No abstract

No abstract

No abstract

The freeze-drying process scale-up and transfer remain a complicated and non-uniform practice. We summarized inefficient and good practices in these papers and provided some practical advice. It was demonstrated that using the same process set points/times in laboratory and commercial scale dryers may lead to loss of product quality (collapse or vial breakage). The emerging modeling approach demonstrated practical advantages. However, the upfront generation of some input parameters (vial heat transfer coefficient, minimum controllable pressure, and maximum sublimation rate) is essential for model utilization. While the primary drying step can be transferred with a high degree of confidence (e.g., using modeling), and secondary drying is usually fairly straightforward, predicting potential changes in product behavior during freezing remains challenging. Graphical Abstract

The objective of this investigation was to evaluate two methods for measuring the maximum sublimation rate that a freeze-dryer will support—the minimum controllable pressure method and the choke point method. Both methods gave equivalent results, but the minimum controllable pressure method is preferred, since it is easier, faster, and less subjective. The ratio of chamber pressure to condenser pressure corresponding to the onset of choked flow was considerably higher in this investigation (up to about 20:1) than in previously published reports. This ratio was not affected by the location of the pressure gauge on the condenser; that is, on the foreline of the vacuum pump versus on the body of the condenser itself. The total water loss due to sublimation as measured by tunable diode laser absorption spectroscopy was consistently within 5% of gravimetrically determined weight loss, regardless of whether the measurement took place during choked versus non-choked process conditions.