IVIVC

IMPORTANCE OF IVIVC AND METHODS OF ESTABLISHING IVIVC

1. INTRODUCTION
The therapeutic efficacy of pharmaceutical formulations is governed by factors
related to both the in vitro dissolution characteristics of the drug and its in vivo
bioavailability. This inherent interdependency within the drug - patient biosystem is the
major concern that underlines the importance of in vitro/in vivo correlation studies. The
dissolution rate of a specific dosage form is an arbitrary parameter that is very dependant
on the methodology utilized in generating the data. Changes in
o Type of apparatus,
o Dissolution medium,
o Agitation speed,
etc can modify dramatically the dissolution pattern. Therefore, unless it is demonstrated
experimentally that the in vitro dissolution behavior reflects the in vivo performance in
humans, the data can be of no relevant value in predicting or passing any judgment on the
clinical effectiveness of the drug product.
Thus in other words the bioavailability implications of dissolution should never be
accepted on faith; rather it has to be proved through carefully designed in vitro-in vivo
correlation studies.
Long back, Wagner had stated that, Future research in dissolution rate should be
directed mainly towards establishing correlation of in-vitro data with in-vivo data.

A) DEFINITION OF IVIVC
In vitro and in vivo correlation (IVIVC) for drug products, especially for solid oral dosage
forms, has been developed to predict product bioavailability from in vitro dissolution.
Biological properties such as Cmax, or AUC have been used to correlate with in vitro
dissolution behavior such as percent drug release in order to establish IVIVC. IVIVC can be
used to set product dissolution specifications; and as a surrogate for in vivo bioequivalence
in the case of any changes with respect
to formulation, process, or manufacturing site.

o IVIVC has been defined by the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) as A predictive
mathematical model describing relationship between in-vitro property of a dosage
form and in-vivo response.

B) CRITERIA FOR IVIVC
o Successful IVIVC can be developed when in-vitro dissolution is rate limiting step in
absorption and appearance of drug in in-vivo circulation following oral or other routes of
administration.
o These studies are to be conducted during the early stages of drug product development
in order to select the most effective formulation and to establish appropriate dosage
regimen.


o The release-controlling excipient in the formulations should either be identical or very
similar.

C) OBJECTIVE OF IVIVC
o To reduce the number of human studies during the formulation development
o To serve as a surrogate for in vivo bioavailability
o To support biowaivers.
o To validates the use of dissolution methods and specification settings (This is because
the IVIVC includes in vivo relevance to in vitro dissolution specifications).
o To assist quality control for certain scale-up and post-approval changes (SUPAC).

Due to all above objective, such IVIVC leads to
1. Shortens the drug development period,
2. Economizes the resources and
3. Leads to improved product quality.

D) NEED FOR IVIVC
o Theoretically, correlation of in-vivo absorption rate with clinical response will be the
most worthwhile approach. But, clinical approach is a poor tool for accurate
measurement of bioavailability.
o Determination of drug level at the site of administration would be next logical approach.
But again, with some exceptions, its impossible.
o Urinary excretion analysis of drug is meaningful for establishing IVIVC but due to
complicated pharmacokinetic considerations, such as drug metabolism and urine
collection problems.thus it is generally assumed that blood(serum/plasma) level
measurements give a better assessment of bioavailability and bioequivalence.
o This relationship is an important item of research in the development of drug delivery
systems.
o A good IVIVC model can explore the relationship between in vitro dissolution or release
and in vivo absorption profiles.
o The IVIVC model relationship facilities the rational development and evaluation of
immediate or extended release dosage form as a tool for formulation screening ,in
setting dissolution specifications and as a surrogate for bioequivalence testing.

Factors to Consider for Meaningful IVIVC
Strategies to develop meaningful IVIVC for MR products are summarized below. It is
important first to obtain in vivo data, and then identify the in vivo drug release mechanism.
The in vitro release method can then be designed with consideration to the in vivo release
profile and mechanism.

E) FACTORS AFFECTING DEVELOPMENT OF A PREDICTABLE IVIVC:-
The following factors play a vital role in development of a predictable IVIVC
1. Complexity of the delivery system.
2. Composition of formulation
3. Method of manufacture
4. Physicochemical properties.
5. Dissolution method.



