alexa Design, Development and Formulation of Orodispersible Tablets of a Model Drug Using Response Surface Methodology | OMICS International
ISSN : 2153-2435
Pharmaceutica Analytica Acta

Like us on:

Make the best use of Scientific Research and information from our 700+ peer reviewed, Open Access Journals that operates with the help of 50,000+ Editorial Board Members and esteemed reviewers and 1000+ Scientific associations in Medical, Clinical, Pharmaceutical, Engineering, Technology and Management Fields.
Meet Inspiring Speakers and Experts at our 3000+ Global Conferenceseries Events with over 600+ Conferences, 1200+ Symposiums and 1200+ Workshops on
Medical, Pharma, Engineering, Science, Technology and Business

Design, Development and Formulation of Orodispersible Tablets of a Model Drug Using Response Surface Methodology

Lokesh PNV, Abdul Althaf S* and Sailaja PB

Division of Pharmacy, Sri Venkatswara University, Tirupati, Andhra Pradesh, India

*Corresponding Author:
Abdul Althaf S
Division of Pharmacy
Sri Venkatswara University
Tirupati, Andhra Pradesh, India
E-mail: [email protected]

Received date: November 06, 2012; Accepted date: November 19, 2012; Published date: November 25, 2012

Citation: Lokesh PNV, Abdul Althaf S, Sailaja PB (2012) Design, Development and Formulation of Orodispersible Tablets of a Model Drug Using Response Surface Methodology. Pharmaceut Anal Acta 3:195. doi: 10.4172/2153-2435.1000195

Copyright: © 2012 Lokesh PNV, et al. This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited.

Visit for more related articles at Pharmaceutica Analytica Acta

Abstract

The present investigation deals with preparation of Fast Dissolving Tablets (FDT) of Model drug (Telmisartan) and to determine the influence of the certain excipients on physical properties of the tablets and solubility. Direct compression technique was used because of its ease of access and contains limited number of unit operations. Glycine and SLS are used as wetting agent. Various superdisintegrants like Croscarmellose, Sodium starch glycolate, Crospovidone, Crospovidone-XL10 and Polacrallin potassium were screened to find the best formulation with good friability and disintegration values. Employing a 32 factorial design, the joint influence of two formulation variables like superdisintegrant concentration and ratio of diluents (MCCP: MANNITOL) on the disintegration time and friability were determined. The drug excipient compatibility studies were performed by FTIR and solubility changes are observed by dissolution using HPLC. The physical characteristics were analyzed by X-ray diffraction and supported by DSC studies. The multiple linear regression analysis was used to find the effect of these variables on physical properties of final formulation. Finally, a check-point batch is prepared to prove the validity of evolved method. Using the contour plot, effect of the independent variables on the responses was represented graphically. The stability studies of the optimized formula were carried as per ICH guidelines.

Keywords

Telmisartan; Fast dissolve tablet; Kyron; 32 Factorial designs; Contour plot

Introduction

The aim and objective of the present study is to develop and evaluate FDT of Telmisartan and enhance the onset of action of Telmisartan and also to study the influence of excipients on the physical characteristics of the tablets by applying three level two factor factorial designs taking Telmisartan as model drug which is used in the treatment of the hypertension. The study was intended to select the best possible diluents and the superdisintegrants combination to formulate the dispersible tablets among all the diluents and disintegrants used. Finally the impact of the diluents ratio and superdisintegrants on various properties of the tablet were also determined [1].

The basic approach in the development of the fast dissolving tablet is the use superdisintegrants. Croscarmellose, sodium starch glycolate, crospovidone, polacrallin potassium are the best used superdisintegrants globally. In this study all the above mentioned superdisintegrants are selected and best one is selected for further studies. Another approach used in developing FDT’s is freeze drying and vacuum drying, but both are cumbersome and they yield a fragile and hygroscopic product. Therefore it was decided to adopt the Direct Compression Technique to prepare FDT in an easy and comfortable way as it requires less number of unit operations. Additionally a wetting agent is used to increase the wicking nature of the tablet.

Factorial Experiments

Factorial designs allow for the simultaneous study of the effects that several factors like concentration of superdisintegrants and diluent concentration may have on the physical characteristics of the tablets [2].

Contour Plots

Contour plot helps in visualizing the response surface. Contour plots are useful for establishing desirable response values and operating conditions [3].

Response Surface Design – Surface Plots

Using a surface plot one can visualize the response surface. Surface plots are useful for establishing desirable response values and operating conditions.

Equipments Used

Electronic digital balance-Sartorious BT 323S, Tapped density apparatus-Electrolab USP ETD 1020, Rotary tablet punching machine- Elit Jemkay Pvt Lt, Ahmedabad, Friability test apparatus-Electrolab, EF 2, Mumbai, Disintegration apparatus-Electrolab ED 2AL, Helium lamp (LOD)-Mettler-Toledo, Thickness (Vernier Calipers)-Mitutogo Vernier Calipers, Sieves, Jayanth test sieves, Mumbai, Hardness tester, Monsanto hardness tester, UV-Visible spectrophotometer-Shimadzu (uv-1601), Vernier calipers-Mitutoyo, Japan, Monsanto hardness tester-Scientific Eng Corp Delhi, Stability chamber-Neutronics, HPLCShimadzu, FTIR-Shimadzu, X-ray diffractor-Philips, DSC (Differential Scanning Colorimetry)-Shimadzu.

