drennen idrc 2004
Post on 03-Mar-2016
217 Views
Preview:
DESCRIPTION
TRANSCRIPT
Implementation of PAT in the Pharmaceutical Industry
Duquesne UniversityCenter for Pharmaceutical Technology
James K. Drennen, III
2
Duquesne University Center for Pharmaceutical Technology (DCPT)
http://http://http://www.dcpt.duq.eduwww.dcpt.duq.eduwww.dcpt.duq.edu
James K. Drennen, III
3
“No wind favors him who has no destined port.”
Montaigne
James K. Drennen, III
4
Today’s Manufacturing ProcessesCharacterised by:
Large inefficient batch equipmentLow utilization 30 - 40 % on averageLow product yieldsExcessive amounts of product non-conformancesLong lead-times due to stage and final product testingCapital and labour intensiveHigh operating costsHigh inventories and excessive warehouse capacityResistant to innovationCycle time improvement perceived to be limited by regulatory constraints
CAMP Member Companies Presentation to FDA March 2002
James K. Drennen, III
5
“The significant problems we face cannot be solved by the same level of thinking we were at when we created them.”
Albert Einstein
James K. Drennen, III
6
Pharmaceutical Manufacturing in the Future
Guidance for IndustryPAT- A framework for Innovative Pharmaceutical Manufacturing and Quality Assurance
Scientific principles and tools supporting innovationPAT ToolsProcess Understanding Risk-Based Approach
Regulatory Strategy accommodating innovation PAT Team approach to Review and Inspection Joint training and certification of staff
James K. Drennen, III
7
What is PAT?
A system for:designing, analyzing, and controlling manufacturingtimely measurements (i.e., during processing)monitoring critical quality and performance attributes raw and in-process materialsprocess understanding
“Analyzing” includes:chemical, physical, microbiological, mathematical, and risk analysis
James K. Drennen, III
8
Process Understanding
A process is well understood when:all critical sources of variability are identified and explainedvariability is managed by the processproduct quality attributes can be accurately and reliably predicted
Accurate and Reliable predictions reflect process understanding
James K. Drennen, III
9
Key Elements of PAT Implementation
Risk AnalysisExperimental DesignControl Strategies
SensorsModel development/MaintenanceSPC
Process SamplingInformation Management
James K. Drennen, III
10
Risk Analysis/Experimental Design
FBDrier
Milling
Blender Press
Coater
Sieve
Dispensary
Wet granulation
NIRNIR
NIRNIR
NIRNIR
NIRNIR
Direct Compression
James K. Drennen, III
11
Sampling/SPC/Data Management
James K. Drennen, III
12
Objectives (I)
Qualify capabilities of instrument and sampling systemEvaluate the potential effect of “process signature” on calibration developmentCompare the utility of reflection and transmission data
James K. Drennen, III
13
Instrument Performance Testing-Performed On-Line, When Possible
James K. Drennen, III
14
Test of Sample Positioning System
James K. Drennen, III
15
Test of Sample Positioning System
Two sides of tablet provide identical spectra
James K. Drennen, III
16
Test of Sample Positioning System
Early positioning studies led to improvements in conveyor and trigger system
X-position study for 2nd Deriv. Intensity vs. Position along the belt
-0.002
0.000
0.002
0.004
0.006
0.008
0.010
0.012
0.014
0.016
40.0 42.0 44.0 46.0 48.0 50.0 52.0 54.0 56.0 58.0
P o sit io n alo ng the belt (1 / 64 in)
James K. Drennen, III
17
Sample Position- Reflection
James K. Drennen, III
18
Sample Position- Transmission
James K. Drennen, III
19
Process Signature
James K. Drennen, III
20
Production Samples
James K. Drennen, III
21
Compression Samples- Reflection
James K. Drennen, III
22
Production Samples Projected onto Compression Model
James K. Drennen, III
23
Conclusion (I)
The impact of positioning error on NIR reflection and transmission analysis can be mitigated using preprocessing techniques, automatic positioning system suitable for its intended useShielding not required for transmission measurements Spectra acquired from laboratory and production samples can be pooledDiffuse reflection spectra were less sensitive to sample positioning
James K. Drennen, III
24
Objectives (II)
Calibration Development/Validation
James K. Drennen, III
25
Truncated Spectra from API Content Calibration
James K. Drennen, III
26
Robustness Index (RI) for selection of preprocessing
James K. Drennen, III
27
Robustness Index
∫=
++= 3
0
2 CBA
1RI
NLNN LL
James K. Drennen, III
