Scientific, statistical, practical, and regulatory considerations in design space development

References

• Food and Drug Administration (FDA), Center for Drug Evaluation and Research, Center for Biologics Evaluation and Research. International Conference on Harmonization of Technical Requirements for Registration of Pharmaceuticals for Human Use (ICH), Guidance for Industry: Q8 (R2) Pharmaceutical Development. 2009. [Internet]; Available from: http://www.fda.gov/downloads/drugs/guidancecomplianceregulatoryinformation/guidances/ucm073507.pdf
   Google Scholar
• Wahid Z, Nadir N. Improvement of one factor at a time through design of experiments. World Appl Sci J (Mathe Appl Eng). 2013;21:56–61.
   Google Scholar
• Czitrom V. One-factor-at-a-time versus designed experiments. Am Stat. 1999;53:126–131.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• FDA, Center for Drug Evaluation and Research, Center for Biologics Evaluation and Research. ICH, guidance for industry, Q9 quality risk management. 2006. [Internet]; Available from: http://www.fda.gov/downloads/Drugs/…/Guidances/ucm073511.pdf
   Google Scholar
• FDA, Center for Drug Evaluation and Research, Center for Biologics Evaluation and Research. ICH, guidance for industry, Q10 pharmaceutical quality system. 2009. [Internet]; Available from: http://www.fda.gov/downloads/Drugs/…/Guidances/ucm073517.pdf
   Google Scholar
• Landin M, Rowe RC, York P. Establishing and analyzing the design space in the development of direct compression formulations by gene expression programming. Int J Pharm. 2012;434:35–42.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Schenck L, Troup GM, Lowinger M, et al. Achieving a hot melt extrusion design space for the production of solid solutions. In: am Ende DJ, editor. Chemical engineering in the pharmaceutical industry: R&D to manufacturing. Hoboken (NJ): John Wiley & Sons, Inc; 2010. p. 819–836.
   Google Scholar
• Rosas JG, Blanco M, González JM, et al. Quality by design approach of a pharmaceutical gel manufacturing process, part 1: determination of the design space. J Pharmaceut Sci. 2011;100:4432–4441.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Puñal Peces D, García-Montoya E, Manich A, et al. Approach to design space from retrospective quality data. Pharm Develop Technol. 2014;21:26–38.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lebrun P, Krier F, Mantanus J, et al. Design space approach in the optimization of the spray-drying process. Eur J Pharm Biopharm. 2011;80:226–234.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Adam S, Suzzi D, Radeke C, et al. An integrated Quality by Design (QbD) approach towards design space definition of a blending unit operation by Discrete Element Method (DEM) simulation. Eur J Pharm Sci. 2010;42:106–115.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Pisano R, Fissore D, Barresi AA, et al. Quality by design: optimization of a freeze-drying cycle via design space in case of heterogeneous drying behavior and influence of the freezing protocol. Pharm Dev Technol. 2013;18:280–295.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Fissore D, Pisano R, Barresi AA. Advanced approach to build the design space for the primary drying of a pharmaceutical freeze-drying process. J Pharm Sci. 2011;100:4922–4933.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Giordano A, Barresi AA, Fisore D. On the use of mathematical models to build the design space for the primary drying phase of a pharmaceutical lyophilization process. J Pharm Sci. 2010;100:311–324.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Charoo NA, Shamsher AA, Zidan AS, et al. Quality by design approach for formulation development: a case study of dispersible tablets. Int J Pharm. 2011;423:167–178.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Baldinger A, Clerdent L, Rantanen J, et al. Quality by design approach in the optimization of the spray-drying process. Pharm Develop Technol. 2012;17:389–397.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Souihi N, Josefson M, Tajarobi P, et al. Design space estimation of the roller compaction process. Ind Eng Chem Res. 2013;52:12408–12419.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Anderson MJ. Framing a QbD design space with tolerance intervals. Pharma QbD; 2012.
