Inves4ga4on of Mechanical Property Variability in Lactose Products

Similar documents
Title: Plan for Approach to the Understanding and Predicting Excipient Properties and Functionality

A Digital Design Approach to Prediction of Powder Flowability

YOUR PARTNER IN PARTICLE CHARACTERIZATION

QbD QUANTITATIVE MEASUREMENTS OF CQAS IN SOLID DOSAGE FORM UNIT OPERATIONS

Linear Regression and Correla/on. Correla/on and Regression Analysis. Three Ques/ons 9/14/14. Chapter 13. Dr. Richard Jerz

Linear Regression and Correla/on

Technical brochure DuraLac H TABLETING DIRECT COMPRESSION ANHYDROUS LACTOSE

TABLE OF CONTENTS. vii

Application of Ring Shear Testing to Optimize Pharmaceutical Formulation and Process Development of Solid Dosage Forms

Physical Properties Testing Technical Bulletin

Limestone Powders Yielding and Steady State Resistance under Shearing with Different Testers

Technical Bulletin. Particle Size Analysis in Dry Powder Cell Culture Media Production. Introduction. Particle Size Analysis Capabilities

Johnson Matthey Technology Centre, P.O. Box 1, Belasis Avenue, Billingham, Cleveland, TS23 1LB, United Kingdom b

Measuring the flow properties of powders. FT4 Powder Rheometer. freemantechnology

Particle Size and Shape Analysis in PHARMACEUTICAL INDUSTRY.

Formulation of Low Dose Medicines - Theory and Practice

Geology 229 Engineering Geology. Lecture 5. Engineering Properties of Rocks (West, Ch. 6)

Experimental study of mechanical and thermal damage in crystalline hard rock

2510 PREPREG SYSTEM. Industry Database FAA approved design allowable values (AGATE methodology), results in a low cost one-batch equivalency.

3D simulations of an injection test done into an unsaturated porous and fractured limestone

Discussion and results

MSC Elastomers Seminar Some Things About Elastomers

COMS- MEMS testkey for residual stress extrac7ng at wafer- level

3 Flow properties of bulk solids

Research Article. The Stokes Number Approach to Support Scale-Up and Technology Transfer of a Mixing Process

2510 PREPREG SYSTEM. Industry Database FAA approved design allowable values (AGATE methodology), results in a low cost one-batch equivalency.

D Y N A M I C M E C H A N I C A L A N A L Y S I S A N D I T S A D V A N T A G E S O V E R D E F L E C T I O N T E M P E R A T U R E U N D E R L O A D

Stress-Strain Behavior

N = Shear stress / Shear strain

NORMAL STRESS. The simplest form of stress is normal stress/direct stress, which is the stress perpendicular to the surface on which it acts.

Global properties of atomic nuclei

Unbound Pavement Applications of Excess Foundry System Sands: Subbase/Base Material

Effects of Resin and Fabric Structure

Powder. Aulton Chapter 8-10,14,24. Powders

Drop Test: A New Method to Measure the Particle Adhesion Force

MECHANICS LAB AM 317 EXP 3 BENDING STRESS IN A BEAM

Global properties of atomic nuclei

Mechanics of Solids. Mechanics Of Solids. Suraj kr. Ray Department of Civil Engineering

Prediction Quality Attributes For Mixtures From Single Component Data

Geology 2112 Principles and Applications of Geophysical Methods WEEK 1. Lecture Notes Week 1

Single fibre tensile testing

Seismologia A Seismology A Lecture 9: Engineering seismology: seismic veloci:es in soils

next generation Welcome to the Dispersion options Smarter particle sizing Your sample, expertly processed and prepared Particle size

Modifications to Johanson's roll compaction model for improved relative density predictions

Electrostatics and cohesion: Cause or effect?

Summary of test results for Daya Bay rock samples. by Patrick Dobson Celia Tiemi Onishi Seiji Nakagawa

Development of a Reproducible Powder Characterization Method Using a Powder Rheometer

Strength of Material. Shear Strain. Dr. Attaullah Shah

Correla'on. Keegan Korthauer Department of Sta's'cs UW Madison

Evaluation of in-plane orthotropic elastic constants of paper and paperboard

Mechanical Properties of Polymers. Scope. MSE 383, Unit 3-1. Joshua U. Otaigbe Iowa State University Materials Science & Engineering Dept.

