European Journal of Pharmaceutical Sciences 21 (2004) 617623

Alternative method for enteric coating of HPMC capsules

resulting in ready-to-use enteric-coated capsules
Nathalie Huyghebaert, An Vermeire, Jean Paul Remon
Laboratory of Pharmaceutical Technology, Ghent University, Harelbekestraat 72, B-9000 Ghent, Belgium
Received 5 August 2003; received in revised form 28 November 2003; accepted 7 January 2004

Abstract
The aim of this study was to develop an alternative method for enteric coating of HPMC capsules that avoids the sealing step before
coating, resulting in ready-to-use enteric-coated capsules for the use in retail or hospital pharmacy or R&D sections of pharmaceutical
industry and for the production of enteric-coated heat and moisture sensitive biomaterials. HPMC caps and bodies 00 (Vcaps, Capsugel)
were coated separately in a fluid bed apparatus prior to filling (GPCG-1, Glatt) with Eudragit L30D-55 or Eudragit FS 30 D (Rhm),
Aqoat AS-HF (Shin-Etsu) and Sureteric (Colorcon), using an optimised coating process. The coated bodies were filled and closed with
the coated caps without encountering problems of coating damage. The release in 0.1N HCl after 2 h from capsules coated with Eudragit
L30D-55, Eudragit FS 30 D, Aqoat AS-HF and Sureteric was 0.6 0.3, 0.6 0.3, 1.2 0.2 and 7.3 1.9%, respectively. The alternative
method was reproducible and offered a way to overcome the time-consuming and expensive sealing step required using the conventional
coating procedure. The obtained enteric-coated HPMC capsules can be stored (un)-filled for at least 6 months without loosing enteric
properties.
2004 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.
Keywords: HPMC capsules; Enteric coating; Sealing

1. Introduction
During the early stages of drug development, the limited
amount of new chemical entities, sensitive to the gastric
fluid or causing gastric irritation, excludes the development
of a coated pellet or tablet formulation. Since the coating
process of capsules is independent of the capsule content,
contrary to coating of pellets and tablets, capsule coating
technology can be easily applied (Cole et al., 2002). Enteric
coating of HPMC capsules, since decades used in the dietary
supplement industry as a vegetarian alternative for gelatine
(Ogura et al., 1998), results in good polymer adhesion and
compatibility (Cole et al., 2002; Scott and Cole, 2001). This
is contrary to gelatine, the most commonly used material
for manufacturing capsules. Organic coating of hard gelatine
capsules is possible, but is very sensitive and can lead to shell
embrittlement and poor adhesion of the coat to the smooth
gelatine surface (Murthy et al., 1986; Thoma and Bechtold,
1992). A pre-coating can reduce interactions between the

Corresponding author. Tel.: +32-9-2648054; fax: +32-9-2228236.

E-mail address: [email protected] (J.P. Remon).

0928-0987/$ see front matter 2004 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.
doi:10.1016/j.ejps.2004.01.002

gelatine and the enteric polymer but is time consuming and

complicated. Moreover, aqueous coating is preferred above
organic coating because of toxicological, environmental and
safety-related drawbacks, with hence high manufacturing
costs (Cunningham and Fegely, 2001; Wheatley et al., 1997).
However, the aqueous coating process of gelatine capsules is
very sensitive and requires a very long process time, because
of the aqueous solubility of gelatine and hence results in
high costs.
HPMC capsules offer the advantage that aqueous coating
is possible, but a sealing step prior to coating, closing the
gap between the body and the cap, is required to avoid leaking of the capsule content into the stomach or vice versa.
It can be performed manually using a brush by applying a
20% (w/w) gelatine solution to overlay the closure of the
capsule (Felton et al., 2002). The need for manual sealing
can be overcome by using the LEMSTM technique (Liquid
Encapsulation Microspray Sealing), developed by Capsugel
for the sealing of capsules containing semi-solids or liquids.
In this process, a solution of ethanol and water is sprayed
between the overlap of body and cap, followed by a heating
step (4060 C) to complete the fusion of the body and the