Some compound properties will prohibit the successful application of IVIVC, such as
o Those with a narrow therapeutic window,
o Those with a variable first-pass effect,
o Endogenous compounds,
o Prodrugs or those with multiple response populations.



Current uses of in vitro release testing method
Formulation development
Quality assurance and process control
Evaluation of the changes in the manufacturing process
Substantiation of label claims
Compendial testing

2. SOME COMMON TERMS
A) MEAN ABSORPTION TIME: The mean time required for drug to reach systemic
circulation from the time of drug administration.
MAT = MRT
oral
MRT
i.v.
B) MEAN IN-VIVO DISSOLUTION TIME: It reflects the mean time for drug to dissolve in-
vivo. For solid dosage form:
MDT
solid
= MRT
solid
MRT
solution
.
C) MEAN RESIDENCE TIME: The mean time that the drug resides in the body. Also known
as mean transit time.
MRT = AUMC / AUC.
Where, AUMC = Area under first moment Curve (Concentration*time Vs time)
AUC = Area under curve (Concentration Vs time)
D) PERCENT PREDICTION ERROR:
% PE = [(observed value Predicted value) / observed value] x 100

3. LEVELS OF CORRELATION
There are five levels of IVIVC, which include levels A, B, C, multiple C and D.

A) LEVEL A CORRELATION
o This correlation represents a point-to-point relationship between in vitro dissolution and
in vivo dissolution (input/absorption rate). Level A IVIVC is also viewed as a predictive
model for the relationship between the entire in vitro release time course and entire in
vivo response time course.
o In general, correlations are linear at this level. Although a concern of acceptable non-
linear correlation has been addressed, no formal guidance on the non-linear IVIVC has
been established.
o The data treatment involves Wagner-Nelson method (which considers body as a single
compartment) or Loo-Reigleman or Deconvolution (which needs plasma concentration
time data for a fast releasing formulation i.e. intravenous (i.v.) or fast release oral
formulation like solution or suspension or tablet for comparison) method followed by
comparison of fraction of drug absorbed and fraction of drug dissolved in-vitro to obtain
a linear correlation.
o Formulations showing Level A correlation require no additional human studies to justify
change in manufacturing site, raw material supplier or minor formulation changes.











o Level A correlation is the most informative and very useful from a regulatory perspective
since it is predictive of the dosage forms in vivo performance.

Significance of Level A Correlation
A Level A correlation defines a linear relationship between in vitro and in vivo data so that
measurement of the in vitro dissolution rate alone is sufficient to determine the
pharmacokinetic profile in vivo. After a proper validation, IVIVC predicts the in vivo
bioavailability results from in
vitro dissolution data,and this simulation reflects the in vivo behavior of the various
formulations (8). In the presence of an IVIVC,the FDA states (2),

In vitro dissolution testing is important for (1) providing process control and quality
assurance, (2) determining stable release characteristics of
the product over time; and (3) facilitating certain regulatory determinations (e.g.,absence of
effect of minor formulation changes or of change in manufacturing site on performance). In
certain
cases, especially for ER formulations, the dissolution test can serve not only as a quality
control for the manufacturing process but also as an indicator of how the formulation will
performin vivo.
Thus,a main objective of developing and evaluating an IVIVC is to establish the dissolution
test as a surrogate for human bioequivalence studies

That highlights the significance of IVIVC and dissolution studies both during development
and throughout the life of the product. For example,the establishment of dissolution limits
could be based on IVIVC, as stated by FDA. IVIVC can also be used to support biowaivers in
two cases over the five categories described in the SUPAC guidance (2,3).

Conclusion
Level A IVIVCs define the relationship between an in vitro dissolution curve and an in vivo
input (absorption) profile. A Level A correlation should always be tried a priori in order to
have a tool that allows a complete in vivo prediction from an in vitro dissolution curve and
thus accelerates the development and assists in some regulatory aspects
(SUPAC). The correlation quality depends solely on the quality of the data. As in vivo data
are now well standardized, the main effort must be directed to the in vitro data. Various
apparatus and media should be tested and assessed in terms of their in vivo predictability.
The user
should always be aware of the limits of the method and of
the confidence of its prediction.



