Abstract
The purpose of this study was to evaluate the effect of carrier particle size and simulated inspiratory flow increase rate on emptying from dry powder inhalers (DPIs). Several flow rate ramps were created using a computer-generated voltage signal linked to an electronic proportioning valve with a fast response time. Different linear ramps were programmed to reach 30, 60, 90, and 120 L/minute over 1, 2, or 3 seconds. At the lower flow rates, 100-ms and 500-ms ramps were also investigated. Three DPIs, Spinhaler, Rotahaler, and Turbuhaler, were used to test the effect of flow rate ramp on powder emptying. To test the effect of carrier particle size, anhydrous lactose was sieved into 3 particle sizes, and 20 mg of each was introduced into #2 and #3 hard gelatin capsules for Spinhaler and Rotahaler, respectively. Emptying tests were also carried out using the on/off solenoid valve described in the United States. Pharmacopeia (USP) (resulting in no ramp generation). Powder emptying increased from 9% to 46% for Rotahaler and 69% to 86% for Spinhaler from the shallowest (3 seconds to reach peak flow) to the 100-ms ramp for the 53-to 75-μm lactose size range at 30 L/minute. Similar trends were observed for larger particle size fractions at the same flow rate. However, at higher airflow rates (60, 90, and 120 L/minute), there was no significant increase in percentage of emptying within the ramps for a particular particle size range. Trends observed were similar for placebo-filled Turbuhaler and commercially available Rotacaps used with Rotahaler, with the steepest ramp demonstrating more complete emptying. Percentage of powder emptying determined by the USP solenoid valve overestimated the emitted dose compared with the ramp method at 30 L/minute for all 3 devices. Results indicate that there is a significant difference in powder emptying at 30 L minute from the shallowest to the steepest ramp within a particular size range. Within a particular particle size range, the USP method produced more complete emptying than even the steepest ramp, especially at the lower flow rates. Thus, when the USP device is used to estimate DPI emptying at lower flow rates, the results are likely to overestimate DPI performance significantly.
References
- 1.Rees J, Price J. Asthma in children treatment. BMJ. 1995;310:1522–1527. doi: 10.1136/bmj.310.6993.1522. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 2.Cutie A, Sciana J.Therapeutic inhalation aerosols in the treatment of asthma Am J of Hosp Pharm 1989461845–1855.2679064 [Google Scholar]
- 3.Prime D, Atkins P, Slater A, Sumby B. Review of dry powder inhalers. Advanced Drug Delivery Reviews. 1997;26:51–58. doi: 10.1016/S0169-409X(97)00510-3. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 4.Bell J, Treneman B. Design and engineering of dry powder inhalers. Buffalo Grove, IL: Interpharm Press; 1994. pp. 93–99. [Google Scholar]
- 5.Nantel N, Newhouse M. Inspiratory flow rates through a novel dry powder inhaler (Clickhaler) in pediatric patients with asthma. J Aerosol Med. 1999;12:55–58. doi: 10.1089/jam.1999.12.55. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 6.Lucas P, Andersen K, Staniforth J. Protein deposition from dry powder inhalers: fine particle multiplets as performance modifiers. Pharm Res. 1998;15:562–568. doi: 10.1023/A:1011977826711. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 7.Hindle M, Byron P. Dose emissions from marketed dry powder inhalers. Int J Pharm. 1995:169–176.
- 8.Clark A, Bailey R. Inspiratory flow profiles in disease and their effects on the delivery characteristics of dry powder inhalers. Buffalo Grove, IL: Interpharm Press; 1996. pp. 221–228. [Google Scholar]
- 9.Hickey J, Concessio N, Platz R. Factors influencing the dispersion of dry powders as aerosols. PharmTech. 1994;18:58–64. [Google Scholar]
- 10.Srichana T, Martin G, Marriott C. The relationship between drug and carrier deposition from dry powder inhalers in vitro. Int J Pharm. 1998;167:13–23. doi: 10.1016/S0378-5173(98)00037-4. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
- 11.DeBoer A, Winter H, Lerk C. Part I. Inhalation characteristics, work of breathing and volunteer’s preferences in dependence of the inhaler resistance. Int J Pharm. 1996;130:231–244. doi: 10.1016/0378-5173(95)04326-8. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
- 12.DeBoer A, Gjaltema D, Hagedoom P. Inhalation characteristics and their effects on in vitro drug delivery from dry powder inhalers. Part 2. Effect of peak flow rate (PIFR) and inspiration time on the in vitro drug release from three different types of commercial dry powder inhalers. Int J Pharm. 1996;138:45–46. doi: 10.1016/0378-5173(96)04526-7. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
- 13.Steckel H, Muller B. In vitro evaluation of Dry Powder Inhalers Part 2. Influence of carrier particle size and concentration on in vitro deposition. Int J Pharm. 1997;154:31–37. doi: 10.1016/S0378-5173(97)00115-4. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
- 14.Byron P. Compendial dry powder testing: USP perspectives. Buffalo Grove, IL: Interpharm PRess; 1994. pp. 153–162. [Google Scholar]
- 15.Stimuli to the revision process. Pharmacoperal Forum 23. 1997;6:5216.
- 16.Clark A, Hollingworth A. The relationship between powder inhaler resistance and peak inspiratory conditions in healthy volunteers. Implications for in vitro testing. J Aerosol Med. 1993;6:99–110. doi: 10.1089/jam.1993.6.99. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]