Materials Used

Telmisartan, Kyron T-314, Crosspovidone, XL 10, SSG, Croscarmellose, Strawberry Flavour, Aerosil, Neotame, Microcrystalline cellulose, Mannitol SD, Magnesium stearate, Glycine, Methanol (HPLC Grade), HCl, TEA(tri ethyl amine), Acetonitrile (HPLC Grade). All the chemicals were provided by KAPL Bangalore [4].

Plan of Work

The plan of work is to perform pre-formulation studies of the prepared formulation with excipients for their compatibility by FTIR studies and screening of various disintegrating agents for the preparation of rapidly integrating tablets. The best disintegrating agent was used and further evaluated by 32 factorial design and regression analysis. Dispersible tablets were prepared by direct compression technique for a model antihypertensive drug, telmisartan. Formulation of rapidly disintegrating tablets was carried out using different diluents ratio. The prepared dosage form was subjected to pre- and post- compression parameters. Selection and optimization of the best formulation was carried out based on the above results. The results were subjected to ANOVA after the development of polynomial models. The optimized formulation was compared with the reference product by using similarity factor to assess the bioequivalence between the two products. Compatibility studies were performed for the final formulation by using DSC and also stability studies were performed on the most satisfactory formulation as per ICH guidelines [5].

Direct Compression Method

The disintegration and solubilisation of directly compressed tablets depends on action of the disintegrant and other excipients used like wetting agents. Disintegrant efficacy is strongly affected by tablet size and hardness. Large and hard tablets will have more disintegration time than usually required. As a consequence low values in hardness may lead to increased friability. This will affect the physical resistance on the tablet. Disintegrants have major role in the disintegration process of the mouth dissolving tablets made by direct compression. To ensure high disintegration rate, choice of suitable type and optimal amount of the disintegrant is important. All the ingredients were passed through #30 meshes separately. The drug and the diluents were mixed in small portions of both at each time and blended to get a uniform mixture. The ingredients are weighed and mixed in geometrical order. Flavouring agents followed by the lubricants were added at the end and were mixed thoroughly. The blend was compressed using 10 mm flat punch to get a tablet of 300 mg using 16-stationary rotary punching machine. Elit Jemkay Pvt Ltd., Ahmedabad [6].

Formulation of Telmisartan FDT’s

The aim of the study is to formulate fast dissolving tablets of Telmisartan by direct compression technique using a wetting agent for fast wicking action and for the solubility enhancement of Telmisartan. Different disintegrants were selected for this study following literature survey. Superdisintegrants used are Croscarmellose sodium, Sodium starch glycolate, Crospovidone, Crospovidone XL 10 and Polacrallin potassium.

Method Development

Since Telmisartan had poor solubility and less bioavailability. Therefore, Addition of different Superdisintegrants were added to decrease the disintegration time thereby increasing the bioavailability and wetting agent was employed to enhance its solubility [7-21].

Method

For the drug Telmisartan, Superdisintegrants were added in different percentage concentrations. The Superdisintegrants and other excipients were mixed thoroughly. The blend was then compressed directly. All the Superdisintegrants were screened and the final formulations with favorable disintegration time and friability results were taken into account for solubility enhancement studies. Since it is already proved that addition of a wetting agent like Glycine will increase the solubility of water insoluble drugs, Glycine is added at a concentration of 3%w/w of the total tablet. The process for the formulation of Telmisartan fast dissolving tablets was developed in a systematic way. Trials were taken by conducting the dissolution studies of the tablets with Glycine, with 1% SLS and 3% SLS in which the drug is intended to show greater solubility (Tables 1-4).

Ingredients F1 F2 F3 F4 F5 F6 F7 F8 F9 F10 F11 F12 F13 F14 F15
Telmisartan 40 40 40 40 40 40 40 40 40 40 40 40 40 40 40
Croscarmellose 3 9 18 - - - - - - - - - - - -
SSG - - - 6 15 24 - - - - - - - - -
Crosspovidone - - - - - - 6 10.5 15 - - - - - -
XL 10 - - - - - - - - - 3 6 9 - - -
KYRON - - - - - - - - - - - - 1 8 15
Mg.stearate 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3
Aerosil 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8
Glycine 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9
SLS 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3
Neotame 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1
MCCP 180 180 180 180 180 180 180 180 180 180 180 180 180 180 180
Peartilol qs to 300 300 300 300 300 300 300 300 300 300 300 300 300 300 300

Table 1: Working formula of the preliminary batches from f1-f15 batches.

Batch Code Variables Levels In Coded Forms Disintegration Time (Y1) % Friability (Y2)
X1 X2
P1 -1 1 119 1.71
P2 0 1 58 1.45
P3 1 1 26 0.98
P4 -1 0 69 0.45
P5 0 0 24 0.28
P6 1 0 8 0.16
P7 -1 -1 45 0.53
P8 0 -1 25 0.49
P9 1 -1 15 0.39
Check point batch 0.5 -0.3 16 0.89

Table 2: Factorial design studies: 32 Full factorial design lay out.

Coded values Actual values
X1 ( Kyron in mg) X2 (MCCP:MANNITOL)
-1 1 3:1
0 8 2:2
1 15 1:3

Table 3: Coded values and actual values of X1and X2 variables.