Tensile stress strain curves for different materials. Shows in figure below

PHYSICO-MECHANICAL PROPERTIES OF ROCKS LECTURE 2. Contents

GEOSYNTHETICS ENGINEERING: IN THEORY AND PRACTICE

II Pedologic classifica>on schemes

This is a repository copy of Drop test: A new method to measure the particle adhesion force.

Method validation for laser diffraction measurements

BIO & PHARMA ANALYTICAL TECHNIQUES. Chapter 5 Particle Size Analysis

DEM Simulation of a Screw Feeder Using the Adhesion Powder

Juan E. Santos a,b,c, Gabriela B. Savioli a and Robiel Martínez Corredor c a

Hardened Concrete. Lecture No. 16

The Frictional Regime

Some consideration about fluid substitution without shear wave velocity Fuyong Yan*, De-Hua Han, Rock Physics Lab, University of Houston

RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN RADIAL COMPRESSIVE MODULUS OF ELASTICITY AND SHEAR MODULUS OF WOOD Jen Y. Liu Research Engineer

Introducing the Morphologi G3 ID The future of particle characterization

Optimal conditions to prepare fine globular granules. with a multi-functional rotor processor

Chapter 7. Highlights:

RESEARCH PROJECT NO. 26

Lab Exercise #5: Tension and Bending with Strain Gages

Particle size analysis -Chapter 3

TECHNICAL PAPER INVESTIGATION INTO THE VALIDATION OF THE SHELL FATIGUE TRANSFER FUNCTION

Geotechnical Properties of Soil

6.4 A cylindrical specimen of a titanium alloy having an elastic modulus of 107 GPa ( psi) and

A comparative study of particle size analysis in fine powder: The effect of a polycomponent particulate system

EART162: PLANETARY INTERIORS

3960 PREPREG SYSTEM. Flexible Processing Prepreg can be suitably processed in either AFP or hand lay-up methodologies.

Back Calculation of Rock Mass Modulus using Finite Element Code (COMSOL)

D : SOLID MECHANICS. Q. 1 Q. 9 carry one mark each. Q.1 Find the force (in kn) in the member BH of the truss shown.

16 Rainfall on a Slope

Bending Stress. Sign convention. Centroid of an area

Stress Strain Elasticity Modulus Young s Modulus Shear Modulus Bulk Modulus. Case study

S HEAR S TRENGTH IN P RINCIPAL P LANE OF W OOD

2. MASS AND VOLUME MEASUREMENTS Mass measurement Analytical and standard laboratory balances Pre-lab Exercises

Simulation of Particulate Solids Processing Using Discrete Element Method Oleh Baran

Particle Characterization of Pharmaceutical Products by Dynamic Image Analysis

Integrating Lab and Numerical Experiments to Investigate Fractured Rock

Experimentally Calibrating Cohesive Zone Models for Structural Automotive Adhesives

Laboratory 4 Bending Test of Materials

2008 SEAUPG CONFERENCE-BIRMINGHAM, ALABAMA

INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF APPLIED ENGINEERING RESEARCH, DINDIGUL Volume 2, No 1, 2011

Pressure and Compaction in the Rock Physics Space. Jack Dvorkin

UNIVERSITY OF SASKATCHEWAN ME MECHANICS OF MATERIALS I FINAL EXAM DECEMBER 13, 2008 Professor A. Dolovich

Geomechanical Controls on Hydraulic Fracturing in the Bakken Fm, SK

Some Review and Hypothesis Tes4ng. Friday, March 15, 13

MAAE 2202 A. Come to the PASS workshop with your mock exam complete. During the workshop you can work with other students to review your work.

Health Monitoring of Early Age Concrete

SPE DISTINGUISHED LECTURER SERIES is funded principally through a grant of the SPE FOUNDATION

Fracture of andesite in the brittle and brittleductile transition regimes

PARTICLE SHAPE FACTORS AND THEIR USE IN IMAGE ANALYSIS PART II: PRACTICAL APPLICATIONS As Published in GXP, Autumn 2011 (Vol15/No4) Eric Olson

Transcription:

1 Inves4ga4on of Mechanical Property Variability in Lactose Products Kris4ne Alston and Carl Wassgren School of Mechanical Engineering Purdue University In associa4on with Steve Hoag and Ting Wang University of Maryland Ann Chris4ne Catlin, Sumudinie Fernando, and Sudheera Fernando Purdue University

2 Overview Importance of understanding excipient proper4es Proper4es of interest Background Proper4es measured and test methods Materials Results Conclusions