618

N. Huyghebaert et al. / European Journal of Pharmaceutical Sciences 21 (2004) 617623

cap. However, this is still a time-consuming and expensive

technique and the heat sealing process could lead to inactivation of the active substance.
Thereby there is also a need to overcome problems of
destabilisation of heat and moisture sensitive materials such
as lyophilised biomaterials (peptides, proteins, live vaccines, etc.) for which all handling at elevated temperatures
and at high relative humidity must be limited. Moreover,
there is clearly a need for an alternative method to produce
enteric-coated capsules in the retail or hospital pharmacy
or in R&D sections of the pharmaceutical industry, where
enteric coating of capsules offers a problem due to lack of
appropriate equipment and training.
The aim of this study was to develop an alternative method
for the enteric coating of HPMC capsules eliminating the
sealing step and providing enteric-coated capsules for use
in retail or hospital pharmacy and R&D. The new method
will be evaluated in terms of enteric properties of the coated
capsules, applicability to other polymers, reproducibility of
the method, release from the coated capsules and stability
of the capsules.

2. Materials and methods

2.1. Preparation of enteric-coated capsules
2.1.1. Traditional coating method
2.1.1.1. Filling of the capsules. HPMC capsules 00
(Vcaps) (Capsugel, Bornem, Belgium) were filled with a
mixture of 300 mg -lactose monohydrate 200 Mesh (Pharmatose, De Melkindustrie, Veghel, The Netherlands) and
30 mg thymidine (marker substance) and closed. Thymidine was chosen as marker substance because it is freely
water-soluble (5.5 g per 100 ml) at all pH values and had
therefore excellent properties to evaluate the enteric properties of an enteric-coated formulation.
2.1.2. Coating of HPMC capsules with Eudragit FS 30 D
and Eudragit L30D-55
The filled capsules were coated with Eudragit L30D-55,
an anionic copolymer of methacrylic acid and ethylacrylate (1:1) and Eudragit FS 30 D, an anionic copolymer
of methyl acrylate, methyl methacrylate and methacrylic
acid. Previous experiments showed that Eudragit FS 30
D dissolves from pH 7.2 and Eudragit L30D-55 from pH
6.0 (Huyghebaert et al., submitted for publication). Both
polymers are available as a 30% (w/w) aqueous dispersion (Rhm, Darmstadt, Germany). For the preparation of
the Eudragit L30D-55 dispersion, 4.6 g of triethyl citrate (plasticiser) (SigmaAldrich, Bornem, Belgium), 2.3 g
of a polysorbate 80 solution (33%, v/w) (wetting agent)
(Tween 80, Alpha pharma, Nazareth, Belgium) and 1.9 g
of glyceryl monostearate (glidant) (Federa, Braine-lAlleud,
Belgium) were added to 103.3 g water and stirred over a pe-