   Google Scholar
• De Beer TRM, Wiggenhorn M, Hawe A, et al. Optimization of a pharmaceutical freeze-dried product and its process using an experimental design approach and innovative process analyzers. Talanta. 2010;83:1623–1633.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Chatzizaharia KA, Hatziavramidis DT. Dissolution efficiency and design space for an oral pharmaceutical product in tablet form. Ind Eng Chem Res. 2015;54:6305–6310.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Huang J, Kaul G, Cai C, et al. Quality by design case study: an integrated multivariate approach to drug product and process development. Int J Pharm. 2009;382:23–32.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hayashi Y, Kikuchi S, Onuki Y, et al. Reliability evaluation of nonlinear design space in pharmaceutical product development. J Pharm Sci. 2012;101:333–341.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Basalious EB, El-Sebaie W, El-Gazayerly O. Application of pharmaceutical QbD for enhancement of the solubility and dissolution of a class II BCS drug using polymeric surfactants and crystallization inhibitors: development of controlled-release tablets. AAPS PharmSciTech. 2011;12:799–810.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Nistor I, Lebrun P, Ceccato A, et al. Implementation of a design space approach for enantiomeric separations in polar organic solvent chromatography. J Pharm Biomed Anal. 2012;74:273–283.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wu H, White M, Khan MA. Quality-by-Design (QbD): an integrated process analytical technology (PAT) approach for a dynamic pharmaceutical co-precipitation process characterization and process design space development. Int J Pharm. 2010;405:63–78.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Burt JL, Braem AD, Ramirez A, et al. Model-guided design space development for a drug substance manufacturing process. J Pharm Innov. 2011;6:181–192.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hallow DM, Mudryk BM, Braem AD, et al. An example of utilizing mechanistic and empirical modeling in quality by design. J Pharm Innov. 2010;5:193–203.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Carlo C, Mohammed Y, Zadeo C, et al. Application of quality by design principles for the definition of a robust crystallization process for casopitant mesylate. Org Process Res Dev. 2010;14:1407–1419.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Stockdale GW, Cheng A. Finding design space and a reliable operating region using a multivariate bayesian approach with experimental design. Q Technol Quant Manage. 2009;6:391–408.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Harms J, Wang X, Kim T, et al. Defining process design space for biotech products: case study of pichia pastoris fermentation. Biotechnol Prog. 2008;24:655–662.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Banerjee A. Designing in quality: approaches to defining the design space for a monoclonal antibody process. BioPharm Int. 2010;23(5):26–40.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Jenke D. Application of Quality by Design (QbD) principles to extractables leachables assessment. Establishing a design space for terminally sterilized aqueous drug products stored in a plastic packaging system. PDA J Pharm Sci Technol. 2010;64:527–535.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Sundaram J, Shay Y-HM, Hsu CC, et al. Design space development for lyophilization using DOE and process modeling. BioPharm Int. 2010;23:26–28, 30–32, 34–36.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kamm J. Winning the space race. 2010. [Internet]; Available from: http://www.pharmaqbd.com
   Google Scholar
• Chatzizacharia KA, Hatziavramidis DT. Design space approach for pharmaceutical tablet development. Ind Eng Chem Res. 2014;53:12003–12009.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Merkku P, Lindqvist A-S, Leiviska K, et al. Influence of granulation and compression process variables on flow rate of granules and on tablet properties, with special reference to weight variation. Int J Pharm. 1994;102:117–125.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kristan K, Horvat M. Rapid exploration of curing process design space for production of controlled‐release pellets. J Pharm Sci. 2012;101:3924–3935.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Koganti VR, Shalaev EY, Berry MR, et al. Investigation of design space for freeze-drying: use of modeling for primary drying segment of a freeze-drying cycle. AAPS PharmSciTech. 2011;12:854–861.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Zomer S, Gupta M, Scott A. Application of multivariate tools in pharmaceutical product development to bridge risk assessment to continuous verification in a quality by design environment. J Pharm Innov. 2010;5:109–118.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Chavez P-F, Lebrun P, Sacré P-Y, et al. Optimization of a pharmaceutical tablet formulation based on a design space approach and using vibrational spectroscopy as PAT tool. Int J Pharm. 2015;486:13–20.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Aleksić I, Đuriš J, Ibrić S, et al. An investigation into the usefulness of different empirical modeling techniques for better control of spray-on fluidized bed melt granulation. Int J Pharm. 2015;496:627–635.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Aleksić I, Đuriš J, Ilić I, et al. In silico modeling of in situ fluidized bed melt granulation. Int J Pharm. 2014;466:21–30.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Goshima H, Do G, Nakagawa K. Impact of ice morphology on design space of pharmaceutical freeze-drying. J Pharm Sci. 2016;105:1920–1933.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kan S, Lu J, Liu J, et al. A quality by design (QbD) case study on enteric-coated pellets: Screening of critical variables and establishment of design space at laboratory scale. Asian J Pharm Sci. 2014;9:268–278.
