4.5 Article

Integrated Application of Quality-by-Design Principles to Drug Product Development: A Case Study of Brivanib Alaninate Film-Coated Tablets

Journal

JOURNAL OF PHARMACEUTICAL SCIENCES
Volume 105, Issue 1, Pages 168-181

Publisher

WILEY
DOI: 10.1016/j.xphs.2015.11.023

Keywords

quality by design; tablets; brivanib alaninate; design space; control strategy; critical quality attributes; critical process parameters; critical material attributes; dissolution; porosity

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Modern drug product development is expected to follow quality-by-design (QbD) paradigm. At the same time, although there are several issue-specific examples in the literature that demonstrate the application of QbD principles, a holistic demonstration of the application of QbD principles to drug product development and control strategy, is lacking. This article provides an integrated case study on the systematic application of QbD to product development and demonstrates the implementation of QbD concepts in the different aspects of product and process design for brivanib alaninate film-coated tablets. Using a risk-based approach, the strategy for development entailed identification of product critical quality attributes (CQAs), assessment of risks to the CQAs, and performing experiments to understand and mitigate identified risks. Quality risk assessments and design of experiments were performed to understand the quality of the input raw materials required for a robust formulation and the impact of manufacturing process parameters on CQAs. In addition to the material property and process parameter controls, the proposed control strategy includes use of process analytical technology and conventional analytical tests to control in-process material attributes and ensure quality of the final product. (C) 2016 American Pharmacists Association (R). Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.5
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available