riod of 10 min with a high-speed mixer (Silverson, Bucks,

UK) until a fine, homogenous dispersion was obtained. This
dispersion was gently added to 77.1 g of Eudragit dispersion (30%, w/w). After complete preparation, the coating
dispersions were passed through a 0.3 mm sieve and continuously stirred using a magnetic stirrer. For the preparation
of the Eudragit FS 30 D dispersion, only 2.3 g of triethyl
citrate was needed since this polymer exhibits a lower minimum film-forming temperature (14 C) and Tg (45 C) than
Eudragit L30D-55 (MFT 27 C, Tg = 115 C).
For the coating experiments, 735 ml of filled capsules (total surface area of 0.2 m2 ) were coated in a fluid bed apparatus (GPCG-1, Glatt, Binzen, Germany) using the bottom spray mode with the Wurster set-up and the partition
for tablet coating. The operating parameters are provided in
Table 1. Based on theoretical estimation, 10 mg polymer/cm2
was applied. Capsules coated with Eudragit FS 30 D were
cured at low relative humidity (20% RH) to prevent sticking
as this polymer exhibits a low Tg .
2.1.3. Alternative coating method
The preparation of the coating dispersions is described below. After complete preparation, the dispersions were passed
through a 0.3 mm sieve and continuously stirred throughout
the coating process using a magnetic stirrer. For the alternative coating method, 650 and 700 ml HPMC caps or bodies
00 (Vcaps), respectively (total surface area of 0.2 m2 ) were
coated separately in the fluid bed apparatus (Section 2.1.1).
Based on theoretical estimation, 10 mg polymer/cm2 was applied. The operating parameters are provided in Table 1.
2.1.3.1. Coating of the HPMC caps and bodies with
Eudragit FS 30 D and Eudragit L30D-55. The composition, the preparation of the Eudragit L30D-55 and
Eudragit FS 30 D coating dispersions and the coating operating parameters were identical to the traditional coating
method.
2.1.3.2. Coating of the HPMC caps and bodies with
Aqoat AS-HF. Aqoat AS-HF is a polymer consisting of
hydroxypropyl methylcellulose acetate succinate, designed
to be used in an aqueous system and available as a fine
powder. Previous experiments showed that the polymer dissolves from pH 6.5 (Huyghebaert et al., submitted for publication). The coating dispersion was prepared by first dissolving 8.1 g of triethyl citrate (plasticiser) (SigmaAldrich,
Bornem, Belgium) and 0.7 g of sodium lauryl sulphate
(wetting agent) (Federa, Brussels, Belgium) in 291.4 g of
water. Then, 23.1 g of Aqoat AS-HF (Shin-Etsu Chemical
Co., Tokyo, Japan) and next 6.9 g of talc (glidant) (Alpha
pharma, Nazareth, Belgium) were gradually added while
stirring.
2.1.3.3. Coating of the HPMC caps and bodies with
Sureteric . Sureteric (Colorcon, Kent, UK) is a mixture of PVAP (polyvinyl acetate phthalate), plasticisers and

N. Huyghebaert et al. / European Journal of Pharmaceutical Sciences 21 (2004) 617623

619

Table 1
Operating parameters used to coat HPMC capsules with Eudragit FS 30 D, Eudragit L30D-55, Aqoat AS-HF and Sureteric
Eudragit
FS 30 D

Eudragit
L30D-55

Aqoat
AS-HF

Sureteric

Before coating
Preheating to ( C)

25

25

30

38

Coating
Nozzle diameter (mm)
Spray rate (g/min)
Atomising pressure (bar)
Inlet air volume (m3 /min)
Inlet air temperature ( C)
Product temperature ( C)
Coating time (min)

0.8
6
1.3
2.43
30
2526
31

0.8
6
1.3
2.43
30
2526
31

0.8
1015
1.3
2.43
3441
30
23

0.8
4.6
1.5
2.43
4446
3840
33

Curing
In fluid bed
Time (min)
Product temperature ( C)
On trays
Temperature ( C)
Relative humidity (%)

5
25
ON
RT
20

5
25
ON
RT
60

5
30
ON
RT
60

5
38
ON
RT
60

ON: overnight, RT: room temperature.

other ingredients and dissolves from pH 5.5. To prepare

the coating dispersion, 0.15 g of simethicone emulsion (anti
foam agent) (30%, USP, Colorcon, Kent, UK) was added to
129.8 g of water while stirring. Next, 23.1 g of Sureteric
was gradually added while stirring. The final dispersion
was stirred for at least 30 min before use.
2.1.3.4. Filling of the capsules. The coated bodies were
filled with a mixture of 300 mg -lactose monohydrate 200
Mesh (Pharmatose, De Melkindustrie, Veghel, The Netherlands) and 30 mg thymidine and closed manually with the
coated caps.

2.2. Evaluation of the enteric-coated capsules

2.2.1. Dissolution testing
To evaluate the enteric properties of the capsules coated
with the different polymers, a dissolution test (n = 3) was
performed using the reciprocating cylinder method (USP apparatus 3) (Bio-Dis, Vankel, NJ, USA) at a dip rate of 21 dpm
using one capsule per vessel, filled with 250 ml 0.1N HCl
for 2 h. To determine the pH dissolution profile of the coated
capsules, a dissolution test was performed using two consecutive media: first 0.1N HCl for 2 h and consequently a
buffer solution (phosphate buffer 0.2 M) for 4 h at pH 5.5, 6.0
and 6.5 and at pH 7.0, 7.2 and 7.4 for capsules coated with
Eudragit L30D-55 and Eudragit FS 30 D, respectively.
To determine influence of storage on release from the coated
capsules, a dissolution test was performed at pH 1 for both
polymers and consequently at pH 6.5 and 7.4, for Eudragit
L30D-55 and Eudragit FS 30 D coated capsules, respectively. Marker release was measured spectrophotometrically
(Perkin Elmer, Zaventem, Belgium) at 267 nm.

