Contact Us
Chengguan District, Lanzhou, Gansu, China
© 2025 Jeifer Pharmaceutical, All Right
Reserved.
Pharmaceutical excipients have always demanded fine-tuning. Decades ago, researchers sought film-formers for oral drugs that performed in more reliable and patient-friendly ways. The scientific community observed the need for something more customizable than simple cellulose derivatives. Enter the world of cellulose esters and ethers. Hydroxypropyl methylcellulose acetate succinate, often called HPMCAS, found its roots in Japanese innovation around the late 1970s. At that time, demand soared for controlled-release medicines and enteric-coated pills that could resist stomach acids yet dissolve in the intestine. HPMCAS emerged from a series of structural modifications and synthesis efforts, building from established knowledge of cellulose derivatives, but with added functional groups that offered precise solubility and protection. Its adoption grew as both Western and Asian pharmacopeias standardized its quality, leading to inclusion in BP, EP, and USP monographs.
HPMCAS is not an ingredient many outside the pharmaceutical industry encounter daily. In the lab, though, its utility stands out. Produced as an off-white to pale beige powder, it seems unremarkable at first glance. Its true appeal lies in its ability to serve as an enteric coating material, providing solid protection for sensitive actives in oral formulations. In my experience working alongside pharmaceutical technologists, what grabs their attention is the polymer's ability to withstand harsh gastric fluid while dissolving efficiently in the higher pH of the small intestine.
This compound brings together characteristics from both cellulose ethers and esters. It possesses a molecular backbone of anhydroglucose units, substituted with hydroxypropyl, methyl, acetate, and succinate groups. Such a structure allows it to repel water in acidic settings and absorb it at higher pH. Specific grades feature different ratios of substitution, affecting how thick a solution becomes or how quickly a coating dissolves in simulated intestinal fluid. The average molecular weight often ranges between 40,000 and 130,000 g/mol. Commercial samples present as non-volatile, hygroscopic powders with good dispersibility in most organic solvents. They do not melt but decompose upon excessive heating, releasing volatile organic acids and thoroughly blackening.
Regulatory detail matters in pharmaceuticals. HPMCAS grades for BP, EP, and USP must conform to monograph specifications. Pharmacopeias specify assay limits for acetyl, hydroxypropoxyl, methoxyl, and succinoyl content as a percentage of dry mass. Limits for heavy metals, microbial counts, moisture content, and loss on drying keep quality high. Most manufacturers label grades based on viscosity, particle size, and proportion of functional groups. Pharmacists and regulators check for batch traceability, expiry, and GMP compliance on labels, a practice born from necessity rather than bureaucracy, as safety can turn on small details.
Synthesizing HPMCAS begins with purified cellulose, usually extracted from wood pulp or cotton linters. The cellulose first receives methyl and hydroxypropyl groups through etherification, using dimethyl sulfate and propylene oxide in an alkaline medium. This pre-treated polymer then reacts with acetic and succinic anhydrides in the presence of mild acid catalysts. The resulting mixture of acetate and succinate groups controls the eventual solubility and pH profile. After filtering, washing, and drying, the fine polymer powder undergoes size reduction and sieving. Stringent in-process testing verifies that every stage lands within precise tolerance ranges to suit downstream pharmaceutical use.
The manufacturing process allows for some customization. By adjusting the ratio of acetic to succinic anhydride, companies can tailor the pH threshold where the polymer dissolves. Research teams tweak conditions in the reactor, controlling the reaction temperature and duration to ensure optimal substitution levels. These modifications change film flexibility, swelling behavior, and mechanical durability. In product development meetings, chemists often push for small changes to get a coating that cracks less, withstands more impact, or lets a capsule dissolve in a narrower section of the intestine.
