TY - JOUR
T1 - Osmolality of Excipients for Parenteral Formulation Measured by Freezing Point Depression and Vapor Pressure – A Comparative Analysis
AU - Hugo Silva, Mariana
AU - Hudson, Sarah P.
AU - Tajber, Lidia
AU - Garin, Matthieu
AU - Dong, Wenyu
AU - Khamiakova, Tatsiana
AU - Holm, René
N1 - Publisher Copyright:
© 2022, The Author(s), under exclusive licence to Springer Science+Business Media, LLC, part of Springer Nature.
PY - 2023/7
Y1 - 2023/7
N2 - Purpose: To investigate the difference in methods to determine the osmolality in solutions of stabilizers used for long-acting injectable suspensions. Methods: The osmolality was measured by freezing point depression and vapor pressure for 11 different polymers and surfactants (PEG 3350, 4000, 6000, 8000, 20,000, PVP K12, K17 and K30, poloxamer 188, 388 and 407, HPMC E5, Na-CMC, polysorbate 20 and 80, vitamin E-TPGS, phospholipid, DOSS and SDS) in different concentrations. Results: Independently of the measuring method, an increase in osmolality with increasing concentration was observed for all polymers and surfactants, as would be expected due to the physicochemical origin of the osmolality. No correlation was found between the molecular weight of the polymers and the measured osmolality. The osmolality values were different for PVPs, PEGs, and Na-CMC using the two different measurement methods. The values obtained by the freezing point depression method tended to be similar or higher than the ones provided by vapor pressure, overall showing a significant difference in the osmolality measured by the two investigated methods. Conclusions: For lower osmolality values (e.g. surfactants), the choice of the measuring method was not critical, both the freezing point depression and vapor pressure could be used. However, when the formulations contained higher concentrations of excipients and/or thermosensitive excipients, the data suggests that the vapor pressure method would be more suited.
AB - Purpose: To investigate the difference in methods to determine the osmolality in solutions of stabilizers used for long-acting injectable suspensions. Methods: The osmolality was measured by freezing point depression and vapor pressure for 11 different polymers and surfactants (PEG 3350, 4000, 6000, 8000, 20,000, PVP K12, K17 and K30, poloxamer 188, 388 and 407, HPMC E5, Na-CMC, polysorbate 20 and 80, vitamin E-TPGS, phospholipid, DOSS and SDS) in different concentrations. Results: Independently of the measuring method, an increase in osmolality with increasing concentration was observed for all polymers and surfactants, as would be expected due to the physicochemical origin of the osmolality. No correlation was found between the molecular weight of the polymers and the measured osmolality. The osmolality values were different for PVPs, PEGs, and Na-CMC using the two different measurement methods. The values obtained by the freezing point depression method tended to be similar or higher than the ones provided by vapor pressure, overall showing a significant difference in the osmolality measured by the two investigated methods. Conclusions: For lower osmolality values (e.g. surfactants), the choice of the measuring method was not critical, both the freezing point depression and vapor pressure could be used. However, when the formulations contained higher concentrations of excipients and/or thermosensitive excipients, the data suggests that the vapor pressure method would be more suited.
KW - freezing point depression
KW - osmolality
KW - parenteral vehicles
KW - suspension
KW - vapor pressure
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85128707756&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1007/s11095-022-03262-6
DO - 10.1007/s11095-022-03262-6
M3 - Article
C2 - 35460023
AN - SCOPUS:85128707756
SN - 0724-8741
VL - 40
SP - 1709
EP - 1722
JO - Pharmaceutical Research
JF - Pharmaceutical Research
IS - 7
ER -