Generic Modified Release Drug Products
Post on 22-Oct-2014
159 Views
Preview:
DESCRIPTION
Transcript
1
Quality by Design Example forGeneric Modified Release Drug Products
Andre Raw*, PhDandre.raw@fda.hhs.gov
*Opinions expressed in this presentation are those of the speaker and do not necessarily reflect the views or policies of the FDA
2
A Generic Drug is Therapeutically Equivalent To the Brand-Name Product
• Generic Drugs Account for 70-75% of Prescriptions in US
• Therapeutic Equivalents- Have the same clinical effect and safety profile when administered to patients under the conditions specified in the labeling
• FDA PracticePharmaceutical Equivalence + Bioequivalence = Therapeutic Equivalence
3
Pharmaceutical Equivalence
Same active ingredient(s)
Same dosage form
Same route of administration
Identical in strength or concentration
Meet compendial or other applicable standards of strength, quality, purity, and identity
May differ in shape, excipients, packaging...
4
What is Pharmaceutical Quality?Janet Woodcock (Center Director for Drugs)
- Free of contamination and reproduciblydelivering the therapeutic benefit promised in the label
ICH Q8 R(2): The suitability of either a drug substance or a drug product for its intended use
Quality cannot be tested into products; Quality can only be built into products
5
Quality by Design (QbD)Quality by Design “means that product and process performance characteristics are scientifically designed to meet specific objectives... To achieve QbD objectives, product and process characteristics important to desired performance must be derived from a combination of prior knowledge and experimental assessment during product development.”
Pharmaceutical Quality = ƒ (Drug substance, excipients, manufacturing, and packaging)
6
Regulatory View for Pharmaceutical Quality
21st Century ViewICH Q8/cGMP’s FDA Initiative
Testing
Design
Traditional/Historical
TestingDesign
7
What Do Really Mean by QbD?What are Regulator’s Expectations for QbD?
Industrial Consortium Developed Examples to Attempt to Illustrate QbD Concepts
• Conformia “ACE Tablets” (US)• “Examplain” HCl Tablets (EU)• “Sakura Tablet” (Japan)
All Immediate Release Products
8
But there is a Dichotomy1. Traditional Review Paradigm for ANDAs: For the most part highly
successful for immediate release/solution products
2. However modified-release and other complex dosage forms are seen as potentially problematic in ANDAs for generics
a. Modified Release Drug Products Introduce increasingly Complexi. Bioequivalence Issuesii. Chemistry, Manufacturing and Controls Issues
b. Modified Release Drug Products on the Rise
c. Complexities often ignored by ANDA sponsors rush to be the first to file to obtain 180-day exclusivity
3. Consumer Complaints/Generic Skepticism on some Modified Release Products
9
Modified-Release QbD Example1. Developed by the Office of Generic Drugs (2009-2011)http://www.gphaonline.org/sites/default/files/DraftExampleQbDforMRTablet%20April%2026.pdf
2. Vetted Extensively within the Agency. Three Workshops with the US Generic Pharmaceutical Association (2011)
3. Intended to illustrate the types of development studies ANDA applicants may use as they implement QbD for these complex products. Provide a concrete illustration of the QbD principles from ICH Q8(R2)
4. Development of a real product may differ from the examplea. Different Products will have Different Issuesb. There are Scientifically Valid Alternative Approaches
5. Full-Implementation of QbD in the review assessment by 2013
10
Implementation of QbD?
Labeled UseSafety and Efficacy
DEFINE QualityTarget Product Profile
IDENTIFY Critical Material Attributesand Critical Process Parameters
DESIGN Formulation and Process
CONTROL Materials and Process
TARGET DESIGN IMPLEMENTATION
11
QbD Now Asks Sponsors to Define their Quality Target Product Profile (QTPP)
Asks whether Generic Firms are Focusing Product Design at the Right Target
12
Quality Target Product Profile
ICH Q8(R2) Definition
QTPP : A prospective summary of the quality characteristics of a drug product that ideally will be achieved to ensure the desired quality, taking into account safety and efficacy of the drug product.