Ingredients P1 P2 P3 P4 P5 P6 P7 P8 P9
Telmisartan 40 40 40 40 40 40 40 40 40
KYRON 1 8 15 1 8 15 1 8 15
Glycine 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9
SLS 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3
Neotame 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1
Mg. stearate 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3
Aerosil 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8
Mccp: Peartilol 3:1 3:1 3:1 2:2 2:2 2:2 1:3 1:3 1:3
Total 300 300 300 300 300 300 300 300 300

Table 4: Analysis of factorial formulation: Working formula of factorial formulation.

NOTE: X1 and X2 are independent variable representing the concentration of Kyron and diluents ratio in the coded values. Y1 and Y2 are the dependent variables representing the responses like Disintegration time in seconds and % Friablilty. All the values of Y1 and Y2 are the taken from the following table.

Compatibility Studies of Telmisartan with Formulation Excipients

Compatibility analysis by FTIR spectrophotometer was performed.

Pre-compression parameters

It contains Bulk density, Tapped density, Compressibility index and hausner’s ratio, Angle of repose.

Post-compression parameters include

Weight variation, Thickness and diameter, Apparent density, Physical appearance, Hardness, Friability, Disintegration Time, Wetting Time and Water Absorption Ratio, Assay [22-30].

In vitro dissolution studies: In vitro dissolution studies for fabricated Mouth Dissolving tablet is carried out by using USPXX III Type II (Electro Lab dissolution tester) dissolution apparatus at 75 rpm in 900 ml of 0.1 N HCl as dissolution media, maintained at 37 ± 0.5°C. Mouth dissolving tablet of desired formulation were taken and placed in the vessels of dissolution apparatus. Sample of 10 ml were collected from the vessels at specified time intervals 10, 20, 30, and 60 min filtered and determined by liquid chromatography as described in the following procedure. Drug concentration was calculated from the standard and expressed as percentage of drug dissolved or released [9].

Stability Studies

The purpose of stability testing is to provide evidence of the quality of the drug substance or drug product, and how it varies with time under the influence of a variety of environmental conditions (heat, humidity, light, air etc). The choice of test conditions defined in the guideline ICH – Q1A (R2) is based on an analysis of the effects of climatic conditions in the three regions of the EC, Japan and the United States [31-39].

Dissolution Profile Comparison

Dissolution profiles may be considered similar by virtue of (1) overall profile similarity and (2) similarity at every dissolution sample time point. The dissolution profile comparison may be carried out using model independent or model dependent method [40].

Model Independent Approach Using a Similarity Factor

A simple model independent approach uses a difference factor (f1) and a similarity factor (f2) to compare dissolution profiles (Moore 1996). The difference factor (f1) calculates the percent (%) difference between the two curves at each time point and is a measurement of the relative error between the two curves [41-47].

Results

Standard plot of telmisartan

Regression analysis: Absorbance Y vs. Conc X (mcg/ml): The regression equation is Absorbance (Y)=0.01136(c)+0.05292 (m). Conc X (mcg/ ml). Where, c=y intercept, m=slope of the regression equation; r2=0.9993; R-Sq=99.93%; R-Sq (adj)=99.9% (Figures 1-15) (Tables 5-22).

S.No. Pos.
[°2Th.]
Height
[cts]
FWHM
[°2Th.]
d-spacing
[Å]
Rel. Int.
[%]
Status with Ref.
1 6.8203 9532.15 0.1338 12.96068 100.00 Complies
2 14.2584 3176.73 0.1506 6.21188 33.33 Complies
3 15.0878 1057.50 0.1338 5.87220 11.09 Complies
4 18.3679 803.62 0.1673 4.83028 8.43 Complies
5 22.3664 1589.01 0.1338 3.97499 16.67 Complies

Table 5: Peak list.

 S.No.          Ingredients   Ratio                               Description   FTIR
Initial 55°C
(2 weeks)
40 ± 2°C / 75 ± 5% RH   (4 weeks)
1 API 1 Off white No change No change Complies
2 Mannitol 1 White No change No change Complies
3 Kyron T-314 1 Off white No change No change Complies
4 Glycine 1 White No change No change Complies
5 MCC PH 101 1 Off white No change No change Complies
6 SLS 1 White No change No change Complies
7 Aerosil 1 White No change No change Complies
8 Magnesium stearate 1 White No change No change Complies
9 API+Kyron 5:1 Off white No change No change Complies
10 API+ MCC PH 101 1:5 Off white No change No change Complies
11 API+Mannitol 1:5 Off-white No change No change Complies
12 API+ SLS 10:1 Off white No change No change Complies
13 API+Glycine 4:1 Off white No change No change Complies
14 API+ Aerosil 5:1 Off white No change No change Complies
15 API+ Mg. stearate 5:1 Off white No change No change Complies

Table 6: Pre-Formulation Studies: Drug-excipient compatibility studies.

PRINCIPAL PEAKS
Ingredients Aromatic
C-H ‘oop’
1°, 2° Amines N-H wagging Amines
C-N stretch
Arom.Amines C-N stretch Carbonyls C=O stretch Aromatics
C-H stretch
PURE API 749 861 1127 1269 1697 3060
API+Kyron 750.3 861.24 1126.4 1266.6 1697.44 3058.4
API+MCCP 749.3 864.13 1123.5 1269.2 1694.5 3062.09
API+Glycine 750 861.24 1127.43 1266.3 1696.45 3056.3
API+Mannitol 750.4 874.5 1083.06 1264.38 1697.41 3064
API+Mg.Stearate 750.33 862.5 1114 1268 1696 3064
API+Aerosil 751 862 1100.42 1263 1700.3 3059

Table 7: Principal Peaks in FTIR spectrum.

