Yu Lawrence X, Carlin Alan S, Amidon Gordon L, Hussain Ajaz S
Food and Drug Administration, Office of Pharmaceutical Science, Center for Drug Evaluation and Research, 5600 Fishers Lane, Rockville, MD 20857, USA.
Int J Pharm. 2004 Feb 11;270(1-2):221-7. doi: 10.1016/j.ijpharm.2003.10.016.
The purpose of this report was to investigate the feasibility of using disk intrinsic dissolution rate (DIDR) to determine solubility class membership. We employed a VanKel dissolution apparatus fitted with a Wood's intrinsic dissolution die. To test the robustness of the method, variations of DIDR with compression force, dissolution volume, distance of the drug disk from the bottom of the dissolution vessel, and drug disk rotation speed were studied using furosemide and metoprolol in pH 4.5 acetate buffer as a model system. The DIDRs of six low solubility and nine high solubility model drugs were then determined at pH 1.2, 4.5, and 6.8 and compared to their BCS solubility class membership. It was found that the compression force, dissolution medium volume, and die position had no significant effect on DIDR for the system studied. The proposed compression force, dissolution volume, die position, and rotation speed are 2000 psi, 900 ml, 0.5 in., and 100 rpm, respectively. The test results obtained from 15 model BCS drugs show a good relationship between the DIDR and BCS solubility classification with 0.1 mg/min/cm(2) as a class boundary unless the dose is either extremely low or high where discrepancies may exist between the solubility and DIDR methods. Therefore, more scientific research and debates are needed before considered for regulatory purpose.
本报告的目的是研究使用圆盘固有溶出速率(DIDR)来确定溶解性分类归属的可行性。我们使用了配备伍兹固有溶出模具的范凯尔溶出装置。为了测试该方法的稳健性,以pH 4.5醋酸盐缓冲液中的速尿和美托洛尔作为模型系统,研究了DIDR随压力、溶出体积、药物圆盘与溶出容器底部的距离以及药物圆盘转速的变化。然后在pH 1.2、4.5和6.8条件下测定了六种低溶解性和九种高溶解性模型药物的DIDR,并将其与它们的BCS溶解性分类归属进行比较。结果发现,对于所研究的系统,压力、溶出介质体积和模具位置对DIDR没有显著影响。建议的压力、溶出体积、模具位置和转速分别为2000 psi、900 ml、0.5英寸和100 rpm。从15种BCS模型药物获得的测试结果表明,DIDR与BCS溶解性分类之间存在良好的关系,以0.1 mg/min/cm²作为分类界限,除非剂量极低或极高,此时溶解性方法和DIDR方法之间可能存在差异。因此,在考虑用于监管目的之前,还需要进行更多的科学研究和辩论。