28
Robustness Index
Where:RI = Robustness indexLN = Level of simulated noise added
= Quadratic fit of the noise augmented prediction error data
RI is inverse of the AUC defined by quadriaticfit of RMSE plotted as function of added spectral noise
CBA 2 ++ NN LL
James K. Drennen, III
29
Cross-Validation and Robustness Testing for API Calibration
Preprocessing Treatment
PLS Factors
RMSECV ( mg )
RMSE ( mg ) r2
Robustness Index
Raw Data 5 2.36 1.96 0.886 0.18SNV 5 2.19 1.70 0.915 0.25SNV + 1st Deriv. 4 1.79 1.49 0.935 0.33SNV + 2nd Deriv. 3 1.93 1.64 0.921 0.29MSC 5 2.12 1.68 0.917 0.26MSC + 1st Deriv. 4 1.80 1.48 0.936 0.33MSC + 2nd Deriv. 3 1.89 1.61 0.923 0.291st Deriv. 4 1.80 1.48 0.936 0.322nd Deriv. 3 1.89 1.61 0.924 0.29
James K. Drennen, III
30
Cross-Validation and Robustness Testing for Hardness Calibration
Preprocessing Treatment Model Type
Factors/ Terms RMSECV RMSE r2
Robustness Index
Raw Data PLS 3 10.11 8.88 0.907 0.042SNV PLS 3 10.96 9.75 0.888 0.040SNV 1st Deriv. PLS 3 12.04 10.86 0.861 0.038SNV 2nd Deriv. PLS 3 12.38 11.08 0.855 0.037MSC PLS 3 9.66 8.82 0.908 0.043MSC 1st Deriv. PLS 3 8.82 8.11 0.923 0.047MSC 2nd Deriv. PLS 3 8.21 7.48 0.934 0.0461st Deriv. PLS 2 9.11 8.22 0.920 0.0432nd Deriv. PLS 3 8.73 7.91 0.926 0.0451st Order Baseline Fit 2 NA 8.79 0.909 0.0361st Order Baseline Fit 1 NA 8.75 0.910 0.0382nd Order Baseline Fit 3 NA 8.01 0.924 0.0332nd Order Baseline Fit 2 NA 8.32 0.918 0.038
James K. Drennen, III
31
Prediction Plot for API Content
James K. Drennen, III
32
Calibration/Validation API
Calibration Dataset VAL1 VAL2 VAL3
Samples ( n ) 500 350 40 38 Batches ( n ) 23 30 4 2
Maximum ( mg ) 65.32 66.06 50.31 65.53Mean ( mg ) 48.90 49.07 49.44 47.92
Minimum ( mg ) 32.66 33.63 47.70 32.43Standard Deviation ( mg ) 5.83 4.94 0.67 13.93
Model TypePreprocessing
Spectral Range ( nm )Latent Variables ( n )
RMSE ( mg )* 1.48 1.25 5.35 (1.04) 5.07 (3.76)RMSE ( %, nominal )* 2.96 2.50 10.7 (2.08) 10.1 (7.52)
r 0.967 0.972 0.441 0.974r2 0.936 0.944 0.194 0.948
RPD* 3.9 4.0 NA 2.7 (3.8)Bias ( mg )* 0.00 -0.22 -5.3 (0.71) -4.0 (2.04)
Full-spectrum PLS regression
* A prediction bias was identified for the VAL2 and VAL3 datasets. The corrected values are in parentheses.
MSC+1st Derivative(1300 - 2000), 2
4
James K. Drennen, III
33
Hardness Prediction
James K. Drennen, III
34
Calibration/Validation Hardness
Calibration Dataset
Validation Dataset
Samples ( n ) 437 152Batches ( n ) 22 8
Maximum ( N ) 140.0 145.0Mean ( N ) 61.7 58.1
Minimum ( N ) 16.0 13.0Standard Deviation ( N ) 29.2 30.9
Model TypePreprocessing
Spectral Range ( nm )Latent Variables ( n )
RMSE ( N )* 8.1 12.0 (8.5)r 0.961 0.961
r2 0.922 0.92344RPD* 3.6 2.6 (3.6)
Bias ( N )* 0.0 -8.0 (-0.01)
* A prediction bias was identified. Corrected values are in parentheses.
Full-spectrum PLS regressionMSC+1st Derivative
(1300 - 2000), 23
James K. Drennen, III
35
Model Robustness
James K. Drennen, III
36
High-Flux Noise Robustness Test
James K. Drennen, III
37
Wavelength Accuracy Robustness
James K. Drennen, III
38
Conclusion (II)
Calibration model form (for hardness) and preprocessing operations were selected based on RI analysis and cross-validationValidation of accuracy, precision, linearity, specificity and robustness, using independent datasetsRobustness demonstrated to variation in instrumental high-flux noise and wavelength shift
James K. Drennen, III
39
Objectives (III)
Develop a system for continuous calibration monitoringFormulate a strategy for calibration transfer/update to support instrument maintenance and inter-instrument transferDetermine the required number (and evaluate stability) of instrument standardization “rescue” samples
James K. Drennen, III
40
Failure Detection
NIRInstrument Sample
NIRData
Pre -treatment
Model
Result(Prediction) Final
Result
Is prediction valid?(Qres and T 2)
InstrumentStandardization Instrument
Evaluation andcorrective action
Potential errors ( A) due to:-New instrument-Changed instrument response
Potential errors ( B) due to:-Raw material change-Process change
Result is valid
Result requires investigationInstrumentMatching
Calibration TransferProcesses NIR Prediction Prediction Validity
Historicaldata and
actionthreshold
James K. Drennen, III
41
Instrument Performance Testing
James K. Drennen, III
42
IPC using Pearson Correlation
21
21
22
111
)(Σ)n(Σ)(Σ)n(Σ
))(Σ(Σ)(n(Σ),r(
+λ+λλλ
+λλ+λλ+λλ
Χ−ΧΧ−Χ
ΧΧ−ΧΧ=ΧΧ
Xλ = Odd-numbered spectral data pointsXλ+1 = Even-numbered spectral data
points.