2.2.2. Optical microscopy

Images were taken of HPMC capsules, coated using the
traditional and alternative method, before and after the dissolution test using an Olympus SZX9 stereomicroscope, fitted
to an Olympus Camedia Digital Camera (C3030, Japan).
2.2.3. Scanning electron microscopy
The coating thickness, homogeneity and appearance of
polymer at the inner surface of caps and bodies coated with
Eudragit L30D-55 and Eudragit FS 30 D using the alternative coating method was examined by scanning electron microscopy (SEM) (Jeol JSM 5600 LV, Jeol, Tokyo,
Japan) at the open end, in the middle and at the domed end
(n = 3). The coated bodies and caps were longitudinally cut
and platina coated using a sputter coater (Auto Fine Coater,
JFC-1300, Jeol, Tokyo, Japan) before scanning electron microscopy was performed.
2.2.4. Reproducibility
To test the reproducibility of the alternative method, three
batches were coated with Eudragit L30D-55 and Eudragit
FS 30 D, and the enteric properties were evaluated.
2.2.5. Stability
It was evaluated if the enteric properties and the release
form the capsules coated with Eudragit L30D-55 and
Eudragit FS 30 D using the alternative coating method
were affected by storage of the coated caps and bodies prior
to filling. Caps and bodies coated with Eudragit L30D-55
were stored at standard ambient conditions (25 C and 60%
RH), while those coated with FS 30 D were stored at 25 C
and 20% RH to prevent sticking. After 6 months the coated
bodies were filled and closed with the coated caps. Influence
of storage on the enteric properties and the release from

620

N. Huyghebaert et al. / European Journal of Pharmaceutical Sciences 21 (2004) 617623

filled capsules was also evaluated. Therefore, immediately

after coating and curing, the coated bodies were filled and
closed with the coated caps. Consequently, the filled capsules were stored. Capsules coated with Eudragit L30D-55
were stored at standard ambient conditions (25 C and 60%
RH) and at 25 C in Alu sachets (LPS, Vapor flex barrier
bag, New Jersey, USA) sealed at 20% RH, while capsules
coated with Eudragit FS 30 D were stored only at 25 C
in Alu sachets (LPS, Vapor flex barrier bag, New Jersey,
US) sealed at 20% RH. Enteric properties and release from
the coated capsules was evaluated.

3. Results and discussion

3.1. Traditional coating method
In order to develop an alternative enteric coating method
avoiding the need for prior sealing, the cause of poor enteric
properties obtained by the traditional coating method had to
be explored. According to Cole et al. (2002), the capsules
must at least be coated with 6 and 8 mg/cm2 Eudragit
FS 30 D and Eudragit L30D-55, respectively, to obtain
enteric properties. In this study, 10 mg/cm2 polymer was
applied (based on theoretical estimation) to ensure enteric
properties. From Fig. 1a the absence of enteric coating
polymer on the critical area where the cap overlaps the body
was clear. Using dissolution apparatus 1, the coated capsule
(size 00) was fixed in the basket, and hence disintegration
was hindered. Therefore, dissolution testing was performed
using dissolution apparatus 3. This prevented floating of
the capsules, without hampering disintegration. During the
dissolution test, a rupture appeared at the critical overlap
site of the body after 1 h in 0.1N HCl. Due to the absence of enteric coating polymer at this site, the dissolution
medium penetrated between body and cap and dissolved
the HPMC. This led to the disintegration of the capsule
(Fig. 1b) and 100% thymidine was released after 2 h in 0.1N
HCl. Fig. 1c clearly shows that there was no damage at the
domed end of the coated capsule after 1 h dissolution in
0.1N HCl. This indicated that the coating process was performed efficiently, that good polymer/HPMC adhesion was
obtained and that sufficient coating polymer was applied.
These observations confirmed that the lack of enteric prop-

