due to instrument variability reported by Stein and Olson (4). Table 4 is a partial listing of some of Andersen s specifications, which USP and EP hope to be able to complete and add as features of the standard Andersen Mk II in the future.
7 Respiratory Drug Delivery IX, 2004 Byron et al. 175 Table 4 Proposed engineering specifications for Andersen Mk II cascade impactor. Stage # Number of jets Target Diameter (mm) a Tolerance (mm) b Distance to plate (mm) c a Original Andersen Mk II specifications were drill diameters with tolerances, in inches (e.g., Stage 0 was to inches; reference 4). Values in table are metric equivalents based on Nichols (6). US manufactured instruments may still be produced with non-metric drills. Impactors purchased from Andersen between about 1992 and 1998 were produced in the UK using metric tools. Note that there is presently no consensus on these dimensional qualifications. b Tolerances are best estimates based on (3 x standard deviation) values noted by Nichols for a group of acceptably calibrated Andersen Mk II cascade impactors. Values are experimental estimates (based on sampling and measurement) that need to be debated and agreed between impactor manufacturers, users and the compendia. c Values require debate; tolerances need to be defined (15). Finally, mensuration should be performed using a standard technique routinely, so as to determine the effects of routine use and wear, as well as cleaning; this because some products may have abrasive effects and others contain compounds which block nozzles and are difficult to remove. For example, during mensuration, some nozzles may be observed to be partially blocked. When this occurs, it may be necessary to assess whether the impactor has been operating in a fit for purpose condition since its last mensuration. For the Andersen Mk II impactor, blockage is most prevalent for stages 6 and 7 which have the smallest hole diameters, although stage 5 can have similar problems (blockages rarely occur on the other stages due to the prevalence of larger nozzles on those stages). Blocked nozzles lead to an increase in air velocity through the remaining nozzles on the stage and cause the stage cutpoint to decrease slightly. However, the magnitude of this change can be quite small. For example, having 5 of the 400 nozzles on stage 6 or 5 of the 201 nozzles on stage 7 of the Mk II impactor blocked, causes the cutpoint to decrease by approximately 0.7% (0.005 µm) and 1.5% (0.006 µm), respectively. ese differences are much smaller than the stage cutpoint differences observed by Stein and Olson (4) and may be considered negligible in most circumstances. Reducing test method variability: Following successful mensuration, analytical methods must be developed and decisions made concerning the variables to be assessed. Common practices in chemical analysis (Table 3) are well known and will not be discussed here. Worldwide, the PSD variables which are measured and used during QC testing are a subject of much debate (7). FDA tend to require assessment of individual and/or grouped stage depositions known to be typical of the batches tested during clinical trials; specifications are then chosen for the drug mass in each apparent size category, and its permissible variance. Overall, the product developer usually needs to ensure that the method is sufficiently robust in development to meet regulatory expectations prior to Phase 3 testing. While choice of common data transformations as product specifications (e.g., mass median aerodynamic diameter (MMAD), drug mass <5 µm aerodynamic diameter determined by interpolation), are often frowned upon by regulators as unnecessary additions to the actual measurements made during the test itself, it is often helpful when assessing (and attempting to minimize) method variance to select as small a number of variables as possible. For validation purposes therefore, transformations which capture all of the PSD profile and its mass better than numerous individual stage depositions provide a more understandable view of what really adds and subtracts
8 176 Selection and Validation of Cascade Impactor Test Methods Byron et al. from the overall variance due to the method. For example, the primary author recommends the choice of MMAD, (84.1% diameter/15.9% diameter) ratio, especially for monomodal PSD profiles which show a reasonable adherence to log-normality. In such a case, the geometric standard deviation (GSD = (84.1/15.9% diameter ratio) 1/2 and MMAD can best be determined by linear-linear interpolation of data such as that shown in Figure 1, and used alongside the total mass recovered from the impactor as three suitable variables. However, there are sufficient instances where these variables are unsuitable, making generalizations impossible. For DPIs in particular, one factor that can influence measurement accuracy and reproducibility concerns the establishment of the flow profile (through the inhaler and the impactor) to be used during testing. Pharmacopeial methods for DPIs require the use of complex switching valves to establish airflow through the impactor during the measurement (2, 3). It is a fact that many aerosols are actually being sized, at least as they pass the upper stages of the impactor, and while the steady-state flow rate is still being established. is inherently results in inaccurate particle size measurements. It is essential therefore that not only the steady-state airflow for a given test be well controlled (and measured during set-up), but also that the experimental set-up ensures that every time a test is performed (irrespective of which impactor, pump, or flow diverter is employed), the flow profile is reproducible. Currently within the pharmacopeias, there are no specific controls to ensure that this is assured. Method validation must eventually be performed by assessing the variance of the parameters which will ultimately be used for QC purposes. Comparison of the variance associated with the chosen parameters in accord with the effect of the issues described under method performance (Table 3), generally enables improvement in method precision to be brought about by standardizing the control features of the test method. Furthermore, variability problems associated with cascade impaction are usually to do with poorly described and executed methodology. e Mass Balance Group of the Product Quality Research Institute recently published their recommendations for Best Practices to be used during the performance of cascade impactor tests (12). ese should be fol- lowed carefully because the lacking standardization of an important control maneuver is often the reason for unwanted high variance results. Reference standards: QC analysts reading this advocacy article will likely have asked on several occasions why method variance cannot be determined using a Reference Standard Aerosol. Indeed, a series of reference aerosol products which are polydisperse with respect to their aerodynamic particle size distributions would be most helpful as a means of assuring both accuracy and precision during the validation process. In practice these days, pressurized MDI formulations can be manufactured which have apparent particle size distributions which are quite reproducible (e.g., Figure 1 and reference 7). Different formulations and actuators may potentially be chosen to cover the range of impactor deposition profiles illustrated by Lee (14). USP could potentially solicit the creation of such standards and test and issue them as tools to be used in the method validation package. is process requires considerable investment by USP however, in order to (a) commission and manufacture, and (b) test and assure the quality of these MDIs, so that (c) such standards could be provided publicly along with certificates to accredit their PSD profiles (by several different standard methods). In the absence of publicly available reference standard products, the analyst must develop an alternative approach to ensure that the cascade impactor is working correctly. However, one possibility when developing cascade impaction methods for large in vitro variance DPIs, could involve the periodic use of a commercially available, low-variance MDI product, with an appropriately selected PSD profile, as a means of assuring that the instrument and some aspects of the method remain under control as providers of valid data.