B) LEVEL B CORRELATION
o A predictive mathematical model for relationship between summery parameters that
characterize the in-vitro and in-vivo time course i.e. it compares the Mean In-vitro
Dissolution Time (MDT
vitro
) to the Mean In-vivo Dissolution Time (MDT
vivo
), Mean in vitro
dissolution time (MDT
vitro
to the Mean Residence Time In-vivo (MRT), or In-vitro
Dissolution Rate Constant (k
d
) to Absorption Rate Constant(k
a
).
o In Level B correlation, the mean in vivo dissolution or mean residence time is compared
to the mean in vitro dissolution time by using statistical moment analytical methods.
o This type of correlation uses all of the in vitro and in vivo data; thus, it is not considered
as a point-to-point correlation.
o This is of limited interest and use because more than one kind of plasma curve produces
similar mean residence time.



C) LEVEL C CORRELATION
o A predictive mathematical model of relationship between the amounts dissolved in-vitro
at a particular time (e.g., % of drug dissolved in 1 hour) or time required for in-vitro
dissolution of a fixed percent of dose (e.g., T50%,T90%) and a summery pharmacokinetic
parameter that characterizes in-vivo time course. e.g., Cmax, Tmax, T1/2 or AUC.
o Its considered as lowest correlation level as it does not reflect a complete shape of
plasma concentration time curve.



D) MULTIPLE LEVEL C CORRELATIONS
o It relates one or more pharmacokinetic parameters to the percent drug dissolved at
several time points of dissolution profile. Thus be more useful
o If a multiple level C correlation exists, theres a possibility of Level A correlation.




Level In vitro In vivo
A Dissolution curve Input (absorption) curves
B Statistical Moments: MDT
Statistical Moments: MRT,
MAT, etc
C
Disintegration time, Time to
have 10, 50, 90% Dissolved,
Dissolution rate, Dissolution
efficiency
C
max
, T
max
, K
a
, Time to have
10, 50, 90% absorbed, AUC
(total or cumulative),


NOTE:-
Level B and C correlations can be useful in early formulation development, including
selecting the appropriate excipients, to optimize manufacturing processes, for quality
control purposes, and to characterize the release patterns of newly formulated immediate-
release and modified-release products relative to the reference.

E) LEVEL D CORRELATION
1. Level D correlation is a rank order and qualitative analysis and is not considered useful
for regulatory purposes. It is not a formal correlation but serves as an aid in the
development of a formulation or processing procedure

4. CORRELATION METHODS
A) SIMPLE POINT TYPE
The percentage of drug dissolved in a given time or the time taken for a certain
percentage of drug to be dissolved, is correlated with certain parameter of the
bioavailability

B) COMPARISON OF PROFILES
o The entire in vivo response time profile can be correlated to the entire dissolution rate
time curve.
o Some of the in vivo and in vitro parameters employed for correlation are as follows.

In vivo data In vitro data
1. Plasma conc. time profile
o Plasma concentration at time t,
o C max,
o tmax,
o AUC
o
t
AUC
o

o t30% t50% t90%

1. Percent drug dissolution profile
o Percent drug dissolved at time t,
o tmax,
o Time taken for maximum amount of drug to
dissolve.
o Total amt. of drug dissolved.
o Time for a certain percentage of drug to
dissolve such as t30% t50% t90%
2. Pharmacokinetic parameters
o Absorption &elimination rate
constant & half life
2. Kinetic parameter
o Dissolution rate constant.
o Dissolution half life
3. Percent drug absorbed time profile
3. Percent drug dissolved time profile
o Percent drug dissolved at time t
4. Statistical moment analysis
o MRT , MAT
4. Statistical moment analysis
o MDT



C) DIRECT,DIFFERENTIAL-EQUATION-BASED
in-vitro-in-vivo correlation (IVIVC) method = a novel method
A new, differential equation-based in-vitro-in-vivo correlation (IVIVC) method is
proposed that directly relates the time-profiles of in-vitro dissolution rates and in-vivo
plasma concentrations by using one- or multi-compartment pharmacokinetic models and a
corresponding system of differential equations.
The rate of in-vivo input is connected to the rate of in-vitro dissolution through a
general functional dependency that allows for time scaling and time shifting. A multiplying
factor that accounts for the variability of absorption conditions as the drug moves along is
also incorporated.
Two data sets incorporating slow-, medium-, and fast-release formulations were
used to test the applicability of the method, and predictive powers were assessed with a
leave-one-formulation-out approach. All fitted parameters had realistic values, and good or
acceptable fits and predictions were obtained as measured by plasma concentration mean
squared errors and percent AUC errors. Introduction of step-down functions that account
for the transit of the dosage form past the intestinal sites of absorption proved useful.
By avoiding the integral transforms used in the existing deconvolution- or
convolution-based IVIVC models, the present method can provide increased transparency,
improved performance, and greater modelling flexibility