Batch Bulk
density (g/ml)
Tapped
density (g/ml)
Carrs
Index (%)
Hausners
Ratio
Angle of
Repose (θ)
F1 0.47 0.59 20.3 1.25 32
F2 0.45 0.54 16.66 1.2 30.5
F3 0.50 0.62 19.3 1.209 30.2
F4 0.54 0.6 16.66 1.11 29.9
F5 0.50 0.62 19.3 1.24 29.1
F6 0.33 0.41 19.5 1.23 29.68
F7 0.36 0.44 18.18 1.22 31.5
F8 0.34 0.42 19.0 1.23 31.9
F9 0.43 0.52 17.3 1.209 31.6
F10 0.339 0.421 19.44 1.24 29.1
F11 0.341 0.429 20.51 1.26 31.2
F12 0.329 0.414 20.53 1.25 30.2
F13 0.32 0.385 16.1 1.19 31
F14 0.318 0.377 15.64 1.18 29
F15 0.313 0.371 15.6 1.15 31.1

Table 8: Pre-compression parameters of the preliminary batches F1-F15.

Disintegrant F1 F2 F3 F4 F5 F6 F7 F8 F9 F10 F11 F12 F13 F14 F15
Cross
Carmellose
3 9 18 - - - - - - - - - - - -
SSG - - - 6 15 24 - - - - - - - - -
Crospovidone - - - - - - 6 10.5 15 - - - - - -
XL 10 - - - - - - - - - 3 6 9 - - -
KYRON - - - - - - - - - - - - 1 8 15
Responses
D T (Sec) 65 56 39 49 45 36 24 12 9 52 43 31 121 78 19
% Friability 2.2% 1.2% 0.9% 2.2% 1.6% 0.9% 1.9% 1.2% 0.7% 2.1% 1.8% 1.22% 0.94% 0.71% 0.45%

Table 9: Effect of the Disintegrating Agent with the Disintegration Time and % Friability.

Batch
code
Hardness
(kg/cm2)
Friability Weight. variation Wetting
time (Sec)
D.T. (sec) W.A.R Assay (%)
F1 3.9 2.2% Pass 80 65 54.4% 99.6%
F2 4.0 1.23% Pass 65 56 64.4% 101.3%
F3 4.0 0.89% Pass 49 39 79.9% 101.1%
F4 4.1 2.24% Pass 59 49 66.2% 103.3%
F5 4.0 1.55 Pass 49 45 80.9% 99.8%
F6 4.2 0.99% Pass 42 36 89.1% 101.4%
F7 3.9 1.9% Pass 28 24 45.3% 100.4%
F8 4.1 1.2% Pass 21 12 56.4% 100.9%
F9 4.0 0.65% Pass 16 9 79.6% 99.4%
F10 4.2 2.1% Pass 69 52 69.5% 102.1%
F11 4.0 1.8% Pass 47 43 79.5% 100.5%
F12 3.9 1.22% Pass 37 31 94.6% 99.6%
F13 4.2 0.94% Pass 140 121 89.3% 100.5%
F14 4.1 0.71% Pass 67 78 96% 100.1%
F15 4.2 0.45% Pass 22 19 101.3% 99.8%

Table 10: Post-compression parameters of the preliminary batches F1-F15.

S.No. Time Condition Tab. wt Std Wt (gm) Std
absorbance
Spl
Absorbance
%
Purity
mg/Tab
released
%Release
1 10 Glycine 0.306 0.0448 1456624.5 2764986 99.86% 37.902427 94.75607
2 10 1% SLS 0.307 0.0448 1456624.5 2774165 99.86% 37.892128 94.73032
3 10 3% SLS 0.2982 0.0448 1456624.5 2435898 99.86% 34.287098 85.71775
4 20 Glycine 0.306 0.0448 1456624.5 2866861 99.86% 39.324615 98.31154
5 20 1% SLS 0.3028 0.0448 1456624.5 2750950 99.86% 38.13345 95.33362
6 20 3% SLS 0.2982 0.0448 1456624.5 2482267 99.86% 34.939777 87.34944
7 30 Glycine 0.306 0.0448 1456624.5 2878330 99.86% 39.456147 98.64037
8 30 1% SLS 0.3028 0.0448 1456624.5 2790687 99.86% 38.684281 96.7107
9 30 3% SLS 0.2982 0.0448 1456624.5 2497834 99.86% 35.158894 87.89723
10 60 Glycine 0.306 0.0448 1456624.5 2902128 99.86% 39.78237 99.45592
11 60 1% SLS 0.3028 0.0448 1456624.5 2821973 99.86% 39.117965 97.79491
12 60 3% SLS 0.3016 0.0448 1456624.5 2578947 99.86% 35.891396 89.72849

Table 11: Screening the effect of glycine, 1% SLS and 3% SLS on solubility by dissolution apparatus.