James K. Drennen, III
43
IPC for Typical (blue) and Noisy (red) NIR Spectra
James K. Drennen, III
44
Noise Factor Level (NFL)
Using this formula, a noise factor level (NFL) is estimated
NFL = f(1 – r(Xλ, Xλ+1))
James K. Drennen, III
45
Histogram of historical NFL scores for API content calibration spectra
James K. Drennen, III
46
Sample-Based AOTF Wavelength Uncertainty Test
James K. Drennen, III
47
Calibration Monitoring
James K. Drennen, III
48
Use of Q residual and T2 for Calibration Monitoring
James K. Drennen, III
49
Use of Q and T2 for API CAL and VAL2
James K. Drennen, III
50
Calibration Maintenance and Transfer
James K. Drennen, III
51
Calibration Maintenance/Transfer
Why are transfer/update protocols necessary?Need for a calibrated backup instrumentEventual expansion to further linesTransfer-in-time of knowledge from earlier experiments
James K. Drennen, III
52
Master and Slave Instruments
James K. Drennen, III
53
Exhibit 5
Potential investigation actions1. Review daily internal
performance test and internal performance test history
2. Run an internal performance test
3. Rescan tablet4. Review SPC of method
assessment5. Review SPC of tablet test
results6. Perform a parallel laboratory
test on tablet
Potential remediation actionsA. Instrument repair,
standardization, and external performance test
B. Calibration updateC. Address as an
out-of-specification (OOS) investigation
Instrumentevaluation and
corrective action(legend)
James K. Drennen, III
54
Example: Lamp change
1300 1400 1500 1600 1700 1800 1900 20000.7
0.8
0.9
1
1.1
1.2
1.3
1.4
Wavelength ( nm )
Ref
lect
ance
Rat
io
James K. Drennen, III
55
Justification for baseline subtraction method
46 46.5 47 47.5 48 48.5 49 49.5 5046
46.5
47
47.5
48
48.5
49
49.5
50
Prior to Lamp Change, ( mg )
Follo
win
g La
mp
Cha
nge,
Unc
orre
cted
( m
g )
James K. Drennen, III
56
Calibration transfer model for correcting lamp change
1300 1400 1500 1600 1700 1800 1900 2000-0.05
-0.04
-0.03
-0.02
-0.01
0
0.01
0.02
0.03
0.04
0.05
Wavelength ( nm )
Ref
lect
ance
Rat
io
Additive Calibration Transfer Coefficients
James K. Drennen, III
57
Prediction quality with calibration transfer
46 46.5 47 47.5 48 48.5 49 49.5 5046
46.5
47
47.5
48
48.5
49
49.5
50
Prior to Lamp Change, ( mg )
Follo
win
g La
mp
Cha
nge,
Tra
nsfe
r Cor
rect
ed (
mg
)
James K. Drennen, III
58
How Many Transfer Samples?
5 10 15 20 25 30
1
Number of Transfer Samples ( n )
Rel
ativ
e Er
ror (
mul
tiple
)
James K. Drennen, III
59
Continuous Calibration Monitoring for Stability Samples
James K. Drennen, III
60
Conclusion (III)
Key instrument performance parameters can be monitored using features of sample spectraHotelling’s T2 and Q residuals provide basis of predicting spectral deviationsCalibration transfer among multiple instruments can be achieved using baseline subtraction and as few as 15 transfer samples
James K. Drennen, III
61
Conclusion (III)
Calibration transfer samples can be stored for at least one month without compromising calibration transfer performanceLong-term spectral database uniformity can be maintained using appropriate calibration transfer methods
James K. Drennen, III
62
Acknowledgements
Carl AndersonRobert CogdillDavid MolseedMiriam Delgado
Robert ChisholmAli AfnanRaymond BoltonThorsten HerkertKen Leiper
James K. Drennen, III
63
Duquesne University Center for Pharmaceutical Technology
http://http://http://www.dcpt.duq.eduwww.dcpt.duq.eduwww.dcpt.duq.edu
top related