While “Hydroxypropyl Methylcellulose Acetate Succinate” dominates academic and regulatory documents, commercial landscapes feature a host of proprietary names. Pharmaceutical suppliers market this excipient under names like Aquasolve, Shin-Etsu AQOAT, and HPMCAS HP. Global harmonization remains a challenge because not every country uses the same nomenclature, which sometimes complicates import-export paperwork and clinical trial submissions. Consistency in naming stands out as a key factor in minimizing supply disruptions and ensuring that regulatory reviews unfold smoothly.
Patient health stands on regulatory vigilance. In pharmaceutical plants, operators handle HPMCAS powders with masks and gloves because, like most fine organic materials, inhalation can irritate sensitive lungs. Material safety data sheets mandate dust control and good laboratory practice, though most animal studies report low overall toxicity. Any presence of residual reagents or by-products triggers process reviews and batch rejection if necessary. Regulatory agencies worldwide check plant records and quality control logs to clamp down on contamination or mislabeling. I have seen production lines halt over minor deviations—better safe than sorry, as batch recalls cost more than preventive care.
HPMCAS goes far beyond a simple pill coating. Drug formulators working on poorly soluble APIs rely on it to produce amorphous solid dispersions, boosting oral bioavailability for medications that poorly dissolve on their own. Many blockbuster drugs, like some HIV antivirals, depend on HPMCAS-based dispersions for their success in the market. The excipient plays a role in controlled-release pellets, taste-masked granules, orally disintegrating tablets, and even certain medical devices. Once a company validates a process with HPMCAS, changing to another excipient can mean months of requalification and clinical bridging studies.
Research takes creative turns in major R&D facilities using HPMCAS. Scientists explore combining it with other polymers for multi-level release or layering systems. Universities devote resources to studying its behavior under fantastic stress—like extreme humidity or mechanical compression—to see if drug stability can improve. In real-world manufacturing, the trend toward personalized medicine and nanoparticle drug delivery keeps HPMCAS in the spotlight. Pharmaceutical companies now invest in predictive modeling and AI-driven analytics to forecast which drugs will benefit most from HPMCAS-based formulations, saving time and capital in the process.
Regulatory acceptance depends on comprehensive safety testing. Studies across Europe, Asia, and the US track both short-term and chronic exposure. Oral toxicity evaluations in lab animals consistently report low systemic effects when used in typical pharmaceutical amounts. Clinical experience with drugs formulated using HPMCAS, observed via pharmacovigilance networks, signals rare allergic or hypersensitive reactions. No significant accumulation or metabolic by-products have raised red flags in long-term human studies. Still, toxicologists probe for new issues, running genotoxicity and carcinogenicity tests as new substitution levels or sources of cellulose come to market.
Looking forward, the trajectory of HPMCAS seems tied to the rise of complex, biopharmaceutical drugs and ever-stricter regulatory expectations. The industry increasingly requires excipients that meet greener production standards—less waste, fewer solvents—and some HPMCAS manufacturers respond by investing in zero-discharge facilities or biodegradable blends. Analysts predict that personalized formulations will lead to new grades with even finer control of pH-triggered release, improved compatibility, and greater flexibility for non-oral applications, including injectables and implants. As generic drug makers push for better cost controls and branded innovators chase the next blockbuster molecule, HPMCAS will play a crucial, if often invisible, part in making future therapies safer, more affordable, and more effective.
Hydroxypropyl methylcellulose acetate succinate, often called HPMCAS, carries a complicated name, but its impact on drug development feels straightforward. I first heard about HPMCAS while working on a project that struggled to solve a simple problem: how to keep a tablet stable in the stomach and make sure the body actually absorbs the medicine. Turns out, HPMCAS helps with both.
Plenty of new drugs won’t dissolve well in water. For the human body, that can mean reduced absorption, wasted medicine, and unpredictable results. HPMCAS sticks out because it acts as a polymer that keeps drugs suspended in a way that stops them from clumping together or falling out of solution. I’ve seen drug developers fight this problem with all sorts of additives, but HPMCAS gets the job done more reliably than most.
