A DPI can be split into three different modules; device, formulation, process. These are developed in parallel, and together with the user they provide the performance of an inhalation product. During product development, these modules are evolving and changing, whereas the requirements on an inhalation product are always expressed in terms of the performance of the final commercial product. To do performance testing during development when the product is not finished presents many challenges and can be confusing and misleading. During development, the performance of the final product is typically being predicted by testing ever changing prototypes. This article describes methods and approaches to manage such development and to, during development, provide relevant predictions of the in vitro and in vivo performances of the final product.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
LastowO: Redundancy Based Development (RBD). Inhalation Magazine, February2012.
2.
MitchellJP, and NagelMW: Improved laboratory test methods for orally inhaled products. Ther Deliv., 2013; 4:1003–1026.
3.
MitchellJP, and SuggettJA: Developing ways to evaluate in the laboratory how inhalation devices will be used by patients and care-givers: The need for clinically appropriate testing. AAPS PharmSciTech., 2014; Jun4. [Epub ahead of print]. DOI: 10.1208/s12249-014-0145-4
4.
DelvadiaR, HindleM, LongestPW, and ByronPR: In vitro tests for aerosol deposition II: IVIVCs for different dry powder inhalers in normal adults. J Aerosol Med Pulm Drug Deliv., 2013; 26:138–144.
5.
OlssonB, BorgströmL, LundbäckH, and SvenssonM: Validation of a general in vitro approach for prediction of total lung deposition in healthy adults for pharmaceutical inhalation products. J Aerosol Med Pulm Drug Deliv., 2013; 26:355–369.
6.
ChapmanKR, FogartyCM, PeckittC, LassenC, JadayelD, DederichsJ, DalviM, and KramerB: Delivery characteristics and patients' handling of two single-dose dry-powder inhalers used in COPD. Int J Chron Obstruct Pulmon Dis., 2011; 6:353–363.
7.
AzouzW, ChetcutiP, HoskerHS, SaralayaD, StephensonJ, and ChrystynH: The inhalation characteristics of patients when they use different dry powder inhalers. J Aerosol Med Pulm Drug Deliv. ahead of print. doi:10.1089/jamp.2013.1119.
8.
ByronPR, XinangyinW, DelvadiaRR, LongestPW, and VenitzJ: Breath profiles for testing new DPI devices in development. In: DalbyRN, ByronPR, PeartJ, SumanJD, FarrSJ, YoungPM, and TrainiD, (eds.). Respiratory Drug Delivery. Serentec Press, Raleigh, NC; pp. 295–302, 2014.
9.
BurnellPKP, MaltonA, ReavillK, and BallMHE: Design, validation and initial testing of the electronic lung device. J Aerosol Sci., 1998; 29:1011–1025.
10.
MillerNC, ManiaciMJ, DwivediS, and WardGW: Aerodynamic sizing with simulated inhalation profiles: Total dose capture and measurement. In: DalbyRN, ByronPR, FarrSJ, and PeartJ, (eds). Respiratory Drug Delivery. VII. Serentec Press, Raleigh, NC; pp. 191–196, 2000.
11.
TougasPT, MitchellJP, and LyapustinaSA: Good Cascade Impactor Practices, AIM and EDA for Orally Inhaled Products. Springer Science Business Media, New York, 2013.
12.
TougasTP, ChristopherD, MitchellJP, StricklandH, WykaB, van OortM, and LyapustinaS: Improved quality control metrics for cascade impaction measurements of orally inhaled drug products (OIPs). AAPS PharmSciTech., 2009; 10:1276–1285.
13.
PrimeD, and HamiltonM: The role of the hydraulic lung in comparing the performance of dry powder inhalers. Inhalation Mag, October2013.
14.
BurnellPKP, AskingL, BorgströmL, NicholsSC, OlssonB, PrimeD, and ShrubbI: Studies of the human oropharyngeal airspaces using magnetic resonance imaging IV. The oropharyngeal retention effect for our inhalation delivery systems. J Aerosol Med., 2007; 20:269–281.
15.
ZhangY, and FinlayWH: Experimental measurements of particle deposition in three proximal lung bifurcation models with an idealized mouth-throat. J Aerosol Med., 2005; 18:460–473.
ZhouY, SunJJ, and ChengYS: Comparison of deposition in the USP and physical mouth-throat models with solid and liquid particles. J Aerosol Med Pulmon Drug Deliv., 2011; 24:277–284.
18.
GolshahiL, and FinlayWH: An idealized child throat that mimics average pediatric oropharyngeal deposition. Aerosol Sci Technol., 2012; 46:i–iv.
19.
LindertS, BelowA, and BreitkreutzJ: Performance of dry powder inhalers with single dosed capsules in preschool children and adults using improved upper airway models. Pharmaceutics., 2014; 6:36–51.
20.
BickmannD, WachtelH, KrögerR, and LangguthP: Examining inhaler performance using a child's throat model. Respir Drug Deliv., 2008; 2:565–570.
