Improved quality control metrics for cascade impaction measurements of orally inhaled drug products (OIPs).

This study of aerodynamic mass-weighted particle size distribution (APSD) data from orally inhaled products (OIPs) investigated whether a set of simpler (than currently used) metrics may be adequate to detect changes in APSD for quality control (QC) purposes. A range of OIPs was examined, and correlations between mass median aerodynamic diameter and the ratio of large particle mass (LPM) to small particle mass (SPM) were calculated. For an Andersen cascade impactor, the LPM combines the mass associated with particle sizes from impactor stage 1 to a product-specific boundary size; SPM combines the mass of particles from that boundary through to terminal filter. The LPM-SPM boundary should be chosen during development based on the full-resolution impactor results so as to maximize the sensitivity of the LPM/SPM ratio to meaningful changes in quality. The LPM/SPM ratio along with the impactor-sized mass (ISM) are by themselves sufficient to detect changes in central tendency and area under the APSD curve, which are key in vitro quality attributes for OIPs. Compared to stage groupings, this two-metric approach provides better intrinsic precision, in part due to having adequate mass and consequently better ability to detect changes in APSD and ISM, suggesting that this approach should be a preferred QC tool. Another advantage is the possibility to obtain these metrics from the abbreviated impactor measurements (AIM) rather than from full-resolution multistage impactors. Although the boundary is product specific, the testing could be accomplished with a basic AIM system which can meet the needs of most or all OIPs.

A two one-sided parametric tolerance interval test for control of delivered dose uniformity--part 3--investigation of robustness to deviations from normality.

The robustness of the parametric tolerance interval test, which was proposed by the Food and Drug Administration for control of delivered dose uniformity in orally inhaled and nasal drug products, is investigated in this article using different scenarios for deviations from a univariate normal distribution. The studied scenarios span a wide range of conditions, the purpose of which is to provide an understanding of how the test performs depending on the nature and degree of the deviation from normality. Operating characteristic curves were generated to compare the performance of the test for different types of distributions (normal and non-normal) having the same proportion of doses in the tails (on one or both sides) outside the target interval. The results show that, in most cases, non-normality does not increase the probability of accepting a batch of unacceptable quality (i.e., the test is robust) except in extreme situations, which do not necessarily represent commercially viable products. The results also demonstrate that, in the case of bimodal distributions where the life-stage means differ from each other by up to 24% label claim, the test's criterion on life-stage means does not affect pass rates because the tolerance interval portion of the test reacts to shifting means as well.

A two one-sided parametric tolerance interval test for control of delivered dose uniformity. Part 1--characterization of FDA proposed test.

The FDA proposed a parametric tolerance interval (PTI) test at the October 2005 Advisory Committee meeting as a replacement of the attribute (counting) test for delivered dose uniformity (DDU), published in the 1998 draft guidance for metered dose inhalers (MDIs) and dry powder inhalers (DPIs) and the 2002 final guidance for inhalation sprays and intranasal products. This article (first in a series of three) focuses on the test named by the FDA "87.5% coverage." Unlike a typical two-sided PTI test, which controls the proportion of the DDU distribution within a target interval (coverage), this test is comprised of two one-sided tests (TOST) designed to control the maximum amount of DDU values in either tail of the distribution above and below the target interval. Through simulations, this article characterizes the properties and performance of the proposed PTI-TOST under different scenarios. The results show that coverages of 99% or greater are needed for a batch to have acceptance probability 98% or greater with the test named by the FDA "87.5% coverage" (95% confidence level), while batches with 87.5% coverage have less than 1% probability of being accepted. The results also illustrate that with this PTI-TOST, the coverage requirement for a given acceptance probability increases as the batch mean deviates from target. The accompanying articles study the effects of changing test parameters and the test robustness to deviations from normality.

A two one-sided parametric tolerance interval test for control of delivered dose uniformity--part 2--effect of changing parameters.