What’s more, HPMCAS doesn’t let go of the drug until it’s passed through the stomach and reached the small intestine—where absorption climbs. Standard coatings often break down too soon, exposing the medicine to stomach acid. That destroys some compounds or leaves users with stomach trouble. HPMCAS holds on tightly in acidic environments and then swells open at the higher pH in the intestine, so the tablet’s core gets released where it should.
Pharmaceutical companies rely on HPMCAS mostly for two things. First, it acts as an enteric coating, protecting drugs that stomach acid would otherwise destroy. Drugs like proton pump inhibitors, some anti-inflammatories, and certain antibiotics benefit from this technology. My own experience with patients has shown that regular coatings can cause stomach irritation or fail to deliver the intended dose. HPMCAS keeps these drugs safe until they reach the more neutral pH of the small intestine.
Second, HPMCAS is crucial in something called amorphous solid dispersions. This process doesn’t just shield the drug; it boosts solubility and helps tricky compounds actually get absorbed. I remember a cancer drug that saw increased patient response rates after developers used HPMCAS in its formulation. The compound on its own barely dissolved in the gut—so it stayed in the pill, passing straight through the body. Incorporating HPMCAS turned a nearly useless treatment into a real option.
While folks outside of pharmaceutical science rarely hear about excipients like HPMCAS, their impact on real lives can’t be overstated. A well-chosen polymer doesn’t just help a company get a new drug to market—it helps patients avoid stomach pain, ensures the body can actually use the medicine, and even allows for smaller, more manageable pills.
Still, the story doesn’t end with improved absorption or better coatings. New types of drugs, like biologics and poorly soluble molecules, keep the demand for innovative excipients alive. Some researchers are exploring tweaks to HPMCAS to make it even more selective in which environments trigger release. Others look at how it interacts with changing gut conditions in folks with digestive diseases. Side effects, drug interactions, and performance under stress are all under the microscope.
I've seen firsthand how investing in the right polymers makes a difference for patients each day. Keeping an eye on the way HPMCAS shapes future pharmaceuticals means keeping pace with drug challenges that never seem to let up. For a component most people never see, HPMCAS stands at the frontline in the ongoing fight for better treatments.
Hydroxypropyl methylcellulose acetate succinate, known as HPMCAS in lab circles, plays a behind-the-scenes role in countless tablets and capsules. At a glance, it keeps drugs from breaking down too soon in the gut. But there’s a bigger story when you look at the BP, EP, and USP grades.
Each grade comes from a separate pharmacopeia. The BP (British Pharmacopoeia), EP (European Pharmacopoeia), and USP (United States Pharmacopeia) all write their own rules for purity, identity, and how HPMCAS should behave. These rules aren’t minor fine print. They decide whether a drug makes it past quality control or ends up in a recall pile. This isn’t only a paperwork headache for manufacturers. Patients could end up with a product that doesn’t release its medicine properly, which means those strict checks are not just for show.
Labs use different chemical tests, and you spot this right away with BP, EP, and USP. The three standards don’t always match on identification routines or the allowed amounts of tiny, hard-to-detect impurities. For example, USP may call for specific infrared absorption checks. EP looks closely at things like chloride levels or heavy metals. BP might require different solvents in its routine. These details sound technical, but if a producer follows the wrong book, their batch won’t reach some global markets.
Impurities like heavy metals, residual solvents, and unknown particles raise red flags. EP and BP tend to set tighter or sometimes different impurity limits than USP—partly a reflection of regional policy or historical scares. As a chemist, I’ve seen cleared drugs held up over a handful of micrograms of extra impurity according to stricter regional requirements. For patients, the wrong impurity profile can mean side effects or reactions not seen in clinical trials. That’s the real-world reason these grading quirks stay important.
Manufacturers shipping to multiple regions juggle these standards daily. A batch passing US approval sometimes falls short in Europe due to stricter EP lead or arsenic requirements. It means more rounds of purification and retesting, which drives up costs and causes delays. At the same time, ignoring these differences risks headlines about contaminated drugs, trust breakdown, or global recalls. Regulatory oversight roots in past incidents where less distinct boundaries let dangerous material through. Pharma remembers those lessons as part of daily routine.
