Comparative evaluation of the use of dry binders in a physical mixture or as a coprocessed dry binder in matrix tablets with extended drug release

1. P. Gupta, S. K. Nachaegari and A. K. Bansal, Improved Excipient Functionality by Coprocessing, in Excipient Development for Pharmaceutical Biotechnology and Drug Delivery Systems (Eds. K. A. Katdare, M. V. Chaubal) Informa Healthcare USA 2006, pp. 109–126.10.1201/9781420004137.ch9Search in Google Scholar

2. K. Satish, S. K. Nachaegari and A. K. Bansal, Coprocessed excipients for solid dosage forms, Pharm. Tech.28 (2004) 52–64.Search in Google Scholar

3. M. C. Gohel and P. D. Jogani, A review of coprocessed directly compressible excipients, J. Pharm. Pharm. Sci. 8 (2005) 76–93; https://doi.org/10.12691/ajmsm-2-4-210.12691/ajmsm-2-4-2Search in Google Scholar

4. P. M. Belda and J. B. Mielck, The tabletting behavior of Cellactose compared with mixtures of celluloses with lactoses, Eur. J. Pharm. Biopharm.42 (1996) 325–330.Search in Google Scholar

5. J. D. Allen, Improving DC with SMCC, Manuf. Chemist.67 (1996) 19–20.Search in Google Scholar

6. B. E. Sherwood and J. W.Becker, A new class of high-functionality excipients: Silicified microcrystalline cellulose, Pharm. Technol. 22 (1998) 78–88.Search in Google Scholar

7. P. C. Schmidt and C. J. Rubensdorfer, Evaluation of Ludipress as a multipurpose excipient for direct compression. Part 1. Powder characteristics and tabletting properties, Drug Dev. Ind. Pharm.20 (1994) 2899–2925; https://doi.org/10.3109/0363904940904268710.3109/03639049409042687Search in Google Scholar

8. K. G. Wagner and J. A. Dressler, A corn starch/alpha -lactose monohydrate compound as a new directly compressible excipient, Pharm. Ind.64 (2002) 992–999.Search in Google Scholar

9. J. Mužíková, P. Svačinová and A. Srbová, A study of a novel coprocessed dry binder composed of α-lactose monohydrate, microcrystalline cellulose and corn starch. Pharm. Dev. Technol.22 (2017) 964–971; https://doi.org/10.3109/10837450.2015.113171710.3109/10837450.2015.1131717Search in Google Scholar

10. H. Kathpalia and K. Jogi, Coprocessed excipients – a review, WJPR3 (2014), 3863–3885.Search in Google Scholar

11. G. K. Bolhuis and N. A. Armstrong, Excipients for Direct Compaction – an update, Pharm. Dev. Technol.11 (2006) 111–124; https://doi.org/10.1080/1083745050046425510.1080/10837450500464255Search in Google Scholar

12. J. S. M. Gar and M. H. Rubinstein, Compaction properties of cellulose-lactose direct-compression excipient, Pharm. Tech. Int.15 (1991) 24–27.Search in Google Scholar

13. Meggle Excipients & Technology, Technical Brochure MicroceLac^®100. Firm. Lit. http://www.meggle-pharma.com/en/lactose/13-microcelac-100.html, access date March 25, 2015.Search in Google Scholar

14. Kerry, Product document. Disintequik^TM MCC 25. Firm. Lit. http://www.sheffieldbioscience.com/disintequik_MCC25/, access date March 28, 2015.Search in Google Scholar

15. Meggle Excipients & Technology. Technical Brochure Cellactose^® 80. Firm. Lit. https://www.meggle-pharma.com/en/lactose/12-cellactose-80.html, access date October 13, 2017.Search in Google Scholar

16. European Pharmacopoeia, 9^th ed., Council of Europe, Strasbourg, 2017.Search in Google Scholar

17. G. Ragnarsson, Force-displacement and Network Measurements, in Pharmaceutical Powder Compaction Technology (Eds. G. Alderborn and Ch. Nyström), Marcel Dekker Inc., New York 1996, pp. 77–96.Search in Google Scholar

18. A. Stamm and C. Mathis, Verpressbarkeit von Festen Hilfsstoffen für Direkttablettierung, Acta Pharm. Technol. 22 (1976) 7–16.Search in Google Scholar

19. J. T. Fell and J. M. Newton, Determination of tablet strength by diametral-compression test, J. Pharm. Sci. 59 (1970) 688–691; https://doi.org/10.1002/jps.260059052310.1002/jps.2600590523Search in Google Scholar

20. C. E. Bos, G. K. Bolhuis, H. van Doorne and C. F. Lerk, Native starch in tablet formulations: properties on compaction, Pharm. Weekbl. Sci.9 (1987) 274–282; https://doi.org/10.1007/BF0195363010.1007/BF01953630Search in Google Scholar

21. P. Costa and J. M. Sousa Lobo, Modeling and comparison of dissolution profiles, Eur. J. Pharm. Sci.13 (2001) 123–133; https://doi.org/10.1016/S0928-0987(01)00095-110.1016/S0928-0987(01)00095-1Search in Google Scholar

22. S. Dash, P. N. Murthy, L. Nath and P. Chowdhury, Kinetic modeling on drug release from controlled drug delivery systems, Acta Pol. Pharm. 67 (2010) 217–223; https://doi.org/10.1080/1071754049026537910.1080/1071754049026537915168793Search in Google Scholar

23. V. A. Belousov, Choice of optimal pressure values in tabletting medicinal powders, Khim. Farm. Zh. 10 (1976) 105–111.10.1007/BF00757998Search in Google Scholar

24. Y. Lei, Q. Zhou, Y. Zhang, J. Chen, S. Sun and I. Noda, Analysis of crystallized lactose in milk powder by Fourier-transform infrared spectroscopy combined with two-dimensional correlation infrared spectroscopy, J. Mol. Struct. 974 (2010) 88–93; https://doi.org/10.1016/j.molstruc.2009.12.03010.1016/j.molstruc.2009.12.030Search in Google Scholar

25. H. S. Mansur, C. M. Sadahira, A. N. Souza and A. A. P. Mansur, FTIR spectroscopy characterization of poly (vinyl alcohol) hydrogel with different hydrolysis degree and chemically crosslinked with glutaraldehyde, Mater. Sci. Eng. C28 (2008) 539–548; https://doi.org/10.1016/j.msec.2007.10.08810.1016/j.msec.2007.10.088Search in Google Scholar

26. A. Michoel, P. Rombaut and A. Verhoye, Comparative evaluation of co-processed lactose and microcrystalline cellulose with their physical mixtures in the formulation of folic acid tablets, Pharm. Dev. Technol. 7 (2002) 79–87; https://doi.org/10.1081/PDT-12000223310.1081/PDT-120002233Search in Google Scholar

27. A. T. M. Serajuddin and C. I. Jarowski, Effect of diffusion layer pH and solubility on the dissolution rate of pharmaceutical bases and their hydrochloride salts. II: salicylic acid, theophylline and benzoic acid, J. Pharm. Sci.74 (1985) 148–154; https://doi.org/10.1002/jps.260074020910.1002/jps.26007402093989683Search in Google Scholar