9 Respiratory Drug Delivery IX, 2004 Byron et al. 177 ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS e authors are grateful to Bo Olsson, Michael Hindle, Aki Kamiya, and Masahiro Sakagami for their advice during the early stages of manuscript preparation. AK and MS also assisted with the preparation of Figure 1 which was abstracted from a poster presentation described in reference 9. e Medical College of Virginia Foundation supported the research and preparation of this manuscript. REFERENCES 1. Chowan, Z.T., Casey, D.L., Byron, P.R., Kelly, E.L., Chaudry, I., Lovering, E.G., Vadas, E., iel, C.G., Barnstein, C.H., and Srinivasan, V. (1991), Report and recommendations of the USP Advisory Panel on Aerosols on the USP general chapter [601] on aerosols, Pharmacopeial Forum, 17, , and subsequent USP editions. 2. USP Aerosol Expert Committee (2003), Aerosols, nasal sprays, metered dose inhalers and dry powder inhalers, Pharmacopeial Forum, 29, United States Pharmacopiea, 25 (2002), Aerosols, Metered Dose Inhalers and Dry Powder Inhalers, General Chapter <601>. United States Pharmacopeial Convention, Rockville, MD, pp and European Pharmacopiea, Preparations for Inhalation Inhalanda. See also: Pharmacopeial Forum (2002), 28, Stein, S.W. and Olson, B.A. (1997), Variability in size distribution measurements obtained using multiple Andersen Mark II Cascade Impactors, Pharmaceutical Research, 14, Marple, V.A, Roberts, D.L., Romay, F.J., Miller, N.C., Truman, K.G., Van Oort, M., Olsson, B., Holroyd, M.J., Mitchell, J.P., and Hochrainer, D. (2003), Next generation pharmaceutical impactor (a new impactor for pharmaceutical inhaler testing). Part I: Design, J. Aerosol Med.,. 16, Nichols, S.C. (2000), Andersen cascade impactor: Calibration and mensuration issues for the standard and modified impactor, Pharmeuropa, 12, Byron, P.R. (2002), In vitro bioequivalence of particle size distributions: A commentary on FDA s draft guidance, Respiratory Drug Delivery VIII,, Vol 1, pp Dalby, R.N., Byron, P.R., Peart, J., and Farr, S.J. (eds.), Davis-Horwood International, Raleigh, NC. Available at 8. Marple, V.A., Olson, B.A., Santhanakrishnan, K., Mitchell, J.P., Murray, S.C., and Hudson- Curtis, B.L. (2003), Next generation pharmaceutical impactor (a new impactor for pharmaceutical inhaler testing). Part II: Archival calibration, J. Aerosol Med., 16, Kamiya, A., Sakagami, M., Hindle, M., and Byron, P.R. (2003), Particle sizing with the next generation pharmaceutical impactor; a study of Vanceril metered dose inhaler, J. Aerosol Med., 16, 216.
10 178 Selection and Validation of Cascade Impactor Test Methods Byron et al. 10. Mitchell, J.P., Nagel, M.W., Wiersema, K.J., and Doyle, C.C. (2003), Aerodynamic particle size analysis of aerosols from pressurized metered dose inhalers: Comparison of Andersen 8 stage cascade impactor, next generation pharmaceutical impactor and Model 3321aerodynamic particle sizer aerosol spectrometer, AAPS PharmSciTech, 4, Article 54. Available at Asking, L. and Nichols, S. (2003), Next generation pharmaceutical impactor (NGI) EPAG collaborative study, presentation at Drug Delivery to the Lungs, 14, 33-36, e Aerosol Society, London, UK. 12. e PQRI Particle Size Distribution Working Group: Christopher, D. et al. (2003), Considerations for the development and practice of cascade impaction testing, including a mass balance failure investigation tree, J. Aerosol Med.,. 16, Vision Systems information, available at Lee, D. (2004), Searching for the holy grail of a single PSD profile comparator: Technical challenges with the chi-square approach, in Respiratory Drug Delivery IX,, Dalby, R.N., Byron, P.R., Peart, J., Suman, J.D., and Farr, S.J. (eds.), Davis Healthcare International, River Grove, IL, pp Available at Vaughan, N.P. (1989), e Andersen impactor: Calibration, wall losses and numerical simulation, J. Aerosol Sci., 20,
Understanding cascade impaction and its importance for inhaler testing
Understanding cascade impaction and its importance for inhaler testing Mark Copley, Technical Sales Manager Inhalation product development is an important area of activity for the pharmaceutical sector.