13
Past/Present Paradigm QbD MR Example
Asks Sponsors How They Systemically Arrived at a Bioequivalent Drug Product
“Bioequivalence by Design”
Claimed to be Acceptable Based Upon a Passing BE study to the RLD
“Bioequivalence by Testing”
ANDA Formulation/Process Submitted Without Context
QTPP: Guiding Quality Surrogates Used in the Development of the ANDA Formulation and ProcessEquivalent to the RLD
Raw, Lionberger, and Yu, Pharmaceutical Research 28 (7) 2011.
14
Generic MR (10 mg) Tablet
LabelActive ingredient Z (BCS Class I)
Indication: Immediate onset of effect similar to the IR product, aswell as for maintenance of the effect, for once a day dosing.
PK: MR provides for plasma concentrations of Z comparable toimmediate release product through the first two hours for immediateonset of effect, and a sustained release phase to maintain plasma concentrations of the drug through 24 hours
Dose: 10 mg TabletConveniently Scored for 5 mg DoseTaken without Regard to Food (No Food Effect)
15Needed for commercial reasons24 month shelf lifeStability
Needed for patient acceptabilityNMT 1.0% Friability
Targeted for consistent clinical effectivenessRSD < 3%CU
Ensure main degradation product remainsbelow qualification threshold
Impurity A < 0.5 %Impurity
Targeted for consistent clinical effectiveness95-105%Assay
Needed for Patient AcceptabilitySize and Shape Conducive to PatientSafety when Swallowing.
Conforming to Description,Shape and Size SameScoring as RLD
“Generally” similar in Sizeand Shape to RLD
Dosage FormAppearance and Characteristics
Pharmaceutical Equivalence Requirement Same Strength
Dose: 10 mgStrength
Pharmaceutical Equivalence RequirementSame Dosage Form
TabletDosage Form
Pharmaceutical Equivalence Requirement Same Active Ingredient
RationaleQTPP TargetProfile Component
QTPP for Modified Release Product
16
Needed to minimize potential foodeffect of IR component, similarto brand name product
Rapidly disintegrating tablet matrix designthat releases IR and ER component in particulates(<1 mm in diameter). Precludes the use of a nondisintegrating tablet ER matrix.
Disintegration
Maximize the feasibility ofachieving the target goals ofAUC0-2, AUC2-24, AUC0-∞ andCmax under fasting and fedconditions.
Must provide for biphasic release of drug,with initial rapid release followed by sustainedrelease ER of dose.
Biphasic DrugRelease(IR and ER)
Additional BioequivalenceParameters NeededBased Upon Labeling
Generic MR provides for: 1. Initial plasma concentrationsthrough the first two hours thatprovide for a clinicallysignificant effect
2. Sustained release phasedesigned to maintain plasmaconcentrations formaintenance of effect
Fasting Study and Fed Study 90 % confidence interval of the PK parameters, AUC0-2, AUC2-24, AUC0-∞ and Cmax should fall within BE limits.
PK
17
Initial target goals used tomaximize the feasibility ofachieving the bioequivalencetarget goals of AUC0-2, AUC2-24,AUC0-∞ and Cmax under fastingand fed conditions
Rapid release (NMT 15 min) using USPapparatus II (paddle) at 50 rpm in 0.1 HCl (4 mg equivalent)
and
Similar drug release using USP apparatus II(paddle) in pH 6.8 (buffer).
Drug ReleaseInitial Target
Generic MR is convenientlyscored for administration of the 5 mg dose
Similar drug release of whole and split halftablets.
(Precludes ER coating of a compressed tabletcore to provide for sustained release of drug).
Drug ReleaseWhole versusHalf Tablets
Revised Drug Release Target
Convolution of IVIVR Target:Similarity (not F2) of the in-vitrorelease maximizes feasibility ofachieving the bioequivalencetarget goals of AUC0-2, AUC2-24,AUC0-∞ and Cmax
Target: Similar Drug Release Profile (Based upon Convolution of IVIVR)
Apparatus III: 10 dpm in phosphate buffer pH 6.8 (250 mL)
Drug Release (Revised Target)
18
Is Formulation Designed using a QTPP that Targets Equivalence to the RLD?