Importance of Measuring 3 Excipient Proper4es Component proper4es have significant impact on drug product performance and manufacturability Create a database of proper4es for use in models, correla4ons and quality control Derived from natural sources; varia4on may occur due to Geographic origin Seasonal climate varia4ons Storage and processing Formula4ons and manufacturing processes regulated by FDA Variable input + constant process = variable output

4 Some Proper4es of Interest Par$cle Powder Power Compact size distribu4on Hausner ra4o elas4c modulus shape compressibility yield strength true density flow func4on fracture strength apparent density effec4ve angle of internal fric4on indenta4on hardness specific surface area poured and tapped bulk density cri4cal stress intensity factor elas4c modulus Poisson's ra4o yield strength fracture strength adhesion

5 Background Literature survey Large sca]er in the data Range of test methods used Details of tes4ng condi4ons and procedures are rarely reported Difficult to determine the source of discrepancies Few studies have been performed on the variability of lactose (Gamble et al., 2010; Kushner et al., 2011; Whiteman et al., 1990) Common excipient Purpose: diluent, filler- binder Objec4ve: study the variability in par4cle, powder, and compact level proper4es of lactose Though a wide range of lactose grades were studied, only select results are presented here.

6 Materials Tested Crystalline milled α- lactose monohydrate Equivalent products 85 100 µm nominal par4cle size Lactose Monohydrate 310 (Foremost Farms, USA) Pharmatose 130M (DMV Fonterra Excipients) 40 50 µm nominal par4cle size Lactose Monohydrate 312 (Foremost Farms, USA) Pharmatose 130M (DMV Fonterra Excipients) Product Name From Manufacturing Site Lot no. Lactose Monohydrate 310 Kerry Bioscience (Foremost Farms, USA) Rothschild, WI 8510122310 Lactose Monohydrate 310 Kerry Bioscience (Foremost Farms, USA) Rothschild, WI 8511061010 Lactose Monohydrate 312 Kerry Bioscience (Foremost Farms, USA) Rothschild, WI 8510101512 Lactose Monohydrate 312 Kerry Bioscience (Foremost Farms, USA) Rothschild, WI 8510101712 Pharmatose 130M (NZ) DMV- Fonterra Excipients Fonterra Limited, Kaponga, New Zealand NZ000542 Pharmatose 130M (NZ) DMV- Fonterra Excipients Fonterra Limited, Kaponga, New Zealand NZ000570 Pharmatose 130M (NZ) DMV- Fonterra Excipients Fonterra Limited, Kaponga, New Zealand NZ000667 Pharmatose 150M DMV- Fonterra Excipients FrieslandCampina DMV BV, Veghel, The Netherlands 10498250 Pharmatose 150M DMV- Fonterra Excipients FrieslandCampina DMV BV, Veghel, The Netherlands 10544872

7 Proper4es and Test Methods Property Test Method Equipment Standard Apparent Density Helium pycnometry Accupyc II 1340 Pycnometer Helium gas ASTM B923-10 Particle Size Distribution Laser diffraction Malvern Mastersizer 2000 Particle Size Analyzer Hydro µp wet dispersion unit Malvern Mastersizer 2000E Particle Size Analyzer Scirocco M dry powder feeder ASTM B822-10 Poured Bulk Density - Graduated cylinder ASTM D7481-09 Tapped Bulk Density - Agilent Technologies 350 Tapped Density Tester ASTM D7481-09 Shear Cell Flowability Ring shear cell Schulze Ring Shear Tester RST- XS ASTM D6773-08 Elastic Modulus Tensile Strength Three point bending Three point bending Critical Stress Intensity Factor Three point bending Carver Hydraulic Press Instron ElectroPuls E1000 Custom three point bend fixture Carver Hydraulic Press Instron ElectroPuls E1000 Custom three point bend fixture Carver Hydraulic Press Instron ElectroPuls E1000 Custom three point bend fixture ASTM B925-08 ASTM D790-07 ASTM B925-08 ASTM D790-07 ASTM B925-08 ASTM E399-09

8 Results Apparent Density Apparent Density (g/cc) 1.58 1.57 1.56 1.55 1.54 1.53 1.52 1.51 1.50 85 100 µm lots 40 50 µm lots True density of α- lactose monohydrate: 1.53 g/cc Determined from 20 measurements ± 1 standard devia4on

