Date post: | 15-May-2018 |
Category: |
Documents |
Upload: | phungkhanh |
View: | 239 times |
Download: | 2 times |
LubriTose™ Mannitol Michael Crowley,
Director of R&D, Excipients
2 | Taste & Nutrition
Introduction
• Michael Crowley • Director of R&D Excipients
158 St. Highway 320
Norwich, NY 13815 PH – 315-802-5970 [email protected]
3 | Taste & Nutrition
4 | Taste & Nutrition
Science & Technology Expertise Over 800 R&D Scientists
• 250+ w/ PhD’s & MSc degrees • Global infrastructure that is
aligned through common information system architecture
• Expertise across a range of technical disciplines
A robust foundation of technical expertise made up of integrated disciplines embedded in science, research and technology.
5 | Taste & Nutrition
Excipient Technologies
• Portfolio • Lubricated Compression
Aid
• Fast Disintegrating
• Orally Dissolving
• Co-processed systems
• All monograph compliant
materials
• Free flowing, highly
compressible with low dusting
properties
Tabletting
Systems
• Portfolio (SheffCoat) • Immediate Release
• Moisture Barrier
• Enteric
• Natural
• Higher efficiency coatings
• Alternative and cost effective
• Custom formulation
development
• Matching of existing coating
• Tablet functionality testing
Film Coatings
• Portfolio • Anhydrous Lactose
• Crystalline Monohydrate
• Spray Dried Monohydrate
• Inhalation Lactose
• Original patent for Anhydrous
• 25 different off-the-shelf
grades
• Custom particle size
engineering capabilities
• Batch to batch consistency
• Dual manufacturing sites
• Animal Rennet Free
Lactose
• Portfolio • Mono & Diglyceride
• Acetylated Monoglyceride
• Polysorbates
• Tablet hardness maintained
• Low ejection forces
• Dispersing Agent
Glycerides Flavors
• Portfolio • Flavor Modulator
Technology (fmt™)
• Crystals
• Liquid & Powder
• Best in class flavor library with
DMF’s
• Bitterness masking of APIs
• Experience in supplying
nutraceutical and pharma
customers
6 | Taste & Nutrition
Kerry Lactose
Over 70 year experience producing lactose
Highlights
• Kerry (Sheffield) brands
• Anhydrous and crystalline
• Anhydrous DT brand
• Anhydrous DTHV brand
• Three manufacturing facilities
• Foremost Farms brands
• Spray dried and crystalline
• Fast Flo 316 brand
• Pharmaceutical Film Coatings
• SheffCoat brand
• SheffCel brand HPMC
7 | Taste & Nutrition
Kerry Co-Processing Technology
Technologies • Co-spray drying
• Fluid bed agglomeration
• Hot melt extrusion
• Particle coating
Functional co-processing philosophy • Not just ingredient combination for ease of purchase or blending
• Manufacturing or process improvement
• Stability improvements
• Challenging API’s
• Functional synergies
8 | Taste & Nutrition
LubriTose™
• Kerry developed Self Lubricating Excipients- LubriTose
• Coated with glyceryl monostearate – Ejection forces similar as when using magnesium stearate
– Ease of use (no over blending and less dust)
LubriTose™ SD
LubriTose™ AN
LubriTose™ MCC
LubriTose™ Family
LubriTose™ Mannitol
9 | Taste & Nutrition
LubriTose™
• LubriTose™ SD Spray dried Lactose 96% Glyceryl monostearate 4%
• LubriTose™ AN Anhydrous Lactose 96% Glyceryl monostearate 4%
• LubriTose™ MCC Microcrystalline cellulose 98% Glyceryl monostearate 2%
LubriTose™ Mannitol Spray dried mannitol 96% Glyceryl monostearate 4%
10 | Taste & Nutrition
LubriTose™ Mannitol Study Objective
Objective: To compared LubriTose™ Mannitol to Spray Dried Mannitol and determine if there are benefits with LubriTose™ Mannitol
Tablet lubrication comparison
Compressibility comparison
Tablet weight variability testing
Tablet stability testing
11 | Taste & Nutrition
Acknowledgment
Study completed by St. John Fisher College
Study lead:
Vivek S. Dave, P.D.