More informationWhat Do Cascade Impaction Measurements Tell Us: In Vitro Aspects. Context of Presentation
What Do Cascade Impaction Measurements Tell Us: In Vitro Aspects Jolyon P. Mitchell, Ph.D. Trudell Medical International London, Canada IPAC-RS Conference November 2006 1 Context of Presentation This talk
More informationINTRODUCTION. size and total nozzle area decrease with stage number. Volumetric air flow rate through
CASCADE I M P A C T I O N Optimizing Cascade Impactor Testing for Characterizing Orally Inhaled & Nasal Drug Products By: Mark Copley INTRODUCTION Cascade impaction is a core analytical technique for characterizing
More informationCaption: The equipment required for testing Fluticasone Propionate (FP) Inhalation Powder in line with a new product-specific monograph (USP36-NF31).
Product-specific FDA guidance, and product-specific pharmacopeial monographs, point to the use of test equipment, some of which isn t included in the general USP/Ph. Eur. chapters for orally inhaled products
More informationThe abbreviated impactor measurement concept
AS APPEARED IN Inhalation JUNE 2009 www.inhalationmag.com The abbreviated impactor measurement concept A potentially faster and more precise way to assess quality of inhaled drug products Jolyon P. Mitchell,
More informationInhalation Product Research at FDA
Inhalation Product Research at FDA Changning Guo Ph. D., Chemist Division of Pharmaceutical Analysis FDA/CDER/OPS/OTR 2016 GPhA CMC workshop, May 17, 2016 Disclaimer: This presentation reflects the views
More informationEquivalence Evaluation of Valved Holding Chambers (VHCs) with Albuterol Pressurized Metered Dose Inhaler (pmdi)
Respiratory Drug Delivery Europe 2017 Nagel and Suggett Equivalence Evaluation of Valved Holding Chambers (VHCs) with Albuterol Pressurized Metered Dose Inhaler (pmdi) Mark W. Nagel and Jason A. Suggett
More informationEPAG Perspective - Regulatory Advances Related to Nasal Spray Pumps. Dr G.Williams Nasal Drug Delivery Management Forum London, 15 Apr 2010
1 EPAG Perspective - Regulatory Advances Related to Nasal Spray Pumps Dr G.Williams Nasal Drug Delivery Management Forum London, 15 Apr 2010 Overview 2 EPAG, what is it?, background, this project Regulatory
More informationPRACTICES OF COATING COLLECTION SURFACES OF CASCADE IMPACTORS: A SURVEY OF MEMBERS OF THE EUROPEAN PHARMACEUTICAL AEROSOL GROUP (EPAG)
PRACTICES OF COATING COLLECTION SURFACES OF CASCADE IMPACTORS: A SURVEY OF MEMBERS OF THE EUROPEAN PHARMACEUTICAL AEROSOL GROUP () J.P. Mitchell on behalf of members of the European Pharmaceutical Aerosol
More informationCOMMENTS. Submitted by The International Pharmaceutical Aerosol Consortium
COMMENTS on a draft Guidance for Industry Nasal Spray and Inhalation Solution, Suspension, and Spray Drug Products Chemistry, Manufacturing, and Controls Documentation (Docket No. 99D-1454) Submitted by
More informationAssessing Quality of Inhaled Products And Links to Efficacy and Safety
Assessing Quality of Inhaled Products And Links to Efficacy and Safety Prasad Peri, PhD ONDQA 2011 IPAC-RS Conference Bringing Value To The Patient In A Changing World March 30, 2011 1 Outline of the Presentation
More informationAssessing the role of breathing simulators in OIP testing
As first AppeAred in Inhalation April 2014 www.inhalationmag.com Assessing the role of breathing simulators in OIP testing Exploring how the application of patient-representative inhalation profiles can
More informationLast updated: July 2011
EFFICIENT DATA ANALYSIS, ABBREVIATED IMPACTOR MEASUREMENTS, AERODYNAMIC PARTICLE SIZE DISTRIBUTIONS: PUBLICATIONS AND PRESENTATIONS BY MEMBERS OF THE IPAC-RS CASCADE IMPACTION WORKING GROUP AND EPAG 2000-2011
More informationCOMMITTEE FOR MEDICINAL PRODUCTS FOR HUMAN USE (CHMP) GUIDELINE ON THE PHARMACEUTICAL QUALITY OF INHALATION AND NASAL PRODUCTS
European Medicines Agency Inspections London, 16 February 2005 Doc Ref.: EMEA/CHMP/QWP/49313/2005 corr. COMMITTEE FOR MEDICINAL PRODUCTS FOR HUMAN USE (CHMP) GUIDELINE ON THE PHARMACEUTICAL QUALITY OF
More informationGo With the Flow REGULATORY LANDSCAPE. Mark Copley at Copley Scientific
Go With the Flow Image: Guzel Studio shutterstock.com Increasing global requirements for efficacious, inexpensive products to treat respiratory illnesses are driving the development of inhaled generics.