IMPORTANT CONSIDERATIONS IN DEVELOPING A CORRELATION
o When the dissolution is not influenced by factors such as pH, surfactants, osmotic
pressure, mixing intensity, enzyme, ionic strength, and a set of dissolution data obtained
from one formulation is correlated with a deconvoluted plasma concentration-time data
set.
o In a linear correlation, the in vitro dissolution and in vivo input curves may be directly
superimposable or may be made to be superimposable by the use of appropriate scaling
factor (time corrections).
o If one or more of the formulations may not illustrate the same relationship between in
vitro performance and in vivo profiles compared with the other formulations, the
correlation is still valid
o The in vitro dissolution methodology should be able to adequately discriminate between
the study formulations.
o During the early stages of correlation development, dissolution conditions may be
altered to attempt to develop a one-to-one correlation between the in vitro dissolution
profile and the in vivo dissolution profile
o An established correlation is valid only for a specific type of pharmaceutical dosage form
(tablets, gelatin capsules, etc.) with a particular release mechanism (matrix, osmotic
system, etc.) and particular main excipient and additives
o Extrapolation of IVIVC established in healthy subjects to patients has to be taken into
account.
o The release rates, as measured by percent dissolved, for each formulation studied,
should differ adequately (e.g., by 10%).

5. ESTABLISHING IN VITRO/IN VIVO CORRELATION
It can be achieved using
1. Pharmacological correlations based on clinical observations.
2. Semi quantitative correlations based on the drug blood levels or urinary excretion data.


3. Quantitative correlations arising from absorption kinetics and calculation of in vivo
dissolution rate and absorption rate constants.

TWO BASIC TYPE OF CORRELATION
1. Quantitative correlation:-In vivo parameter-y ,in vitro-x, y= mx +c
o Pearson product moment correlation coefficient, r (-1 to +1) quantify strength of
relationship between x & y.
o If r is close to 1 (strong correlation) If r is close to zero (weak correlation)

2. Rank order correlation :-( spearman rank correlation, rs) Values of the two variables
are ranked in ascending or descending order.

6. STAGES OF IVIVC MODEL DEVELOPMENT
Model development involves two stages:
1. Model development
2. Model validation

A) MODEL DEVELOPMENT
o The principles of IVIVC model development have been successfully applied to oral
dosage forms. However, the ground rules for developing and validating IVIVC models for
novel and non-oral dosage forms/delivery systems (microspheres, implants, liposome,
etc) are still unclear today.
o For orally administered drugs, IVIVC is expected for highly permeable drugs or drugs
under dissolution rate-limiting conditions, which is supported by the Biopharmaceutical
Classification System (BCS).
o For extended-release formulations following oral administration, modified BCS
containing the three classes (high aqueous solubility, low aqueous solubility, and
variable solubility) is proposed.

Class Solubility Permeability IVIVC expectation
I. High High
IVIVC: if dissolution rate is slower than gastric
emptying rate.
Otherwise limited or no correlation required.
II. Low High
IVIVC is expected if in-vitro dissolution rate is similar
to in-vivo dissolution rate, unless dose is very high.
III. High Low
Absorption/permeability is rate determining and
limited or no correlation with dissolution rate.
IV. Low Low Limited or no IVIVC expected.

A number of methods are available to probe the in vitro-in vivo relationships. Among
the earliest methods are the two-stage Deconvolution methods that involve estimation of
the in vivo absorption profile from the concentration-time data using the Wagner-Nelson
methods (Stage 1). Subsequent to the estimation of the in vivo absorption profile, the
relationship with in vitro dissolution is evaluated (Stage 2). More recently, one-stage
convolution-based approaches for IVIVC have been investigated.
The one-stage convolution methods compute the in vivo absorption and
simultaneously model the in vitro-in vivo data.