Assistant Professor (Pharmaceutical Sciences)
St. John Fisher College
Wegmans School of Pharmacy
Rochester, NY
12 | Taste & Nutrition
Materials
LubriTose Mannitol
Physical blends:
SD Mannitol (brand 1)/MCC/Magnesium stearate
SD Mannitol (brand 2)/MCC/Magnesium stearate
NOTE: The LubriTose Mannitol samples were compressed neat, i.e. without adding anything.
The other samples, i.e. the spray-dried mannitol could not be compacted successfully in their pure form due to extensive ‘capping’ and ‘lamination’ issues. For these materials, binary mixtures (1:1) with Avicel® PH102 were prepared and lubricated with Mg-stearate (0.5% w/w, 2 minute blending). These mixtures were then compressed into compacts.
13 | Taste & Nutrition
Methods – Tablet Ejection Force Comparison
– Tablet ejection
• Tablet ejections were not measured during the SJF study. However, Kerry has performed extensive testing on the other LubriTose grades using an instrumented press. We have compared ejection forces for the LubriTose products to physical blends of the corresponding excipients with magnesium stearate.
• A curve of LubriTose™ AN is included. This is a simulated worst case scenario as anhydrous lactose would stick easily without proper lubrication. We would expect similar results when using LubriTose™ Mannitol.
14 | Taste & Nutrition
Methods – Compression Evaluations
– Tablet manufacture
• The tablets (compacts) of the samples were prepared on an instrumented, 10-station, single-layer, rotary tablet press (Model: Piccola B-506, SMI Inc., Lebanon, NJ) using 10mm, standard-concave, “B” tooling (SMI Inc., Lebanon, NJ). The target compact weight was set at 500 mg. The compacts were prepared at a constant tableting speed of 20RPM. The compacts were prepared at different compression forces ranging from 5-25KN, in 5 KN increments.
– Tablet compression
• The compacts were prepared at different compression forces ranging from 5-25KN, in 5 KN increments. The breaking force (diametrical crushing strength) of the prepared compacts was tested using the method specified in the USP38 – NF33, general chapter <1217> on tablet breaking force. Briefly, 10 randomly selected tablets from each batch were tested using an automatic hardness tester (Model: VK200, Varian, Inc., Cary, NC). The compact breaking force is reported in Kp units.
15 | Taste & Nutrition
Methods – Weight and Stability
– Tablet weight evaluation
• The weight variation of the prepared compacts was evaluated using the method specified in the USP 38 – NF 33, general chapter <905> on the uniformity of dosage units. Tablets (n=10) were randomly selected from each batch, and individually weighted on an electronic balance, and the weight recorded.
– Stability studies
• All samples (neat powders and the prepared compacts) were subjected to stability testing for a period of one month. The standard stability conditions, i.e. 25°C/60%RH, and 40°C/75% RH were used to assess the influence of temperature and humidity on the samples. The powder samples, and the prepared compacts were placed in open, 6 inch plastic weighing boats (for maximum exposure) in the stability chambers (Model: FormaTM 3911, Thermo Scientific, Rochester, NY). The powder and the compact samples were pulled out on day 10, day 20, and day 30). These samples were evaluated using the methods above, and compared to the day 0 samples.
16 | Taste & Nutrition
Powder SEMs
LubriTose™ Mannitol
SD Mannitol
200x 1000x 5000x
17 | Taste & Nutrition
Tablet SEMs
18 | Taste & Nutrition
Tablet SEMs
LubriTose™ Mannitol
SD Mannitol
200x 1000x 5000x
19 | Taste & Nutrition
LubriTose™ Mannitol Lubrication Evaluation
Ejection force - LubriTose AN vs Lactose/Magnesium Stearate
5
7
9
11
13
15
17
19
21
600 800 1000 1200 1400 1600
Compression Force (lbs)
Eje
cti
on
Fo
rce (
lbs)
Lubritose AN DT 1% mag stear.
