Open Access


Read more
image01

Online Manuscript Submission


Read more
image01

Submitted Manuscript Trail


Read more
image01

Online Payment


Read more
image01

Online Subscription


Read more
image01

Email Alert



Read more
image01

Original Research Article | OPEN ACCESS

Optimization of pitavastatin calcium and ezetimibe combination tablet using full factorial design

Ji Eun Kim1, Shugeng Cao2, Jae Sung Pyo1 , Kang Min KIm3

1Department of Pharmacy, Kyungsung University, Busan, Republic of Korea,; 2Daniel K. Inouye College of Pharmacy, University of Hawai’i at Hilo, Hawaii, United States of America,; 3Department of Pharmaceutical Science and Technology, Kyungsung University, Busan, Republic of Korea.

For correspondence:-  Jae Sung Pyo   Email: jspyo@ks.ac.kr   Tel:+82-51-663-4891

Received: 18 October 2024        Accepted: 7 March 2025        Published: 30 March 2025

Citation: Kim J, Cao S, Pyo J, KIm K. Optimization of pitavastatin calcium and ezetimibe combination tablet using full factorial design. Trop J Pharm Res 2025; 24(3):293-302 doi: 10.4314/tjpr.v24i3.1

© 2025 The authors.
This is an Open Access article that uses a funding model which does not charge readers or their institutions for access and distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0) and the Budapest Open Access Initiative (http://www.budapestopenaccessinitiative.org/read), which permit unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly credited..

Abstract

Purpose: To identify the optimized region of formulation using quality by design for pitavastatin calcium (PTV) and ezetimibe (EZE) immediate-release fixed-dose combination tablets Methods: Hardness, friability, disintegration time, content, content uniformity, and dissolution rate were critical quality attributes (CQAs). Through the initial risk assessment, microcrystalline cellulose (MCC), sodium starch glycolate (SSG), the amount of water in the wet granulation part, and the main compression force were identified to affect the CQAs, and a full factorial design of the experiment (DoE) was applied. Results: Parameters in all the batches were significantly influenced based on the analysis of variance (p < 0.05). MCC affected content (p = 0.0002), content uniformity (p = 0.0002), and dissolution rate (p = 0.0131) while SSG affected friability (p = 0.0004), disintegration time (p < 0.0001), and dissolution rates (pH 4.5 for pravastatin: p = 0.0227, 0.5 % SLS (pH 4.5) for ezetimibe: p < 0.0001, and 0.5 % SLS (pH 6.8) for ezetimibe: p = 0.0434, respectively). The amount of water in wet granulation part and main compression were the main factors affecting hardness (p = 0.0143) and disintegration time (p = 0.0005). Optimized ranges included MCC (10 – 18 %), SSG (7.86 – 15 %), amount of water in the wet granulation part (38 – 43.52 %), and main compression (954 – 1133 kgf). Conclusion: The optimized region ranges of MCC, SSG, compression force, and the amount of water in the wet granulation for manufacturing process development have been successfully achieved by the design of experiments (DoE) approach.

Keywords: Critical quality attribute, Design of experiment, Ezetimibe, Pitavastatin, Quality by design

Impact Factor
Thompson Reuters (ISI): 0.6 (2023)
H-5 index (Google Scholar): 49 (2023)

Article Tools

Share this article with



Article status: Free
Fulltext in PDF
Similar articles in Google
Similar article in this Journal:

Archives

2025; 24: 
1,   2,   3
2024; 23: 
1,   2,   3,   4,   5,   6,   7,   8,   9,   10,   11,   12
2023; 22: 
1,   2,   3,   4,   5,   6,   7,   8,   9,   10,   11,   12
2022; 21: 
1,   2,   3,   4,   5,   6,   7,   8,   9,   10,   11,   12
2021; 20: 
1,   2,   3,   4,   5,   6,   7,   8,   9,   10,   11,   12
2020; 19: 
1,   2,   3,   4,   5,   6,   7,   8,   9,   10,   11,   12
2019; 18: 
1,   2,   3,   4,   5,   6,   7,   8,   9,   10,   11,   12
2018; 17: 
1,   2,   3,   4,   5,   6,   7,   8,   9,   10,   11,   12
2017; 16: 
1,   2,   3,   4,   5,   6,   7,   8,   9,   10,   11,   12
2016; 15: 
1,   2,   3,   4,   5,   6,   7,   8,   9,   10,   11,   12
2015; 14: 
1,   2,   3,   4,   5,   6,   7,   8,   9,   10,   11,   12
2014; 13: 
1,   2,   3,   4,   5,   6,   7,   8,   9,   10,   11,   12
2013; 12: 
1,   2,   3,   4,   5,   6
2012; 11: 
1,   2,   3,   4,   5,   6
2011; 10: 
1,   2,   3,   4,   5,   6
2010; 9: 
1,   2,   3,   4,   5,   6
2009; 8: 
1,   2,   3,   4,   5,   6
2008; 7: 
1,   2,   3,   4
2007; 6: 
1,   2,   3,   4
2006; 5: 
1,   2
2005; 4: 
1,   2
2004; 3: 
1
2003; 2: 
1,   2
2002; 1: 
1,   2

News Updates