Transitioning Amiodarone Tablet Manufacturing: A Comparative Study of Batch and Continuous Wet Granulation
Abstract
1. Introduction
2. Results and Discussion
2.1. Comparative Assessment of Granules
2.1.1. Comparative Analysis of Granule Flowability
2.1.2. Comparative Analysis of Granule Content Uniformity
2.1.3. Comparative Analysis of Milled Granule Particle Size Distribution
2.2. Comparative Evaluation of Physical Tablet Properties
2.3. Comparative Evaluation of In Vitro Dissolution Profiles
2.4. Establishment of the Design Space
2.5. Comparative Evaluation of Stability
2.6. Comparison of Manufacturing Time and Costs Between Batch and Continuous Processes
3. Materials and Method
3.1. Materials and Composition of Immediate-Release Formulation
3.2. Manufacturing Process Study
3.2.1. Batch Wet Granulation Process
3.2.2. Continuous Wet Granulation Process
3.3. Comparative Characterization of Granules
3.3.1. Flowability
3.3.2. Granule Content Assay
3.3.3. Granule Particle Size Distribution
3.4. Tablet Manufacturing Process Study
3.5. Comparative Assessment Study of Tablets
3.6. Dissolution Profiles
3.7. Design of Experiments
3.8. Stability Study
4. Conclusions
Author Contributions
Funding
Institutional Review Board Statement
Informed Consent Statement
Data Availability Statement
Conflicts of Interest
Abbreviations
| CM | continuous manufacturing |
| CPPs | critical Process Parameters |
| PAT | process analytical technology |
| CMAs | critical material attributes |
| CQAs | critical quality attributes |
| HSM | high shear mixer |
| TSG | Twin-screw granulation |
| RTD | residence time distribution |
| PSD | particle size distribution |
| DS | design space |
| HCl | hydrochloride |
| DoE | Design of Experiment |
| CCD | central composite design |
| USP | United States Pharmacopeia |
| CI | Carr’s Index |
| HPLC | High-performance liquid chromatography |
| SME | specific mechanical energy |
| RT | room temperature |
| AC | accelerated storage |
| RH | relative humidity |
| API | active pharmaceutical ingredient |
| LOD | loss on drying |
| HR | Hausner Ratio |
| UV-Vis | ultraviolet-visible |
| Tween 80 | polysorbate 80 |
References
- Burcham, C.L.; Johnson, M.D. Continuous Manufacturing in Pharmaceutical Process Development and Manufacturing. Annu. Rev. Chem. Biomol. Eng. 2018, 9, 253–281. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Michal, T.; Bart, M.; Andras, E.; Janina, L. Recent progress in continuous and semi-continuous processing of solid oral dosage forms: A review. Drug Dev. Ind. Pharm. 2015, 42, 1195–1214. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Movilla-Meza, N.A.; Patel, D.S.; Romanach, R.J. PAT for monitoring the state of control in continuous manufacturing of solid oral dosage forms. Anal. Bioanal. Chem. 2025, 412, 5597–5609. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Plumb, K. Continuous Processing in the Pharmaceutical Industry: Changing the Mind Set. Chem. Eng. Res. Des. 2005, 83, 730–738. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Holzberg, T.R.; Watson, V.; Brown, S. Sensors for biomanufacturing process development: Facilitating the shift from batch to continuous manufacturing. Curr. Opin. Chem. Eng. 2018, 22, 115–127. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Schaber, S.D.; Gerogiorgis, D.I.; Trout, B.L. Economic Analysis of Integrated Continuous and Batch Pharmaceutical Manufacturing: A Case Study. Ind. Eng. Chem. Res. 2011, 50, 10083–10092. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Kashinath, K.P.; Kaity, S. Continuous manufacturing based paradigm shift in pharmaceuticals production and current regulatory framework. Chem. Eng. Res. Des. 2025, 215, 1–22. