Effect of Binder Type and Binder Level on the Properties of Agglomerates Containing Lactose and Dibasic Calcium Phosphate Dihydrate - Pharmaceutical Technology

Latest Issue
PharmTech

Latest Issue
PharmTech Europe

Effect of Binder Type and Binder Level on the Properties of Agglomerates Containing Lactose and Dibasic Calcium Phosphate Dihydrate
The authors studied the effect of the combination of binders on the flow and compressibility characteristics of the agglomerates of binary combination of lactose and dibasic calcium phosphate dihydrate.


Pharmaceutical Technology
Volume 32, Issue 10, pp. 54-64


AUTHORS
With the introduction of instrumented single and multistation tablet presses, directly compressible materials have gained increasing importance in tablet formulations. Materials comprising individual unmodified particles are not often suitable as filler–binders because of their lack of flowability (e.g., native starches), lack of binding properties (e.g. α lactose monohydrate 100#), and lubricant sensitivity (e.g., native starches). Although binding properties can be improved with physical modifications such as dehydration, partial pregelatinization, and coating, the flow properties of these products are often still insufficient (1). Coprocessed multicomponent-based excipients help achieve better powder characteristics and tableting properties than when a single substance or a physical mixture is used (2), and several coprocessed filler–binders have appeared in the pharmaceutical market in recent years.

This study evaluated six binders: the traditional binders hydroxypropyl methylcellulose (HPMC), guar gum, acacia, and polyethylene glycol (PEG); colloidal silicon dioxide, which has been reported to increase the hardness of the tablets (3); and starch, which exhibits both binding and disintegrant properties when it is incorporated either as a paste or dry before granulation with other agents. Wet granulation was used because of its simplicity.

Several studies have reported the influence of individual binders on the tensile strength of tablets (4–9). Very few studies have actually combined more than one binder in a single formulation and evaluated their influence on tensile strength (10). In this study, the Plackett-Burman statistical design was used to screen the factors affecting a certain attribute (11–14). These variables were optimized to achieve the desirable response after initial screening (15). Various combinations of the six binders were used according to the Plackett-Burman design to prepare a directly compressible adjuvant.

Experiment


Table I: Factors in the Plackett-Burman screening design.
Materials. Lactose, dibasic calcium phosphate dihydrate (DCP), starch, PEG, and HPMC 15 cps were received as generous gifts from Bombay Tablets (Gandhinagar, India). Acacia, guar gum, magnesium stearate, and colloidal silicon dioxide were received from Torrent Research Centre (Gandhinagar, India).

Experimental design to prepare agglomerates


Table II: Formulation of various batches of agglomerates using a Plackett-Burman design and results of evaluation parameters.
Six binders were used to prepare coprocessed directly compressible adjuvant containing lactose and DCP. Table I lists the binders used and the amount used of each. The binders were screened using a 12-run Plackett-Burman design. Table II shows the composition of each batch of agglomerates prepared using various binders as per the Plackett-Burman design. Fifty grams of lactose and 25 g of DCP were mixed. The binders were added according to the Plackett-Burman design. The whole system was mixed, and water was added as an agglomerating agent. PEG when used was dissolved in water before being added to the main bulk. The mass was forced through a 20# sieve and dried in a hot air oven at 80 ° C. The dried agglomerates were sifted through a 40# sieve. The agglomerates of 40–200# were collected and stored in an airtight container until further use.


ADVERTISEMENT

blog comments powered by Disqus
LCGC E-mail Newsletters

Subscribe: Click to learn more about the newsletter
| Weekly
| Monthly
|Monthly
| Weekly

Survey
How does your company apply quality-by-design (QbD) principles to manufacturing processes?
To all processes for both new and legacy products
To all process for new products only
To select process for new products only
To select processes for both new and legacy products
Do not use QbD
To all processes for both new and legacy products
20%
To all process for new products only
15%
To select process for new products only
24%
To select processes for both new and legacy products
20%
Do not use QbD
22%
View Results
UPCOMING CONFERENCES

Programs for Investigational and Pre-Launch Drugs
Philadelphia, PA
July 17-18, 2013
Request Brochure

Strategic Pipeline Planning & Portfolio Valuation
Philadelphia, PA
August 13-14, 2013
Request Brochure

MES 2013 - Forum on Manufacturing Execution Systems
Philadelphia, PA
August 14-15, 2013
Request Brochure

Mobile Innovation for the Life Sciences Industry
Philadelphia, PA
August 20-21, 2013
Request Brochure

See All Conferences >>

Eric Langer Outsourcing Outlook Eric LangerOutsourcing's Modest Role as a Cost-Containment Strategy
Patricia Van Arnum Ingredients Insider Patricia Van ArnumIntellectual Property Battles in Solid-State Chemistry
Nathan Jessop Industry Insider Nathan Jessop Campaign Against Counterfeit Drugs Continues
Lynn Torbeck Statistical Solutions Lynn D. TorbeckCompositing Samples and the Risk to Product Quality
 More
Global Biosimilars Market to Reach $2.445 Billion in 2013
Adapting to Change
AstraZeneca and Exco InTouch Collaborate to Augment Current COPD Pathways
Overcoming the Challenges in Biopharmaceutical Stability Testing
PhRMA Dismayed by Special 301 Report
FindPharma Custom Search
Source: Pharmaceutical Technology,
Click here