Sign in to use this feature.

Years

Between: -

Subjects

remove_circle_outline
remove_circle_outline
remove_circle_outline

Journals

Article Types

Countries / Regions

Search Results (3)

Search Parameters:
Keywords = orally inhaled drug products (OIDP)

Order results
Result details
Results per page
Select all
Export citation of selected articles as:
24 pages, 2630 KiB  
Review
Advancements in the Design and Development of Dry Powder Inhalers and Potential Implications for Generic Development
by Abhinav Ram Mohan, Qiang Wang, Sneha Dhapare, Elizabeth Bielski, Anubhav Kaviratna, Liangfeng Han, Susan Boc and Bryan Newman
Pharmaceutics 2022, 14(11), 2495; https://doi.org/10.3390/pharmaceutics14112495 - 17 Nov 2022
Cited by 17 | Viewed by 6357
Abstract
Dry powder inhalers (DPIs) are drug–device combination products where the complexity of the formulation, its interaction with the device, and input from users play important roles in the drug delivery. As the landscape of DPI products advances with new powder formulations and novel [...] Read more.
Dry powder inhalers (DPIs) are drug–device combination products where the complexity of the formulation, its interaction with the device, and input from users play important roles in the drug delivery. As the landscape of DPI products advances with new powder formulations and novel device designs, understanding how these advancements impact performance can aid in developing generics that are therapeutically equivalent to the reference listed drug (RLD) products. This review details the current understanding of the formulation and device related principles driving DPI performance, past and present research efforts to characterize these performance factors, and the implications that advances in formulation and device design may present for evaluating bioequivalence (BE) for generic development. Full article
Show Figures

Figure 1

21 pages, 7014 KiB  
Article
Optimization of the Transwell® System for Assessing the Dissolution Behavior of Orally Inhaled Drug Products through In Vitro and In Silico Approaches
by Elham Amini, Abhinav Kurumaddali, Sharvari Bhagwat, Simon M. Berger and Günther Hochhaus
Pharmaceutics 2021, 13(8), 1109; https://doi.org/10.3390/pharmaceutics13081109 - 21 Jul 2021
Cited by 9 | Viewed by 3977
Abstract
The aim of this study was to further evaluate and optimize the Transwell® system for assessing the dissolution behavior of orally inhaled drug products (OIDPs), using fluticasone propionate as a model drug. Sample preparation involved the collection of a relevant inhalable dose [...] Read more.
The aim of this study was to further evaluate and optimize the Transwell® system for assessing the dissolution behavior of orally inhaled drug products (OIDPs), using fluticasone propionate as a model drug. Sample preparation involved the collection of a relevant inhalable dose fraction through an anatomical mouth/throat model, resulting in a more uniform presentation of drug particles during the subsequent dissolution test. The method differed from previously published procedures by (1) using a 0.4 µm polycarbonate (PC) membrane, (2) stirring the receptor compartment, and (3) placing the drug-containing side of the filter paper face downwards, towards the PC membrane. A model developed in silico, paired with the results of in vitro studies, suggested that a dissolution medium providing a solubility of about 5 µg/mL would be a good starting point for the method’s development, resulting in mean transfer times that were about 10 times longer than those of a solution. Furthermore, the model suggested that larger donor/receptor and sampling volumes (3, 3.3 and 2 mL, respectively) will significantly reduce the so-called “mass effect”. The outcomes of this study shed further light on the impact of experimental conditions on the complex interplay of dissolution and diffusion within a volume-limited system, under non-sink conditions. Full article
Show Figures

Figure 1

25 pages, 1202 KiB  
Review
Innovating on Inhaled Bioequivalence: A Critical Analysis of the Current Limitations, Potential Solutions and Stakeholders of the Process
by Jonattan Gallegos-Catalán, Zachary Warnken, Tania F. Bahamondez-Canas and Daniel Moraga-Espinoza
Pharmaceutics 2021, 13(7), 1051; https://doi.org/10.3390/pharmaceutics13071051 - 9 Jul 2021
Cited by 2 | Viewed by 5249
Abstract
Orally inhaled drug products (OIDPs) are an important group of medicines traditionally used to treat pulmonary diseases. Over the past decade, this trend has broadened, increasing their use in other conditions such as diabetes, expanding the interest in this administration route. Thus, the [...] Read more.
Orally inhaled drug products (OIDPs) are an important group of medicines traditionally used to treat pulmonary diseases. Over the past decade, this trend has broadened, increasing their use in other conditions such as diabetes, expanding the interest in this administration route. Thus, the bioequivalence of OIDPs is more important than ever, aiming to increase access to affordable, safe and effective medicines, which translates into better public health policies. However, regulatory agencies leading the bioequivalence process are still deciding the best approach for ensuring a proposed inhalable product is bioequivalent. This lack of agreement translates into less cost-effective strategies to determine bioequivalence, discouraging innovation in this field. The Next-Generation Impactor (NGI) is an example of the slow pace at which the inhalation field evolves. The NGI was officially implemented in 2003, being the last equipment innovation for OIDP characterization. Even though it was a breakthrough in the field, it did not solve other deficiencies of the BE process such as dissolution rate analysis on physiologically relevant conditions, being the last attempt of transferring technology into the field. This review aims to reveal the steps required for innovation in the regulations defining the bioequivalence of OIDPs, elucidating the pitfalls of implementing new technologies in the current standards. To do so, we collected the opinion of experts from the literature to explain these trends, showing, for the first time, the stakeholders of the OIDP market. This review analyzes the stakeholders involved in the development, improvement and implementation of methodologies that can help assess bioequivalence between OIDPs. Additionally, it presents a list of methods potentially useful to overcome some of the current limitations of the bioequivalence standard methodologies. Finally, we review one of the most revolutionary approaches, the inhaled Biopharmaceutical Classification System (IBCs), which can help establish priorities and order in both the innovation process and in regulations for OIDPs. Full article
Show Figures

Figure 1

Back to TopTop