Search PubMed⌕ Search

PubMed · 9269491

Setting dissolution specifications for modified-release dosage forms.

Abstract

Dissolution specifications are used for quality assurance and may also serve as a surrogate for in vivo bioavailability. These limits can guide formulation development and eliminate the need for bioavailability studies for scale up and post approval changes. Several methods for setting dissolution specifications have been reviewed in this chapter. A summary of the advantages and disadvantages for each method can be found in Table 1. When choosing a method for setting dissolution specifications, it is important to 1) have a discriminating dissolution system, 2) incorporate in vivo data, 3) include intersubject variability, and 4) predict plasma concentration-time profiles. Predicting plasma concentration curves allows one to see how the change in formulation or dissolution limits perform in vivo. Dissolution specifications should be set so that all formulations that have dissolution profiles within the limits of the specifications are bioequivalent. This can be assured if the boundaries are tested for bioequivalence. Minimally, the formulations that have dissolution profiles within the limits of the specifications should be bioequivalent to the pivotal batch. A population prediction of the plasma concentration-time profiles for the upper and lower limit would incorporate the true intersubject variability for the formulation.

Explore related subjects

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

D A Piscitelli, D Young. 1997. Setting dissolution specifications for modified-release dosage forms.. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4684-6036-0_13

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related citations

Tumor size on computed tomography scans: is one measurement enough?

BACKGROUND: Bidimensional tumor measurements are used routinely as surrogates for tumor volume. The purpose this study was to determine whether there is any added benefit in bidimensional or tridimensional measurements over a unidimensional measurement. METHODS: Sixty-nine colorectal hepatic metastases on 19 computed tomography scans (1-8 lesions per scan) from 9 patients were analyzed. Five patients contributed 2-4 scans each (mean, 3 scans). The standard volume of these lesions was determined by the "summation of areas" technique. The maximum axial dimension, the product of the greatest axial dimensions, and several volume estimates (based on the volumes of a sphere, an ellipsoid, and a cube) each were correlated with the standard volume. RESULTS: The maximum axial dimension and the product of the greatest axial dimensions correlated equally with tumor volume (correlation coefficient = 0.93). Surrogate measures based on the equations for a sphere and an ellipsoid underestimated tumor volume, whereas the equation for a cube overestimated volume. CONCLUSIONS: When reporting tumor size, there is no significant added benefit in reporting bidimensional or tridimensional measurements over the maximum axial dimension.

Data Interpretation, Statistical↗

[Roaming through methodology. XXX. The capture-recapture method].

The capture-recapture method is useful for the estimation of the incidence and prevalence of a disease if there exist multiple lists that can be linked. Some assumptions have to be fulfilled for the estimate to be adequate. For example, for every list every individual should have the same probability to be on the list, and the lists should be independent. In case of two lists one has to assume that these are independent in order to get an estimate. When three or more lists are available this strong assumption may be mitigated.

Data Interpretation, Statistical↗