One way to ease the pain is harmonizing pharmacopeial standards, so innovators can meet one global rulebook. It’s slower than it sounds, since each region weighs risk and past experience differently. For now, labs run full suites of tests, share data in pre-approval meetings, and keep supply chain records squeaky clean to stay out of trouble. Quality control teams talk directly with regulators, targeting any gaps before a problem hits patients. Getting these grades right means less wasted material, safer products, and trust from folks relying on medication to work as promised.
Hydroxypropyl methylcellulose acetate succinate, or HPMCAS, plays a big part in making drugs easier for the body to absorb. Drug makers turn to HPMCAS for its ability to help pills dissolve in the gut rather than the stomach. From my time working in pharmaceutical logistics, I've seen how careful handling prevents headaches down the line, like loss of quality or reduced shelf-life.
Room temperature means a lot more than it sounds in pharma settings. HPMCAS should settle between 15°C and 30°C (59°F - 86°F). Heat breaks down its structure faster than you might expect, which can lead to product failures during later testing or use. I once visited a small manufacturer who stored their HPMCAS near an exterior window. They ended up tossing the whole batch after the sun turned their white powder into brittle yellow clumps. This was not just wasteful; the financial hit was real.
Humidity can spell disaster for HPMCAS. Even a short period in a damp room can cause clumping, turning a free-flowing powder into a brick. Pharmacies and manufacturers do best with dehumidifiers and moisture-barrier bags. I always recommend checking desiccant packs regularly and resealing containers quickly after use. The small act of adding fresh silica gel pouches saved us more than one headache when the monsoon season came early.
Open containers open more than just the product—they open the door to airborne contaminants, both chemical and microbial. Work with gloves and lab coats, and never use wooden pallets, which shed fibers and attract pests. I visited a site where corner cutting led to powder close to a floor-level vent; cleaning took days, and product safety became suspect. Everything was thrown out. Trust in your product starts with trusting your storage.
Proper packaging shields HPMCAS against light, air, and accidental spills. I prefer tightly sealed high-density polyethylene drums or double-layered liners, not just for regulatory reasons but because one ripped bag means the whole shipment could arrive cross-contaminated and unsellable. Label every container with batch numbers and receipt dates so inventory does not sit around too long.
A climate-controlled storage space provides the foundation. Install digital data loggers to track temperature and humidity. Set up regular staff training on correct handling methods, not just for the sake of compliance but to protect expensive stock and prevent costly errors. Rotate older stock forward and make sure mystery bags never gather dust in the corners.
In the end, the rules for storing HPMCAS protect everyone—from the chemists compounding pills to the patient relying on that medication. Attention to handling and storage isn't just red tape; it’s about delivering medicine that's safe, stable, and does its intended job.
Some drugs land on the market with a big drawback: water just runs right past them, never giving them a real chance to dissolve in your gut. Doctors and patients both know what happens next. The drug doesn’t work as well, people feel frustrated, and companies rush to fix the problem. Enter hypromellose acetate succinate (HPMCAS). This polymer gets added to tablets and capsules because it keeps drugs stable and releases them where they have the best shot at being absorbed. Any scientific team working with tough molecules probably knows HPMCAS inside and out.
I’ve sat across the bench from many scientists who’ve faced the question: how much HPMCAS is enough? Too little, the drug won’t dissolve. Too much, and the tablet just swells up or cramps how much drug fits inside. The sweet spot for HPMCAS usually runs between 10% and 30% by weight of the total solid in a formulation. Go up to 40% for tricky cases. These values come straight from pharmacy handbooks, scientific papers, and the label recommendations. Consider a drug that needs to reach the intestines before dissolving. Most teams study the polymer load using real dissolution tests, monitoring for quick and complete drug release in the right pH window. That’s what truly matters: not what the label says, but what your own drug does in a simulated gut.