“Bioequivalence by Design”
Formulation Designed Based Upon an UnderstandingOf Critical Quality Attributes to Provide a Equivalent
Exposure Profile Needed to Achieve Equivalent Clinical Characteristics in Target Patient Population.
If QTPP Surrogate Does not Target Equivalence To the RLD, May Be Acceptable
Sponsors Should Provide Justification Based On Drug Pharmacokinetic and Clinical Profile
19
Implementation of QbD?Labeled Use
Safety and Efficacy
DEFINE QualityTarget Product Profile
IDENTIFY Critical Material Attributesand Critical Process Parameters
DESIGN Formulation and Process
CONTROL Materials and Process
TARGET DESIGN IMPLEMENTATION
20
Formulation Development
21
Schematic: MR Drug ProductActive
High ShearWet Granulation
IR Granules
Active
DL (MCC Cores)
ER
Wurster Coating
ER Pellets
Blending/LubricationCushioningExcipient
Compression
Tablet CoreFilm Coat
MR Product
22
Formulation (In-Vitro Drug Release)
Past/Present Paradigm
If Bioequivalent
Perform Drug Release Testingat Multiple pH Media (Speeds)
“Empirically” Set AppropriateTolerances at Select Time Points
QbD Paradigm
2. IVIVR
Meaningful Dissolution Methods:Derived from Data in Pilot BE on ExperimentalFormulations and Used to Guide Development
3. PAT SurrogatesMeasure ER Coating (Terahertz/Raman/NIR)
1. IVIVC
23
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 22 24
Time (Hour)
% R
elea
se
Test-F1-Water
Test-F1-HCl
Test-F1-4.5
Test-F1-6.8
RLD-Water
RLD-0.1 N HCl
RLD-pH 4.5
RLD-pH 6.8
0
50
100
150
200
250
300
350
400
0 4 8 12 16 20 24
Time (Hour)
Con
cent
ratio
n (n
g/m
L)
RLDTest F-1
USP Recommended Method (USP Apparatus II – pH 6.8 at 50 rpm)
Development Trial Formulation F-1(25% ER Coating)
Similar Dissolution at three pHs
24
Comparative in-vitro release characteristics of the RLD and the prototype test formulations using the discriminating method (right) and non-discriminating method (left)
F-1 (25% ER Coating)F-2 (30% ER Coating) F-3 (35% ER Coating)
USP 3 apparatus(250 mL, pH 6.8, 10 dpm)
USP Recommended Method (USP Apparatus II, pH 6.8, 50 rpm)
25
0
50
100
150
200
250
300
350
400
0 5 10 15 20 25 30
Time (hour)C
once
ntra
tion
(ng/
mL)
RLDTest F-2Test-F3
0.750.950.950.81Test F-3 (35% ER Coating)
1.030.960.980.97Test F-2 (30% ER Coating)
1.321.101.211.1Test F-1 (25% ER Coating)
CmaxAUC2-IAUC2-TAUC0-2
T/R ratio
Final IVIVR using PK dat for test product obtained from F1, F2, F3
In USP 3 apparatus (250 mL, pH 6.8, 10 dpm)y = -4.344E-3 + 0.954 × xx = Fraction in-vitro release y = Fraction in-vivo release
SEP=0.037 MAE=0.027 AIC= -51.54
26
Formulation (Stability)Past/Present Paradigm
Stable by Testing ( 25 C/60% RH for 24 months)
QbD Paradigm
Has the Applicant Optimized the Formulation To Achieve “Stability by Design”
Limited Testing Sufficient to Ensure Stability on Future Production Batches?
“Not all Batches Placed on Stability”
API/Excipient Compatability?
Amorphous Dispersion (API/Binder) on MCC Core Physically Stable?
