The invention relates to the pharmaceutical field and in particular to methods related to the filling of containers containing liquid-in-vial drug products.
When containers for liquid and freeze-dried drug products are filled-in, a slight volume excess—also referred to as excess volume or overfill volume (Voverfill)—is allowed to ensure the target volume (also referred to label-claim volume or labelled volume (Vlabel)) can be extracted/withdrawn and dispensed (USP<1>, USP<1151>, USP<697>, Ph. Eur. monograph 2.9.17). The overfill is needed as losses happen at different levels, such as in the container-closure system and withdrawal device, in which residual volumes remain. Said excess volume has to be determined for each given drug product, each presentation (formulation, vial size, etc.) very early in the development of said drug product. Tests for estimating the extractable volume are proposed in the European Pharmacopoeia (Ph. Eur. monograph 2.9.17, published in July 2019).
The excess volume should be minimized as much as possible to prevent unsafe handling (FDA Guidance for Industry, 2015) and limit drug product waste (Gotham et al., 2019; Hatswell et al., 2019). The excess volume is recommended to be defined based on the hold-up volume in vial, withdrawal syringe and needle (VHU), the filling line variation, and the extractable volume test method variability (Manger 2019). In practice, the excess volume of a given drug product is often defined experimentally, taking into account the hold-up volume and filling process tolerance (Dixon and Gudinas 2018; Sethuraman et al., 2010), calculated as a multiple of the standard deviation obtained from historical data (Sethuraman et al., 2010; Joglekar, 2010; Kruszynski, 2016; Levine, 2017) (
The concern of regulators, however, is that either too much or too little product are filled into their vials. Such excesses and deficiencies may result in medication errors and may lead to misuse of leftover drug product or pooling of vials to obtain a single dose (FDA Guidance for Industry, 2015). Even more concerning to regulators, the pooling of doses or repeated use of a single vial can increase the exposure of patients to adverse events, most notable those caused by microbial contamination.
There remains a need to predict the excess volume of a liquid drug product that is needed and thus optimizing the filling method. A prediction model could provide a first guess of the volume range to be tested to support overfill volume definition.
In order to meet the label claim volume, containers comprising liquid-in-vial drug products are typically filled with a slight excess volume (they are overfilled). In certain cases, should the skilled person be willing to take high risks of not meeting the label claim volume, when overfilling the containers, they could consider that Voverfill=VHU. However, according to the current practice, the skilled person considers that Voverfill=VHU+k×σfilling.
It is a finding from the inventors that it was possible to better predict, or determine, the hold-up volume of liquid-in-vial drug products in a container and withdrawal syringe, as well as the excess volume of liquid-in-vial drug products to be added in a container comprising the liquid drug product, based only on a few parameters, including the residual volume of the liquid drug product in the type of container of interest, the variability of container and extractable volume testing as well as a tolerance factor. Further parameters can also be included such as the product viscosity (as measured at 20° C. for example) and the container neck diameter. Thanks to these methods, it is possible to predict/determine more accurately the excess volume to be added for each liquid drug product and each type of container, leading, among various advantages, to a reduction of experimental testing to support the overfill/excess volume definition. The methods herein described can be used for any type of container, and allow capturing all sources of variation, in order to limit the risk of not meeting the extractable volume specification. In addition, these models can help in defining a maximum overfill volume value, to avoid possible patient safety concerns. Overall, these methods lead to a better process control. The basic concept of the invention is illustrated in
The main object of the present invention is a method of predicting an excess volume (Voverfill) of a liquid drug product to be added in a container comprising the liquid drug product, to ensure that the label-claim volume can be withdrawn from the container, wherein the method comprises using a computer to implement the following steps:
The excess volume is the volume of liquid drug product required in the container in addition to a label-claim volume (Vlabel), before dispensing of the liquid drug product, to ensure that the label-claim volume can be withdrawn, from the container and from the withdrawal/dispensing device (such as a withdrawal/administration syringe), and thus dispensed, for instance, to at least one subject. Therefore, also herein described is a method of predicting an excess volume (Voverfill) of a liquid drug product to be added in a container comprising the liquid drug product, the excess volume being the volume of liquid drug product required in the container in addition to a label-claim volume (Vlabel), before dispensing of the liquid drug product, to ensure that the label-claim volume can be withdrawn from the container, wherein the method comprises using a computer to implement the following steps:
Another object of the invention is a method of predicting an excess volume (Voverfill) of a liquid drug product to be added in a container comprising the liquid drug, wherein the method comprises the steps of:
where A represents an optional one or more further terms in the summation.