Let’s get practical. Let’s say you take a new anticancer pill. It’s got a powerful ingredient, but it hates water. Without the right dose of HPMCAS, you get patchy absorption. That’s not a rare problem; about one in three new drugs has lousy water solubility based on recent market reports. With 10–30% HPMCAS, the drug’s solubility jumps—sometimes ten times higher. A study in the European Journal of Pharmaceutics showed that adding HPMCAS turned around a failing formulation, pushing drug absorption above the needed threshold. Pharmacists call that “bioavailability.”
Most formulators use H grade (high acetate content) or L grade (low acetate) versions based on the drug’s chemical nature. H grade handles acidic drugs better, L grade supports basic ones. These choices fine-tune the release profile, letting formulators work around pH swings from stomach to intestine.
Nobody said it’s easy to settle on one dose. Go too high and suddenly tablets get brittle, don’t compress well, or taste funny. Manufacturing experts point out that the right particle size and mixing method also play a role in performance. Plus, every drug molecule asks for its own approach. Reliable pharmaceutical teams do full stress-tests: high temperature, humidity, and long-term storage trials. No shortcut here—if HPMCAS saves a tricky drug, it’s because someone did the long, slow testing first.
It all comes down to whether patients get the right effect at the right time. Right now, HPMCAS helps bring new, tough drugs into the real world by making them more dependable in the body. As drugs get more complex, being smart about polymer load isn’t just a technical footnote—it influences whether tablets work at all. Controlled and efficient use of HPMCAS in those 10–30% ranges can mean fewer dosing errors, more predictable absorption, and less wasted medicine.
In pharmaceutical development, hydroxypropyl methylcellulose acetate succinate (HPMCAS) has a solid reputation for improving the solubility of poorly water-soluble drugs. Quite a few companies rely on it to stabilize amorphous solid dispersions and control drug release. Still, nothing in a formulation likes to play completely nice with everything else in the mix. In my experience, it pays to look deeper than the spec sheet before swapping excipients or adding HPMCAS to a new compound—a little caution goes a long way here.
Some active pharmaceutical ingredients (APIs) can lose stability when paired with certain functional groups. HPMCAS—thanks to its acetyl and succinoyl groups—brings some risk for chemical interactions. With APIs that show nucleophilic or electrophilic spots, the chance of ester hydrolysis or unwanted bonding goes up, especially in humid storage. Published stability studies on drugs like ritonavir and itraconazole show that the drug-polysaccharide dynamic can, under some conditions, lead to gradual breakdown or impurities over time. Real examples come out of accelerated stability testing; a batch of coated tablets absorbs moisture, the pH shifts, and the API begins to degrade—a pattern sometimes traced back to interactions with succinoyl groups in the polymer.
Taking HPMCAS into a commercial blend means facing another variable: how it behaves with co-excipients. Lactose and other reducing sugars sometimes spark Maillard reactions with amine drugs if moisture levels creep up. Throw HPMCAS in, especially the higher substitution grades, and the blend might hold more water than expected. This has forced formulators to tighten control over environmental conditions during production and storage, or even substitute non-reducing fillers like microcrystalline cellulose.
A lesser-known but real concern: basic excipients like magnesium oxide or carbonate can bring up the micro-environmental pH close to the polymer particles during processing. A higher pH nudges the succinoyl groups in HPMCAS toward hydrolysis, which erodes film integrity and can change release profiles. Teams working on modified-release products usually screen excipient blends with every new API—not out of habit, but because a few failed batches have shown how subtle interactions destroy a promising formulation's shelf life.
Physical properties count, too. Under compression, some lots of HPMCAS blend smoothly. Others force tablets to cap or laminate, often after switching grades from one supplier to another. Over-lubrication with magnesium stearate can worsen this, producing soft, friable tablets. These results have pushed several manufacturers to invest time in early-stage stress-testing: mapping out not just chemical, but also physical compatibility before full-scale runs.