This article examines the effects of changing parameters in the test which was proposed by the FDA at the October 2005 Advisory Committee meeting for confirming delivered dose uniformity in orally inhaled and nasal drug products. This article is an extension of the characterization study presented in an accompanying article (Part 1). The goal of this study is to understand how parameters of the test affect the test performance. The effects of changing test parameters such as target interval, maximum allowable proportion in the tail area, and sample size are examined. The results show that changing the maximum allowable tail area and/or the target interval have the largest impact on the test outcomes, i.e., probability of acceptance for a given batch mean and standard deviation. The presented information may provide potential users of the test with a set of tools for optimizing the test characteristics for a particular product.

Minimizing variability of cascade impaction measurements in inhalers and nebulizers.

The purpose of this article is to catalogue in a systematic way the available information about factors that may influence the outcome and variability of cascade impactor (CI) measurements of pharmaceutical aerosols for inhalation, such as those obtained from metered dose inhalers (MDIs), dry powder inhalers (DPIs) or products for nebulization; and to suggest ways to minimize the influence of such factors. To accomplish this task, the authors constructed a cause-and-effect Ishikawa diagram for a CI measurement and considered the influence of each root cause based on industry experience and thorough literature review. The results illustrate the intricate network of underlying causes of CI variability, with the potential for several multi-way statistical interactions. It was also found that significantly more quantitative information exists about impactor-related causes than about operator-derived influences, the contribution of drug assay methodology and product-related causes, suggesting a need for further research in those areas. The understanding and awareness of all these factors should aid in the development of optimized CI methods and appropriate quality control measures for aerodynamic particle size distribution (APSD) of pharmaceutical aerosols, in line with the current regulatory initiatives involving quality-by-design (QbD).

Comparison of two approaches for treating cascade impaction mass balance measurements.

The multistage cascade impactor (CI) is the most appropriate tool for measuring the aero-dynamic particle size distribution (APSD) of active pharmaceutical ingredient(s) (API) in the aerosol from an orally inhaled drug product. It is possible to determine the total emitted mass per actuation of the inhaler by summing the individual component results obtained when determining APSD. The determination of total mass per actuation recovered from the CI components (or "mass balance" [MB]) has inherently lower precision than that of a delivered dose (DD) determination. An FDA draft guidance for industry has proposed using CI-determined MB as part of the product specification, with acceptance criteria of +/-15% of the label claim (LC) dosage. We propose instead that MB be used to assess whether the CI measurement of APSD is reliable. Two multitiered test schemes for MB are evaluated that allow for retests to accommodate the variability of the MB measurement. We provide statistical evaluations of both test schemes by using operating characteristic (OC) curves. We find that a two-tiered procedure with broader acceptance criteria but limited opportunity for investigating and retesting MB failure results in a greater risk of rejection of good batches ("false positive" error) without the commensurate reduction in the risk of passing unacceptable batches ("false negative" error). In contrast, a three-tiered procedure with narrower acceptance criteria, but more opportunity to check for potential CI system malfunction/method misapplication and to rerun the CI test, provides a compromise that enables the MB measurement to be used without significantly increasing the probability of false positive errors.

Product Quality Research Institute evaluation of cascade impactor profiles of pharmaceutical aerosols. Part 3. Final report on a statistical procedure for determining equivalence.

The purpose of this article is to report final results of the evaluation of a chi-square ratio test proposed by the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) for demonstrating equivalence of aerodynamic particle size distribution (APSD) profiles of nasal and orally inhaled drug products. A working group of the Product Quality Research Institute previously published results demonstrating some limitations of the proposed test. In an effort to overcome the test's limited discrimination, the group proposed a supplemental test, a population bioequivalence (PBE) test for impactor-sized mass (ISM). In this final report the group compares the chi-square ratio test to the ISM-PBE test and to the combination of both tests. The basis for comparison is a set of 55 realistic scenarios of cascade impactor data, which were evaluated for equivalence by the statistical tests and independently by the group members. In many instances, the combined application of these 2 tests appeared to increase the discriminating ability of the statistical procedure compared with the chi-square ratio test alone. In certain situations the chi-square ratio test alone was sufficient to determine equivalence of APSD profiles, while in other situations neither of the tests alone nor their combination was adequate. This report describes all of these scenarios and results. In the end, the group did not recommend a statistical test for APSD profile equivalence. The group did not investigate other in vitro tests, in vivo issues, or other statistical tests for APSD profile comparisons. The studied tests are not intended for routine quality control of APSD.