Fig. 2. HPMC capsule coated by the alternative coating method before

dissolution with inserted SEM pictures of cross-sections with outer and
inner coating thickness at cap domed end (a), in the middle (b) and at
the cap open end (c).

erties was due to leaking at the closure between body and

cap.
3.2. Alternative coating method
In an attempt to prevent disintegration of enteric-coated
HPMC capsules in HCl without sealing them, bodies and
caps were coated separately to ensure coverage of the
body with polymer, especially where the cap overlaps.
In accordance to the coating experiments performed by
the traditional method, a theoretically estimated amount
of 10 mg/cm2 of either Eudragit FS 30 D or Eudragit
L30D-55 was applied to the caps and bodies. Caps and bodies were coated in a separate process to avoid the caps to
slide into the bodies in the adverse way during coating. The
amount of caps or bodies in the apparatus during the coating
process was chosen to reach an equal total outer HPMC surface as in the traditional coating process. Thereby, the same
coating parameters could be applied. During the process
no problems of excessive spray drying or capsule sticking
were encountered. The coated caps and bodies had a glossy
and transparent appearance. No problems were experienced
during filling of the coated bodies and subsequent closing with the coated caps. Coated caps slid easily over the
coated bodies without damaging the coating (Fig. 2). No

Fig. 1. HPMC capsule coated by the traditional coating method before dissolution (a) and after 1 h dissolution in 0.1N HCl at the critical area where
cap overlaps the body (b) and at the domed end of the cap (c).

N. Huyghebaert et al. / European Journal of Pharmaceutical Sciences 21 (2004) 617623

Thymidine released (%)

10

621

Batch 1
Batch 2

Batch 3

6
4
2
0

Eudragit L 30 D- Eudragit FS 30D

55

Aqoat AS-HF

Sureteric

Polymer
Fig. 3. Thymidine released (mean S.D., n = 3) after 2 h in 0.1N HCl from three batches of capsules coated with 6 mg/cm2 Eudragit L30D-55 and
Eudragit FS 30 D, 1 batch of capsules coated with Aqoat AS-HF and Sureteric .

disintegration occurred after 2 h dissolution in 0.1N HCl.

Moreover, capsules coated with Eudragit FS 30 D, as
well as those coated with Eudragit L30D-55 showed a
negligible release after 2 h in 0.1N HCl (<1%) and thereby
complied with the USP/Eur. Pharm. requirements for an
enteric-coated formulation (release < 10% after 2 h in 0.1N
HCl) (Fig. 3).
The coating thickness was measured by SEM. Bodies
and caps coated with Eudragit FS 30 D showed a coating thickness of 31.3 3.4 and 29.5 2.0 m, respectively. The coating thickness on caps and bodies coated with
Eudragit L30D-55 was 29.5 5.3 and 28.5 3.0 m, respectively. This indicated that similar coating thickness on
both the caps and the bodies was obtained. The values are
in accordance to the coating thickness on pellets, enteric
coated with 15% (w/w) Eudragit FS 30 D and Eudragit
L30D-55, which was 25.7 3.1 and 29.5 2.0 m, respectively (Huyghebaert et al., submitted for publication). This
indicated that the alternative coating method was a valuable
tool for obtaining enteric-coated HPMC capsules. Moreover,
from Fig. 2, it is clear that coating thickness at the open end
(35.2 m) (Fig. 2c), in the middle (33.2 m) (Fig. 2b) and
at the domed end (35.7 m) (Fig. 2a) of the coated cap was
similar. The same results were obtained for the coated bodies (figure not shown). This proves that the coating method
results in a homogeneous layer on the capsules. It is also
clear that the coating method results in coating of the inner
surface of the capsules (Fig. 2). Fig. 2 shows that the inner
coating thickness decreases along the cap: from the open
end (24 m) (Fig. 2c), the middle (12 m) (Fig. 2b) to the
domed end (5.3 m) (Fig. 2a). From this, it is estimated that
approximately 40% of the polymer was found on the inner
surface. It can be concluded that the actual coating level
obtained with the alternative coating method, was approximately 6 mg/cm2 , rather than the theoretically determined
10 mg/cm2 .
Additional experiments were performed to evaluate
whether the process performance was dependent on the

