↓ Skip to main content

Development and Manufacture of Protein Pharmaceuticals

Overview of attention for book
Attention for Chapter 6: Fundamentals of freeze-drying.
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

facebook
1 Facebook page

Citations

dimensions_citation
53 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
273 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Chapter title
Fundamentals of freeze-drying.
Chapter number 6
Book title
Development and Manufacture of Protein Pharmaceuticals
Published in
Pharmaceutical biotechnology, January 2002
DOI 10.1007/978-1-4615-0549-5_6
Pubmed ID
Book ISBNs
978-1-4613-5127-6, 978-1-4615-0549-5
Authors

Steven L Nail, Shan Jiang, Suchart Chongprasert, Shawn A Knopp, Nail, Steven L, Jiang, Shan, Chongprasert, Suchart, Knopp, Shawn A, Nail, Steven L., Knopp, Shawn A.

Abstract

Given the increasing importance of reducing development time for new pharmaceutical products, formulation and process development scientists must continually look for ways to "work smarter, not harder." Within the product development arena, this means reducing the amount of trial and error empiricism in arriving at a formulation and identification of processing conditions which will result in a quality final dosage form. Characterization of the freezing behavior of the intended formulation is necessary for developing processing conditions which will result in the shortest drying time while maintaining all critical quality attributes of the freeze-dried product. Analysis of frozen systems was discussed in detail, particularly with respect to the glass transition as the physical event underlying collapse during freeze-drying, eutectic mixture formation, and crystallization events upon warming of frozen systems. Experiments to determine how freezing and freeze-drying behavior is affected by changes in the composition of the formulation are often useful in establishing the "robustness" of a formulation. It is not uncommon for seemingly subtle changes in composition of the formulation, such as a change in formulation pH, buffer salt, drug concentration, or an additional excipient, to result in striking differences in freezing and freeze-drying behavior. With regard to selecting a formulation, it is wise to keep the formulation as simple as possible. If a buffer is needed, a minimum concentration should be used. The same principle applies to added salts: If used at all, the concentration should be kept to a minimum. For many proteins a combination of an amorphous excipient, such as a disaccharide, and a crystallizing excipient, such as glycine, will result in a suitable combination of chemical stability and physical stability of the freeze-dried solid. Concepts of heat and mass transfer are valuable in rational design of processing conditions. Heat transfer by conduction--the dominant mechanism of heat transfer in freeze-drying--is inefficient at the pressures used in freeze-drying. Steps should be taken to improve the thermal contact between the product and the shelf of the freeze dryer, such as eliminating metal trays from the drying process. Quantitation of the heat transfer coefficient for the geometry used is a useful way of assessing the impact of changes in the system such as elimination of product trays and changes in the vial. Because heat transfer by conduction through the vapor increases with increasing pressure, the commonly held point of view that "the lower the pressure, the better" is not true with respect to process efficiency. The optimum pressure for a given product is a function of the temperature at which freeze-drying is carried out, and lower pressures are needed at low product temperatures. The controlling resistance to mass transfer is almost always the resistance of the partially dried solids above the submination interface. This resistance can be minimized by avoiding fill volumes of more than about half the volume of the container. The development scientist should also recognize that very high concentrations of solute may not be appropriate for optimum freeze-drying, particularly if the resistance of the dried product layer increases sharply with concentration. Although the last 10 years has seen the publication of a significant body of literature of great value in allowing development scientists and engineers to "work smarter," there is still much work needed in both the science and the technology of freeze-drying. Scientific development is needed for improving analytical methodology for characterization of frozen systems and freeze-dried solids. A better understanding of the relationship between molecular mobility and reactivity is needed to allow accurate prediction of product stability at the intended storage temperature based on accelerated stability at higher temperatures. This requires that the temperature dependence of glass transition-associated mobility, particularly at temperatures below the glass transition, be studied in greater depth. The relevance of the concept of strong and fragile glasses to frozen systems and freeze-dried solids has only begun to be explored. The list of pharmaceutically acceptable protective solutes is very short, and more imagination--and work--is needed in order to develop pharmaceutically acceptable alternative stabilizers. There is a need for technology development in process monitoring, particularly in developing a way to measure the status of the product during freezing and freeze-drying without placing temperature measurement probes in individual vials of product. The current practice of placing thermocouples in vials is uncertain with respect to reliability of the data, inconsistent with elimination of personnel in close proximity to open vials of product in an aseptic environment, and incompatible with technology for automatic material handling in freeze-drying. In addition, a method for controlling the degree of supercooling during freezing would allow better control of freezing rate and would, in many cases, result in more consistent product quality.

Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 273 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 3 1%
Malaysia 1 <1%
Portugal 1 <1%
United Kingdom 1 <1%
Austria 1 <1%
Unknown 266 97%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 58 21%
Student > Master 48 18%
Researcher 36 13%
Student > Bachelor 19 7%
Student > Doctoral Student 15 5%
Other 29 11%
Unknown 68 25%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 43 16%
Engineering 40 15%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 29 11%
Chemistry 23 8%
Chemical Engineering 13 5%
Other 47 17%
Unknown 78 29%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 17 January 2015.
All research outputs
#20,249,662
of 22,778,347 outputs
Outputs from Pharmaceutical biotechnology
#9
of 11 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#120,541
of 122,834 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Pharmaceutical biotechnology
#1
of 2 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,778,347 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 11 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 2.4. This one scored the same or higher as 2 of them.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 122,834 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 2 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than all of them