Pre-Compression Parameters P1 P2 P3 P4 P5 P6 P7 P8 P9
Bulk density 0.36 0.34 0.33 0.43 0.45 0.47 0.5 0.54 0.50
Tapped density 0.44 0.42 0.41 0.52 0.54 0.59 0.6 0.6 0.62
Carr’s index 18.18 19.0 19.5 17.33 16.66 19.33 16.66 16.66 19.33
Hausner’s ratio 1.22 1.23 1.23 1.209 1.21 1.25 1.2 1.11 1.24
Angle of repose 29.29 29.1 29.9 26.6 26.5 26.9 22.68 22.5 21.9

Table 12: Pre-Compression parameters of factorial formulations.

  P1 P2 P3 P4 P5 P6 P7 P8 P9
Hardness 4 4.1 4.1 4.0 4.2 3.9 4.0 3.9 4
Thickness 3.96 3.94 3.95 3.38 3.39 3.39 3.05 3.04 3.04
Diameter 10.09 10.09 10.08 10.09 10.08 10.09 10.07 10.08 10.09
Density 0.95 0.95 0.95 1.24 1.11 1.06 1.24 1.239 1.24
Friability 1.71 1.45 0.98 0.45 0.28 0.16 0.53 0.49 0.39
Disint.time 119 58 26 9 24 8 45 25 15
Dispersion time 42 34 29 35 28 14 38 25 16
Assay (%) 99.7 100.3 100.9 102.2 101.1 100.4 103.3 100.1 98.9

Table 13: Evaluation of factorial formulations.

S.No. Time Std
Wt in gm
Tablet
wt
Std absorbance Sample Absorbance % Purity mg/Tab released %Release
Smpl 10 0.0448 0.306 1456624.5 2790472 99.86% 38.27679 95.69%
Std 10 0.0458 0.221 1456624.5 2955804 99.86% 40.6888 101.7221
Smpl 20 0.0448 0.306 1456624.5 2816416 99.86% 38.60743 96.52%
Std 20 0.0458 0.221 1456624.5 2996819 99.86% 41.25344 103.1336
Smpl 30 0.0448 0.306 1456624.5 2859674 99.86% 39.22603 98.1%
Std 30 0.0458 0.221 1456624.5 2998622 99.86% 41.27826 103.1956
Smpl 60 0.0448 0.306 1456624.5 2904810 99.86% 39.84516 99.6%
Std 60 0.0458 0.2 1456624.5 3094804 99.86% 42.60228 106.5057

Table 14: Dissolution data of the optimized batch and comparison with the marketed product.

X1 X2 X1 X2 X12 X22 Y1
-1 1 -1 1 1 119
0 1 0 0 1 58
1 1 1 1 1 26
-1 0 0 1 0 69
0 0 0 0 0 24
1 0 0 1 0 8
-1 -1 1 1 1 45
0 -1 0 0 1 25
1 -1 -1 1 1 15

Table 15: Multiple regression analysis for response factor y1 (Disintegration time).

Predictor Coefficients P-value
Constant 26.11111 0.00242
X1 Variable -30.6667 0.000253
X2 Variable 19.66667 0.000948
X1X2 Variable -15.75 0.003299
X12 Variable 11.33333 0.022047
X22 Variable 14.33333 0.011606

Table 16: Summary of results of regression analysis for response factor y1 (Disintegration time):

For D T (Y1)
  df SS MS F Significance F R2
Regression 5 9623.361 1924.672 143.6521 0.000907 0.995841
Error 3 40.19444 13.39815      
Total 8 9663.556        

Table 17: Results of ANOVA for dependent variables.

X1 X2 X1 X2 X12 X22 Y2
-1 1 -1 1 1 1.71
0 1 0 0 1 1.45
1 1 1 1 1 0.98
-1 0 0 1 0 0.45
0 0 0 0 0 0.28
1 0 0 1 0 0.16
-1 -1 1 1 1 0.53
0 -1 0 0 1 0.49
1 -1 -1 1 1 0.39

Table 18: Multiple Regression Analysis for Response Factor Y2 (% Friability):

Predictor Coefficients P-value
  FM RM FM RM
Constant 0.321111 0.296667 0.007005 0.001157
X1 Variable -0.19333 -0.19333 0.005345 0.001578
X2 Variable 0.455 0.455 0.000433 5.63E-05
X1X2 Variable -0.1475 -0.1475 0.02005 0.008917
X12 Variable -0.03667 - 0.483493 -
X22 Variable 0.628333 0.296667 0.000848 0.001157

Table 19: Summary of results of regression analysis for response factor Y2 (% Friability).

For % Friability
Full Model
  Df SS MS F Significance F R2
Regression 5 2.345736 0.469147 110.9435 0.001333 0.994621
Residual 3 0.012686 0.004229      
Total 8 2.358422        
Reduced model
Regression 4 2.343047 0.585762 152.3933 0.000127 0.993481
Residual 4 0.015375 0.003844      
Total 8 2.358422        

Table 20: Results of ANOVA of Full and Reduced Model for Dependent Variable.

pharmaceutica-analytica-acta-Standard-plot-Telmisartan

Figure 1: Standard plot of Telmisartan.

pharmaceutica-analytica-acta-X-ray-pure-API

Figure 2: X-ray of pure API: (sample)

pharmaceutica-analytica-acta-X-ray-reference-API

Figure 3: X-ray of reference API.

pharmaceutica-analytica-acta-DSC-Thermogram-pure

Figure 4: DSC Thermogram of pure API.

pharmaceutica-analytica-acta-Compatibility-studies-FTIR

Figure 5: Compatibility studies by FTIR.