polymer tested. Therefore, this method was evaluated using

two other polymers applicable as an aqueous dispersion:
Aqoat AS-HF and Sureteric . For both polymers, no data
are available about the coating thickness on capsules required to ensure gastric integrity. Cole et al. used Eudragit
L30D-55 and Eudragit FS 30 D, only. For tablets, a weight
increase of 8 and 10% is recommended for Aqoat and
Sureteric , respectively. However, formulation dependency
is mentioned. In accordance to the Eudragit polymers,
10 mg/cm2 of each polymer was applied, based on theoretical estimation. During the process, no problems of capsule
sticking were encountered. However, coating with Aqoat
AS-HF resulted in excessive spray drying, even at high
spray rates. Caps and bodies coated with Aqoat AS-HF
as well as with Sureteric exhibited a white and dull appearance. During filling of the bodies, coated with both
polymers and subsequent closing with the coated caps, no
coating damage was observed. However, for both polymers,
a remarkable resistance was experienced during closing the
coated bodies with the coated caps, which could cause problems on an industrial scale. Fine-tuning of capsule filling
and closing equipment to produce enteric-coated formulations on industrial scale will be necessary. The capsules
coated with Aqoat AS-HF and Sureteric complied with
the USP/Eur. Pharm. requirements for an enteric-coated
formulation. Capsules coated with Aqoat AS-HF showed
a negligible release of 1.2% after 2 h in 0.1N HCl, while the
release from capsules coated with Sureteric was higher
(7.3%), but still below 10% (Fig. 3). These data indicated
that the alternative coating method is applicable to the most
commonly used enteric coating polymers. However, form
this study it was clear that the Eudragit polymers resulted
in superior enteric-coated capsules in terms of coating efficacy (spray drying), aesthetic and enteric properties and in
ease of handling. The polymers were selected for the evaluation of the reproducibility of the method, the pH release
profiles and the stability of the coated capsules. Further
optimisation of the composition of the Aqoat AS-HF and

622

N. Huyghebaert et al. / European Journal of Pharmaceutical Sciences 21 (2004) 617623

Thymidine released (%)

120

Table 2
Release of thymidine (mean S.D., n = 2) from capsules coated with
Eudragit L30D-55 and Eudragit FS 30 D immediately after preparation
and storage for 6 months

pH 5.5

100

pH 6.0
pH 6.5

80
60
40
20
0

100

(a)

300

400

Time (min)

120
Thymidine released (%)

200

Eudragit L30D-55
Immediately after coating
Stored for 6 months
Prior to filling
(25 C/60% RH)
After filling
(25 C/60% RH)
After filling (Alu sachets
25 C/20% RH)

pH 7.0

100

pH 7.2
pH 7.4

80
60
40
20

(b)

Eudragit FS 30 D
Immediately after coating
Stored for 6 months
Prior to filling
(25 C/20% RH)
After filling (Alu sachets
25 C/20% RH)

100

200

300

Release in
0.1N HCl
for 2 h (%)

Lag-time
(min)

T80 (min)

0.66 0.07

40 0a

0.52 0.15

44 1.4a

67.5 3.5a

0.71 0.04

60 0a

87.5 3.5a

0.52 0.06

35 0b

0.42 0.21

25 7.1b

0.88 0.02

10 14b

35 0b

0.73 0.06

35 0b

60 0a

At pH 7.4.
At pH 6.5.

400

Time (min)

Fig. 4. Release (mean S.D., n = 3) of thymidine from capsules coated

with 6 mg/cm2 Eudragit L30D-55 (a) and Eudragit FS 30 D (b) by the
alternative coating method after 2 h in 0.1N HCl and subsequently 4 h in
buffer solution with pH 5.5 (), 6.0 (), 6.5 () and 7.0 (), 7.2 (),
7.4 (), respectively.

Sureteric coating dispersions could probably solve the

problem of higher resistance while closing, but this was not
the primary aim of this study.
To evaluate the reproducibility, three batches were compared for enteric properties. For all batches, release of
marker substance from the HPMC capsules coated with
Eudragit L30D-55 and Eudragit FS 30 D was below
1% after 2 h in 0.1N HCl at 37 C (Fig. 3), indicating the
reproducibility of the method.
Previous studies revealed that complete release of thymidine from pellets coated with Eudragit L30D-55 and
Eudragit FS 30 D, occurred within 40 min after the gastric
stage (0.1N HCl for 2 h) at pH 6.5 and 40 min at pH 7.4,
respectively (Huyghebaert et al., submitted for publication).
Therefore, the release from the capsules coated by the alternative coating method was investigated at pH values around
the critical pH of dissolution of the coating polymers, after a
simulated gastric residence time (0.1N HCl) of 2 h (Fig. 4a
and b). From capsules coated with Eudragit L30D-55, no
release was seen at pH 5.5 for 4 h after simulated gastric
stage. At pH 6.0, a lag-time of 20 min was observed before
release started and 80% was released after 60 min (T80 ).
At pH 6.5, release started immediately after the gastric
stage without lag-time and T80 was 30 min. From capsules
coated with Eudragit FS 30 D, no release was seen at pH

7.0. At pH 7.2 and 7.4 a lag-time of 60 and 40 min, and

a T80 of 100 and 60 min was observed after the simulated
gastric stage (2 h), respectively. The lag-time values were
in accordance with the release data obtained by Cole et al.
(2002) from capsules coated with 6 mg/cm2 Eudragit FS
30 D at pH 7.4 (36 min). Capsules coated with Eudragit
L30D-55 comply with the specifications of gastro-resistant
capsules of the Eur. Pharm. (disintegration within 60 min
at pH 6.8). For capsules coated with Eudragit FS 30 D,
these specifications are not applicable as the polymer does
not dissolve at pH 6.8, but only from pH 7.2.
Next, it was evaluated whether the enteric properties and
the release form the capsules coated by the alternative coating method were affected by storage. Therefore, the coated
caps and bodies were stored prior to filling and after filling. Table 2 shows the release of thymidine from Eudragit
L30D-55 and Eudragit FS 30 D coated capsules stored for
6 months prior to filling and after filling. It can be concluded that for both polymers the enteric properties were
maintained after 6 months storage at all conditions for the
capsules stored prior to filling as well as for those filled
prior to storage. The release was below 1% after 2 h in 0.1N
HCl at 37 C and the lag-time and T80 did not change in
time, except for filled capsules coated with Eudragit FS
30 D stored in Alu-sachets, for which T80 and lag-time increased during storage with 27.5 and 20 min, respectively.
These data need to be interpreted with care: a dissolution
test does not mimic in vivo mechanical forces and so in vivo
release tests have to reveal if this change in lag-time and T80
is of any significance.
Murthy et al. (1988) reported that Eudragit L30D-55
coated gelatine capsules, precoated with HPC showed no

N. Huyghebaert et al. / European Journal of Pharmaceutical Sciences 21 (2004) 617623

significant change under storage, even at accelerated storage

at 37 C/80% RH. This is in accordance with our study. No
change in lag-time is seen for HPMC capsules coated with
Eudragit L30D-55. This means that the change in lag-time
from HPMC capsules coated with Eudragit FS 30 D has
to be attributed to this specific polymer or to interactions
between Eudragit FS 30 D and HPMC. No literature is
available on the influence of ageing on Eudragit FS 30 D
dissolution.
From all these experiments it is clear that our proposed
method provides a simple way to obtain enteric-coated
HPMC capsules. This approach results in ready-to-use
capsules that can be applied for obtaining enteric-coated
capsules of labile products or new drug entities without
requiring coating experience or equipment. An important
application of these ready-to-use enteric-coated capsules
in pharmaceutical industry could be the preparation of
enteric-coated formulations of heat and moisture sensitive
materials such as biomaterials (peptides, proteins, etc.) for
which all handling at elevated temperatures and at high
relative humidity must be limited. Also in food industry,
this technology could provide a valuable tool, e.g. to coat
probiotics as these are labile products and food industry
rarely possesses coating equipment and experience.
The ready-to-use enteric-coated capsules are also an efficient tool in the area of R&D departments of the pharmaceutical industry, where some new chemical entities present
a challenge in testing for efficacy due to instability in gastric
fluids or because of irritation of the gastrointestinal tract.
Besides, the ready-to-use enteric-coated capsules can be
used in retail or hospital pharmacy where enteric coating
of capsules offers for many pharmacists a problem due to
lack of appropriate equipment and training. In retail or hospital pharmacy the most common method used to coat capsules is the dipping method. This procedure is not only
time-consuming, but often a lot of practical problems are encountered during the dipping procedure that could lead to an
inhomogenous coat and doubtful enteric properties. A faster
and more reproducible alternative is the capsule-coater (ter
Horst et al., 1989). However, this also requires training and
optimisation of the process.