9 Results Par4cle Size Distribu4on 85 100 µm lots 40 50 µm lots Volume Percent (%) 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 0 200 400 600 800 Size (µm) Foremost 310 Lot A Foremost 310 Lot B Pharmatose 130M Lot A Pharmatose 130M Lot B Pharmatose 130M Lot C Volume Percent (%) 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 0 100 200 300 Size (µm) Foremost 312 Lot A Foremost 312 Lot B Pharmatose 150M Lot A Pharmatose 150M Lot B

10 Results Par4cle Size Distribu4on size [um] 250 200 150 100 50 0 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 40 50 µm lots size [um] d10 (F 310) d10 (P 130M) d50 (F 310) d50 (P 130M) d90 (F 310) d90 (P 130M) d3,2 (F 310) d3,2 (P 150M) d4,3 (F 310) d4,3 (P 150M) 140 120 100 80 60 40 20 0 85 100 µm lots 0 1 2 3 4 5 d10 (F 312) d10 (P 150M) d50 (F 312) d50 (P 150M) d90 (F 312) d90 (P 150M) d3,2 (F 312) d3,2 (P 150M)

11 Results Par4cle Size Distribu4on 3.0 2.5 span 2.0 1.5 1.0 F 310 P 130M F 312 P 150M 0.5 0.0 0 1 2 3 4 5 6

Results Poured and Tapped 12 Bulk Density Bulk Density (g/cc) 1.0 0.9 0.8 0.7 0.6 0.5 0.4 0.3 0.2 0.1 0.0 85 100 µm lots 40 50 µm lots Poured Tapped Determined from 3 measurements ± 1 standard devia4on

13 Results Hausner Ra4o Hausner Ra$o (- ) 1.50 1.45 1.40 1.35 1.30 1.25 1.20 1.15 1.10 1.05 1.00 85 100 µm lots 40 50 µm lots HR= ρ tapped / ρ bulk Smaller HR = be]er flow Determined from 3 measurements ± 1 standard devia4on

14 Results Shear Cell Flowability 85-100 µm Grades Powder Flow Func$on for Foremost 310 Lot 8511061010 Unconfined Yield Strength (Pa) 3500 3000 2500 2000 1500 1000 500 0 0 5000 10000 15000 Consolida$on Stress (Pa) Foremost 310 Lot A Foremost 310 Lot B Pharmatose 130M Lot A Pharmatose 130M Lot B Pharmatose 130M Lot C Unconfined Yield Strength (Pa) 2500 2000 1500 1000 500 0 0 5000 10000 15000 Consolida$on Stress (Pa) Run 1 Run 2 Run 3 Grade Lot Number Flow Factor at ~8000 Pa (- ) Foremost 310 A 3.69 Foremost 310 B 4.67 Pharmatose 130M A 3.28 Pharmatose 130M B 3.56 Pharmatose 130M C 3.77 Larger flow factor => be]er flow

15 Results Shear Cell Flowability Unconfined Yield Strength (Pa) 4000 3500 3000 2500 2000 1500 1000 500 0 40-50 µm Grades 0 5000 10000 15000 Consolida$on Stress (Pa) Foremost 312 Lot A Foremost 312 Lot B Pharmatose 150M Lot A Pharmatose 150M Lot B Grade Lot Number Flow Factor at ~8000 Pa (- ) Larger flow factor => be]er flow Foremost 312 A 3.29 Foremost 312 B 3.22 Pharmatose 150M A 3.15 Pharmatose 150M B 2.93

16 Results Elas4c Modulus 2.5 85-100 µm Grades Elas$c Modulus (GPa) 2.0 1.5 1.0 0.5 Foremost 310 Lot A Foremost 310 Lot B Pharmatose 130M Lot A Pharmatose 130M Lot B Pharmatose 130M Lot C 0.0 0 0.05 0.1 0.15 0.2 Porosity (- ) Grade Lot Number E 0 (GPa) b (- ) R 2 Foremost 310 A 4.3 11.6 0.98 Foremost 310 B 5.1 13.3 0.98 Pharmatose 130M A 4.9 14.4 0.96 Pharmatose 130M B 3.6 15.0 0.94 Pharmatose 130M C 4.2 15.8 0.98 Sprigg s Equa4on: E= E 0 e b&