While the two-stage method allows for systematic model development, the one-
stage method obviates the need for the administration of an intravenous, oral solution or
immediate-release bolus dose.
The most basic IVIVC models are expressed as a simple linear equation (Equation 1)
between the in vivo drug absorption and in vitro drug dissolved (released).
Y (in vivo absorption) = mX (in vitro drug dissolved) + C

In this equation, m is the slope of the relationship, and C is the intercept.

Ideally, m=1 and C=0, indicating a linear relationship. However, depending on the
nature of the modified-release system, some data are better fitted using nonlinear models,
such as Sigmoid, Weibull, Higuchi, or Hixson-Crowell.
Equation 1 may be applied to most formulations with comparable in vitro and in vivo
duration of release. However, for dosage forms with complicated mechanisms of release,
which are of longer duration, in vitro release may not be in the same time scale as the in
vivo release. Thus, in order to model such data, it is necessary to incorporate time-shifting
and time-scaling parameters within the model (Figure 1). This is the kind of data that is
routinely encountered in the development of sustained-release dosage forms.

In vivo release rate (Xvivo) can also be expressed as a function of in vitro release
rate (Xrel,vitro) with parameters (a, b), which may be empirically selected and refined using
appropriate mathematical processes as shown in Equation 2.An iterative process may be
used to compute the time-scaling and time-shifting parameters.

Xvivo (t) = Xrel, vitro (a + bt)

DETERMINING THE FRACTION OF DOSE ABSORBED
o Model Dependent methods
1. Wagner Nelson Equation
2. Loo-Riegelman Method

o Model Independent methods
1. Deconvolution

B) MODEL VALIDATION
o It can be accomplished using data from the formulations used to build the model
(internal validation) or using data obtained from a different (new) formulation (external
validation).
o While internal validation serves the purpose of providing basis for the acceptability of
the model, external validation is superior and affords greater confidence in the model.

1. Internal Validation:
(1) Using the IVIVC model, for each formulation, the relevant exposure parameters (C
max

and AUC) are predicted and compared to the actual (observed) values. The prediction
errors are calculated using Equation.3
Prediction Error (%PE) = (C
max observed
C
max predicted
) * 100
C
max observed



= (AUC
observed
AUC
predicted
) * 100
AUC
observed
(2) The criteria set in the FDA guidance on IVIVC are as follows: For C
max
and AUC, the mean
absolute percent prediction error (% PE) should not exceed 10%, and the prediction error
for individual formulations should not exceed 15%.

2. External Validation:
(1) For establishing external predictability, the exposure parameters for a new formulation
are predicted using its in vitro dissolution profile and the IVIVC model and the predicted
parameters are compared to the observed parameters.
(2) The prediction errors are computed as for the internal validation. For Cmax and AUC, the
prediction error for the external validation formulation should not exceed 10%. A
prediction error of 10% to 20% indicates inconclusive predictability and illustrates the
need for further study using additional data sets.
(3) For drugs with narrow therapeutic index, external validation is required despite
acceptable internal validation, whereas internal validation is usually sufficient with non-
narrow therapeutic index drugs.

7. EVALUATION OF IVIVC
Depending on the intended application of an IVIVC and the therapeutic index of the
drug, evaluation of prediction error internally and/or externally may be appropriate.
Evaluation of internal predictability is based on the initial data used to define the IVIVC
model. Evaluation of external predictability is based on additional test data sets.
Internal predictability is applied to IVIVC established using formulations with three or
more release rates for non-narrow therapeutic index drugs exhibiting conclusive prediction
error. If two formulations with different release rates are used to develop IVIVC, then the
application of IVIVC would be limited to specified categories. Under these circumstances, for
complete evaluation and subsequent full application of the IVIVC, prediction of error
externally is recommended.
External predictability evaluation is not necessary unless the drug is a narrow
therapeutic index, or only two release rates were used to develop the IVIVC, or, if the
internal predictability criteria are not met i.e. prediction error internally is inconclusive.
However, since the IVIVC will potentially be used to predict the in vivo performance for
future changes, it is of value to evaluate external predictability when additional data are
available.
The objective of IVIVC evaluation is to estimate the magnitude of the error in
predicting the in vivo bioavailability results from in vitro dissolution data. This objective
should guide the choice and interpretation of evaluation methods. Any appropriate
approach related to this objective may be used for evaluation of predictability.