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- John, W. Review: Continuous Manufacturing of Small Molecule Solid Oral Dosage Forms. Pharmaceutics 2021, 13, 1311. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Vargas, J.M.; Romanach, R.J. Process analytical technology in continuous manufacturing of a commercial pharmaceutical product. Int. J. Pharm. 2018, 538, 167–178. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Jeon, C.-W.; Yoon, J.-H.; Kim, J.-E. QbD-Based Formulation Development of Amiodarone Hydrochloride Tablet. Pharmaceutics 2026, 18, 264. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Vervaet, C.; Remon, J.P. Continuous granulation in the pharmaceutical industry. Chem. Eng. Sci. 2005, 60, 3949–3957. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Lee, S.L.; O’Connor, T.F.; Yang, X.; Woodcock, J. Modernizing Pharmaceutical Manufacturing: From Batch to Continuous Production. J. Pharm. Innov. 2015, 10, 191–199. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Jung, E.-A.; Park, Y.-J.; Kim, J.-E. Application of continuous manufacturing for solid oral dosage forms. J. Pharm. Investig. 2023, 53, 457–474. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Mascia, S.; Trout, B.L. End-to-End Continuous Manufacturing of Pharmaceuticals: Integrated Synthesis, Purification, and Final Dosage Formation. Angew. Chem. 2013, 125, 12585–12589. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Seok, S.H.; Yoo, S.-D.; Kim, W.; Lee, I.-A.; Min, K.H.; Kang, J.-H.; Park, C.-W.; Kim, J.-Y.; Park, E.-S. Continuous manufacturing and process analytical technology: Focusing on dosage forms with improved solubility and controlled release. J. Pharm. Investig. 2025, 55, 463–479. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Gong, S.-J.; Kim, H.R.; Park, Y.-J.; Kim, J.-E. Recent trends in continuous manufacturing and digitalization in pharmaceutical process development and manufacturing. J. Pharm. Investig. 2025, 55, 397–414. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Rathore, A.S. Continuous integrated manufacturing for biopharmaceuticals: A new paradigm or an empty promise? Biotechnol. Bioeng. 2022, 120, 333–351. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Yoo, S.-D.; Kim, J.Y.; Han, S.-K.; Lee, B.-H.; Choi, D.H.; Park, E.-S. Development of prediction model with machine learning in continuous twin screw granulation. J. Pharm. Investig. 2023, 53, 707–722. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Lee, M.-W.; Kim, D.-H.; Ju, H.; Kim, J.-E. A Strategic Shift from Batch to Continuous Flow for Modernizing Tianeptine Sustained-Release Tablet Process. Processes 2026, 14, 272. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- United States Pharmacopeial Convention. Chapter <1174> Powder flow. In The United States Pharmacopeia and the National Formulary (USP-NF); United States Pharmacopeial Convention: Rockville, MD, USA, 2024. [Google Scholar]
- Gorringe, L. Continuous twin-screw granulation: Influence of specific mechanical energy (SME) on granule attributes. Int. J. Pharm. 2021, 602, 120593. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Schmidt, A. Mechanistic understanding of twin-screw granulation using scale-independent parameters: SME and RTD. Eur. J. Pharm. Biopharm. 2023, 185, 42–55. [Google Scholar]
- Zheng, W. Linking twin-screw granulation process parameters to tablet CQAs via RTD and granule porosity. J. Pharm. Sci. 2024, 113, 678–689. [Google Scholar]