pharmaceutica-analytica-acta-Disintegrant-Disintegration-time

Figure 6: Left: Radar plot showing the effect of the Disintegrant on the Disintegration time.
Right: Radar plot showing the Effect of the Disintegrant on the % Friability.

pharmaceutica-analytica-acta-various-wetting-agents

Figure 7: Effect of various wetting agents on the dissolution of the Telmisartan FDT’s and comparative dissolution profile Telmisartan tablets with two different wetting agents.

pharmaceutica-analytica-acta-dissolution-profile-solubility

Figure 8: Comparative dissolution profile solubility enhancer vs. without enhancers.

pharmaceutica-analytica-acta-Comparative-dissolution-profile

Figure 9: Comparative dissolution profile of Marketed batch vs. P6 Batch.

pharmaceutica-analytica-acta-Plot-showing-level

Figure 10: Right: Plot showing the level of interactions between the X1 and X2 at various concentrations. Left: Plots showing the effect of individual concentration of X1, X2 on the % Friability.

pharmaceutica-analytica-acta-effect-individual-concentration

Figure 11: Right: Plot showing the level of interactions between the X1 and X2 at various concentrations. Left: Plots showing the effect of individual concentration of X1, X2 on the % Friability.

pharmaceutica-analytica-acta-Contour-plot-showing

Figure 12: Right: Contour plot showing the effect of X1 and X2 on the % Friability. Left: Contour plot showing the effect of X1 and X2 on the % Friability.

pharmaceutica-analytica-acta-Response-Surface-Plot

Figure 13: Right: Response Surface Plot of Y1 vs. X1 and X2; Left: Response Surface Plot of Y2 vs X1 and X2.

pharmaceutica-analytica-acta-dispersion-time-dispersible

Figure 14: Diagramatic representation of invitro dispersion time of dispersible tablets: (P6 optimized batch).

pharmaceutica-analytica-acta-Final-compatibility-studies

Figure 15: Final compatibility studies of telmisartan fast dissolving tablets using differential scanning colorimetry.

Polymorphism studies by x-ray diffraction

S=3.66035 ; R-Sq=99.6%; R-Sq(adj)=98.9%; Regression Analysis: Y1 versus X1, X2, X1 X2, X12, X22; The regression equation is Y1=26.1-30.7X1+19.7X2- 15.7X1X2+11.3 X12+14.3X22.

Y2 (Fraibility) vs. X1 and X2

S=0.0650285; R-Sq=99.5%; R-Sq(adj)=98.6% {FULL MODEL}

Regression Analysis: Y2 versus X1, X2, X1 X2, X12, X22 {FULL MODEL}. The regression equation is Y2=0.321-0.193 X1+0.455 X2-0.147X1X2-0.0367 X12+0.628X22

S=0.0619980; R-Sq=99.3%; R-Sq(adj)=98.7% {REDUCED MODEL}

Regression Analysis: Y2 versus X1, X2, X1 X2, X22 {REDUCED MODEL}. The regression equation is Y2=0.297-0.193X1+0.455X2-0.147 X1X2+0.628X22

Stability data:

Discussion

Melting point determination

By using melting point determination apparatus, the preliminary physical characteristics of the pure API like melting point, Telmisartan was found to be 255°C complies with literature standards.

X-ray diffraction studies and DSC studies

The X-ray Studies revealed that the API sample is only of pure polymorph A and there was no contamination of polymorph B which has less stability, poor flow than polymorph A which may cause degradation during the compression stages of tablets.

FT-IR studies

The excipient compatibility studies were conducted with the pure API and it was found to be compatible by comparative studies. Results revealed that there was no disturbance in the pure API.

HPLC studies

The solubility studies between without solubility enhancer, glycine and 1% SLS, 3% SLS were conducted. There was huge indirect relationship was observed that, increase in the concentration of SLS from 1% to 3% causes decrease in the solubility from 98% to 85%. And glycine has showed very good solubility of 99.97% which is comparatively higher than SLS which was observed by HPLC chromatograms.

DSC studies

Final compatibility studies of Telmisartan with all the excipients are performed and analyzed. The comparative thermogram of API and final blend results revealed that that there was no incompatibility between them. The clear peak at 252°C in the pure API thermogram was not disturbed after final blending was completed.

Experimental design

In the present study, a three level two factorial design was used to evaluate the effects of the selected independent variables on the responses, to characterize the physical properties of the tablet like disintegration time, the % friability and to optimize the procedure. This design is suitable for exploration of the quadratic responses and the second order polynomial models, thus helping to optimize the process by using a small number of experimental runs. This design resolves the two factor interaction effects of the individual terms and allows the mid-level setting (0) for the combination of factors.

Optimization results

The formulation was designed using 32 factorial design, the materials and compositions used are presented in table 4. In this study, formulation variables i.e,

Independent variables: X1=Disintegrant Concentration (Kyron T-314)

                                     X2=Diluent ratio (MCCP: MANNITOL)

Dependent variables: Y1=Disintegration time,

                                   Y2=% Friability.