Plasticizer Optimal to Minimize Curing
27
*Amorphous-crystallinity ratio as determined by XRPD after 1 month storage at 40 C/75% RH.
Amorphous Dispersion (API/Binder) on MCC Core Physically Stable?
not detected0.299.4%80%80:20With PVP K30
not detected0.399.6%90%85:15With PVP K30
200.299.8%85%90:10With PVP K30
800.199.9%85%100:0No binder
Percentage of crystalline API (%)
LODHPLCAssay
%Release in 15 min
API: BinderRatio
Output CharacteristicsInput VariablesExperiment
XRPD Analysis: API crystals (a), Binder (b) and Amorphous API with 15% Binder (d).
28
Plasticizer Optimal to Ensure Adequate Curingto Minimize Changes in Drug Release on Storage)?Coating formulation optimized to enure low minimum film formation temperature
(MFT = 5°C) for Kollicoat SR 30D with 5% TEC as plasticizer
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
0 5 10 15 20 25Time (hr)
% R
elea
sed
Uncured12 h / 60°C24 h / 60°C
Confirmed in pilot scale process development studies
29
Formulation (Manufacturability)
Past/Present Paradigm QbD Paradigm
Manufacturable at Exhibit (Biobatch) Scale?
Excipients Selected to Ensure a Robust Process?What is the Elongation Percentage for the ER Coating Polymers? Can ER Coating WithstandCompression Pressures during Compression?
If not, will Cushioning Excipients Rectify this?Does this Ensure the Sponsor has
Developed a Robust Formulation that Can be Reproducibly Manufactured ?
30
1.340.13 0.624.89
142.83
38.41
126.31
13.02
136
376.1
0
50
100
150
200
250
300
350
400
% E
long
atio
n
Polymer 4ER Polymer 5ER Polymer 1ER Polymer 2 ER Polymer 3 ER
Dry StateWet State
31
Process Development/Scale-Up
32
Manufacturing Process Past/Present Paradigm
Exhibit (Biobatch) Production Record
10 x Scale-UpSame Equipment/
Operating Principle
Full Production Batches( Not Reviewed by OGD)
No Data to Classify CPPs versus
non-CPPs
QbD Paradigm
Risk Assessment +
Design of Experiments
Classify CPPs versus non-CPPs in the unit Operation
Increased Likelihood of a Successful Commercial-Scale Process
Can Sponsor Reliably Manufacture atCommercial Production Scale(or Even at the Same Scale)?
Define Design Process Space for CPPsAt Pilot Scale (Bioequivalence Batch)
33
Raw Materials:Drug Substance and
Excipients
ER Coating
Sieving II
Pre-Lubrication andLubrication Blending
Charging to Blender
Compression
Drug Layering
Sieving I
Raw Materials:Drug Substance and
Excipients
ER Coating
Sieving II
Pre-Lubrication andLubrication Blending
Charging to Blender
Compression
Drug Layering
Sieving I
Quality Attributesto be Considered
ManufacturingProcess Steps
Material Attributes andProcess Parameters
Particle sizeDensity
Moisture contentExcipient type/grade/level
Lot-to-lot variationViscosity
Inlet air volumeInlet air temperatureProduct temperatureSpray rate per nozzle
Nozzle diameter and number of nozzleAtomization air pressure
Partition diameter and heightCapacity utilized
Inlet air dew pointFilter
Screen sizeScreen type
Inlet air volumeInlet air temperatureProduct temperatureSpray rate per nozzle
Nozzle diameter and number of nozzleAtomization air pressure
Partition diameter and heightCapacity utilized
Inlet air dew pointFilter
Coating dispersion: Solid content,Viscosity and sedimentation
IR Granules from ANDA# aaaaaaExtragranular Excipients
Holding timeMaterial transfer method
Order of addition
Screen sizeScreen type
Blender Type/GeometryNo. of revolutions (time and speed)
Capacity utilizedIntensifier bar (on/off)
Holding time
Pre-compression forceMain compression force
Press speedFeeder speed/Type
Ejection forceHopper design: Height and Vibration
Hopper fill
AppearanceDissolutionAssayContent Uniformity
AssayCoating/Content UniformityDS Solid State FormLOD
DissolutionDose DumpingLOD
Particle Size DistributionSieve Cut vs. DissolutionFines/AgglomeratesUsable Yield