- Vercruysse, J.; Peeters, E.; Vervaet, C. Use of a continuous twin screw granulation and drying system during formulation development and process optimization. Eur. J. Pharm. Biopharm. 2015, 89, 239–247. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Van, M.B.; Vervaet, C.; Remon, J.P. Validation of a continuous granulation process using a twin-screw extruder. Int. J. Pharm. 2008, 356, 224–230. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- United States Pharmacopeial Convention. Chapter <701> Disintegration. In The United States Pharmacopeia and the National Formulary (USP-NF); United States Pharmacopeial Convention: Rockville, MD, USA, 2025. [Google Scholar]
- United States Pharmacopeial Convention. Chapter <711> Dissolution. In The United States Pharmacopeia and the National Formulary (USP-NF); United States Pharmacopeial Convention: Rockville, MD, USA, 2021. [Google Scholar]





| Quality Category | Specific Parameter | Target Criteria | Role in Current Study | Comparison Strategy |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Mandatory (Critical release criteria) | Assay (%) | 90.0–110.0% | Strict compliance required for product release. Direct indicators of therapeutic equivalence. | Individual Runs: Compared vs. Reference Drug to assess process risk boundaries. Optimized Sweet Spot: Compared vs. Batch and Reference Drug for final validation. |
| Content uniformity | USP Compliant | |||
| Friability (%) | ≤1.0% | |||
| Disintegration | USP Compliant | |||
| Dissolution (f2) | f2 ≥ 50 | |||
| Informative (Process indicators) | Flowability | Process suitability | Used as process performance indicators to evaluate granulation and milling efficiency. | Monitored across all DoE runs to map out the process Design Space. |
| Particle size distribution | Trend monitoring |
| Process | Continuous Process | Batch Process | ||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Twin Screw (rpm) | 300 | 500 | 700 | |||||||
| Milling Size (mm) | 1.0 mm | 2.0 mm | 3.0 mm | 1.0 mm | 2.0 mm | 3.0 mm | 1.0 mm | 2.0 mm | 3.0 mm | 1.0 mm |
| Bulk density (g/mL) | 0.6583 | 0.7500 | 0.6728 | 0.6315 | 0.7000 | 0.6343 | 0.6985 | 0.7125 | 0.6512 | 0.6500 |
| Tapped density (g/mL) | 0.9307 | 0.9375 | 0.9122 | 0.8710 | 0.9333 | 0.8748 | 0.8950 | 0.9194 | 0.8288 | 0.7200 |
| Carr’s Index (%) | 29.3 | 20.0 | 26.3 | 27.5 | 25.0 | 27.5 | 22.0 | 22.5 | 21.4 | 9.7 |
| Hausner’s Ratio | 1.41 | 1.25 | 1.36 | 1.38 | 1.33 | 1.38 | 1.28 | 1.29 | 1.27 | 1.11 |
| Flow character | Poor | Fair | Poor | Poor | Passable | Poor | Passable | Passable | Passable | Excellent |
| Process | Continuous Process | Batch Process | ||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Twin Screw (rpm) | 300 | 500 | 700 | |||||||
| Milling Size (mm) | 1.0 mm | 2.0 mm | 3.0 mm | 1.0 mm | 2.0 mm | 3.0 mm | 1.0 mm | 2.0 mm | 3.0 mm | 1.0 mm |
| Content Uniformity (%) | 93.7 | 95.2 | 94.7 | 92.1 | 94.3 | 93.1 | 95.1 | 95.2 | 95.1 | 96.2 |
| 92.8 | 95.6 | 93.8 | 92.3 | 94.0 | 93.6 | 94.5 | 94.9 | 95.5 | 98.0 | |
| 92.5 | 95.8 | 95.0 | 91.7 | 94.4 | 93.0 | 96.0 | 93.7 | 97.0 | 96.0 | |
| Average (%) | 93.0 ± 0.6 | 95.5 ± 0.3 | 94.5 ± 0.6 | 92.0 ± 0.3 | 94.3 ± 0.2 | 93.2 ± 0.3 | 95.2 ± 0.8 | 94.6 ± 0.8 | 95.8 ± 1.0 | 96.8 ± 1.1 |
| Process | Continuous Process | Batch Process | ||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Twin Screw (rpm) | 300 | 500 | 700 | |||||||
| Milling Size (mm) | 1.0 mm | 2.0 mm | 3.0 mm | 1.0 mm | 2.0 mm | 3.0 mm | 1.0 mm | 2.0 mm | 3.0 mm | 1.0 mm |
| Hardness (kp) | 3.9 | 2.7 | 1.8 | 3.8 | 2.9 | 1.8 | 4.0 | 3.1 | 2.2 | 3.0 |
| Friability (%) | 0.38 | 0.67 | 0.76 | 0.57 | 0.66 | 0.66 | 0.19 | 0.47 | 0.28 | 0.19 |
| Disintegration (min) | 3.20 | 2.95 | 4.23 | 2.13 | 2.80 | 4.03 | 4.42 | 5.13 | 5.58 | 1.67 |
| No. | Twin Screw (rpm) | Milling Size (mm) | pH 4.0 f2 Value | pH 1.2 f2 Value | Risk Assessment |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | 300 | 1.0 | 51.3 | 58.4 | Moderate Risk |
| 2 | 300 | 2.0 | 58.2 | 57.6 | Low Risk |
| 3 | 300 | 3.0 | 50.2 | 65.6 | High Risk |
| 4 | 500 | 1.0 | 55.2 | 53.1 | Moderate Risk |
| 5 | 500 | 2.0 | 84.4 | 53.8 | Moderate Risk |
| 6 | 500 | 3.0 | 50.1 | 58.3 | High Risk |
| 7 | 700 | 1.0 | 52.5 | 68.3 | Moderate Risk |
| 8 | 700 | 2.0 | 63.6 | 55.5 | Moderate Risk |
| 9 | 700 | 3.0 | 74.7 | 61.3 | Extremely Safe |
| 11 | Batch process | 1.0 | 70.9 | 54.4 | Moderate Risk |
| Run Order | Independent Variables | Dependent Variables | ||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Twin Screw (rpm) | Milling Size (mm) | Flowability (%) | Disintegration (min) | pH 1.2 Dissolution 10 min (%) | pH 1.2 Dissolution 15 min (%) | pH 4.0 Dissolution 10 min (%) | pH 4.0 Dissolution 15 min (%) | Friability (%) | Assay (%) | |
| X1 | X2 | Y1 | Y2 | Y3 | Y4 | Y5 | Y6 | Y7 | Y8 | |
| 1 | 300 | 1.0 | 29.3 | 3.20 | 72.3 | 83.1 | 39.4 | 57.2 | 0.38 | 94.3 |
| 2 | 700 | 1.0 | 22.0 | 4.42 | 68.9 | 82.2 | 39.3 | 58.5 | 0.19 | 91.9 |
| 3 | 300 | 3.0 | 26.3 | 4.23 | 67.3 | 80.3 | 37.7 | 55.2 | 0.76 | 101.4 |
| 4 | 700 | 3.0 | 21.4 | 5.58 | 66.0 | 79.8 | 48.6 | 73.5 | 0.28 | 95.2 |
| 5 | 300 | 2.0 | 20.0 | 2.95 | 72.5 | 85.3 | 42.1 | 63.9 | 0.67 | 95.5 |
| 6 | 700 | 2.0 | 22.5 | 5.13 | 69.3 | 81.8 | 44.4 | 67.7 | 0.47 | 92.2 |
| 7 | 500 | 1.0 | 27.5 | 2.13 | 77.0 | 85.5 | 43.2 | 61.0 | 0.57 | 91.0 |
| 8 | 500 | 3.0 | 27.5 | 4.03 | 71.6 | 82.7 | 39.6 | 56.1 | 0.66 | 93.2 |
| 9 | 500 | 2.0 | 27.5 | 2.80 | 69.2 | 79.9 | 49.4 | 68.2 | 0.66 | 92.4 |
| 10 | 500 | 2.0 | 28.8 | 3.02 | 71.5 | 82.2 | 52.6 | 71.4 | 0.76 | 94.0 |
| 11 | 500 | 2.0 | 28.7 | 3.15 | 76.5 | 84.6 | 52.7 | 73.3 | 0.76 | 97.6 |
| 12 | 500 | 2.0 | 27.3 | 2.98 | 72.4 | 82.2 | 51.6 | 71.0 | 0.66 | 94.7 |
| 13 | 500 | 2.0 | 28.8 | 3.05 | 72.9 | 82.3 | 51.0 | 70.8 | 0.76 | 95.8 |
| Amiodarone Hydrochloride | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Sample | Storage Condition * | Time | Assay (%) | Impurity D (%) | Total Impurity (%) |
| Continuous tablet | - | Initial | 94.4 | 0.06 | 0.15 |
| RT | 1 M | 95.5 | 0.06 | 0.14 | |
| 3 M | 98.6 | 0.07 | 0.20 | ||
| 6 M | 98.6 | 0.07 | 0.21 | ||
| AC | 1 M | 93.4 | 0.20 | 0.28 | |
| 3 M | 94.9 | 0.32 | 0.45 | ||
| 6 M | 97.9 | 0.45 | 0.58 | ||
| Batch tablet | - | Initial | 97.7 | 0.05 | 0.14 |
| RT | 1 M | 94.2 | 0.05 | 0.12 | |
| 3 M | 102.4 | 0.06 | 0.18 | ||
| 6 M | 97.7 | 0.07 | 0.20 | ||
| AC | 1 M | 94.6 | 0.20 | 0.26 | |
| 3 M | 95.4 | 0.35 | 0.46 | ||
| 6 M | 98.0 | 0.46 | 0.59 | ||
Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content. |
© 2026 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license.
Share and Cite
Yoon, J.-H.; Jeon, C.-W.; Kim, J.-E. Transitioning Amiodarone Tablet Manufacturing: A Comparative Study of Batch and Continuous Wet Granulation. Pharmaceuticals 2026, 19, 850. https://doi.org/10.3390/ph19060850
Yoon J-H, Jeon C-W, Kim J-E. Transitioning Amiodarone Tablet Manufacturing: A Comparative Study of Batch and Continuous Wet Granulation. Pharmaceuticals. 2026; 19(6):850. https://doi.org/10.3390/ph19060850
Chicago/Turabian StyleYoon, Ju-Hyun, Chae-Won Jeon, and Joo-Eun Kim. 2026. "Transitioning Amiodarone Tablet Manufacturing: A Comparative Study of Batch and Continuous Wet Granulation" Pharmaceuticals 19, no. 6: 850. https://doi.org/10.3390/ph19060850
APA StyleYoon, J.-H., Jeon, C.-W., & Kim, J.-E. (2026). Transitioning Amiodarone Tablet Manufacturing: A Comparative Study of Batch and Continuous Wet Granulation. Pharmaceuticals, 19(6), 850. https://doi.org/10.3390/ph19060850