Influence of independent variables on the final formulation

The preliminary trails were conducted by using five different Superdisintegrants like Croscarmellose, sodium starch glycolate, Crospovidone, XL-10 and kyron T-314. Three batches were using a single superdisintegrant. On the basis of the results obtained in the preliminary studies, the batch containing the Kyron T-314 is showing good correlation % friability and disintegration time. Hence it was selected for further studies. The hardness was adjusted to the 4 kg/cm2. Wetting agent like glycine is used to increase the water availability for the superdisintegrant by its wicking action. The table of post compression parameters of F1 to 15 indicates that the concentration dependent disintegration was observed in the batches prepared by the different Superdisintegrants at different concentrations. Tablets with lower friability (≤ 0.5%) may not break during handling on machines and or shipping. In the first few attempts in preliminary batches a change in the filler ratio of (MCCP: Mannitol) causes changes in the friability values were observed and hence it is also considered as one of the important factor that effect friability. The use of superdisintegrant at varied concentrations {along with change in the filler concentration/ratio} effecting the friability was also observed. Addition of colloidal silicon dioxide results in decreased friability and marginal effect on the disintegration time. As the magnesium stearate will form a layer around the tablet that may decrease the wicking action of the other excipients. It was decided to add the colloidal silicon dioxide that helps to restore the bonding properties of the other excipients. So, based on the observation it was decided to take superdisintegrant concentration and MCCP: MANNITOL (filler ratio) as the two independent variable that effecting the friability and disintegration time taken as the dependent variables. The disintegration time and % friability for the 9 batches from P1 to P9 showed wide range of variation (i.e., 8 sec to 119 sec and 0.16% to 1.71%) respectively. This indicates the disintegration time and friability are strongly dependent on the selected independent variables. The fitted equation (full and reduced model) relating the disintegration time and friability is shown in the table. The polynomial equation can be used to draw the conclusion after considering the magnitude of the coefficient and the mathematical sign it carries (positive or negative). Table 27 shows results of analysis of variance (ANOVA), which was performed to identify the insignificant factors. The high values of the correlation coefficient for disintegration time and % friability indicates a good fit.

Estimation of quantitative effects of the factors

A response regression analysis for each factor was performed by using the coded values of the factor levels (-1, 0, 1). In the table 18, 19, 21 and 22, the factor effects and associated p-values for the responses were presented. A factor is considered to influence the response if the effects significantly differ from zero and the p-value is less than 0.05. A positive sign indicates a synergistic effect, while a negative sign represents an antagonistic effect of the factor on the selected response.

Analysis of fitted data

Combinational effect on disintegration time: The results of linear multiple regression analysis reveal that on increasing the concentration of the superdisintegrant i.e. Kyron T-314, there is decrease in the disintegration time is observed as the coefficient of the X1 bears the negative symbol. This may be due to an increase in the concentration might cause the increase in the water uptake by the superdisintegrant in the formulation causing the tablet to disintegrate rapidly by swelling. Similarly the X2 coefficient positive symbol indicates that increase in the concentration of MCCP in the diluents ratio will increase the disintegration time was observed.

Y1=26.1-30.7X1+19.7X2-15.7X1X2+11.3 X12+14.3X22

The factor X1, and interaction term X1 X2 has antagonistic effect on the Y1 response and these factors are found to be significant with a p-value of 0.0002 and 0.003. The factor X2, and the nonlinearity factors X12, X22 have synergetic effect on the Y1 and found to be significant with p-values of 0.001, 0.022 and 0.012. For estimation of the significance of the model, the analysis of variance ANOVA was applied. Using the 5% significance level, a model is considered to be significant if its p-value (significant probability value) is less than the 0.05. From the table 19, the value of p was found to be less than 0.05 and hence the model is considered was found to be significant to predict the influence of the independent variables on the responses or dependent variables i.e. disintegration time (Y1).

Combination effect on % friability: As the concentration of the superdisintegrant led to decrease in the friability values because the coefficient of X1 indicates negative sign. When an higher amount of the superdisintegrant is used, the adhesive nature may result in the increase in the inter particulate bonding strength such that decrease in the friability is achieved. Thus addition of polacrallin potassium not only favors the disintegration time but also the friability values. Tablets of low friability of 0.16% may not break during the handling, packing and shipping. Thus polacrallin potassium helps in producing the mechanically strong Fast Dissolving Tablets. In the same manner, the coefficient of the X2 bears positive symbol indicating that increase in the MCCP in the filler ratio causes increase in the friability value. But from the graph the effect is in sigmoid fashion. This indicates that decrease in the concentration of MCCP will decrease the friability values up to certain extent i.e. when the MCCP: MANNITOL is 2:2. But the proportionality is observed up to the certain level i.e. up to the MCCP: Mannitol ratio is 2:2, after that again the reverse is observed because the X22 nonlinearity factor was found to be more significant.

Y2=0.321-0.193 X1+0.455 X2-0.147 X1 X2-0.0367 X12+ 0.628 X22 {Full model}

Y2=0.297-0.193 X1+0.455 X2-0.147 X1 X2+0.628 X22 {Reduced Model}

The factor X1 and interaction term X1 X2 have antagonistic effect on the Y1 response and these factors are found to be significant with a p-value of 0.005 and 0.02. The factor X2 , and the nonlinearity factor X22 have synergetic effect on the Y1 and found to be significant with p-values of 0.001 and 0.001. The nonlinearity factor X12 was to found to be insignificant in predicting the % friability because its p-value is 0.483 and hence it was excluded in estimating the ANOVA of the model. For estimation of the significance of the model, the analysis of variance ANOVA was applied. Using the 5% significance level, a model is considered to be significant if its p-value (significant probability value) is less than the 0.05. From the tables 2 and 3, the value of p was found to be less than 0.05 and hence the model is considered was found to be significant to predict the influence of the independent variables on the responses or dependent variables i.e. % friability. The reduced model was tested to determine whether X12 variable contribute significantly to predict the % friability or not. Since the p-value is <0.05, it was conclude that X12 does not contribute significantly to predict the % friability.

