Can 3D Printed Tablets Be Bioequivalent and How to Test It: A PBPK Model Based Virtual Bioequivalence Study for Ropinirole Modified Release Tablets

Overview

Journal Pharmaceutics

Publisher MDPI

Date 2024 Feb 24

PMID 38399313

Authors

Olha Shuklinova

Gabriela Wyszogrodzka-Gawel

Ewelina Baran

Bartosz Lisowski

Barbara Wisniowska

Przemyslaw Dorozynski

Piotr Kulinowski

Sebastian Polak

Affiliations

Soon will be listed here.

Abstract

As the field of personalized dosing develops, the pharmaceutical manufacturing industry needs to offer flexibility in terms of tailoring the drug release and strength to the individual patient's needs. One of the promising tools which have such capacity is 3D printing technology. However, manufacturing small batches of drugs for each patient might lead to huge test burden, including the need to conduct bioequivalence trials of formulations to support the change of equipment or strength. In this paper we demonstrate how to use 3D printing in conjunction with virtual bioequivalence trials based on physiologically based pharmacokinetic (PBPK) modeling. For this purpose, we developed 3D printed ropinirole formulations and tested their bioequivalence with the reference product Polpix. The Simcyp simulator and previously developed ropinirole PBPK model were used for the clinical trial simulations. The Weibull-fitted dissolution profiles of test and reference formulations were used as inputs for the model. The virtual bioequivalence trials were run using parallel design. The study power of 80% was reached using 125 individuals. The study demonstrated how to use PBPK modeling in conjunction with 3D printing to test the virtual bioequivalence of newly developed formulations. This virtual experiment demonstrated the bioequivalence of one of the newly developed formulations with a reference product available on a market.

References

Loisios-Konstantinidis I, Cristofoletti R, Fotaki N, Turner D, Dressman J . Establishing virtual bioequivalence and clinically relevant specifications using in vitro biorelevant dissolution testing and physiologically-based population pharmacokinetic modeling. case example: Naproxen. Eur J Pharm Sci. 2019; 143:105170. DOI: 10.1016/j.ejps.2019.105170. View

Laisney M, Heimbach T, Mueller-Zsigmondy M, Blumenstein L, Costa R, Ji Y . Physiologically Based Biopharmaceutics Modeling to Demonstrate Virtual Bioequivalence and Bioequivalence Safe-space for Ribociclib which has Permeation Rate-controlled Absorption. J Pharm Sci. 2021; 111(1):274-284. DOI: 10.1016/j.xphs.2021.10.017. View

Ganti A, Yu S, Sharpnack D, Ingalla E, De Bruyn T . Physiologically-based pharmacokinetic/pharmacodynamic modeling to predict tumor growth inhibition and the efficacious dose of selective estrogen receptor degraders in humans. Biopharm Drug Dispos. 2023; 44(4):301-314. DOI: 10.1002/bdd.2358. View

Templeton I, Jones N, Musib L . Pediatric Dose Selection and Utility of PBPK in Determining Dose. AAPS J. 2018; 20(2):31. DOI: 10.1208/s12248-018-0187-8. View

Karalia D, Siamidi A, Karalis V, Vlachou M . 3D-Printed Oral Dosage Forms: Mechanical Properties, Computational Approaches and Applications. Pharmaceutics. 2021; 13(9). PMC: 8467731. DOI: 10.3390/pharmaceutics13091401. View

Iwasaki S, Yamamoto S, Sano N, Tohyama K, Kosugi Y, Furuta A . Direct Drug Delivery of Low-Permeable Compounds to the Central Nervous System Via Intranasal Administration in Rats and Monkeys. Pharm Res. 2019; 36(5):76. DOI: 10.1007/s11095-019-2613-8. View

Skowyra J, Pietrzak K, Alhnan M . Fabrication of extended-release patient-tailored prednisolone tablets via fused deposition modelling (FDM) 3D printing. Eur J Pharm Sci. 2014; 68:11-7. DOI: 10.1016/j.ejps.2014.11.009. View

Davit B, Braddy A, Conner D, Yu L . International guidelines for bioequivalence of systemically available orally administered generic drug products: a survey of similarities and differences. AAPS J. 2013; 15(4):974-90. PMC: 3787230. DOI: 10.1208/s12248-013-9499-x. View

Jamei M, Marciniak S, Feng K, Barnett A, Tucker G, Rostami-Hodjegan A . The Simcyp population-based ADME simulator. Expert Opin Drug Metab Toxicol. 2009; 5(2):211-23. DOI: 10.1517/17425250802691074. View

10.

