The literature reported data are used to demonstrate applicability of the method. The percentage coefficient of variation in reference and test formulations at each time point was considered for calculating weight. To find the heat absorbed by the solution, you can use the equationThe objective of the present work was to propose a method for calculating weight in the Moore and Flanner Equation. DeltaH'diss' -q'solution' The minus sign is used here because heat lost carries a negative sign. More specifically, you can assume that. The idea here is that you can use the heat absorbed by the solution to find the heat given off by the dissolution of the salt.Solves your linear systems by Gauss-Jordan elimination.If you are using the 2690D/2695D Separations Module and specified rapid sampling in the dissolution sample set method, amounts are calculated as follows: When N 1, the equation above is applied. Solve a linear system of equations with multiple variables, quadratic, cubic and any other equation with one unknown. KeywordsOnline equations solver. The scientists who need high accuracy in calculation may use this approach. The results show a drop in the value of similarity factor as compared to the approach proposed in earlier work.Earlier, we suggested three differentSchemes for calculating weight to compute similarityFactor. The concept ofSimilarity factor (f 2) has been endorsed by Food andDrug Administration (FDA) therefore, it is widelyAdopted in formulation and development and dossierPreparation. Henderson-Hasselbalch equation slightly, we can calculate the degree of dissociation of an acid.Moore and Flanner proposed two new indices (f 1 and f 2) to compare dissolution profiles of a testAnd a reference formulations.It isFurther stated in the guidance document that to allowUse of mean data, the percent coefficient of variation(%CV) should not be more than 20% at the earlierTime points, and at the other time points %CV shouldNot be more than 10%. The weightFactor (w t) is usually considered as unity.FDA states that in the instances where within batchVariability is more than 15% coefficient of variation(CV), a multivariate model independent procedure isMore suitable for dissolution profile comparison. Generally, an average of twelveObservations is used for calculating f 2. The equationOf similarity factor proposed by Moore and Flanner isWhere, f 2 is similarity factor, n is the number ofObservations, wt is optional weight, R t is averagePercentage drug dissolved from reference formulationAnd T t is average percentage drug dissolved from test formulation.
![]() Standard deviation (SD) of the 144 values was calculated. In approach 3, reference product(12 units) and test product (12 units) were used toGenerate 144 values of absolute differences between aReference and a test formulation at the four samplingTime points (30, 60, 90 and 180 min). %CV=(standard deviationIn our earlier publication, we stated that the approach3 was the best amongst other approaches forCalculating weight. If the %CV of Rt and %CV of T t is equalTo zero, w t is equal to one. Co-efficient of variation was calculated usingThe Eqn. MCV E/L was 20 for earlier time point(30 min) and it was 10 for later time points (above30 min). Free gospel music soundtrack downloadsThe average value of cumulative percentageDrug dissolved for reference (R) and (T) formulationsAre shown in Table 1. In thePresent work, two ratio terms are included in Eqn.2 to cause a drop in similarity factor as variabilityTo demonstrate the utility of new weight approach,The dissolution data reported by Shah et al. Previously, we reportedThat as the value of weight (wt) increases, a decreaseIn the value of similarity factor is anticipated. In was arbitrarily decided to giveWeight equal to one when standard deviation is zero.The value of similarity factor (f2) is 100 when theDifference between reference and test formulation isZero and weight (wt) is unity. The maximumAllowed standard deviation was arbitrarily chosenAs 10 to allow within samples as well as variabilityBetween samples. The weight wasCalculated from the Eqn.: (1+standard deviation/Maximum allowed standard deviation). It considers within samples (12 units ofReference and 12 units of test) as well as betweenSamples (reference and test formulations) variabilityBecause of utilization of standard deviation andAverages of reference and test formulations at eachTime points for calculating weight. The maximumAllowable %CV is also considered in the proposedMethod. Equal stress is given to variability in reference andTest formulation in the new approach. Another advantage of theNew method is simple calculation steps than approach3. The positive and negative pointsOf the new approach will emerge out when variousResearchers will try the approach with their data sets. If the value of f 2-m is greater than 50Than we may safely conclude that products showSimilar dissolution. The approachMay also find application in selection of a bio-batch.The use of new approach may become a strong point in Abbreviated New Drug Application (ANDA)Submission. US Food and Drug Administration, Rockville, MD, USA, 1997. Guidance for industry: Dissolution testing of immediate release solid oral dosage forms. Assessment of similarity factor using different weighting approaches. Gohel MC, Sarvaiya KG, Mehta NR, Soni CD, Vyas VU, Dave RK. Pharma Tech 1996 20:64-74. Pharma Res 1998 15:889-95. In vitro dissolution profile comparison statistics and analysis of the similarity factor, f2.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorMatt ArchivesCategories |