The excess volume corresponds to the volume of liquid drug product required in the container in addition to a label-claim volume (Vlabel), before dispensing of the liquid drug product, to ensure that the label-claim volume can be withdrawn, from the container and from the withdrawal/dispensing device (such as a withdrawal/administration syringe), and then dispensed, for instance, to at least one subject. Thus, also herein described is a method of predicting an excess volume (Voverfill) of a liquid drug product to be added in a container comprising the liquid drug product, the excess volume being the volume of liquid drug product required in the container in addition to a label-claim volume (Vlabel), before dispensing of the liquid drug product, to ensure that the label-claim volume can be withdrawn from the container, wherein the method comprises the steps:
where A represents an optional one or more further terms in the summation.
In the methods according to the invention as a whole, k has preferably a value ranged from 1.64 (z0.95) to 2.78 (z0.9973). The specific value will depend on the appetite of risk to be taken of not withdrawing the label-claim volume. It is a personal or company decision. This is based on the well-known z-Table, used in hypothesis testing.
In an alternative embodiment of any methods herein described, the first set of values to be collected/received (step a) further includes the average filling bias (Bfilling). In such a case, equation (1) is amended in equation (1bis):
In other words, the predicting of the excess volume comprises performing a summation over at least VHU, k×σtotal, and Bfilling, as shown in the following version (1bis) of equation (1):
Including this parameter improves even more the accuracy of the methods but is not mandatory, as the initial formula already provides a high level of accuracy. When the Bfilling is used, it can be predetermined experimentally.
In the context of the invention as a whole, the value VHU can be determined, or predicted, according to various methods. One method to determine VHU comprises the main steps of:
In the context of this alternative method, the given volume of the liquid product can be any volume as long as it is a volume slightly above the possible VHU (such as determined by the current method, see e.g. USP <1151> and Table 1) and not more than the volume needed to completely fill the container. For example, should the Labelled volume (or labelled size) be 2 mL, and the drug product be mobile, the given volume to be filled in will be any volume at least slightly above 0.15 mL. In another example, should the Labelled volume (or labelled size) be 10 mL, and the drug product be viscous, the given volume to be filled in will be any volume at least slightly above 0.70 mL.
An alternative method to determine VHU comprises the main steps of:
This method is exemplified in
However, the inventors have surprisingly identified a method according to which the value VHU can be predicted, or determined, simply based on the viscosity of the drug product and on the container neck diameter. Therefore, herein described is a method to determine, or to predict, the residual volume of a liquid drug product in a container and a withdrawal syringe (VHU); the method comprising determining, or predicting, VHU according to the following equation (3):
where VHUwater is a value depending on the neck diameter and wherein η corresponds to the viscosity of the liquid drug product. In particular, it was found by the inventors that should the container have a neck diameter of 13 mm (such as a glass vial of type 2R), and VHUwater a value of 174 (when viscosity is measured at room temperature, such as at 20° C. for example), then the equation to determine, or to predict VHU will be VHU=174×η1/7. In another example, it was found by the inventors that should the container have a neck diameter of 20 mm (such as a glass vial of type 6R, 10R or 20R), VHUwater has a value of 262 (when viscosity is measured at room temperature, such as at 20° C. for example) and thus the equation to determine, or to predict VHU will be VHU=262×η1/7. Should this method be used to predict, or to determine, the excess volume (Voverfill) of the liquid drug product to be added, in the context of the invention as a whole, the first set of values to be received, or collected, in addition to VHU, σtotal, and k, will comprise the viscosity, η, of the liquid drug product (as measured at 20° C. for instance) and the container neck diameter. The advantage of using a container (such as a glass vial) having a neck diameter of either 13 mm or 20 mm is that the determination, or the prediction, of VHU is straightforward, i.e. no actual weighing is needed. VHUwater can be determined for any type of container based on the teaching of the example section. The only further information that needs to be known is the viscosity, η, of the liquid drug product (as measured at 20° C. for instance).
In the context of the invention as a whole, σtotal can be calculated using the following equation (E4):
Wherein σfilling is the filling standard deviation of the equipment used to fill-in the container, σanalysis is the analytical test method standard deviation (alternatively called extractable volume testing variability). σfilling can be determined for instance by weighing several containers filled subsequently at a given target fill weight. σanalysis can be determined for instance by performing extractable volume testing on several replicate vials.
When any of the methods of predicting an excess volume, as herein described, are implemented by a computer, the output of the predicted excess volume is a value transmitted to a database, a dataset, a computer readable memory, a computer readable medium, a computer processor, a computer network, a printout device, a visual display, or a wireless receiver, optionally to allow display of the predicted excess volume via any means such as on a computer monitor or on any device screen as a text or as a graph, printing out of the predicted excess volume as a text or as a graph, or communication of the predicted excess volume as sound, for example by output via a computer system.
Also disclosed herein is a method for filling a container with a liquid drug product, wherein the method comprises the steps of:
In the context of the invention as a whole, the liquid drug product is preferably withdrawn from the container using a withdrawal syringe. Such syringe can thus be used for administration to a subject in need of said drug product, in such a case the withdrawal needle of the syringe will be preferably replaced by an administration needle.
In the context of the present invention, the container can be an ampoule, a glass vial, a tube, a bottle, a syringe, a cartridge, or other such reservoir suitable for storage of a liquid drug product. For instance, the container can be a glass bottle and have a neck size of from 13 mm to 56 mm and having a nominal volume of between about 5 mL to 500 mL. As another example, it can be a glass vial compliant with ISO standard (such as ISO8362 standard) having a neck size of 13 mm or 20 mm and having a nominal volume of between about 2 mL to 100 mL. These vials are also known as 2R, 4R, 6R, 8R, 10R, 15R, 20R, 30R, 50R and 100R. For examples, according to the ISO8362 standard, glass vials 2R and 4R will have a neck diameter of 13 mm and have a capacity respectively of 4 and 6 mL and glass vials 6R to 100R will have a neck diameter of 20 mm and have a capacity of respectively 10, 11.5, 13.5, 19, 26, 32.5, 37.5, 62 and 123 mL. Although the methods herein disclosed could be applicable to containers having a neck of above 56 mm and a nominal volume of above 500 mL, there is no need to overfill said containers as they are typically used for containing drug products which administration needs less precision.
In the context of the invention as a whole the liquid drug product is either a liquid drug product or a liquid drug product obtained after reconstitution of a freeze-dried or spray dried drug product. The drug product can be any drug product containing either a chemical compound (alternatively herein named Small Molecule Drug or SMD) or a biological compound as an active ingredient. Should the drug product contain a biological compound, said biological compound can be any therapeutic peptides, polypeptides or proteins, such as a cytokine, a growth factor, a hormone, an antibody or a fusion protein.
In the context of the invention as a whole, the viscosity of the liquid drug product is preferably comprised between 1 and 100, even preferably between 1 and 50, and is expressed in cP or alternatively in mPa·s. Thus, the viscosity of the liquid drug product is preferably comprised between 1 and 100 cP (alternatively expressed as 1 and 100 mPa·s), even preferably between 1 and 50 cP (alternatively expressed as 1 and 50 mPa·s). In the context of the invention as a whole, the viscosity, n is preferably measured at room temperature, such as between 15 and 25° C., for example 18 or 20° C.
Liquid drug products (also known as liquid-in-vial drug products) are typically overfilled in their containers to meet the label-claim volume, while considering for losses in the container, closure system and withdrawal device. Not only deviations to the maximum overfill values defined by the guidelines (e.g. USP <1151>) need to be justified based on experimental data but any overfill volume setting requires justification. The aim of this study was to predict the excess volume required for a vialled liquid drug product using a total variability approach including the filling and extractable volume testing variabilities.
In short, glass vials sizing from 2R to 20R capacity were filled with sorbitol-based aqueous solutions having a viscosity at 20° C. ranging from 1 to 40 mPa·s. Viscosity and vial neck diameter were shown to be the main contributors to the hold-up volume of sorbitol-based aqueous solutions in vial and withdrawal syringe. The hold-up volume (alternatively called VHU) of various molecules of therapeutic interest was successfully estimated using a model built from sorbitol-based aqueous solutions data.
A total variability approach is therefore proposed for predicting the excess volume of liquid-in-vial drug products, considering product viscosity, vial neck diameter, filling variability and extractable volume test variability. The use of this prediction model could allow reducing testing to support excess volume definition, especially in early phases of development where drug substance availability can be limited. It could replace the standard methods currently on use.
Drug products used in the examples section are defined in Table 5.
Vial filling: The hold-up volume determination focused on 3 factors: viscosity (7 levels in the 1-40 mPa·s range), vial format (4 levels: 2R, 6R, 10R and 20R) and fill volume (5 levels per vial format: 2R—1.10, 1.20, 1.30, 1.40 and 1.50 mL; 6R—3.20, 3.30, 3.40, 3.50 and 3.60 mL; 10R—5.20, 5.35, 5.50, 5.65 and 5.80 mL; 20R—10.20, 10.40, 10.60, 10.80 and 11.00 mL). A full factorial design approach (all combinations of factors and levels) was followed, leading to 140 experimental conditions. The tare weight (Wtare−vial, stopper and overseal) was measured prior to filling (see
Extractable volume testing: Vials were filled with sorbitol solutions. The syringes were suitably sized to the volumes to be extracted: 2R vials—3 mL syringes, 6R vials—5 mL syringes, 10R vials—10 mL syringes, 20R vials—20 mL syringes. 19 G×1½″ needles—wider than the recommended 21 G needles of not less than 1″ length (see e.g. USP <1>; USP <697>; JP General Test 6.05; FDA Guidance for Industry, 2015 or ICH Q4B Annex 2 (R1))—were used to limit the withdrawal force required for viscous solutions during extractable volume testing. The syringe and needle were connected. The Flip-Off® disk was removed and the vial stopper was pierced using the syringe needle. No air was expelled from the syringe into the vial to aid extraction. The entire contents of the inverted vial were extracted as far as possible in the syringe. The syringe needle was removed from the vial stopper. With the needle pointing upwards the syringe was tapped to collapse any air bubbles. Air was carefully expelled from the syringe and needle until the first signs of liquid emerged from the needle tip. The syringe content was expelled (without emptying the needle) into a tared glass beaker. The net weight of expelled contents (Wextr) was recorded. The vial gross weight after solution withdrawal (Wresid, including Flip-Off® disk weight) was recorded (
The hold-up volume in vial (VHUv) was calculated using the following formula:
The hold-up volume in withdrawal syringe (VHUs) was indirectly obtained by difference:
The effect of fill volume, solution viscosity, vial format (fixed effects) and analyst (random effect) on hold-up volume results in vial and withdrawal syringe (VHU) was analysed using a mixed model (α=0.05). A logarithmic transformation was applied to VHU and viscosity values. The relative extractable volume test method variability (RSDanalysis=σanalysis/VHU) obtained by regression analysis (log-log model) was defined as the combination of the vial-to-vial (model root mean square error) and analyst variabilities.
Filling process variability determination: The filling process variability was estimated using in-process fill weight values from 82 batches involving 17 vialled drug product presentations filled using a peristaltic pump. The viscosity, concentration and fill volume were ranging from 1 to 20 mPa·s, 1 to 160 mg/mL and 1.0 to 16.8 mL, respectively. The actual fill weight dependence with target fill weight (Vfill, fixed effect) and batch (random effect) was evaluated using a mixed model (α=0.05). A logarithmic transformation was applied to actual and target fill weights. Two sources of filling variability were estimated (
Total variability determination: Total variability was calculated as the root sum of squares of the filling precision and extractable volume test method variability (equation 1):
Data analysis: Statistical analysis was performed using JMP 11.0.0 (SAS Institute). Graphs were created using Prism 8.1.1 (GraphPad Software).
Literature and preliminary trials data show an exponential increase of viscosity (at 20° C.) with sorbitol concentration (
VHUv and VHU values were surprisingly found to be independent from the fill volume but dependent on the solution viscosity and vial format (Table 3). Post-hoc multiple comparisons of VHUv and VHU values per vial format using the Tukey-Kramer Honestly Significant Difference method (α=0.05) identified 2 different groups among VHUv and VHU data: 13 mm (2R) and 20 mm (6R, 10R and 20R) neck diameter vials.