   Google Scholar
• Eon-Duval A, Valax P, Solacroup T, et al. Application of the quality by design approach to the drug substance manufacturing process of an Fc fusion protein: towards a global multi‐step design space. J Pharm Sci. 2012;101:3604–3618.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hakemeyer C, McKnight N, St John R. Process characterization and design space definition. Biologicals. 2016;44:306–318.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Westerhuis JA, Coenegracht PMJ, Lerk CF. Multivariate modelling of the tablet manufacturing process with wet granulation for tablet optimization and in-process control. Int J Pharm. 1997;156:109–117.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sovány T, Tislér Z, Kristó K, et al. Estimation of design space for an extrusion–spheronization process using response surface methodology and artificial neural network modelling. Eur J Pharm Biopharm. 2016;106:79–87.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Patel SM, Pikal MJ. Lyophilization process design space. J Pharm Sci. 2013;102:3883–3887.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mortier STFC, Van Bockstal P-J, Corver J, et al. Uncertainty analysis as essential step in the establishment of the dynamic Design Space of primary drying during freeze-drying. Eur J Pharm Biopharm. 2016;103:71–83.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Thomson NM, Seibert KD, Tummala S, et al. Case studies in the applicability of drug substance design spaces developed on the laboratory scale to commercial manufacturing. Org Process Res Dev. 2015;19:925–934.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Peterson JJ. What your ICH Q8 design space needs: a multivariate predictive distribution. Pharm Manuf. 2009;8:23–28.
   Google Scholar
• Peterson JJ, Lief K. The ICH Q8 definition of design space: a comparison of the overlapping means and the bayesian predictive approaches. Stat Biopharm Res. 2010;2:249–259.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bergum J, Pfahler L, Senderak E, et al. Statistical considerations in design space development (Part I of III). Pharm Technol. 2010;34(7):66–70.
   Google Scholar
• Bergum J, Pfahler L, Senderak E, et al. Statistical considerations in design space development (Part II of III). Pharm Technol. 2010;34(8):52–60.
   Google Scholar
• Bergum J, Pfahler L, Senderak E, et al. Statistical considerations in design space development (Part III of III). Pharm Technol. 2011;34(9):1–12.
   Google Scholar
• Yu LX, Amidon G, Khan MA, et al. Understanding pharmaceutical quality by design. AAPS J. 2014;16:771–783.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Garcia T, Cook G, Nosal R. PQLI key topics: criticality, design space, and control strategy. J Pharm Innov. 2008;3:60–68.
   Google Scholar
• Muteki K, Swaminathan V, Sekulic SS, et al. De-risking pharmaceutical tablet manufacture through process understanding, latent variable modeling, and optimization technologies. AAPS PharmSciTech. 2011;12:1324–1334.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Dave VS, Saoji SD, Raut NA, et al. Variability and its impact on dosage form functionality. J Pharm Sci. 2015;104:906–915.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Anderson C, B, Igne Z, Shi, et al. Dynamic design space as an integrated component of quality by design. Poster presented at AIChE Annual Meeting; 2011.
   Google Scholar
• Kourti T. Pharmaceutical manufacturing: the role of multivariate analysis in design space, control strategy, process understanding, troubleshooting, and optimization. In: am Ende DJ, editor. Chemical engineering in the pharmaceutical industry: R&D to manufacturing. Hoboken (NJ): John Wiley & Sons, Inc; 2010. p. 853–878.