Chetty M, Rose R, Abduljalil K, Patel N, Lu G, Cain T . Applications of linking PBPK and PD models to predict the impact of genotypic variability, formulation differences, differences in target binding capacity and target site drug concentrations on drug responses and variability. Front Pharmacol. 2014; 5:258. PMC: 4244809. DOI: 10.3389/fphar.2014.00258. View

11.

Tsakalozou E, Babiskin A, Zhao L . Physiologically-based pharmacokinetic modeling to support bioequivalence and approval of generic products: A case for diclofenac sodium topical gel, 1. CPT Pharmacometrics Syst Pharmacol. 2021; 10(5):399-411. PMC: 8129718. DOI: 10.1002/psp4.12600. View

12.

Shebley M, Sandhu P, Emami Riedmaier A, Jamei M, Narayanan R, Patel A . Physiologically Based Pharmacokinetic Model Qualification and Reporting Procedures for Regulatory Submissions: A Consortium Perspective. Clin Pharmacol Ther. 2018; 104(1):88-110. PMC: 6032820. DOI: 10.1002/cpt.1013. View

13.

Kuemmel C, Yang Y, Zhang X, Florian J, Zhu H, Tegenge M . Consideration of a Credibility Assessment Framework in Model-Informed Drug Development: Potential Application to Physiologically-Based Pharmacokinetic Modeling and Simulation. CPT Pharmacometrics Syst Pharmacol. 2019; 9(1):21-28. PMC: 6966181. DOI: 10.1002/psp4.12479. View

14.

Sawada Y, Hanano M, Sugiyama Y, Harashima H, Iga T . Prediction of the volumes of distribution of basic drugs in humans based on data from animals. J Pharmacokinet Biopharm. 1984; 12(6):587-96. DOI: 10.1007/BF01059554. View

15.

Lafeber I, Tichem J, Ouwerkerk N, van Unen A, van Uitert J, Bijleveld-Olierook H . 3D printed furosemide and sildenafil tablets: Innovative production and quality control. Int J Pharm. 2021; 603:120694. DOI: 10.1016/j.ijpharm.2021.120694. View

16.

Rodgers T, Leahy D, Rowland M . Physiologically based pharmacokinetic modeling 1: predicting the tissue distribution of moderate-to-strong bases. J Pharm Sci. 2005; 94(6):1259-76. DOI: 10.1002/jps.20322. View

17.

Gonzalez D, Rao G, Bailey S, Brouwer K, Cao Y, Crona D . Precision Dosing: Public Health Need, Proposed Framework, and Anticipated Impact. Clin Transl Sci. 2017; 10(6):443-454. PMC: 5698804. DOI: 10.1111/cts.12490. View

18.

Wyszogrodzka-Gawel G, Shuklinova O, Lisowski B, Wisniowska B, Polak S . 3D printing combined with biopredictive dissolution and PBPK/PD modeling optimization and personalization of pharmacotherapy: Are we there yet?. Drug Discov Today. 2023; 28(10):103731. DOI: 10.1016/j.drudis.2023.103731. View

19.

Zhang Y, Xiao M . Generalized dressed and doubly-dressed multi-wave mixing. Opt Express. 2009; 15(12):7182-9. DOI: 10.1364/oe.15.007182. View

20.

Shuklinova O, Dorozynski P, Kulinowski P, Polak S . Quality Control Dissolution Data Is Biopredictive for a Modified Release Ropinirole Formulation: Virtual Experiment with the Use of Re-Developed and Verified PBPK Model. Pharmaceutics. 2022; 14(7). PMC: 9320685. DOI: 10.3390/pharmaceutics14071514. View