Blend UniformityParticle Size DistributionDensityFlowability/Compressibility
Blend Uniformity
AssayContent Uniformity (whole and split)Weight VariationHardnessFriabilityDisintegrationUsable Yield
Particle Size DistributionFines/AgglomeratesUsable Yield
34
Table 63. Initial risk assessment of the ER coating process variables
A filter bag is used to prevent loss of material and to allow air to pass through. A filter bonnet with a sizeof 200 μm was used based on previous experience.MediumFilter
Keep nozzle tip and air cap flush for consistency.LowNozzle tip/air cap position
Nozzle tip size determines a nozzle’s spray rate capability. Based on potential spray rate, a nozzle with 1.0mm orifice diameter was selected.MediumNozzle tip diameter
Partition gap can impact the circulation rate of beads passing through the coating zone. When the gap is toobig, insufficient differential pressure to draw beads up the partition column can be generated. When the gapis too small, the circulation rate of beads goes up, but the mass flow of beads will be limited. The partitionheight was set at 25 mm based on bed fill level and prior knowledge.
MediumPartition height (gap)
The air distribution plate can impact the fluidization pattern of beads passing through the partition column. C plate is selected based on the size of beads and previous experience.MediumAir distribution plate
By equipment design: 89 mm in diameter.LowPartition column diameter
7″ Wurster HS insert is selected based on its capacity, 2.5 – 5 kg.MediumWurster insert diameter
Justification and Initial StrategyRisk AssessmentProcess Variables
The coating dispersion may thin due to shear if the coating process is long.MediumCoating Time
If atomization air pressure is too high, attrition to the beads may occur.If atomization air pressure is too low, agglomeration may occur.Investigate with DOE
HighAtomization air pressure
If spray rate is too high, agglomeration may occur. If spray rate is too low, spraying time may be too long and spray drying may occur.Investigate with DOE
HighSpray rate/nozzle
If air volume is too high, spray drying may occur.If air volume is too low, agglomeration may occur.Investigate with DOE
HighAir volume
Product temperature is a function of inlet air temperature, air volume, and spray rate. If product temperature is too high, spray drying may occur and results in large amount of fines.If product temperature is too low, agglomeration may occur.Investigate with DOE
HighProduct temperature
Inlet temperature will be adjusted to reach the desired product temperature. The range of 40-60ºC is selected based on trial batches in GPCG-1MediumInlet air temperature
To prevent beads from being trapped in the filter bag. 60 sec/5sec: based on prior knowledge.LowShaking interval/duration
Variation of inlet air humidity may have an impact on drug release rate. The impact needs to be evaluated.Typically, a dew point of 10-15º C is used for processing.MediumInlet air dew point
35
DOE Screening Design to Investigate which‘High Risk’ Parameters are Critical in ER Coating
36
Critical Process Parameters Investigated (23-1 factorial DOE) to Define a ER Layering Design Space at Pilot Scale Studies using 18 Wurster HS Insert
Design Space for 40 Kg ER Layering Using GPC-120 equipped with a 18” Wurster Insert
37
Updated risk assessment of the ER coating process variables
Atomization air pressure is identified. In the studied range, ER coated beads with consistent quality were produced at 40 kg scale. Atomization air pressure is a scale dependent parameter. However, ER coating change from 18″ to 32″Wurster is a scale-out process instead of a scale-up process. The three nozzles used in the 32″ Wurster are identical to the one used in the 18″ Wurster. The atomization air pressure for each nozzle is kept the same.