   Google Scholar
• am Ende DJ, Bronk KS, Mustakis J, et al. API quality by design example from the torcetrapib manufacturing process. J Pharm Innov. 2007;2:71–86.
   Google Scholar
• Park G-J. Design of experiments. In: Analytic methods for design practice. London (UK): Springer; 2007. p. 309–391.
   Google Scholar
• Cavazzuti M. Design of experiments. In: Optimization methods, from theory to design scientific and technological aspects in mechanics. Berlin: Springer; 2013. p. 13–42.
   Google Scholar
• Mahesh S, Graham M. Practical considerations for DoE implementation in quality by design. BioProcess Int. 2010;8(6):22–30.
   Google Scholar
• Eriksson L, Johansson E, Kettaneh-Wold N, et al. Design of experiments, principles and applications, third revised and enlarged edition. Umea (Sweden): Umetrics Academy; 2008.
   Google Scholar
• Gabrielsson J, Lindberg N-O, Lundstedt T. Multivariate methods in pharmaceutical industry. J Chemometr. 2002;16:141–160.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Khuri AI, Mukhopadhyay S. Response surface methodology. WIREs Comp Stat. 2010;2:128–149.
   Google Scholar
• Myers RH, Montgomery DC, Anderson-Cook CM. Response surface methodology: process and product optimization using designed experiments. 4th ed. New York: Wiley; 2016.
   Google Scholar
• Charoo NA, Ali AA. Quality risk management in pharmaceutical development. Drug Develop Ind Pharm. 2013;39:947–960.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bezerra MA, Santelli RE, Oliveira EP, et al. Response surface methodology (RSM) as a tool for optimization in analytical chemistry. Talanta. 2008;76:965–977.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kourti T, Lepore J, Liesum L, et al. Scientific and regulatory considerations for implementing mathematical models in the quality by design (QbD) framework (Part 2). Pharm Eng. 2015;34:38–51.
   Google Scholar
• FDA, Center for Drug Evaluation and Research, Center for Biologics Evaluation and Research. ICH, guidance for industry: Q8, Q9, & Q10 questions and answers. 2012. [Internet]; Available from: http://www.fda.gov/downloads/drugs/guidancecomplianceregulatoryinformation/guidances/ucm313094.pdf
   Google Scholar
• Lunney PD, Cogdill RP, Drennen JK, III. Innovation in pharmaceutical experimentation Part 1: review of experimental designs used in industrial pharmaceutics research and introduction to Bayesian D-optimal experimental design. J Pharm Innov. 2008;3:188–203.
   Google Scholar
• von Stosch M, Hamelink J-M, Oliveira R. Hybrid modeling as a QbD/PAT tool in process development: an industrial E. coli case study. Bioprocess Biosyst Eng. 2016;39:773–784.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Umetrics, AN MKS Company. Design of experiments and QbD. 2013.
   Google Scholar
• Chatterjee S. Role of models in the quality by design (QbD) paradigm: regulatory perspective. 2011. [Internet]; Available from: http://www.fda.gov/downloads/aboutfda/centersoffices/ officeofmedicalproductsandtobacco/cder/ucm301042.pdf
   Google Scholar
• von Stosch M, Davy S, Francois K, et al. Hybrid modeling for quality by design and PAT: benefits and challenges of applications in biopharmaceutical industry. Biotechnol J. 2014;9:719–726.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• EMA, FDA. Questions and answers on design space verification. 2013. [Internet]; Available from: http://www.ema.europa.eu/docs/en_GB/document_library/Other/2013/11/WC500153784.pdf
   Google Scholar
• Lepore J, Spavins J. PQLI design space. J Pharm Innov. 2008;3:79–87.
   Google Scholar
• Teasdale A. Regulatory highlights. Org Process Res Dev. 2014;18:1164–1168.
   Google Scholar
• Teasdale A. Regulatory highlights. Org Process Res Dev. 2014;18:468–472.
   Google Scholar
• Schmidt M. The Sankey diagram in energy and material flow management, part I: history. J Ind Ecol. 2008;12:82–94.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Schmidt M. The Sankey diagram in energy and material flow management, Part II: methodology and current applications. J Ind Ecol. 2008;12:173–185.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar