1. The Biopharmaceutical Classification System (BCS)
Dr Mohammad Issa

2. Biopharmaceutical Classification System (BCS)
Biopharmaceutics Classification System (BCS) is a predictive approach to relate certain physicochemical characteristics of a drug substance and drug product to in-vivo bioavailability
BCS categorized drugs according to two key physico-chemical parameters:
Solubility
Permeability

3. Biopharmaceutical Classification System (BCS)
These two factors were selected because most orally administered drugs are absorbed via a passive diffusion process through the small intestine, where the extent of oral absorption is largely influenced by a drug’s membrane permeability and solubility

4. BCS Classes Class I Highly permeable Highly soluble Class II
Poorly soluble
Class III
Poorly permeable
Class IV

5. Biopharmaceutical Classification System (BCS)
According to the FDA guidelines, a high solubility drug is defined as one that, in the largest dose strength, fully dissolves in 250 mL of aqueous medium with the pH ranging from 1 to 7.5 at 37 ° C. Otherwise, drugs are considered poorly soluble. In other words, the highest therapeutic dose must dissolve in 250 mL of water at any physiological pH
In the same guidance as mentioned above, a drug is considered highly permeable if the extent of oral absorption is greater than 90%

6. Biopharmaceutical Classification System (BCS) objectives
to guide decisions with respect to in vivo and in vitro correlations and the need for bioequivalence studies
to provide a useful framework to identify appropriate dosage form designs that are aimed at overcoming absorption barriers posed by solubility and permeability related challenges

7. BCS Class I: High Solubility and High Permeability
Compounds belonging to this class are normally expected to dissolve quickly in gastric and intestinal fluids, and readily cross the intestinal wall through passive diffusion
BCS Class I are unlikely to show bioavailability or bioequivalence issues
Therefore, for BCS class I drugs, in vitro dissolution studies are thought to provide sufficient information to assure in vivo product performance making full in vivo bioavailability / bioequivalence studies unnecessary

8. BCS Class I: High Solubility and High Permeability
Although class I compounds are expected to have excellent oral absorption, given their high solubility and high permeability, additional absorption barriers may exist beyond the scope of the BCS
For example, luminal complexation and degradation can significantly limit the amount of drug available for absorption. Even after the drug crosses the intestinal membrane, it may be metabolized within the enterocytes/hepatocytes and/or pumped out of the cells due to efflux mechanisms.

9. BCS Class II: Poor Solubility and High Permeability
By definition, poor solubility and/or slow dissolution are the rate-limiting steps for oral absorption of BCS class II compounds
For compounds with a very large dose-to-solubility ratio, poor solubility is likely to be the rate-limiting step for absorption.
In other words, the compounds may dissolve quickly enough to reach their equilibrium solubility, but the solubility is too low to establish a wide enough concentration gradient to drive passive diffusion

10. BCS Class II: Poor Solubility and High Permeability
Formulations designed to overcome solubility or dissolution rate problems:
Salt formation
Particle size reduction
Metastable forms
Solid dispersion
Complexation
Lipid based formulations
Precipitation inhibitors

11. BCS Class III: High Solubility and Low Permeability
Since passive diffusion is the rate-limiting step for oral absorption of BCS class III compounds, the most effective way to improve absorption and bioavailability of this class of compounds is to increase the membrane permeability
Approaches to improve permeability:
Prodrugs
Permeation enhancers

12. BCS Class IV: Low Solubility and Low Permeability
Class IV compounds exhibit both poor solubility and poor permeability, and they pose tremendous challenges to formulation development
As a result, a substantial investment in dosage form development with no guarantee of success should be expected
A combination of class II and class III technologies could be used to formulate class IV compounds, although the success rate is not expected to be high

13. Case Study I: Use of the BCS in Formulation Development
Pregabalin (Lyrica®) is is indicated for the management of neuropathic pain associated with diabetic peripheral neuropathy, management of postherpetic neuralgia, adjunctive therapy for adult patients with partial onset seizures, and management of fibromyalgia
Pregabalin is a BCS Class 1 compound (highly permeable and highly soluble). Pregabalin is an amino acid and its lowest aqueous solubility occurs at its isoelectric point (at pH 7.4)

14. Case Study I: Use of the BCS in Formulation Development
It is considered high solubility as the amount of water needed (<10 mL) to dissolve the highest dose strength (300 mg) at pH 7.4 is less than the 250 mL criteria. Pregabalin meets the BCS criteria for a highly permeable compound as greater than 90% of the dose is excreted unchanged in the urine
Three different series of formulations were used during clinical development. Each series was comprised of one to three different dose strengths. Strengths within each series were content proportional with respect to drug and excipients

15. Case Study I: Use of the BCS in Formulation Development
All three series used the same excipients; however the relative proportion of each excipient was different for each series
Bioequivalence between and among these formulations and the commercial formulation was established for this BCS Class 1 compound by demonstrating that all formulations were rapidly dissolving and had similar dissolution profiles over a pH range of 1.2 to 6.8
Thus bioequivalence was demonstrated using dissolution data and waivers of in vivo bioequivalence studies were granted

16. Case Study I: Use of the BCS in Formulation Development
Application of BCS had significant impact on the cost of clinical development program for pregabalin.
It has been estimated that this example saved the company more than $1,000,000 compared to a more traditional approach that would have utilized four separate bioequivalence studies
Further, indirect savings are equally impressive. Considering that yearly Pregabalin sales exceed $1,200,000,000, each month of times saving equates to an additional $100,000,000 in sales prior to loss of patent exclusivity