IN VITRO EQUIVALENCE STUDY OF DIFFERENT DOSES OF CARBAMAZEPINE REFERENCE TABLETS USING USP APPARATUSES 2 AND 4

JOSE RAUL MEDINA-LOPEZ; Luis Antonio Cedillo-Díaz; Marcela Hurtado

doi:10.22159/ijap.2019v11i4.33174

Authors

JOSE RAUL MEDINA-LOPEZ Departamento Sistemas Biológicos, Universidad Autónoma Metropolitana-Xochimilco, Mexico City, Mexico
Luis Antonio Cedillo-Díaz Departamento Sistemas Biológicos, Universidad Autónoma Metropolitana-Xochimilco, Mexico City, Mexico
Marcela Hurtado Departamento Sistemas Biológicos, Universidad Autónoma Metropolitana-Xochimilco, Mexico City, Mexico

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.22159/ijap.2019v11i4.33174

Keywords:

Carbamazepine, Flow-through cell method, Reference drug products, USP Apparatus 4

Abstract

Objective: To perform an in vitro equivalence study of two doses of carbamazepine reference tablets sold in the local market under hydrodynamic conditions of USP Apparatus 4, a dissolution apparatus that better simulates the human gastrointestinal tract. Results were compared with dissolution official conditions using USP Apparatus 2.

Methods: Dissolution profiles of both formulations were carried out with an automated USP Apparatus 2 at 75 rpm and 900 ml of dissolution medium. USP Apparatus 4 with laminar flow at 16 ml/min and 22.6 mm cells were used. 1% lauryl sulfate aqueous solution at 37.0±0.5 °C was used as dissolution medium. Spectrophotometric determination of drug at 285 nm was carried out during 60 min. Dissolution profiles were compared with model-independent and-dependent approaches.

Results: When comparing dissolution profiles of low vs. high dose similar profiles were found (f₂>50) in each dissolution apparatus, however, when the same dose was compared, USP 2 vs. USP 4, opposite results were obtained. Comparison of mean dissolution time and dissolution efficiency data corroborates these results. Weibull function was the best mathematical model that described the in vitro dissolution performance of carbamazepine. No significant differences were found in Td values (low vs. high dose) but opposite results were also found with USP 2 vs. USP 4.

Conclusion: Equivalent dissolution performance of two doses of carbamazepine reference tablets were found in each USP dissolution apparatus. The main problem identified in this comparative study is the low dissolution rate and extent found with USP Apparatus 4. More research on this field is necessary for all available doses of reference drug products since the quality of generic formulations depends on the quality of references.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

References

Food and Drug Administration. Guidance for Industry: Waiver on in vivo bioavailability and bioequivalence studies for immediate-release solid oral dosage forms based on a biopharmaceutics classification system; 2017. Available from: https://www.fda.gov/downloads/Drugs/Guidances/ucm070246.pdf. [Last accessed on 20 Mar 2019].

Lennernas H, Abrahamsson B. The use of biopharmaceutical classification of drugs in drug discovery and development: current status and future extension. J Pharm Pharmacol 2005;57:273–85.

International Pharmaceutical Federation. Biowaiver monographs. Available from: https://www.fip.org/ bcs_monographs. [Last accessed on 20 Mar 2019]

Barhate S, Husain M. Development of hydrophilic matrix tablet of carbamazepine using 33 full factorial experimental designs. Int J Pharm Pharm Sci 2015;7:369−75.

Food and Drug Administration. Guidance for Industry: Dissolution testing of immediate release solid dosage forms; 1997. Available from: https://www.fda.gov/downloads/ drugs/guidances/ucm070237.pdf. [Last accessed on 20 Mar 2019].

United States Pharmacopeia and National Formulary USP 41-NF 36; The United States Pharmacopeial Convention, Inc: Rockville MD: 2018.

Castro N, Jung H. Determination of absorption profiles of carbamazepine products by the deconvolution method and its correlation with in vitro data. Rev Mex Cienc Farm 2000;31:42−6.

Jung H, Milan RC, Girard ME, Leon F, Montoya MA. Bioequivalence study of carbamazepine tablets: in vitro/in vivo correlation. Int J Pharm 1997;152:37−44.

Singh I, Aboul Enein HY. Advantages of USP apparatus IV (flow-through cell apparatus) in dissolution studies. J Iran Chem Soc 2006;3:220–2.