8. APPLICATIONS OF IVIVC IN DRUG DELIVERY

1. EARLY STAGES OF DRUG DELIVERY TECHNOLOGY DEVELOPMENT
Proof-of-Concept the selection of a drug candidate marks the most crucial stage in
the life cycle of drug development. Such selection is primarily based on the drug
developability criteria, which include physicochemical properties of the drug and the
results obtained from preliminary studies involving several in vitro systems and in vivo
animal models, which address efficacy and toxicity issues. During this stage, exploring the


relationship between in vitro and in vivo properties of the drug in animal models provide an
idea about the feasibility of the drug delivery system for a given drug. In such correlations,
study designs including study of more than one formulation of the modified-release dosage
forms and a rank order of release (fast/slow) of the formulations should be incorporated.
Even though the formulations and methods used at this stage are not optimal, they prompt
better design and development efforts in the future.

2. FORMULATION ASSESSMENT
In Vitro Dissolution a suitable dissolution method that is capable of distinguishing the
performance of formulations with different release rates in vitro and in vivo is an important
tool in product development. IVIVC facilitates the process of such method development.
Depending on the nature of the correlation, further changes to the dissolution method can
be made. When the discriminatory in vitro method is validated, further formulation
development can be relied on the in vitro dissolution only.

3. DISSOLUTION SPECIFICATIONS
Modified-release dosage forms typically require dissolution testing over multiple
time points, and IVIVC plays an important role in setting these specifications. Specification
time points are usually chosen in the early, middle, and late stages of the dissolution
profiles. In the absence of an IVIVC, the range of the dissolution specification rarely exceeds
10% of the dissolution of the pivotal clinical batch. However, in the presence of IVIVC,
wider specifications may be applicable based on the predicted concentration-time profiles
of test batches being bioequivalent to the reference batch.
The process of setting dissolution specifications in the presence of an IVIVC starts by
obtaining the reference (pivotal clinical batch) dissolution profile. The dissolution of batches
with different dissolution properties (slowest and fastest batches included) should be used
along with the IVIVC model, and prediction of the concentration time profiles should be
made using an appropriate convolution method. Specifications should optimally be
established such that all batches with dissolution profiles between the fastest and slowest
batches are bioequivalent and less optimally bioequivalent to the reference batch.


Main phenomena after administration of various formulations (8).

4. FUTURE BIOWAIVERS
Frequently, drug development requires changes in formulations due to a variety of
reasons, such as unexpected problems in stability, development, availability of better
materials, better processing results, etc.


Having an established IVIVC can help avoid bioequivalence studies by using the
dissolution profile from the changed formulation, and subsequently predicting the in vivo
concentration-time profile. This predicted profile could act as a surrogate of the in vivo
bioequivalence study. This has enormous cost-saving benefit in the form of reduced drug
development spending and speedy implementation of post-approval changes. The nature of
post-approval changes could range from minor (such as a change in non release-controlling
excipient) to major (such as site change, equipment change, or change in method of
manufacture, etc).

5. IVIVC PARENTERAL DRUG DELIVERY
IVIVC can be developed and applied to parenteral dosage forms, such as controlled-
release particulate systems, implants, etc, that are either injected or implanted. However,
there are relatively fewer successes in the development of IVIVC for such dosage forms,
which could be due to several reasons, a few of which are discussed further.

1. Burst Release - In the case of polymer-based delivery systems, the underlying issue
with developing IVIVC is drug release during the initial period called burst release, which
results in biphasic plasma profiles. The bi-phasic profile is believed to occur due to the
loosely associated drug particles with the surface of the (polymer) particles. Because the
burst release is unpredictable and unavoidable, sophisticated modeling techniques are
needed to correlate the in vitro and in vivo data.

2. Potent Drugs & Chronic Therapy - In general, several parenteral drug delivery
systems are developed for potent drugs (e.g., hormones, growth factors, antibiotics, etc)
and for long-term delivery (anywhere from a day to a few weeks to months). The design
of such systems is very complex, and changing the composition or method of
manufacture of these systems would affect their in vivo performance drastically.