LowHighAtomization air pressure
Spray rate range is identified. In the studied range, ER coated beads with consistent quality were produced at 40 kg scale. Spray rate is a scale dependent parameter. For commercial scale production, we plan to increase the spray rate 3 folds, because coating change from 18″ to 32″Wurster is a scale-out process instead of a scale-up process. However, further adjustment may be necessary.
MediumHigh
Spray rate
Air volume range is identified. In the studied range, ER coated beads with consistent quality were produced at 40 kg scale. Air volume is a scale dependent parameter. For commercial scale production, we plan to increase the air volume 3 folds, because coating change from 18″ to 32″Wurster is a scale-out process instead of a scale-up process. However, further adjustment may be necessary.
MediumHighAir volume
Product temperature range is identified. In the studied range, ER coated beads with consistent quality were produced at 40 kg scale. Product temperature is a scale independent parameter, and can be applied to other scales.
LowHigh
Product temperature
Justification for the Mitigated RisksFinal Risk Assessment
Initial Risk AssessmentProcess Variables
38
Bioequivalence: Scale-Up Past/Present Paradigm
Bioequivalent Exhibit Batch
Linking Bioequivalence at Commercial Scale Using “Empirical” Dissolution Test
Scale-Up
Bioequivalent Exhibit Batch
QbD Paradigm
Linking Bioequivalence at Commercial Scale:
1. IVIVC
2 IVIVR
3. Unit operation incorporating ER mechanismscale-independent process parameters.
4. Linking drug product critical quality material attributes of ER coating between scales (PAT tools)
Commercial Scale DrugProduct Still Bioequivalent ???
39
Based upon IVIVR (T50%) increased from 5.6 h to 6.6 h on commercial scale compared to pilot scale failing a predefined critical quality attributed in development
Bioequivalence: Scale-Up
Despite Similitude of Design 18” Wurster with 32” Wurster failure of scale-up Attributable to higher coating efficiency at commercial scale (72-98% of equipment
capacity compared to pilot scale (50-70% of equipment capacity)
40
41
Linkage of Commercial and Exhibit Batch Process Spaces
Bioequivalent ANDA Bioequivalent ANDA Exhibit Batch well withinExhibit Batch well withinPilot Scale Design Space Pilot Scale Design Space
CPP 1*CPP 1*
CPP
2*
CPP
2*
CPP 3*
CPP 3*
Trial Commercial Batch Trial Commercial Batch Not BioequivalentNot Bioequivalent
Detected by IVIVC/IVIVRDetected by IVIVC/IVIVR
CPP 1*CPP 1*
CPP
2*
CPP
2*
CPP 3*
CPP 3*
Bioequivalent Bioequivalent Commercial BatchCommercial Batch
CPP 1*CPP 1*
CPP
2*
CPP
2*
CPP 3*
CPP 3*
Process Validation/Verification(Post-Submission)
Map/Confirm Points in Predicted Commercial Scale-Process Space
IVIVR/IVIVC and/or PAT tools Adjustments in target coating (30% - 28%)
due to the higher coating efficiency at commercial scale
Scale-up based upon underlying assumptions Similitude, Scale-independence,
Empirical or Semi-Empirical Models,Dimensionless Analysis
CPP 1CPP 1
CPPCPP
22
CPP 3CPP 3
42
Conclusions
QbD
Drug Product StabilityFormulation “Stability by Design”
Commercial Manufacturing Excipient Selected
CPPs versus non-CPPsUnderstanding CPP Process Space
Therapeutic Equivalence “Bioequivalence by Design”
Bioequivalence: Commercial ScaleIVIVR or IVIVC
PAT Surrogates
Enhance Quality of MR Products
43
Acknowledgements
• Lawrence Yu• Robert Lionberger • Lane Christensen • Nilufer Tampal• Om Anand• Ubrani V Venkataram• Quamrul Majumder• Dipak Chowdhury• Roslyn Powers
Peter CapellaLaxma NagavelliSuhas PatankarJennifer MaguireBhagwant RegePeng YingxuYoumin WangKhalid KhanHelen Teng
top related