Qui S, Wang K, Li M. In vitro dissolution studies of immediate-release and extended-release formulations using flow-through cell apparatus 4. Dissol Technol 2014;21:6−15.

Sunesen VH, Pedersen BL, Kristensen HG, Müllertz A. In vivo in vitro correlations for a poorly soluble drug, danazol, using the flow-through dissolution method with biorelevant dissolution media. Eur J Pharm Sci 2005;24:305–13.

Szymanska E, Winnicka K. Comparison of flow-through cell and paddle methods for testing vaginal tablets containing a poorly water-soluble drug. Trop J Pharm Res 2013;12:39–44.

Emara LH, Emam MF, Taha NF, El-Ashmawy AA, Mursi NM. In vitro dissolution study of meloxicam immediate release products using flow-through the cell (USP apparatus 4) under different operational conditions. Int J Pharm Pharm Sci 2014;6:254−60.

Fotaki N, Reppas C. The flow-through cell methodology in the evaluation of intralumenal drug release characteristics. Dissol Technol 2005;12:17−21.

Jinno J, Kamada N, Miyake M, Yamada K, Mukai T, Odomi M, et al. In vitro-in vivo correlation for the wet-milled tablet of poorly water-soluble cilostazol. J Controlled Release 2008;130:29−37.

Jantratid E, De Maio V, Ronda E, Mattavelli V, Vertzoni M, Dressman JB. Application of bio-relevant dissolution tests to the prediction of in vivo performance of diclofenac sodium from an oral modified-release pellet dosage form. Eur J Pharm Sci 2009;37:434−41.

COFEPRIS. Listado actualizado de medicamentos de referencia 2017/08, Mexico. Available from: https://www.gob.mx/ cms/uploads/attachment/file/197452/lMR_2017-08_V006.pdf. [Last accessed on 20 Mar 2019]

Yuksel N, Kanik AE, Baykara T. Comparison of in vitro dissolution profiles by ANOVA-based, model-dependent and independent methods. Int J Pharm 2000;209:57−67.

Zhang Y, Huo M, Zhou J, Zou A, Li W, Yao C, et al. DDSolver: an add-in program for modeling and comparison of drug dissolution profiles. AAPS J 2010;12:263−71.

Medina JR, Hernandez J, Hurtado M. In vitro release studies of carbamazepine tablets and benzoyl metronidazole suspensions using the flow-through cell apparatus and simulated gastrointestinal fluids. Int J Appl Pharm 2017;9:54−60.

Langenbucher F, Benz D, Kurth W, Moller H, Otz M. Standardized flow-cell method as an alternative to existing pharmacopoeial dissolution testing. Pharm Ind 1989;51:1276-81.

Budikayanti A, Chaliana C, Luoisa M, Setiabudy R. Development and validation of carbamazepine plasma concentrations measurement and its application on epilepsy patients. Int J Pharm Pharm Sci 2017;9:87-91.

Podczeck F. Comparison of in vitro dissolution profiles by calculating mean dissolution time (MDT) or mean residence time (MRT). Int J Pharm 1993;97:93−100.

Anderson NH, Bauer M, Boussac N, Khan Malek R, Munden P, Sardaro M. An evaluation of fit factors and dissolution efficiency for the comparison of in vitro dissolution profiles. J Pharm Biomed Anal 1998;17:811−22.

Cardot JM, Beyssac E, Alrici M. In vitro-in vivo correlation: importance of dissolution in IVIVC. Dissol Technol 2007;14:15−9.

Adams E, Coomans D, Smeyers Verbeke J, Massart DL. Non-linear mixed effects models for the evaluation of dissolution profiles. Int J Pharm 2002;240:37−53.

Medina JR, Ortiz HD, Hurtado M, Domínguez Ramirez AM. Influence of dose and the USP basket and flow-through cell dissolution apparatus in the release kinetics of metronidazole immediate-release products. Int J Res Pharm Sci 2014;5:137−46.

Rentmeester TW, Doelman JC, Hulsman JA. Carbamazepine: branded formulation versus generic formulation. Pharma Weekblad 1990;125:1108−10.

Olling M, Mensinga TT, Barends DM, Groen C, Lake OA, Meulenbelt J. Bioavailability of carbamazepine from four different products and the occurrence of side effects. Biopharm Drug Dis 1999;20:19−28.