No significant impact of fill volume and solution viscosity on VHUs values was observed. The following VHUs average and standard deviation values were obtained (n≥87): 88±35 μL (3 mL syringes), 91±38 μL (5 ml syringes), 107±44 μL (10 ml syringes) and 128±51 μL (20 ml syringes).
The models presented were built to predict VHU as a function of sorbitol viscosity (η in mPa·s, at 20° C.; Equation 3):
With a container neck diameter of 13 mm, equation 3 reads VHU=174×η1/7 and with a container neck diameter of 20 mm, equation 3 reads VHU=262×η1/7. (Indeed, the value VHUwater was calculated as being 174, expressed in μl, for a neck diameter of 13 mm, and 262, also expressed in μl for a neck diameter of 20 mm).
The extractable volume test method variability (RSDanalysis) was calculated: 23.56% (Table 4). The analyst and vial-to-vial contributions to analytical variability were 32% and 68%, respectively.
The predictability of sorbitol models was evaluated with 20 drug product presentations of various proteins/antibodies and SMD molecules of therapeutic interest (Table 6). Overall, the sorbitol model has good prediction properties but slightly overestimates VHU values in the 100-200 μL range (
No significant impact of viscosity on filling variability was observed. The in-process fill weight data were analysed per vial neck diameter as a larger variability was observed for low fill volumes. The batch-to-batch and vial-to-vial contributions to filling variability were respectively 23% and 77% (for the 13 mm vials), and 47% and 53% (for the 20 mm vials). Filling precision (RSDfilling) values were 1.23% and 0.47% for 13 mm and 20 mm neck diameter vials, respectively (full set of data not shown).
The average filling biases (Bfilling) were 0.68% and 0.44% for 13 mm and 20 mm vials, respectively (Table 4).
The strategy proposed to predict the excess volume of a liquid-in-vial drug product presentation is illustrated in
This model is illustrated in
Early stage development products are typically filled in small capacity vials below their nominal volume to limit drug product wastage from partially used units. This approach does not consider the waste originating from the excess volume added to compensate for hold-up volumes in vial and withdrawal device (VHU). The excess volume to ensure the labelled volume extraction from a small capacity vial could be larger than the one recommended in the FDA guidelines and should therefore be justified based on experimental data, to fulfil the regulatory requirements.
The availability of drug product material is often limited, especially in early stages of development, leading to an interest in predictive modelling to limit extractable volume testing. A VHU predictive model in vials (2R, 6R and 10R) and syringes (1 to 10 mL) was proposed previously, based on extractable volume data from aqueous polyethylene glycol (PEG) 400 solutions in the 1-30 mPa·s viscosity range. This model predicts different VHU values for 6R and 10R vials, while our approach suggests an identical VHUv/VHU value for 6R and 10R vials as they share the same stopper internal geometry.
The experimental VHUv and VHUs values (Table 3) are of the same order of magnitude as reported previously: 150-200 μL and 100 μL, respectively. The VHU values of PEG 400 and some molecules of therapeutic interest (
Excess volume is traditionally defined considering the hold-up volume (VHU) and filling process tolerance. The total filling process variability values are in the ranges reported in literature (0.25% to 1.0%). The proposed overfill prediction model (equation 1 and equation 1bis, or alternatively equation 5 and equation 5bis) is based on a total variability approach, including both the process (filling precision and bias) and analytical (extractable volume testing) variabilities. This methodology allows capturing all sources of variation, in order to limit the risk of out-of-specification testing results.
A total variability approach to the excess (or overfill) volume prediction of liquid-in-vial drug products is proposed, considering product viscosity, vial neck diameter, filling variability and extractable volume test variability.
The use of this prediction model could allow reducing testing to support overfill volume definition, especially in early phases of development where material availability can be limited. It proves also utility at late stage of development as well as once a drug product is commercialized. These methods also lead to a better process control.
Number | Date | Country | Kind |
---|---|---|---|
2107153.5 | May 2021 | GB | national |
Filing Document | Filing Date | Country | Kind |
---|---|---|---|
PCT/EP2022/063492 | 5/18/2022 | WO |