More informationEPAG Sponsored Workshop on Abbreviated Impactor Measurement (AIM) and Efficient Data Analysis (EDA) Concepts in Inhaler Testing. Overview of AIM EDA
EPAG Sponsored Workshop on Abbreviated Impactor Measurement (AIM) and Efficient Data Analysis (EDA) Concepts in Inhaler Testing Overview of AIM EDA Jolyon Mitchell 1 and Mark Copley 2 1 Trudell Medical
More informationAdapting Pharmacopeial Testing for Pharmaceutical Equivalence Studies. Julie D. Suman, Ph.D. March 29, 2016
Adapting Pharmacopeial Testing for Pharmaceutical Equivalence Studies Julie D. Suman, Ph.D. March 29, 2016 AGENDA Regulatory Approaches for Bioequivalence (BE) Compendial Testing Vs Pharmaceutical Equivalence
More informationUnderstanding Regulatory Global Requirements for Nasal Drug Products. Julie D. Suman, Ph.D. April 8, 2016
Understanding Regulatory Global Requirements for Nasal Drug Products Julie D. Suman, Ph.D. April 8, 2016 AGENDA NDA vs ANDA Regulatory Approaches for Bioequivalence (BE) FDA Drug Specific Guidances FDA,
More informationProduct Guide. MSP Corporation Rice Creek Parkway, Suite 300. Shoreview, Minnesota 55126, U.S.A. Phone: Fax:
Product Guide inhalertesting MSP Corporation 5910 Rice Creek Parkway, Suite 300 Shoreview, Minnesota 55126, U.S.A. Phone: 651.287.8100 Fax: 651.287.8140 sales@mspcorp.com www.mspcorp.com About This Guide
More informationIMPROVING THE REALISM AND RELEVANCE OF MOUTH-THROAT MODELS FOR INHALED PRODUCT TESTING
IMPROVING THE REALISM AND RELEVANCE OF MOUTH-THROAT MODELS FOR INHALED PRODUCT TESTING In this piece, Mark Copley, Sales Director of Copley Scientific, provides some background on mouth-throat models for
More informationAEROSOL THERAPY: THE PRACTICALITIES
AEROSOL THERAPY: THE PRACTICALITIES Lester I. Harrison, PhD Section Head, Clinical Pharmacokinetics, 3M Pharmaceuticals, 3M Center 270-3S-05, St. Paul, MN, USA 55144 liharrison@mmm.com Introduction: Horses,
More informationThe Role of EPAG in Standards and Regulatory Guidance Development
The Role of EPAG in Standards and Regulatory Guidance Development Jolyon P. Mitchell on behalf of EPAG Session 4: The Remit, Activities and Achievements of The European Pharmaceutical Aerosols Group 1
More informationMisty Max 10 nebulizer
AirLife brand Misty Max 10 nebulizer Purpose Introduction Delivery of nebulized medication to the lungs is a complex process dependant upon a variety of clinical and device-related variables. Patient breathing
More informationCharacterizing the Performance of Metered Dose Inhalers with Add-On Devices: New Methods For Clinically Relevant Testing
INSTRUMENTATION» Characterizing the Performance of Metered Dose Inhalers with Add-On Devices: New Methods For Clinically Relevant Testing Mark Copley Director Copley Scientific The recent introduction
More informationUniversity of Groningen. Technology in practice Lexmond, Anne
University of Groningen Technology in practice Lexmond, Anne IMPORTANT NOTE: You are advised to consult the publisher's version (publisher's PDF) if you wish to cite from it. Please check the document
More informationA NEW, ADVANCED HIGH- THROUGHPUT SYSTEM FOR AUTOMATED INHALER TESTING
A NEW, ADVANCED HIGH- THROUGHPUT SYSTEM FOR AUTOMATED INHALER TESTING Two years ago, Novi Systems Ltd set out to shake up the inhaler automation market. On December 8th, 2015, at the Drug Delivery to the
More informationTesting Inhaled Generics
Generic Bioequivalence Testing Inhaled Generics By Mark Copley at Copley Scientific New product-specific FDA guidance and USP monographs support the development of popular inhaled products. This article
More informationProcess Drift and it s Resolution in the Manufacture of Drug Products. MDI s and DPI s Metered Dose Inhalations and Dry Powder Inhalations
Process Drift and it s Resolution in the Manufacture of Drug Products MDI s and DPI s Metered Dose Inhalations and Dry Powder Inhalations Ed Warner, Merck MMD December 2, 2010 PQRI-FDA Workshop on Process
More informationPerformance of a Fluticasone Propionate/Salmeterol Xinafoate 3M Taper DPI
3M Drug Delivery Systems Performance of a Fluticasone Propionate/Salmeterol Xinafoate 3M Taper DPI Poster Reprint / Spring 2011 John Simons 1, Herbert Chiou 1, Louis Sigtermans 1, Tom Robison 1, Debra
More informationQualifying Container Closure Systems for OINDP: Current & Future Regulatory Expectations. Julie D. Suman, Ph.D. November 14, 2014
Qualifying Container Closure Systems for OINDP: Current & Future Regulatory Expectations Julie D. Suman, Ph.D. November 14, 2014 Objectives Container-Closure System Attributes Extractables Regulatory Expectations
More informationDrug/Device Combination Products: Bioequivalence
Drug/Device Combination Products: Bioequivalence Three stories:. The story of Nasal and Inhalation Product BE 2. The story of the Generic Auto-Injector 3. The story of User Interface Considerations Bioequivalence
More informationDEBATING THE OPERATING CURVES FOR DDU TESTS ON MARKETED INHALERS
DEBATING THE OPERATING CURVES FOR DDU TESTS ON MARKETED INHALERS Industry s problem with the current FDA DDU requirements Presented by Bo Olsson, AstraZeneca R&D Lund on behalf of IPAC-RS DDU Working Group
More informationDelivery of Iloprost Inhalation Solution With the HaloLite, Prodose, and I-neb Adaptive Aerosol Delivery Systems: An In Vitro Study
Delivery of Iloprost Inhalation Solution With the HaloLite, Prodose, and I-neb Adaptive Aerosol Delivery Systems: An In Vitro Study Robert E Van Dyke MSc and Kurt Nikander BACKGROUND: Iloprost (Ventavis)
More informationMetered Dose Inhaler Technology
Metered Dose Inhaler Technology Edited by Tol S. Purewal and David J. W. Grant Interpharm Press, Inc. Buffalo Grove, Illinois Contents 1. INTRODUCTION 1 T. S. Purewal Definition of the Metered Dose Inhaler
More informationImplications of the new CHMP Guideline on the Pharmaceutical Quality of Inhalation and Nasal Products
Implications of the new CHMP Guideline on the Pharmaceutical Quality of Inhalation and Nasal Products Wissenschaftliche Prüfungsarbeit zur Erlangung des Titels Master of Drug Regulatory Affairs der Mathematisch-Naturwissenschaftlichen
More informationDraft Guidance on Fluticasone Propionate; Salmeterol Xinafoate. Fluticasone Propionate; Salmeterol Xinafoate. Powder/Inhalation
Reprinted from FDA s website by EAS Consulting Group, LLC Contains Nonbinding Recommendations Draft Guidance on Fluticasone Propionate; Salmeterol Xinafoate This draft guidance, once finalized, will represent
More informationIVIVC in Pediatric OIPs
IPAC-RS/UF Orlando Conference 2014 March 20, 2014 IVIVC in Pediatric OIPs Herbert Wachtel Declaration of Conflicts of Interest H. Wachtel is employee of Boehringer Ingelheim Pharma GmbH & Co. KG, Germany.
