Answers to reviewer

Reviewer #1:
In my opinion the manuscript remains at low quality and many of the major
comments by Reviewer #1 have not been adequately reflected in the revision.
The paper still resembles a collection of raw data rather than a clearly
articulated scientific work that would contribute to the understanding of fluid
bed granulation.
Form the answer to comment no. 3 of reviewer 1 it appears that the standard
chemical engineering concept of enthalpy balance is unknown to the authors,
which is worrying.
The way the temperature data are presented in Figures 7, 8 and 10 is still very
misleading.
I am sorry but I cannot recommend this manuscript for publication.

Reviewer #3:

This manuscript by Korteby et al. is dealing with two types (in-situ and spray-
on) of batch melt granulation. The effect of different processing parameters is
deeply investigated. This work contains valuable results of a more and more
important technique. Therefore, it can be accepted for publication. However,
several details need to be clarified and minor revisions must be undertaken
before acceptance.
1, Even though it is already a revised work, the manuscript still contains typos
ad mistakes such as:
- FGMG -> FBMG (abstract)
- transion -> transition
- where -> were
- bleu -> blue
- bider -> binder
- Line 447-452: too long sentence, shorten it please
- Line 552: too long sentence, unnecessary comma
I would suggest a thorough survey of the manuscript to correct these mistakes
and make the text more grammatically acceptable.
2, Line 59-63: „Also, the selection of the appropriate binder will result in
formulations with sustained (Evrard and Delattre, 1996, Prado e al. 2014,
Quintavalle et al. 2008) or immediate drug release (Mašić et al. 2012, Pawar
et al., 2016) from tablets and granules (Mašić et al., 2014), improving the
bioavailability of poorly water-soluble drugs (Ogawa et al., 2018, Palazi et al.,
2018) and also achieving taste masking (Kharb et al. 2014)."
It would be useful to mention and cite (doi:
10.1021/acs.molpharmaceut.6b00613; doi: 10.1007/s11095-018-2440-3) that
the bioavailability of poorly water-soluble drugs depends on the selection of
the excipients. They might have not just positive or but negative effect on the
bioavailability.
3, As it can be read, the granulation experiments were carried out in
triplicates. What is the situation with the spraying angle, wetting surface and
particle size distribution measurements? Did the authors check if the
differences are statistically significant (if they have standard deviations)?
4, Do the authors know the exact values for viscosities of PEG2000 and
PEG6000 at the given temperatures? It might be worth finding out.
5, In my opinion, the conclusions should be restructured. It would be really
useful if it contained a few 'guidelines' how to carry out melt granulation, how
to avoid fine fraction, how to achieve spherical granules, etc. After all, that is
the point of granulation.