17 Results Tensile Strength 8 85-100 µm Grades Tensile Strength (MPa) 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 Foremost 310 Lot A Foremost 310 Lot B Pharmatose 130M Lot A Pharmatose 130M Lot B Pharmatose 130M Lot C 0 0 0.05 0.1 0.15 0.2 Porosity (- ) Grade Lot Number σ 0 (MPa) b (- ) R 2 Foremost 310 A 21.8 15.1 0.98 Foremost 310 B 20.6 14.3 0.98 Pharmatose 130M A 20.4 16.3 0.98 Pharmatose 130M B 22.2 18.3 0.97 Pharmatose 130M C 21.4 17.1 0.98 Sprigg s Equa4on: σ= σ 0 e b&

Results Cri4cal Stress Intensity 18 Factor Cri$cal Stress Intensity Factor (MPa m) 0.2 0.18 0.16 0.14 0.12 0.1 0.08 0.06 0.04 0.02 0 85-100 µm Grades 0.00 0.05 0.10 0.15 0.20 Porosity (- ) Foremost 310 Lot A Foremost 310 Lot B Pharmatose 130M Lot A Pharmatose 130M Lot B Pharmatose 130M Lot C Grade Lot K IC0 Number (MPa m) b (- ) R 2 Foremost 310 A 0.59 15.7 0.99 Foremost 310 B 0.50 13.7 0.99 Pharmatose 130M A 0.57 16.8 0.98 Pharmatose 130M B 0.50 15.7 0.99 Pharmatose 130M C 0.61 16.5 0.96 Sprigg s Equa4on: K IC = K IC0 e b&

19 Conclusions Apparent density Larger than the true density; small variability Par4cle size distribu4on Considerable lot- to- lot variability Par4cle size distribu4on is more skewed for Foremost products Median size distribu4ons quite different than stated by the manufacturer Bulk Density 85-100 µm: Pharmatose poured and tapped density slightly larger than Foremost More lot and vendor variability for 40-50 µm products Both poured and tapped bulk densi4es smaller for 40-50 µm products Hausner Ra4o smaller for smaller par4cle sizes Shear cell Flow func4on: low variability between lots and products, except for Foremost 310 lot B Flow factors suggest cohesive material, except for Foremost 310 lot B Flow factor and Hausner Ra4o give conflic4ng results. Compact proper4es Elas4c modulus, tensile strength, and cri4cal stress intensity factor follow Sprigg s equa4on quite well Foremost gives consistently larger elas4c modulus, tensile strength, and cri4cal stress intensity factor However, the variability in data points is close to these differences Difficult to discern any differences between lots Data available at: pharmahub.org/excipientsexplore

20 Pharmahub Excipients Database

21 Ques4ons?

22 BACKUP SLIDES

23 Results Elas4c Modulus 40-50 µm Grades Elas$c Modulus (GPa) 2.5 2 1.5 1 0.5 0 0 0.05 0.1 0.15 0.2 0.25 Porosity (- ) Foremost 312 Lot A Foremost 312 Lot B Pharmatose 150M Lot A Pharmatose 150M Lot B Grade Lot Number E 0 (GPa) b (- ) R 2 Foremost 312 A 3.7 11.5 0.95 Foremost 312 B 5.5 12.0 0.97 Pharmatose 150M A 4.9 15.1 0.89 Pharmatose 150M B 4.5 13.6 0.94

24 Results Tensile Strength 40-50 µm Grades Tensile Strength (MPa) 10 8 6 4 2 0 0 0.05 0.1 0.15 0.2 0.25 Porosity (- ) Foremost 312 Lot A Foremost 312 Lot B Pharmatose 150M Lot A Pharmatose 150M Lot B Grade Lot Number σ 0 (MPa) b (- ) R 2 Foremost 312 A 20.4 13.1 0.97 Foremost 312 B 25.1 14.2 0.98 Pharmatose 150M A 26.2 17.2 0.97 Pharmatose 150M B 27.9 16.8 0.98

Results Cri4cal Stress Intensity 25 Factor 0.250 40-50 µm Grades Cri$cal Stress Intensity Factor (MPa m) 0.200 0.150 0.100 0.050 0.000 0.000 0.100 0.200 0.300 Porosity (- ) Foremost 312 Lot A Foremost 312 Lot B Pharmatose 150M Lot A Pharmatose 150M Lot B Grade Lot K IC0 Number (MPa m) b (- ) R 2 Foremost 312 A 0.59 12.6 0.97 Foremost 312 B 0.57 13.6 0.99 Pharmatose 150M A 0.63 16.2 0.90 Pharmatose 150M B 0.62 15.1 0.97