Analysis of contour plots and response surface plots

Three-dimensional (3D) plots and Contour plots for the measured responses were formed, based on the model polynomial functions to assess the change of the response surface. Also the relationship between the dependent and independent variables can be further understood by these plots. Since the model has two factors, one factor was held constant for each diagram; therefore, a total of 2 response surface diagrams was produced one for each response. Response surface plots are presented using optimal levels of the factors studied. Considering the greatest difference in model polynomial functions response, the surface plots for responses Y1 and Y2 are further presented (Figures 13 and 14). In Figure 14 (Right), response surface plots (3D) showing the effect of concentration of superdisintegrant (X1) and ratio of diluents (X2) on the response Y1 (Disintegration time of Telmisartan) and in figure 14 (Left), response surface plots (3D) showing the effect of concentration of superdisintegrant (X1) and ratio of diluents (X2) the response Y2 (% Friability), respectively are presented. The influence of concentration of superdisintegrant (X1) and ratio of diluents (X2) are presented.

Conclusion

Oral disintegrating tablets (ODT) of TELMISARTAN was successfully prepared by using direct compression method The optimal batch P6 exhibited the disintegration time of 8 sec and friability of 0.16%. The method for immediate release of Telmisartan tablets with optimal release properties was determined using experimental design methodology. After determination of significant parameters by using three-level two-factorial design was applied. Analytical parameters investigated in this study were: concentration of superdisintegrant (X1), ratio of diluents (X2). The chosen responses were disintegration time and the % friability. The model reliability and estimation of quantitative effects of different levels of investigated factors was performed using the Minitab System statistical software, Release 16.0. The levels of these factors were predicted to obtain an optimal response with reference to set constraints. The observed responses were close to the predicted values for the optimized drug release method. From the above results, it can be concluded that characterization and optimization of the Telmisartan immediate release tablets was performed in a very short time period and with a small number of experimental runs. It is essential that experimental design methodology is a very economical way for extracting the maximum amount of complex information, a significant experimental time saving factor and moreover, it saves the material used for analyses and personal costs as well. The results of 32 factorial design revealed that the amount of superdisintegrant and the filler ratio significantly affect the dependent variables disintegration time and % friability. It is concluded that by adopting a systematic formulation approach, an optimum can be reached in the shortest time with minimum efforts.

References

Select your language of interest to view the total content in your interested language
Post your comment

Share This Article

Recommended Conferences

  • 7th International Conference on Phamaceutical Auditing
    June 08-09, 2018 Baltimore, USA
  • 4th International Conference on Drug Discovery, Designing and Development
    June 27-28, 2018 Vancouver, Canada
  • 18th World Pharma Congress
    October 18-19, 2018 Warsaw, Poland

Article Usage

  • Total views: 12399
  • [From(publication date):
    November-2012 - May 22, 2018]
  • Breakdown by view type
  • HTML page views : 8538
  • PDF downloads : 3861
 

Post your comment

captcha   Reload  Can't read the image? click here to refresh

Peer Reviewed Journals
 
Make the best use of Scientific Research and information from our 700 + peer reviewed, Open Access Journals
International Conferences 2018-19
 
Meet Inspiring Speakers and Experts at our 3000+ Global Annual Meetings

Contact Us

Agri & Aquaculture Journals

Dr. Krish

[email protected]

1-702-714-7001Extn: 9040

Biochemistry Journals

Datta A

[email protected]

1-702-714-7001Extn: 9037

Business & Management Journals

Ronald

[email protected]

1-702-714-7001Extn: 9042

Chemistry Journals

Gabriel Shaw

[email protected]

1-702-714-7001Extn: 9040

Clinical Journals

Datta A

[email protected]

1-702-714-7001Extn: 9037

Engineering Journals

James Franklin

[email protected]

1-702-714-7001Extn: 9042

Food & Nutrition Journals

Katie Wilson

[email protected]

1-702-714-7001Extn: 9042

General Science

Andrea Jason

[email protected]

1-702-714-7001Extn: 9043

Genetics & Molecular Biology Journals

Anna Melissa

[email protected]

1-702-714-7001Extn: 9006

Immunology & Microbiology Journals

David Gorantl

[email protected]

1-702-714-7001Extn: 9014

Materials Science Journals

Rachle Green

[email protected]

1-702-714-7001Extn: 9039

Nursing & Health Care Journals

Stephanie Skinner

[email protected]

1-702-714-7001Extn: 9039

Medical Journals

Nimmi Anna

[email protected]

1-702-714-7001Extn: 9038

Neuroscience & Psychology Journals

Nathan T

[email protected]

1-702-714-7001Extn: 9041

Pharmaceutical Sciences Journals

Ann Jose

[email protected]

1-702-714-7001Extn: 9007

Social & Political Science Journals

Steve Harry

[email protected]

1-702-714-7001Extn: 9042

 
© 2008- 2018 OMICS International - Open Access Publisher. Best viewed in Mozilla Firefox | Google Chrome | Above IE 7.0 version
Leave Your Message 24x7