More informationMDI. Recommended Equipment
1 x DUSA for MDIs (Silicone Seals) 1 x Base Plate MDI 1 x DUSA for MDIs (Silicone Seals) 9 x Spare Collection Tubes for MDIs 18 x Spare Rinsing Caps for MDIs 1 x Stand for 10 Collection Tubes 1 x Waste
More information905 UNIFORMITY OF DOSAGE UNITS
Change to read: 905 UNIFORMITY OF DOSAGE UNITS [ NOTE In this chapter, unit and dosage unit are synonymous. ] To ensure the consistency of dosage units, each unit in a batch should have a drug substance
More informationGeneral Chapter/Section: <232> Elemental Impurities - Limits Expert Committee(s): General Chapters Chemical Analysis No.
General Chapter/Section: Elemental Impurities - Limits Expert Committee(s): General Chapters Chemical Analysis No. of Commenters: 18 Editorial changes suggested by commenters have been reviewed by
More informationCurrent Challenges and Opportunities in Demonstrating Bioequivalence
Current Challenges and Opportunities in Demonstrating Bioequivalence Gur Jai Pal Singh, Ph.D. Watson Laboratories, Inc. Corona, California, USA Demonstrating Bioequivalence of Locally Acting Orally Inhaled
More informationOPTIMISING ANALYTICAL STRATEGIES FOR THE DEMONSTRATION OF BIOEQUIVALENCE IN A GENERIC NEBULISER
OPTIMISING ANALYTICAL STRATEGIES FOR THE DEMONSTRATION OF BIOEQUIVALENCE IN A GENERIC NEBULISER US FDA guidance for the in vitro demonstration of bioequivalence in a generic nebuliser directly references
More informationCOPLEY SCIENTIFIC. Quality Solutions for Inhaler Testing. metered-dose inhalers dry powder inhalers nebulisers nasal sprays
COPLEY SCIENTIFIC Quality Solutions for Inhaler Testing 2015 Edition metered-dose inhalers dry powder inhalers nebulisers nasal sprays Who are Copley Scientific? Copley Scientific was founded in 1946 in
More informationInternational Pharmaceutical Aerosol Consortium on Regulation and Science
International Pharmaceutical Aerosol Consortium on Regulation and Science 1500 K Street NW Washington DC 20005 Telephone +1 202 230 5607 Fax +1 202 842 8465 Email info@ipacrs.org Web www.ipacrs.org Submitted
More informationREDUCING VARIABILITY IN TEST RESULTS FOR OINDPS WITH AUTOMATED ACTUATION
REDUCING VARIABILITY IN TEST RESULTS FOR OINDPS WITH AUTOMATED ACTUATION In this article, Heli Chauhan, Senior Applications Chemist, and Linda (Lingzhi) Liao, Field Applications Scientist, both of Proveris
More informationDevice Change Management for Inhaled Products. Loy Britto, Ph.D. GlaxoSmithKline ISAM Congress Munich 2015
Device Change Management for Inhaled Products Loy Britto, Ph.D. GlaxoSmithKline ISAM Congress Munich 2015 Topics to be covered Update on ISO/TC 084/WG 15: Guidelines for development of drug products- Quality
More informationResidual Solvents: FDA/ Regulatory Perspective
Rosa Motta Compliance Officer Residual Solvents: FDA/ Regulatory Perspective PDA/USP Residual Solvents Conference January 18-19, 2007 1 Outline Laws and regulations governing the compliance requirements
More informationGuidance for Industry
Guidance for Industry Metered Dose Inhaler (MDI) and Dry Powder Inhaler (DPI) Drug Products Chemistry, Manufacturing, and Controls Documentation DRAFT GUIDANCE This document is being distributed for comment
More informationLessons Learned from Approval of Generic Nasal Products
Lessons Learned from Approval of Generic Nasal Products Julie D. Suman, Ph.D President, Next Breath IPAC-RS/UF Orlando Inhalation Conference: Approaches in International Regulation March 20, 2014 Objectives
More informationTesting inhalers. One of the longstanding challenges facing the
Testing inhalers This article investigates how the industry can test inhalers in a way that is most representative of typical use. One of the longstanding challenges facing the United States Pharmacopeia
More informationRevision 2. Improving Aerosol Drug Delivery During Invasive Mechanical Ventilation with Redesigned Components
Revision 2 Improving Aerosol Drug Delivery During Invasive Mechanical Ventilation with Redesigned Components P. Worth Longest, Ph.D., 1,2* Mandana Azimi, Pharm.D., 2 Laleh Golshahi, Ph.D., 2 and Michael
More informationNext Generation Pharmaceutical Impactor (A New Impactor for Pharmaceutical Inhaler Testing). Part I: Design ABSTRACT
JOURNAL OF AEROSOL MEDICINE Volume 16, Number 3, 2003 Mary Ann Liebert, Inc. Pp. 283 299 Next Generation Pharmaceutical Impactor (A New Impactor for Pharmaceutical Inhaler Testing). Part I: Design VIRGIL
More informationCitation for published version (APA): Westerman, E. M. (2009). Studies on antibiotic aerosols for inhalation in cystic fibrosis s.n.