3. Limited volume of tissue fluids and Area of absorption at the site of administration,
unlike following the oral route of administration. Therefore, it is very difficult to specify
the in vitro dissolution conditions that reflect the observed differences in the in vivo
plasma profiles corresponding to the in vitro release profiles. In such instances, to
establish a good IVIVC model, the drug concentrations should be monitored in the tissue
fluids at the site of administration by techniques such as microdialysis, and then the
correlation should be established to the in vitro release.

9. NEW IVIVC APPLICATIONS
A) IVIVC FOR TRANSDERMAL ESTRADIOL SYSTEMS (Noven pharmaceuticals)
The data generated in development of Novens Vivelle. Dot
TM
using human cadaver
skin has enabled such an IVIVC. Utilizing this human cadaver model, a ratio of skin
permeation of 2.9 to 1.0 was established over five studies for Vivelle.Dot
TM
vs. Vivelle
R
.This
ratio of skin permeation or Estradiol delivery was subsequently confirmed, in vivo, on
human volunteers in a pharmacokinetic study involving 12 patients where bioequivalence
was demonstrated.

B) WHY IVIVC FAIL FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE DOSAGE FORM
For Level A analysis, the fraction drug absorbed (Fa) is plotted against the fraction
drug dissolved (Fd). The fraction drug absorbed profile is obtained by deconvoluting the


plasma profile. Deconvolution is essentially a back calculation to answer the question:
"What must the drug absorption profile have been, given the plasma profile?"
A statistic from Level A analysis is r, the correlation coefficient. Its square r2, ranges
from zero to one and is a measure of the strength of relationship between Fa against Fd.
Often, results with sufficiently large r2 (e.g. greater than 0.9) yielded "a (successful)
correlation." An r2 value that was too low resulted in a "no correlation" conclusion.
Only products with dissolution rate-limited absorption (and with complete
absorption) can be expected to exhibit a Level A plot with a slope of one and zero intercept,
immediate release products will "fail" the Level A method

C) DISSOLUTION SIMULATORS
In order to enhance the capability of in vitro dissolution as a predictor of the in vivo
behavior of dosage forms. But many of these attempts required highly complex and
expensive apparatus with questionable advantage over traditional systems.

1. Gronings model: - It consists of two interconnecting flow through cells and a
reservoir for the dissolution medium, all contained in a constant temperature water
bath. The dosage form disintegrates in the gastric part of the model and some of the
drug particles are continuously pumped into the intestinal part. During an experiment
the cells are rotated by a slow speed electric motor. Unlike conventional dissolution
apparatus it gave good IVIVC.



2. Sartorius dissolution simulator: - This was designed to be used in conjunction
with c&d apparatus. The dissolution simulator is composed of two identical plastic
cylinders containing dissolution media, the pH of which can be changed to mimic the
passage from stomach to intestine. Membrane filters are used with the system and the
cylinders rotate around a horizontal axis to provide a gentle agitation .Samples are
withdrawn automatically for analysis at a rate that is related to the rate of drug
diffusion in the absorption simulator.

SINTERED GLASS
FILTER
GLASS BEADS
AXIS OF
ROTATION
SINTERED GLASS FILTER

POROUS PLASTIC
A B
GRONINGS MODEL


3. Sartorius membrane filter solubility simulator:-
4. Sartorius membrane filter absorption simulator:-This essentially consists of a
dialysis cell designed to determine the diffusion rate of the drug.

