How can the bioavailability of timolol be enhanced? A pharmacokinetic pilot study of novel hydrogels

  • Nicola von der Ohe
  • Martin Stark
  • Hans Mayer
  • Horst Brewitt
Laboratory Investigation

Abstract

• Background: Carbomerbased hydrogels with timolol maleate (T-Gel) were chosen to study the vehicle effect on ocular bioavailability. Pharmacokinetic profiles of T-Gel 0.05% (0.05% timolol), T-Gel 0.025% (0.025% timolol) and commercial timolol ophthalmic solution (TOS 0.1%; 0.1% timolol) were determined and compared. • Methods: A single dose was administered to rabbits' eyes. Timolol was determined by HPLC in aqueous humour, blood samples and washings of the ocular surface (as a measure of residence time). Sampling times were 0.5 h, 1 h and 4 h after instillation. • Results: Concentration versus time curves (AUC) of timolol in aqueous humour demonstrate no significant differences between TOS 0.1% and T-Gel 0.025% (P=0.19), whereas the difference between T-Gel 0.05% and TOS 0.1% is significant (P=0.006); the AUC ratio of T-Gel 0.05%:TOS 0.1%:T-Gel 0.025% was 2.14:1:0.87. Timolol blood levels were highest with TOS 0.1% at every time point. Peak levels occurred after 0.5 h with all test products; the ratio of peak levels (Cmax) for T-Gel 0.05%:TOS 0.1%:T-Gel 0.025% was 0.55:1:0.17. Timolol was detected in the washings up to 1 h after instillation of test products; the highest levels were observed after T-Gel 0.05%. • Conclusion: The new vehicle obviously improves the bioavailability of topically applied timolol.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 1.
    Burstein N, Anderson J (1985) Review: corneal penetration and ocular bioavailability of drugs. J Ocul Pharmacol 1: 309–326PubMedGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Chang S-C, Lee VHL (1986) Vehicle factors influencing the systemic absorption of topically applied timolol in the pigmented rabbit. 1st National Meeting, American Association of Pharmaceutical Scientists 3; pp 865Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Chrai SS, Robinson JR (1974) Ocular evaluation of methylcellulose vehicle in albino rabbits. J Pharm Sci 63: 1218–1223PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Davies NM, Farr SJ, Hadgraft J, Kellaway IW (1991) Evaluation of mucoadhesive polymers in ocular drug delivery. I. Viscous solutions. Pharm Res 8: 1039–1043PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Elena PP, Polzer H, Khosravi E (1993) Bioequivalence between timolol maleate formulated in ophthalmic solution (Timoptol) and a novel gel vehicle (T-Gel). Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci 94: 14–90Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Giroux J, Schrenzel M (1964) Hydrogels à base de polymères de l'acide acrylique. Essais galéniques et pharmacodynamiques. 2e communication. Pharm Acta Helv 39: 615–621PubMedGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Gurny R, Ibrahim H, Aebi A, Buri P, Wilson CG, Washington N, Edman P, Camber O (1987) Design and evaluation of controlled release systems for the eye. J Control Rel 6: 367–373CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Hui H-W, Robinson JR (1985) Ocular delivery of progesterone using a bioadhesive polymer.Int J Pharm 26: 203–213CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Kyyrönen K, Urtti A (1990) Improved ocular:systemic absorption ratio of timolol by viscous vehicle and phenylephrine. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci 31: 1827–1832PubMedGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Lee VHL (1990) Review: new directions in the optimization of ocular drug delivery. J Ocul Pharmacol 6: 157–164PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Mayer H, von der Ohe N (1993) Wirksamkeit von Timolol in neuartiger Gelformulierung. Ophthalmologe 90 [Suppl 1]: 103Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Ohdo S, Grass G, Lee VHL (1991) Improving the ocular to systemic ratio of topical timolol by varying the dosing time. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci 32: 2790–2798PubMedGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Patton T, Robinson J (1975) Ocular evaluation of polyvinyl alcohol vehicle in rabbits. J Pharm Sci 64: 1312–1316PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Robinson JR, Li VHK (1984) Ocular disposition and bioavailability of pilocarpine from piloplex and other sustained release drug delivery systems. In: Tich U, David R (eds) Recent advances in glaucoma. Elsevier, Amsterdam, pp 231–236Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Ros FE, Innemee HC, Van Zwieten PA (1979) Ocular penetration of β-adrenergic blocking agents. An experimental study with atenolol, metoprolol, timolol and propranolol. Doc Ophthalmol 48: 291–301CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Rozier A, Mazuel C, Grove J, Plazonnet B (1989) Gelrite: a novel ion-activated, in-situ gelling polymer for ophthalmic vehicles. Effect on bioavailability of timolol. Int J Pharm 57: 163–168CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Saettone MF, Chetoni P, Torracca MT, Burgalassi S, Giannaccini B (1989) Evaluation of muco-adhesive properties and in vivo activity of ophthalmic vehicles based on hyaluronic acid. Int J Pharm 51: 203–212CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Saettone MF, Giannaccini B, Barattini F, Tellini N (1982) The validity of rabbits for investigations on ophthalmic vehicles: a comparison of four different vehicles containing tropicamide in humans and rabbits. Pharm Acta Helv 57: 47–55PubMedGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Saettone MF, Giannaccini B, Teneggi A, Savigni P, Tellini N (1982) Vehicle effects on ophthalmic bioavailability: the influence of different polymers on the activity of pilocarpine in rabbit and man. J Pharm Pharmacol 34: 464–466PubMedGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Saettone MF, Giannaccini B, Ravecca S, La Marca F, Tota G (1984) Polymer effects on ocular bioavailability — the influence of different liquid vehicles on the mydriatic response of tropicamide in humans and in rabbits. Int J Pharm 20: 187–202CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Saettone MF, Giannaccini B, Guiducci A, Savigni P (1986) Semisolid ophthalmic vehicles. 111. An evaluation of four organic hydrogels containing pilocarpine. Int J Pharm 31: 261–270CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Schmitt CJ, Lotti VJ, Le Douarec JC (1980) Penetration of timolol into the rabbit eye. Measurements after ocular instillation and intravenous injection. Arch Ophthalmol 98: 547–551PubMedGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Schoenwald RD, Boltralik JJ (1979) A bioavailability comparison in rabbits of two steroids formulated as high-viscosity gels and reference aqueous preparations. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci 18: 61–66PubMedGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Schoenwald RD, Ward RL, De Santis LM, Roehrs RE (1978) Influence of high-viscosity vehicles on miotic effect of pilocarpine. J Pharm Sci 67: 1280–1283PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Schrenzel M (1964) Hydrogels à base de polymères de l'acide acrylique. Essais galéniques et pharmacodynamiques. lère communication. Pharm Acta Helv 39: 546–555PubMedGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Vareilles P, Silverstone D, Plazonnet B, Le Douarec J-C, Sears ML, Stone CA (1977) Comparison of the effects of timolol and other adrenergic agents on intraocular pressure in the rabbit. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci 16: 987–996PubMedGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag 1996

Authors and Affiliations

  • Nicola von der Ohe
    • 1
  • Martin Stark
    • 1
  • Hans Mayer
    • 1
  • Horst Brewitt
    • 1
  1. 1.Klinik und Poliklinik für AugenheilkundeMedizinische Hochschule HannoverHannoverGermany

Personalised recommendations