Deep formulation screening stands out as an absolute necessity. Differential scanning calorimetry, PXRD, and forced degradation tests all help identify sneaky incompatibilities up front. Many development teams now run these as standard, catching issues like crystal growth or hydrolysis early. Protective measures—switching to less hygroscopic fillers or adjusting process humidity—make a meaningful difference. Sourcing consistent HPMCAS grades and verifying every lot line up with previous batches also saves headaches downstream. Finally, detailed, API-specific risk assessments help weed out trouble before it snowballs during scale-up or stability testing.
Careful formulation and tough stability testing protect not just the product, but the reputation of everyone on the team. HPMCAS brings unique benefits, but it also demands respect for its quirks, especially when introduced alongside new APIs or unfamiliar excipients.
| Names | |
| Preferred IUPAC name | 2-hydroxypropyl methylcellulose acetate succinate |
| Other names |
Hypromellose Acetate Succinate HPMCAS Cellulose, 2-hydroxypropyl methyl ether, acetate, succinate Pharmacoat AS Hydroxypropylmethylcellulose Acetate Succinate |
| Pronunciation | /haɪˌdrɒksiˈproʊpɪl ˌmɛθəlˈsɛljʊloʊs əˈsiːteɪt səksɪˈneɪt/ |
| Identifiers | |
| CAS Number | 12689-55-7 |
| Beilstein Reference | 1286073 |
| ChEBI | CHEBI:85255 |
| ChEMBL | CHEMBL1201658 |
| ChemSpider | 14167046 |
| DrugBank | DB13919 |
| ECHA InfoCard | 03fc459e-b7e2-47d0-8935-34aad011f802 |
| EC Number | 9004-65-3 |
| Gmelin Reference | 913131 |
| KEGG | C02445 |
| MeSH | D02.241.081.380.495.400.400 |
| PubChem CID | 123206045 |
| RTECS number | TY6390000 |
| UNII | K50WFE6KGM |
| UN number | UN1325 |
| CompTox Dashboard (EPA) | DTXSID50875404 |
| Properties | |
| Chemical formula | C40H64O19 |
| Molar mass | 1298.3 g/mol |
| Appearance | White or almost white powder |
| Odor | Odorless |
| Density | 0.3-0.5 g/cm³ |
| Solubility in water | Insoluble in water |
| log P | -2.3 |
| Acidity (pKa) | 5.0 – 5.5 |
| Basicity (pKb) | 6.5 – 8.0 |
| Refractive index (nD) | 1.370 - 1.380 |
| Viscosity | 4000 mPa.s to 100000 mPa.s |
| Dipole moment | 2.85 D |
| Pharmacology | |
| ATC code | A06AD12 |
| Hazards | |
| Main hazards | May cause respiratory irritation, eye irritation, or skin irritation. |
| GHS labelling | GHS labelling for Hydroxypropyl Methylcellulose Acetate Succinate BP EP USP Pharma Grade: `"Not classified as hazardous according to GHS"` |
| Pictograms | GHS07 |
| Hazard statements | Hazard statements: Not a hazardous substance or mixture according to Regulation (EC) No. 1272/2008 (CLP/GHS). |
| Precautionary statements | Precautionary Statements: P261, P264, P271, P272, P273, P280, P302+P352, P305+P351+P338, P312, P332+P313, P337+P313, P362+P364, P501 |
| NFPA 704 (fire diamond) | 1-1-0 |
| Autoignition temperature | 260°C |
| LD50 (median dose) | LD50 (median dose): >5000 mg/kg (rat, oral) |
| NIOSH | Not Listed |
| PEL (Permissible) | PEL not established |
| REL (Recommended) | Not more than 10 ppm |
| Related compounds | |
| Related compounds |
Cellulose Acetate Hydroxypropyl Methylcellulose Methylcellulose Ethylcellulose Hydroxyethylcellulose Carboxymethylcellulose Sodium Cellulose Acetate Phthalate Hydroxypropyl Cellulose |
Chengguan District, Lanzhou, Gansu, China
