CPHI Milan 2026: Gelita on why gelatin selection makes or breaks softgels

At CPHI Milan 2026, Gelita is discussing the importance of gelatin selection for effective softgel formulation, as misalignment can lead to manufacturing issues such as inconsistent ribbon formation and weak seams. 

At the show floor in Italy, Nutrition Insight meets with the manufacturer of gelatin, collagen, and collagen peptides to learn about the common issues that arise from fill and gelatin interactions. 

Martin Junginger, global category management for Pharma & Bioscience, tells us that formulators must evaluate gelatins based on their compatibility with the fill and long-term performance factors.

He calls for stronger collaborations between procurement, formulators, and gelatin suppliers for optimal formulation strategies, designing robust release profiles for long-term performance. 

When issues tend to rise

Standard gelatin grades are often used in softgels. However, according to Junginger, a standard grade may not provide the functional properties that are required by a particular softgel system. To prevent gelatin-grade issues, he stresses the importance of matching the formulation, process, and desired functionality with the gelatin.

“Problems typically occur first, during softgel manufacturing and drying. Gel strength, viscosity, molecular-weight distribution, and gelation behavior influence ribbon formation, sealing, and drying,” details Junginger. 

“If these properties are not aligned with the formulation and machine settings, the manufacturer may notice an overly narrow processing window, inconsistent ribbon formation, weak or non-uniform seams, leakers, deformation, brittleness, or capsules that are too soft.”

Secondly, problems can occur during bulk storage and throughout shelf life, says Junginger, as some fills contain or develop reactive species that may react with functional groups in gelatin.

Martin Junginger, global category management for Pharma & Bioscience at Gelita.“Examples include aldehydes arising from oxidation, certain polyphenolic compounds, and some multivalent metal ions. Depending on their concentration, physical state, and chemical environment, these substances may contribute to crosslinking — resulting in the formation of a less soluble membrane, often referred to as a pellicle, that completely surrounds the fill material, thus slowing down its release or even preventing it entirely.”

“Lastly, gelatin selection should reflect the desired performance, whether standard, rapid, delayed, or particularly robust release throughout shelf life,” notes Junginger. “We therefore view gelatin selection as part of the formulation strategy, as opposed to the mere purchase of a standard raw material. The shell, fill, process, and intended storage conditions need to be assessed as one system.”

Predicting long-term performance

According to Junginger, formulators do not have a single gelatin parameter to predict performance for every softgel.

“Traditional specifications such as bloom strength and viscosity remain important for processing, but they do not address long-term compatibility with a particular fill. Softgels can contain a wide range of different nutrients and active substances that are specifically intended to interact with the body’s biological system.”

“Gelatin itself is a natural biological substance, too. Therefore, the art of formulation lies in creating a scenario in which both components function synergistically,” he adds.

Additionally, Junginger observes that the most common conceptual mismatch is when a gelatin is selected based on a particular processing specification, such as bloom and viscosity, without checking how the complete fill would interact with the shell over time.

To prevent gelatin grade issues, Junginger says the formulation, process, or desired functionality needs to match the gelatin.“In practice, a fresh softgel may be manufactured and test well, while a compatibility problem may only become apparent during stability testing.”

Designing next-gen release profiles

Crosslinking and delayed dissolution are long-standing softgel problems, which cause a hard, insoluble layer to form, slowing or blocking the release of a supplement or medicine.

“Crosslinking and unintended delayed dissolution are usually multifactorial, and the relative contribution of the gelatin grade, fill composition, manufacturing process, and storage environment varies from product to product,” comments Junginger.

“The fill can often be a risk factor because reactive substances can migrate to the shell and interact with the gelatin. These substances may be part of the original formulation, present as impurities, or formed over time through oxidation or degradation. Heat, humidity, storage duration, and the moisture and plasticizer balance of the shell can all influence the rate and impact of those reactions.”

Despite these factors, Junginger maintains that a gelatin grade matters, as gelatins can differ in “molecular-weight distribution, functional-group availability, charge characteristics, and resistance to internal or externally induced crosslinking.”

While choosing the right grade can increase the robustness of a formulation, it cannot replace good fill design, process control, suitable packaging, and stability testing, states Junginger.

“A technically sound way to express the relationship is: The fill and storage conditions define much of the crosslinking challenge, while the gelatin grade influences how well the shell responds.”

The best approach is to involve the gelatin supplier and softgel manufacturer early on in the process, says Junginger.“That is why Gelita offers a graduated RXL (Reduced Cross-Linking) portfolio rather than one universal anti-crosslinking grade,” he points out. “The appropriate level of protection depends on the individual formulation, including the reactive substances present, their concentration, the complete shell composition, and proposed storage conditions.”

Gelita believes that future discussions need to go beyond overcoming dissolution challenges. Junginger says the focus should be on how release profiles can be designed more efficiently and robustly for better formulation flexibility.

What the market must get right

Junginger also addresses that there are different requirements for procurement, product development, process development, and quality. Because of these differences, problems can emerge when these requirements are not connected early enough.

“So, our view is that this is less about procurement versus formulators and more about cross-functional specification. Procurement ensures consistency, quality, and supply, while formulation and application experts address functional performance requirements.” 

“The best approach is to involve the gelatin supplier and softgel manufacturer early on in the process, share sufficient information about the fill and intended product profile, and select the grade based on both processability and performance throughout the anticipated shelf life,” details Junginger.

He adds that this strategy drives the Gelita Pharma Institute — not just to recommend a material but to help customers in understanding shell-fill interactions while translating the intended product profile into a suitable gelatin and development approach.