Note: 1% Mg. Stearate not typical but used to provide
excellent lubrication for comparative purposes
20 | Taste & Nutrition
Lubritose Mannitol Compression Evaluation
0
50
100
150
200
250
300
350
0 5 10 15 20 25
Compression Comparison Compression Force vs Breaking Force
Mannitol 1 + Avicel Mannitol 2 + Avicel
21 | Taste & Nutrition
Lubritose Mannitol Compression Evaluation
0
50
100
150
200
250
300
350
0 5 10 15 20 25
Compression Comparison Compression Force vs Breaking Force
Lubritose Mannitol Mannitol 1 + Avicel Mannitol 2 + Avicel
22 | Taste & Nutrition
Tablet Weight Uniformity
Lubritose™
Mannitol
Condition Compression force (KN)
10 15 20 25 Day 0 501.8 ± 1.32 499.8 ± 1.32 502.6 ± 1.26 502.9 ± 1.60
25°C/60% RH Day 10 502.2 ± 0.63 501.0 ± 1.63 502.4 ± 1.07 502.2 ± 1.03 Day 20 502.0 ± 1.25 500.4 ± 1.43 502.1 ± 1.91 501.7 ± 0.82
40°C/75% RH Day 10 502.4 ± 0.84 501.1 ± 0.88 502.3 ± 0.82 501.9 ± 0.99 Day 20 500.7 ± 2.06 500.7 ± 0.95 501.9 ± 0.88 502.2 ± 1.23
SD Mannitol:
Avicel PH102 (1:1)
Condition Compression force (KN)
10 15 20 25 Day 0 505.8 ± 2.44 504.3 ± 2.31 502.1 ± 3.31 500.2 ± 2.62
25°C/60% RH Day 10 505.7 ± 3.20 506.7 ± 2.45 501.1 ± 3.45 503.5 ± 2.32 Day 20 506.5 ± 2.99 506.9 ± 2.18 501.1 ± 3.03 502.8 ± 1.55
40°C/75% RH Day 10 506.4 ± 2.80 506.6 ± 3.66 503.3 ± 2.36 501.5 ± 2.22 Day 20 504.4 ± 4.06 504.8 ± 2.94 502.6 ± 2.27 499.2 ± 4.73
SD mannitol 2:
Avicel PH102 (1:1)
Condition Compression force (KN)
10 15 20 25 Day 0 499.2 ± 4.69 501.0 ± 2.21 503.1 ± 4.31 504.6 ± 2.80
25°C/60% RH Day 10 500.0 ± 5.40 503.6 ± 2.37 506.6 ± 2.32 509.2 ± 2.62 Day 20 502.1 ± 4.70 502.9 ± 2.38 505.4 ± 3.06 512.3 ± 2.83
40°C/75% RH Day 10 500.1 ± 4.53 503.4 ± 2.67 505.3 ± 2.21 509.6 ± 2.76 Day 20 498.4 ± 4.17 501.0 ± 2.36 503.4 ± 3.57 507.5 ± 5.32
23 | Taste & Nutrition
Tablet Stability SD Mannitol 1
24 | Taste & Nutrition
Tablet Stability – SD Mannitol 2
25 | Taste & Nutrition
Tablet Stability – LubriTose™ Mannitol
26 | Taste & Nutrition
LubriTose™ Mannitol Study Objective - Recap
Tablet lubrication comparison
Compressibility comparison
Tablet weight variability testing
Tablet stability testing
27 | Taste & Nutrition
Study Conclusions - Lubrication
• No tablet sticking was observed across all compression forces
• Low ejection forces across all compression forces
• Similar to physical blend with magnesium
stearate at 1%
28 | Taste & Nutrition
Study Conclusions – Compression Comparison
• Able to achieved tablet breaking strength of 300kN
• Tablet capping was observed with SD Mannitol alone
• Required addition of MCC to SD Mannitol in order to eliminate capping and achieve breaking strength of 300kN
• Tablets were less porous than those with SD Mannitol
29 | Taste & Nutrition
Study Conclusions – Tablet Weight Variability
• Tablet weight variability was low across all compression forces tested (10kN -25kN)
• LubriTose Mannitol variability was ~+/- 1 mg for 500mg tablets
• SD Mannitol was ~ +/- 3 mg, with a high of 5.4 mg
30 | Taste & Nutrition
Study Conclusions – Stability Testing
• Tablets were produced and stored under accelerated stability conditions
• Breaking strength of tablets was measured after storage (0, 10, and 20 days)
• With LubriTose Mannitol, breaking strength dropped from ~300kN to ~250kN
• With SD Mannitol/MCC, strength dropped dramatically, from ~300kN to ~75kN
31 | Taste & Nutrition
Notes and Next Steps
Notes:
• Samples available from at least three commercial lots
• Fully commercialized process and DMF available
– Product currently used in market
Next Steps:
• Perform studies of LubriTose Mannitol with some model APIs
• Evaluate LubriTose Mannitol at various use levels
Thank you for your attention!