School of Pharmacy and Pharmaceutical Sciences, Trinity College Dublin, Dublin 2, Ireland; SSPC, Synthesis and Solid State Pharmaceutical Centre, Ireland.
School of Pharmacy, Universidad Complutense de Madrid, Plaza Ramón y Cajal s/n, 28040 Madrid, Spain.
Int J Pharm. 2018 Nov 15;551(1-2):241-256. doi: 10.1016/j.ijpharm.2018.09.029. Epub 2018 Sep 14.
The comparison of spray drying versus hot melt extrusion (HME) in order to formulate amorphous solid dispersions has been widely studied. However, to the best of our knowledge, the use of both techniques to form cocrystals within a carrier excipient has not previously been compared. The combination of ibuprofen (IBU) and isonicotinamide (INA) in a 1:1 M ratio was used as a model cocrystal. A range of pharmaceutical excipients was selected for processing - mannitol, xylitol, Soluplus and PVP K15. The ratio of cocrystal components to excipient was altered to assess the ratios at which cocrystal formation occurs during spray drying and HME. Hansen Solubility Parameter (HSP) and the difference in HSP between the cocrystal and excipient (ΔHSP) was employed as a tool to predict cocrystal formation. During spray drying, when the difference in HSP between the cocrystal and the excipient was large, as in the case of mannitol (ΔHSP of 18.3 MPa), a large amount of excipient (up to 50%) could be incorporated without altering the integrity of the cocrystal, whereas for Soluplus and PVP K15, where the ΔHSP was 2.1 and 1.6 MPa respectively, the IBU:INA cocrystal alone was only formed at a very low weight ratio of excipient, i.e. cocrystal:excipient 90:10. Remarkably different results were obtained in HME. In the case of Soluplus and PVP K15, a mixture of cocrystal with single components (IBU and INA) was obtained even when only 10% excipient was included. In conclusion, in order to reduce the number of unit operations required to produce a final pharmaceutical product, spray drying showed higher feasibility over HME to produce cocrystals within a carrier excipient.
为了制备无定形固体分散体,已经广泛研究了喷雾干燥与热熔挤出(HME)的比较。然而,据我们所知,以前尚未比较过这两种技术在载体赋形剂中形成共晶。使用布洛芬(IBU)和异烟酰胺(INA)以 1:1 的摩尔比作为模型共晶。选择了一系列药用赋形剂进行加工-甘露醇、木糖醇、Soluplus 和 PVP K15。改变共晶成分与赋形剂的比例,以评估喷雾干燥和 HME 中形成共晶的比例。Hansen 溶解度参数(HSP)和共晶与赋形剂之间的 HSP 差异(ΔHSP)被用作预测共晶形成的工具。在喷雾干燥过程中,当共晶与赋形剂之间的 HSP 差异较大时,例如甘露醇(ΔHSP 为 18.3 MPa),可以掺入大量赋形剂(高达 50%)而不会改变共晶的完整性,而对于 Soluplus 和 PVP K15,其 ΔHSP 分别为 2.1 和 1.6 MPa,仅在赋形剂的重量比非常低的情况下,即共晶:赋形剂 90:10,才能形成 IBU:INA 共晶。在 HME 中得到了截然不同的结果。在 Soluplus 和 PVP K15 的情况下,即使仅包含 10%的赋形剂,也可以获得共晶与单一成分(IBU 和 INA)的混合物。总之,为了减少生产最终药物产品所需的单元操作数量,喷雾干燥比 HME 更适合在载体赋形剂中生产共晶。