10. NON-LINEAR CORRELATION
IVIVCs reported in the literature are predominantly based on a linear relationship
between the bioavailability parameters and in vitro release data. Non-linear though
predictive IVIVCs studies, however, are very scarce in the literature. In the IVIVC study
reported by Sirisuth et al, linear and non-linear (quadratic, cubic and sigmoid functions)
correlation models were examined using pooled fraction dissolved and absorbed from
various combinations of the diltiazem extended release formulations.
Linear and non-linear regressions have also been attempted for in vivo input and in
vitro release for the controlled-release ethylcellulose-coated pellets containing adenosine
derivative. The relationship between fraction absorbed in vivo and fraction released in vitro
for membrane coated pellets was curvilinear indicating that there was a time-scale
difference between in vivo and in vitro testing being much shorter for in vivo absorption.
The authors, therefore, concluded that an in vitro dissolution test with a shorter time frame
and faster release may be required to establish a linear IVIV correlation (34).
IVIVR
One possible substitution for IVIVC is IVIVR, with "R" denoting "relationship." By comparison
with Level A IVIVC, IVIVR analysis would concern the
elucidation of the in vitro dissolution - in vivo absorption relationship. Hence, IVIVR need
not be limited to straight-line relationships, which appear to be generally incorrect for IR
products (1,6,7). One intent of IVIVR should be to learn about the relative contribution of
dissolution to a product's overall absorption kinetics.
One model for IVIVR is (3):

where
Fa is the fraction of the total amount of drug absorbed at time t,
fa is the fraction of the dose absorbed at t = #,
is the ratio of the apparent first-order permeation rate constant (kpaap) to the first-order
dissolution rate constant (kd), and
Fd is the fraction of drug dose dissolved at time t.
Of note is that the Level A method is a special (linear) case of eq 1. If fa = 1.0 (i.e. complete
-limited absorption), then Fa = Fd, as in
Fig 1.
This IVIVR analysis has been applied to several formulations of metoprolol, piroxicam, and
ranitidine (6,7). IVIVR analysis indicated that formulation properties and drug substance
biopharmaceutic properties influenced the degree to which dissolution controlled overall
absorption kinetics. Interestingly, dissolution was not rate-limiting from even the slowest
dissolving IR formulations for the high solubility drugs.


Future Directions

The use of the term IVIVR rather than IVIVC is preferred. Immediate release products are
amenable to dissolution-absorption analysis. However, the term IVIVR itself is neither new
(8), nor fundamental. Rather, what is needed is a better understanding of in vivo dissolution,
and its in vitro surrogate, the dissolution test. Additionally, dissolution needs to be
considered in the context of other parallel and sequential processes (e.g. permeability,
degradation, and transit). Through a better understanding of dissolution, dissolution and
IVIVR can facilitate not only SUPAC-type changes, but also facilitate drug product
development.
QUESTION BANK
1. What do you mean by IVIVC? Add a brief note on its importance.
2. Add a note on suitability and factors affecting predictable IVIVC?
3. Discuss different levels of correlation given by FDA?
4. Add a note on stages of IVIVC Model development?
5. Describe in brief application of IVIVC?
6. Add a note on future directions of IVIVC?
7. Write short note on
IVIVR
Dissolution simulators
Parenteral IVIVC
Causes of failure of Parenteral IVIVC

REFERENCES
1. Dissolution Methodologies and IVIVC; Marival Bermejo; University of Valencia
2. IVIVC: An Important Tool in the Development of Drug Delivery Systems; Gangadhar
Sunkara, PhD, and Dakshina M. Chilukuri, PhD. http://www.drugdeliverytech.com/cgi-
bin/articles.cgi?idArticle=144
3. Guidance for Industry; Extended Release Oral Dosage Forms: Development, Evaluation,
and Application of In Vitro/In Vivo Correlations; U.S. Department of Health and Human
Services Food and Drug Administration; Center for Drug Evaluation and Research
(CDER);September 1997;BP 2
4. IVIVC Vs IVIVR; James E. Polli, Ph.D.
http://www.dissolutiontech.com/DTresour/800Articles/800_art1.html
5. In-vitro in-vivo Correlation of oral Drug Formulations: An Overview; Dr. C.J. Shishu, S.S.
Salve, S.A. Shah and I.S. Rathod; Indian Journal of Pharmaceutical Sciences; 2000, 62 (3),
153 157.
6. Dissolution, Bioavailability and Bioequivalence by Hamed M.Abdou, Mack Publishing
House.
7. Journal Metadata Search: Pharmaceutical Press - Journal of Pharmacy and Pharmacology
Vol. 55, No. 4, pages 495 (2003)
8. Dissolution Technologies by J-M. Cardot1, E. Beyssac, and M. Alric FEBRUARY 2007
9. Journal of Pharmaceutical Science 9(2):169-189, 2006
10. The Pharmaceutical Journal Vol 277 No 7407 p19-20 1 July 2006