4. Conclusion
This method of coating the caps and bodies resulted in
enteric-coated HPMC capsules that comply with the requirements of USP/Eur. Pharm. for enteric-coated formulations.
The method was reproducible and the thus coated capsules
can be stored, either prior to filling or filled without affect-

623

ing the enteric properties. The promising method for the

production of enteric-coated HPMC capsules eliminates the
need of the time-consuming and expensive sealing step and
results in ready-to-use enteric-coated capsules that can be
filled with heat and moisture sensitive materials, without affecting their stability. As no experience or equipment for
coating is required, the ready-to-use enteric-coated capsules
can be used in R&D departments as well as in retail or hospital pharmacy.

Acknowledgements
This work was supported by the Research Fund of the
Ghent University. We are grateful to Capsugel (Bornem,
Belgium) for supplying the HPMC capsules, C.N. Schmidt
(Amsterdam, The Netherlands) and Rhm (Darmstadt,
Germany) for supplying the Eudragit coating polymers,
Shin-Etsu Chemical Co. (Tokyo, Japan) for supplying the
Aqoat AS-HF coating polymers and Colorcon (Kent, UK)
for supplying the Sureteric coating polymers. Appreciation
is also expressed to Prof. Simoens (Veterinary School, Ghent
University) for the use of the scanning electron microscope
and to Mr. Bart De Pauw for his technical assistance.

References
Cole, E., Scott, R., Connor, A., Wilding, I., Petereit, H., Schminke, C.,
Beckert, T., Cad, D., 2002. Enteric coated HPMC capsules designed
to achieve intestinal targeting. Int. J. Pharm. 231, 8395.
Cunningham, C., Fegely, K., 2001. One-step aqueous enteric coating
systems: scale-up evaluation. Pharm. Technol. Eur. 13 (10), 4854.
Felton, L.A., Wiley, C.J., Friar, A.L., 2002. Enteric coating of gelatine
and cellulosic capsules using an aqueous-based acrylic polymer. AAPSPharmScience 4 (4), T3320.
Murthy, K.S., Daniel, R.Ph., Kubert, A., Fawzi, M.B., 1988. In vitro
release characteristics of hard shell capsules products coated with
aqueous- and organic-based enteric polymers. J. Biomater. Appl. 3,
5279.
Murthy, K.S., Enders, N.A., Mahjour, M., Fawzi, M.B., 1986. A comparative evaluation of aqueous enteric polymers in capsule coating.
Pharm. Technol. 10, 3646.
Ogura, T., Furuya, Y., Matsuura, S., 1998. HPMC capsules: an alternative
to gelatine. Pharm. Technol. Eur. 10, 3242.
Scott, R., Cole, E., 2001. Enteric and colonic delivery using HPMC
capsules. US Patent 9,836,627.
ter Horst, H.J., Kloeg, P.H.A.M., van Drunen, J.R., 1989. De capsule
coater. Pharmaceutisch Weekblad. 124, 530538.
Thoma, K., Bechtold, K., 1992. Enteric coated hard gelatine capsules.
Capsugel Technical Bulletin.
Wheatley, T., Steuernagel, C., 1997. Latex Emulsions for controlled drug
delivery. In: McGinithy, J.W. (Ed.), Aqueous Polymeric Coatings for
Pharmaceutical Dosage Forms. Marcel Dekker, New York, pp. 154.