Dataset Information

Effect of device design on the in vitro performance and comparability for capsule-based dry powder inhalers.

ABSTRACT: This study investigated the effect of modifying the design of the Cyclohaler on its aerosolization performance and comparability to the HandiHaler at multiple flow rates. The Cyclohaler and HandiHaler were designated as model test and reference unit-dose, capsule-based dry powder inhalers (DPIs), respectively. The flow field, pressure drop, and carrier particle trajectories within the Cyclohaler and HandiHaler were modeled via computational fluid dynamics (CFD). With the goal of achieving in vitro comparability to the HandiHaler, the CFD results were used to identify key device attributes and to design two modifications of the Cyclohaler (Mod 1 and Mod 2), which matched the specific resistance of the HandiHaler but exhibited different cyclonic flow conditions in the device. Aerosolization performance of the four DPI devices was evaluated by using the reference product's capsule and formulation (Spiriva capsule) and a multistage cascade impactor. The in vitro data showed that Mod 2 provided a closer match to the HandiHaler than the Cyclohaler and Mod 1 at 20, 39, and 55 l/min. The in vitro and CFD results together suggest that matching the resistance of test and reference DPI devices is not sufficient to attain comparable aerosolization performance, and the improved in vitro comparability of Mod 2 to the HandiHaler may be related to the greater degree of similarities of the flow rate of air through the pierced capsule (Q(c)) and the maximum impact velocity of representative carrier particles (V(n)) in the Cyclohaler-based device. This investigation illustrates the importance of enhanced product understanding, in this case through the CFD modeling and in vitro characterization of aerosolization performance, to enable identification and modification of key design features of a test DPI device for achieving comparable aerosolization performance to the reference DPI device.

SUBMITTER: Shur J

PROVIDER: S-EPMC3475852 | biostudies-other | 2012 Dec

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-other

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Effect of device design on the in vitro performance and comparability for capsule-based dry powder inhalers.

Shur Jagdeep J Lee Sau S Adams Wallace W Lionberger Robert R Tibbatts James J Price Robert R

The AAPS journal 20120622 4

This study investigated the effect of modifying the design of the Cyclohaler on its aerosolization performance and comparability to the HandiHaler at multiple flow rates. The Cyclohaler and HandiHaler were designated as model test and reference unit-dose, capsule-based dry powder inhalers (DPIs), respectively. The flow field, pressure drop, and carrier particle trajectories within the Cyclohaler and HandiHaler were modeled via computational fluid dynamics (CFD). With the goal of achieving in vit ...[more]

PMID: 22723022

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundIn patients receiving inhaled medication, dissatisfaction with and difficulty in using the inhaler can affect treatment adherence. The incidence of handling errors is typically higher in the elderly than in younger people. The aim of the study was to assess inhaler preference for and handling errors with the ELLIPTA® dry powder inhaler (DPI), (GSK), compared with the established BREEZHALER™, a single-dose capsule DPI (Novartis), in inhalation device-naïve Japanese volunteers aged ?40 years.MethodsIn this open-label, nondrug interventional, crossover DPI preference study comparing the ELLIPTA DPI and BREEZHALER, 150 subjects were randomized to handle the ELLIPTA or BREEZHALER DPIs until the point of inhalation, without receiving verbal or demonstrative instruction (first attempt). Subjects then crossed over to the other inhaler. Preference was assessed using a self-completed questionnaire. Inhaler handling was assessed by a trained assessor using a checklist. Subjects did not inhale any medication in the study, so efficacy and safety were not measured.ResultsThe ELLIPTA DPI was preferred to the BREEZHALER by 89% of subjects (odds ratio [OR] 70.14, 95% confidence interval [CI] 33.69-146.01; P-value not applicable for this inhaler) for ease of use, by 63% of subjects (OR 2.98, CI 1.87-4.77; P<0.0001) for ease of determining the number of doses remaining in the inhaler, by 91% for number of steps required, and by 93% for time needed for handling the inhaler. The BREEZHALER was preferred to the ELLIPTA DPI for comfort of the mouthpiece by 64% of subjects (OR 3.16, CI 1.97-5.06; P<0.0001). The incidence of handling errors (first attempt) was 11% with ELLIPTA and 68% with BREEZHALER; differences in incidence were generally similar when analyzed by age (< or ?65 years) or sex.ConclusionThese data, obtained in an inhalation device-naïve population, suggest that the ELLIPTA DPI is preferred to an established alternative based on its ease-of-use features and is associated with fewer handling errors.

Project description:BACKGROUND:Easyhaler® dry powder inhaler (DPI) containing salmeterol and fluticasone propionate was developed for the treatment of asthma and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease. Three different Salmeterol/fluticasone Easyhaler test products (Orion Pharma, Finland) were compared against the reference product Seretide® Diskus® DPI (GlaxoSmithKline, United Kingdom) to study whether any of the test products are bioequivalent with the reference. METHODS:Open and randomized pharmacokinetic four-period crossover study on 65 healthy volunteers was performed in a single center to compare the lung deposition and total systemic exposure of salmeterol and fluticasone propionate after administration of single doses (two inhalations of 50/500??g/inhalation strength) in fasting conditions. Blood samples were drawn before dosing and at frequent time points between 2 minutes and 34 hours after dosing for determination of drug concentrations. The primary variables for total systemic exposure and lung deposition of fluticasone propionate were maximum concentration of the concentration-time curve (Cmax) and area under the concentration-time curve from time zero to the last sample with quantifiable concentration (AUCt). For salmeterol, the primary variables for total systemic exposure were Cmax and AUCt and for lung deposition Cmax and AUC up to 30 minutes after study treatment administration (AUC30min). RESULTS:One of the Easyhaler test products met all the criteria for bioequivalence with the reference. The 96.7% confidence intervals (CIs) for the test/reference ratios of fluticasone propionate Cmax and AUCt were 0.9901-1.1336 and 0.9448-1.0542, respectively. Ninety percent CIs for salmeterol Cmax, AUC30min, and AUCt ratios were 1.0567-1.2012, 1.0989-1.2255, and 1.0769-1.1829, respectively. Median salmeterol time to maximum concentration (tmax) was 4.0 minutes. Median fluticasone propionate tmax was from 1.5 to 2.0 hours. Terminal elimination half-life was 11 hours for salmeterol and 9-10 hours for fluticasone propionate. CONCLUSIONS:Salmeterol/fluticasone Easyhaler was shown to be bioequivalent with the reference product.

Dataset Information

Effect of device design on the in vitro performance and comparability for capsule-based dry powder inhalers.

Publications

Effect of device design on the in vitro performance and comparability for capsule-based dry powder inhalers.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure