Laboratory of Pharmaceutical Process Analytical Technology, Ghent University, Ottergemsesteenweg 460, 9000, Ghent, Belgium.
Johnson & Johnson Pharmaceutical Research and Development, Analytical Development, Turnhoutseweg 30, 2340, Beerse, Belgium.
Anal Chim Acta. 2018 Jul 12;1013:54-62. doi: 10.1016/j.aca.2018.02.007. Epub 2018 Feb 10.
UltraViolet (UV) spectroscopy was evaluated as an innovative Process Analytical Technology (PAT) - tool for the in-line and real-time quantitative determination of low-dosed active pharmaceutical ingredients (APIs) in a semi-solid (gel) and a liquid (suspension) pharmaceutical formulation during their batch production process. The performance of this new PAT-tool (i.e., UV spectroscopy) was compared with an already more established PAT-method based on Raman spectroscopy. In-line UV measurements were carried out with an immersion probe while for the Raman measurements a non-contact PhAT probe was used. For both studied formulations, an in-line API quantification model was developed and validated per spectroscopic technique. The known API concentrations (Y) were correlated with the corresponding in-line collected preprocessed spectra (X) through a Partial Least Squares (PLS) regression. Each developed quantification method was validated by calculating the accuracy profile on the basis of the validation experiments. Furthermore, the measurement uncertainty was determined based on the data generated for the determination of the accuracy profiles. From the accuracy profile of the UV- and Raman-based quantification method for the gel, it was concluded that at the target API concentration of 2% (w/w), 95 out of 100 future routine measurements given by the Raman method will not deviate more than 10% (relative error) from the true API concentration, whereas for the UV method the acceptance limits of 10% were exceeded. For the liquid formulation, the Raman method was not able to quantify the API in the low-dosed suspension (0.09% (w/w) API). In contrast, the in-line UV method was able to adequately quantify the API in the suspension. This study demonstrated that UV spectroscopy can be adopted as a novel in-line PAT-technique for low-dose quantification purposes in pharmaceutical processes. Important is that none of the two spectroscopic techniques was superior to the other for both formulations: the Raman method was more accurate in quantifying the API in the gel (2% (w/w) API), while the UV method performed better for API quantification in the suspension (0.09% (w/w) API).
紫外(UV)光谱法被评估为一种创新的过程分析技术(PAT)工具,用于在半固体制剂(凝胶)和液体制剂(混悬剂)的批生产过程中,对低剂量活性药物成分(API)进行在线和实时定量测定。该新型 PAT 工具(即 UV 光谱法)的性能与基于拉曼光谱法的更为成熟的 PAT 方法进行了比较。在线 UV 测量使用浸入式探头进行,而对于拉曼测量则使用非接触 PhAT 探头。对于两种研究制剂,均基于每种光谱技术开发并验证了在线 API 定量模型。通过偏最小二乘法(PLS)回归,将已知的 API 浓度(Y)与相应的在线采集的预处理光谱(X)相关联。通过基于验证实验计算准确度轮廓来验证每种开发的定量方法。此外,基于用于确定准确度轮廓的数据来确定测量不确定度。根据凝胶的基于 UV 和拉曼的定量方法的准确度轮廓,可以得出结论,在目标 API 浓度为 2%(w/w)的情况下,基于拉曼法给出的 100 个未来常规测量值中,有 95 个将不会偏离真实 API 浓度超过 10%(相对误差),而对于 UV 法,超出了 10%的接受限。对于液体制剂,拉曼法无法对低剂量混悬剂中的 API 进行定量(API 浓度为 0.09%(w/w))。相比之下,在线 UV 方法能够充分定量混悬剂中的 API。本研究表明,UV 光谱法可以作为一种新颖的在线 PAT 技术,用于药物工艺中的低剂量定量。重要的是,两种光谱技术在两种制剂中均没有一种优于另一种:对于凝胶中的 API 定量,拉曼法更准确(2%(w/w)API),而对于混悬剂中的 API 定量,UV 法性能更好(0.09%(w/w)API)。