Cited by 246Analytical Methods in PharmaceuticalsDrug Solubulity and Delivery SystemsPharmaceutical Quality and Counterfeiting

An evaluation of fit factors and dissolution efficiency for the comparison of in vitro dissolution profiles

Anderson, N.H., Bauer, M., Boussac, N., Khan-Malek, R., Munden, P., Sardaro, M.·1998·Journal of Pharmaceutical and Biomedical Analysis

Abstract

Dissolution efficiency (D.E.), the area under a dissolution curve between defined time points, and the fit factors (f1 and f2) have been compared for the characterisation of dissolution profiles, using data from three batches of a product in nine different packs stored under two conditions. The factors f1 and f2 offer ease of calculation and a simple measure of similarity between pairs of dissolution profiles. This is well suited to the qualitative determination of 'similarity' as required by the FDA's SUPAC Guide. However, they do not provide information on individual batches, including their consistency. In contrast, D.E. does provide such information is well-suited to making quantitative comparisons amongst batches. Because D.E. has a simple physical meaning, it is easier to interpret D.E. data then corresponding f1 and f2 results. The confidence limits in D.E. values provide a useful measure of the variability in batch dissolution and allow the statistical significance of difference in D.E. between pairs of batches to be determined. Both of the above measures lead to the same conclusions regarding the similarity in protective power amongst the nine packs under test and to the value of added desiccant in maintaining the dissolution profile of the product when stored under high humidity conditions. It is concluded that D.E. offers a suitable alternative to the single point dissolution measurement for QC of immediate release products.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/s0731-7085(98)00011-9

Cites

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • If the differences of the mean dissolution efficiencies and 95% confidence intervals are within ±10%, the reference and test dissolution profiles are equivalent.

    “If the differences of the mean dissolution efficiencies as well as the 95% confidence intervals are within appropriate limits (±10%), one can conclude that the reference and test dissolution profiles are equivalent 12 .”

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Anderson, N. H., Bauer, M., Boussac, N., Khan-Malek, R., Munden, P., & Sardaro, M.
Affiliations
  • Sanofi (United Kingdom) (GB)
  • Sanofi (France) (FR)
Corresponding author
Anderson, N.H.
Venue
Journal of Pharmaceutical and Biomedical Analysis
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
1998-08
Volume
17
Issue
4-5
Pages
811-822
ISSN
0731-7085 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W1999885157
Cited by
246
References
0
Citations by year
2026: 8 · 2025: 18 · 2024: 17 · 2023: 11 · 2022: 18 · 2021: 19 · 2020: 18 · 2019: 15 · 2018: 5 · 2017: 14 · 2016: 15 · 2015: 18 · 2014: 7 · 2013: 10 · 2012: 13
FWCI
1.84
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Journal of Pharmaceutical and Biomedical Analysis (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Chemistry › Analytical Chemistry › Analytical Methods in Pharmaceuticals
  • Life Sciences › Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutics › Pharmaceutical Science › Drug Solubulity and Delivery Systems
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health › Pharmaceutical Quality and Counterfeiting
Keywords
dissolution profile, dissolution efficiency, in vitro dissolution, batch-to-batch consistency, desiccants, batch-to-batch variation
MeSH terms
Models, Chemical, Solubility

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review