wligtenberg
☆    

The Netherlands,
2017-01-03 16:48
(2641 d 02:55 ago)

Posting: # 16923
Views: 6,458
 

 Using f2 for compounds that never reach 85% dissolution [Dissolution / BCS / IVIVC]

As mentioned before, I am quite new to the bioequivalence and bioavailability field.
I was asked to look into dissolution profiles of a few compounds.

I have already implemented the F2 and mahalanobis distance in R, so the calculation is not an issue. However, I am not sure if the rules in the guidelines are sufficient to apply them in a correct manner.

For instance, we have compounds for which the RLD and the in house product never reach 85% dissolution. (lipophilic compounds in membranes/vesicles)

If I am not mistaken, the idea of having only one time point after dissolution goes above 85% is to make sure, that you don't just add arbitrary high time points to decrease the influence of the lower time points (if they would differ in the beginning).
This would allow you to always get an F2 above 50, if you just measure enough points after dissolution is at its peak.

So I guess, the reason is more that you don't want to compare time points where the dissolution has plateaued. That makes sense, in my opinion.
However, when we have compounds that already plateau before 85% we can still have this issue.

I have thought of 2 possible solutions:
1) Scale the dissolution, so that the maximum (of either product is 100%) and then calculate F2/mahalanobis as normal.
2) Define a way to detect the plateau and then use the first time point that reaches that plateau. For plateau detection we could use: have a 10% increase between each time point. Or fit a (Weibull) model and use that to define the plateau level.

I personally like the second solution better, because it doesn't change the data.
It behaves more like the normal rules, but it is also a bit more complicated.

What do you think? Or are there some rules for instances like this, that I haven't found?
nobody
nothing

2017-01-03 20:19
(2640 d 23:24 ago)

@ wligtenberg
Posting: # 16924
Views: 5,569
 

 Using f2 for compounds that never reach 85% dissolution

Hi!

As the experts are apparently still on holiday :-) I might start with some questions/remarks.

Liposomes with doxorubicin (just wild guessing here ;-) ) are no oral formulation afaik. Why would you do dissolution testing (simulation GI tract, normally)?

The fraction of dose you get into solution pretty much depends on the media you use for your testing, in my opinion.

So maybe some more details on the kind of products/projects your on might be helpful to get more response. :-)

Kindest regards, nobody
wligtenberg
☆    

The Netherlands,
2017-01-04 11:46
(2640 d 07:57 ago)

@ nobody
Posting: # 16928
Views: 5,554
 

 Using f2 for compounds that never reach 85% dissolution

❝ As the experts are apparently still on holiday :-) I might start with some questions/remarks.

❝ Liposomes with doxorubicin (just wild guessing here ;-) ) are no oral formulation afaik. Why would you do dissolution testing (simulation GI tract, normally)?


Wrong guess. :)

❝ The fraction of dose you get into solution pretty much depends on the media you use for your testing, in my opinion.

❝ So maybe some more details on the kind of products/projects your on might be helpful to get more response. :-)


In this case it is for eye drops. So some medium that resembles tears would make sense, right? So I do think that comparing dissolution makes sense in this case, even though it is not the GI tract.

That still leaves the issue that we will not reach 85% dissolution in that medium. And I do think we should not keep many time points from the plateau phase.
nobody
nothing

2017-01-04 12:52
(2640 d 06:52 ago)

@ wligtenberg
Posting: # 16929
Views: 5,496
 

 Using f2 for compounds that never reach 85% dissolution

Dissolution testing for eye drops? WOW! Then I'm definitely out... ;-)

Maybe more info from literature:

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27830515

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26791934

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/24946794

Kindest regards, nobody
wligtenberg
☆    

The Netherlands,
2017-01-16 18:27
(2628 d 01:16 ago)

@ wligtenberg
Posting: # 16956
Views: 5,309
 

 Using f2 for compounds that never reach 85% dissolution

Nobody on this forum has any experience/ideas about this?
My own feeling goes more to identifying the plateau and limiting the data based on that.
Because scaling messes with the F2 values.
Dr_Dan
★★  

Germany,
2017-01-16 19:10
(2628 d 00:33 ago)

@ wligtenberg
Posting: # 16959
Views: 5,340
 

 Using f2 for compounds that never reach 85% dissolution

Dear wligtenberg
I am not experienced in this field, but if I look at EMA/CHMP/806058/2009/Rev. 02 see and take this analogously for products for ocular use I would ask you if it is really necessary to calculate f2 values in order to demonstrate similarity between the test liposomal product and the reference? Wouldn’t it be sufficient just to show the figures? According to this reflection paper IMHO you just need to address (among many others)
  • in vitro drug substance release rate from the liposome in physiologically/clinically relevant media. Reliable and discriminating validated in-vitro release methods should be developed to:
    • monitor the simulated release of the active substance from the liposomes in physiologically/clinically relevant media. If justified an in vitro leakage test in relevant media under multiple conditions (e.g. range of temperatures and pH values) could be appropriate.
I hope this helps

Kind regards and have a nice day
Dr_Dan
wligtenberg
☆    

The Netherlands,
2017-01-17 10:00
(2627 d 09:44 ago)

@ Dr_Dan
Posting: # 16962
Views: 5,300
 

 Using f2 for compounds that never reach 85% dissolution

Dear Dr_Dan,

That was a very useful document, thank you.
Although that document does not specifically state how to measure if the products are comparable, we would still need to show that they are. And I cannot imagine that eye-balling the graphs would cut it.
Still, also during development, we would like to have some idea of how different batches compare as well, so I think we would still want some kind of distance measure and a generally accepted cut-off.
But I do get from the document that you linked to, that for liposomes there are no fixed guidelines (yet).
UA Flag
Activity
 Admin contact
22,957 posts in 4,819 threads, 1,636 registered users;
84 visitors (0 registered, 84 guests [including 9 identified bots]).
Forum time: 19:44 CET (Europe/Vienna)

Nothing shows a lack of mathematical education more
than an overly precise calculation.    Carl Friedrich Gauß

The Bioequivalence and Bioavailability Forum is hosted by
BEBAC Ing. Helmut Schütz
HTML5