University of Groningen Studies on antibiotic aerosols for inhalation in cystic fibrosis Westerman, Elisabeth Mechteld IMPORTANT NOTE: You are advised to consult the publisher's version (publisher's PDF)
More informationOF COATING MATERIAL ON THE AERODYNAMIC PARTICLE SIZE DISTRIBUTION (PSD) OF OXIS TURBOHALER USING MIXING INLET WITH AN ANDERSEN CASCADE IMPACTOR (ACI)
165 J App Pharm 2(3): 165-178 (2011) Khan et al., 2011 EFFECT OF COATING MATERIAL ON THE AERODYNAMIC PARTICLE SIZE DISTRIBUTION (PSD) OF OXIS TURBOHALER USING MIXING INLET WITH AN ANDERSEN CASCADE IMPACTOR
More informationEffect of Interval Between Actuations of Albuterol Hydrofluoroalkane Pressurized Metered-Dose Inhalers on Their Aerosol Characteristics
Effect of Interval Between Actuations of Albuterol Hydrofluoroalkane Pressurized Metered-Dose Inhalers on Their Aerosol Characteristics Ariel Berlinski MD and David Pennington BACKGROUND: Albuterol hydrofluoroalkane
More informationDISSOLUTION TESTING - Exploring the Link Between Particle Size & Dissolution Behavior for OINDPs
Issue: March 2016, Posted Date: 3/1/2016 DISSOLUTION TESTING - Exploring the Link Between Particle Size & Dissolution Behavior for OINDPs INTRODUCTION In the development of orally inhaled and nasal products
More informationMoving to More Realistic In Vitro Testing of OIDPs
Moving to More Realistic In Vitro Testing of OIDPs IPAC-RS/UF 2014 Conference: Orlando Inhalation Conference - Approaches in International Regulation Renishkumar Delvadia, PhD. Food and Drug Administration
More informationIPAC-RS/UF Orlando Inhalation Conference March 20, S.T. Horhota 1, C.B. Verkleij 2, P.J.G. Cornelissen 2, L. Bour 3, A. Sharma 3, M.
IPAC-RS/UF Orlando Inhalation Conference March 20, 2014 Case Study: Pharmacokinetics and Pharmacodynamics of Tiotropium and Salmeterol Following Parallel Administration in COPD Patients Using Different
More informationEverything for Inhalation
Everything for Inhalation Everything for Inhalation Inhalation drug product development at Hovione has a strong focus on formulation for Dry Powder Inhalers (DPI), particularly for capsule-based and reservoir-based
More informationCOPLEY SCIENTIFIC. Quality Solutions for Inhaler Testing Edition. metered-dose inhalers dry powder inhalers nebulisers nasal sprays
COPLEY SCIENTIFIC Quality Solutions for Inhaler Testing 2012 Edition metered-dose inhalers dry powder inhalers nebulisers nasal sprays Who are Copley Based in Nottingham, UK, Copley Scientific was founded
More informationDevice Design Similarity
Device Design Similarity Dave Parkins Director DPI Product Development PQRI Workshop on Demonstrating Bioequivalence of Locally Acting Orally Inhaled Drug Products. Bethesda March 9-10, 2009 Device Similarity
More informationVARIABILITY IN CASCADE IMPACTION: SOURCES, IMPACT AND STRATEGIES FOR REDUCTION
H&T Copley Presspart Scientific VARIABILITY IN CASCADE IMPACTION: SOURCES, IMPACT AND STRATEGIES FOR REDUCTION In this article, Mark Copley, Chief Executive Officer, Copley Scientific, considers cascade
More informationADVANCIA : A TRUE PLATFORM & INNOVATIVE SYSTEM OFFERING EFFICIENT NASAL DOSE DELIVERY
ADVANCIA : A TRUE PLATFORM & INNOVATIVE SYSTEM OFFERING EFFICIENT NASAL DOSE DELIVERY Millions of people suffering from allergic rhinitis use nasal sprays manufactured by Nemera every day. In this article,
More information2009/SOM2/SCSC/WKSP2/014
2009/SOM2/SCSC/WKSP2/014 Modernizing and Harmonizing Infant Formula and Medical Foods Nutrient Methods - Risk Management Perspective: A Stakeholder Approach for Establishing International Consensus Standards
More informationGeneral concepts in the Ph. Eur.: theory and rationale
General concepts in the Ph. Eur.: theory and rationale Cathie VIELLE Head of European Pharmacopoeia Department, EDQM / CoE 1 The structure of the Ph. Eur. General monographs Dosage form monographs General
More informationEVALUATION OF THE CYCLEX IMPACTOR PHASE 2: REPORT 3
EVALUATION OF THE CYCLEX IMPACTOR PHASE 2: COLLECTION EFFICIENCY EVALUATION WITH MICROBIAL SPORES (IMPACTOR S CONFIGURATIONS 1, 2, AND 3) REPORT 3 Submitted to: ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING SYSTEMS, INC. Prepared
More informationSignificance of Leachables and Extractables to Pharmaceutical Quality
Significance of Leachables and Extractables to Pharmaceutical Quality Gordon Hansen, MS Vice President Analytical Development Ridgefield Boehringer Ingelheim Pharmaceuticals, Inc. Presentation Outline
More informationMetered dose Alternative technologies
FACT SHEET 14 Aerosols UNEP Ozone Secretariat UNEP Ozone Secretariat Background Workshop Material for on HFC HFC Workshop, management: 2015 technical issues Bangkok, 20 and 21 April 2015 1. Description
More informationUse of Math Modelling to Understand Delivery of Biopharmaceutical Molecules to the Lung
Use of Math Modelling to Understand Delivery of Biopharmaceutical Molecules to the Lung Nia Stevens 9 th November 2016 Thanks to Richard Kaye, James Mitchell, Dave Prime at GSK Bahman Asgharian and Owen
More informationBest Practices for OINDP Pharmaceutical Development Programs Leachables and Extractables
Best Practices for OINDP Pharmaceutical Development Programs Leachables and Extractables PQRI Leachables & Extractables Working Group PQRI Training Course 12-13 April 2007 Chicago, IL What are leachables
More informationMetered Dose Inhalers (MDIs) In Vitro Measures to Confirm Patient Perceptions: HFA vs. CFC
Metered Dose Inhalers (MDIs) In Vitro Measures to Confirm Patient Perceptions: HFA vs. CFC William H. Doub, Ph.D. Division of Pharmaceutical Analysis (DPA) US FDA/CDER/OPS/OTR The information presented
More informationDisclosure. Objectives. Objectives. Introduction. Introduction. Non-Sterile Compounding/Calculations
49th Annual Meeting Non-Sterile Compounding/ Sunil Jambhekar, B. Pharm., M.S., Ph.D Professor, Pharmaceutical Sciences LECOM Bradenton, School of Pharmacy Bradenton, FL 34211 Disclosure I do not have a
More informationOptimising the application of in vitro test methods for the demonstration of bioequivalence in orally inhaled products
Optimising the application of in vitro test methods for the demonstration of bioequivalence in orally inhaled products Mark Copley, Director and Anna Sipitanou, Business Development Manager, Copley Scientific
More informationDr. Christian Zeine LGC Standards GmbH. Webinar Series 2013 July 2013
The 7 truths of impurities and their reference standards FDA's and other regulators' viewpoints and further stories (Part 1) Dr. Christian Zeine LGC Standards GmbH Webinar Series 2013 July 2013 Quick guide
More informationPREMIXES FOR MEDICATED FEEDING STUFFS FOR VETERINARY USE. Praeadmixta ad alimenta medicata ad usum veterinarium. Effervescent powders
Preparations for inhalation administered in or with water or another suitable liquid. They may also be swallowed directly. They are presented as single-dose or multidose preparations. Where applicable,
More informationCase Study 1: Pharmaceutical Development of EXUBERA
Case Study 1: Pharmaceutical Development of EXUBERA Nancy Harper, PhD Research Fellow, Parenteral Development Center of Emphasis Pfizer Global R&D IPAC-RS Conference November 2006 1 EXUBERA Insulin human
More informationISO INTERNATIONAL STANDARD
INTERNATIONAL STANDARD ISO 15197 First edition 2003-05-01 In vitro diagnostic test systems Requirements for blood-glucose monitoring systems for self-testing in managing diabetes mellitus Systèmes d'essais
More informationAnalytical method validation. Presented by Debbie Parker 4 July, 2016
Analytical method validation Presented by Debbie Parker 4 July, 2016 Introduction This session will cover: Guidance and references The types of test methods Validation requirements Summary Slide 2 PharmOut
More informationPredictive modeling of deposition, dissolution, absorption and systemic exposure
Predictive modeling of deposition, dissolution, absorption and systemic exposure IPAC-RS/UF Orlando Inhalation Conference March 20, 2014 Per Bäckman and Bo Olsson, AstraZeneca R&D, Mölndal Sweden The views
More informationCLINICAL RELEVANCE OF IN VITRO PARTICLE SIZING DATA. Steve Newman, PhD Nottingham, UK November 2006
IPAC-RS Conference 6-8 November 2006 CLINICAL RELEVANCE OF IN VITRO PARTICLE SIZING DATA Steve Newman, PhD Nottingham, UK November 2006 IPAC-RS Conference 6-8 November 2006 1 EFFECT OF PARTICLE SIZE ON
More informationASTRAZENECA v GLAXOSMITHKLINE
CASE AUTH/1986/4/07 ASTRAZENECA v GLAXOSMITHKLINE Symbicort and Seretide cost comparisons AstraZeneca complained about cost comparisons made by GlaxoSmithKline between AstraZeneca s Symbicort (budesonide/formoterol)
More informationPatricia KP Burnell Inhalation Product Development
Patricia KP Burnell Inhalation Product Development Inhaled products: types, development The critical parameters In-vitro testing Ex-vivo testing What dose? Product Development: drug medicine Safety and
More informationCascade Impactor Study Comparing the Amsino OneMask Oxygen Mask and Predicate Mask from Hudson RCI on a Human Model
(p) 93-850-6630 (f) 93-850-6635 Cascade Impactor Study Comparing the Amsino OneMask Oxygen Mask and Predicate Mask from Hudson RCI on a Human Model Abstract This in vitro study compares drug delivery efficiencies
More informationJ Pharm Sci Bioscientific Res (4): ISSN NO
Development and Validation of Analytical Methods for Simultaneous Estimation of Pregabalin and Amitriptyline Hydrochloride in their Combined Marketed Dosage form ABSTRACT: Nikhilkumar Patel, Gurjit Kaur,
More informationCHAPTER 3 METHOD AND PROCEDURE
CHAPTER 3 METHOD AND PROCEDURE Previous chapter namely Review of the Literature was concerned with the review of the research studies conducted in the field of teacher education, with special reference
More information21/03/2011 AEROSOL DEPOSITION AND THE ASSESSMENT OF PULMONARY DRUG DELIVERY. Fundamentals of aerosols
AEROSOL DEPOSITION AND THE ASSESSMENT OF PULMONARY DRUG DELIVERY AEROSOL DEPOSITION AND THE ASSESSMENT OF PULMONARY DRUG DELIVERY Steve Newman Scientific Consultant Norfolk, UK steve.newman@physics.org
More informationExperiences with USP Apparatus 4 Calibration
Experiences with USP Apparatus 4 Calibration Johannes Krämer 1,2, and Erika Stippler 1 email: jkraemer@phast.de Table 1. List of participating laboratory of the 1 st Collaborative Study Laboratory code
More informationISO Process and Standards Under Development. ISO Principles
Inhalation & Nasal Drugs: The Regulatory Landscape ISO Process and Standards Under Development S.C. Nichols 7 1 ISO Principles ISO standards are developed according to the following principles: Consensus
More information040716_ANDI_VENTIS WEBSITE(new) Printout 1. HOME PAGE. Welcome to our world of Dry Powder Inhalers!
1. HOME PAGE Welcome to our world of Dry Powder Inhalers! Andi-Ventis Ltd, established in 2001 is a joint venture between Medochemie Ltd, Cyprus and Miat SpA Italy, founded to carry out the pharmaceutical
More informationFDA Expectations and Evaluation of Inhalation Toxicology Studies
FDA Expectations and Evaluation of Inhalation Toxicology Studies Presented by Timothy McGovern, Ph.D. SciLucent, LLC Herndon, Virginia Development of inhalation products has unique regulatory aspects My
More informationThe effect of different coating materials on the prevention of powder bounce in the next generation impactor
Research in Pharmaceutical Sciences, June 2018; 13(3): 283-287 Received: June 2017 Accepted: December 2017 School of Pharmacy & Pharmaceutical Sciences Isfahan University of Medical Sciences Short Communication
More informationPulmonary deposition of inhaled drugs
Pulmonary deposition of inhaled drugs Federico Lavorini Dept. Experimental and Clinical Medicine Careggi University Hospital Florence - Italy Presenter Disclosures F.L. has received in the last 5 years
More informationQuality of Nasal and Inhalation Drug Products
Quality of Nasal and Inhalation Drug Products Good Development Practices, Specifications, and Analytical Methods for Inhalation Drug Products (Metered Dose Inhaler (MDI), Dry Powder Inhaler (DPI)) and
More informationDeviations Inspection Observations & Issues to Consider for Achieving Compliance
Deviations Inspection Observations & Issues to Consider for Achieving Compliance Kevin O Donnell, Ph.D. Market Compliance Manager Irish Medicines Board IMB GMP & Market Compliance Information Day Dublin,
More informationENGR 83 Final Project
ENGR 83 Final Project Affordable Flowmeter for Measurement of Low- Flowrate Suspended- Particulate Flow Julian Leland ENGR 83, 2011 Swarthmore College Introduction Measurement of fluid flow is an important
More informationDry Powder Inhaler. Developing an Efficient. 3M Conix DPI. White Paper / Spring Proven Solutions that Enable Your Success
3M Drug Delivery Systems Developing an Efficient Dry Powder Inhaler 3M Conix DPI White Paper / Spring 2011 Proven Solutions that Enable Your Success Introduction introduction Inhalation drug delivery has
More informationTEPZZ _7584 A_T EP A1 (19) (11) EP A1 (12) EUROPEAN PATENT APPLICATION. (51) Int Cl.: A61K 9/00 ( ) A61K 31/439 (2006.
(19) TEPZZ _784 A_T (11) EP 3 17 842 A1 (12) EUROPEAN PATENT APPLICATION (43) Date of publication: 07.06.17 Bulletin 17/23 (1) Int Cl.: A61K 9/00 (06.01) A61K 31/439 (06.01) (21) Application number: 1197874.9
More informationTechnology and Quality of Inhalation Drug Products
Technology and Quality of Inhalation Drug Products Good Development Practices, Specifications, and Analytical Methods for Metered Dose Inhaler (MDI) and Dry Powder Inhaler (DPI) Respiratory Drugs 5 6 November
More informationAnalysis of Micronutrients in Milk by Flame Atomic Absorption Using FAST Flame Sample Automation for Increased Sample Throughput
APPLICATION NOTE Atomic Absorption Author: Nick Spivey PerkinElmer, Inc. Shelton, CT Analysis of Micronutrients in Milk by Flame Atomic Absorption Using FAST Flame Sample Automation for Increased Sample
More informationIngredient Listing Qty. Unit NDC # Supplier. q.s. to ml
12/20/2018; Page 1 SUGGESTED FORMULATION Ingredient Listing Qty. Unit NDC # Supplier, USP 10 MU Sucrose, NF 23.00 g Propylene Glycol, USP 7.0 ml Medisca Oral Mix (Flavored Suspending Vehicle) 50.0 ml Medisca
More information