Journal of Nanoparticle Research

, Volume 12, Issue 5, pp 1743–1754 | Cite as

Pure drug nanoparticles in tablets: what are the dissolution limitations?

  • Desmond Heng
  • Keiko Ogawa
  • David J. Cutler
  • Hak-Kim ChanEmail author
  • Judy A. Raper
  • Lin Ye
  • Jimmy Yun
Research Paper


There has been increasing interests for drug companies to incorporate drug nanoparticles into their existing formulations. However, technical knowledge in this area is still in its infancy and more study needs to be done to stimulate growth in this fledging field. There is a need to scrutinize the performance of pure drug nanoparticles in tablets, particularly relating formulation variables to their dissolution performance. Application of the pure form, synthesized without the use of surfactants or stabilizers, is often preferred to maximize drug loading and also to minimize toxicity. Cefuroxime axetil, a poorly water-soluble cephalosporin antibiotic, was used as the model drug in the formulation development. Drug release rate, tablet disintegration time, tensile strength and energy of failure were predominantly influenced by the amount of super-disintegrant, amount of surfactant, compression force and diluent species, respectively. The compression rate had minimal impact on the responses. The main hurdle confronting the effective use of pure drug nanoparticles in tablets is the difficulty in controlling aggregation in solution, which could potentially be aggravated by the tabletting process. Through the use of elevated levels of surfactants (8 w/w% sodium dodecyl sulphate), drug release from the nanoparticle preparation was enhanced from 58.0 ± 2.7% to 72.3 ± 0.7% in 10 min. Hence, it is recommended that physical formulations for pure drug nanoparticles be focused on the particle de-aggregation step in solution, if much higher rates are to be desired. In conclusion, even though pure drug nanoparticles could be easily synthesized, limitations from aggregation may need to be overcome, before successful application in tablets can be fully realized.


Solid dosage form Drug nanoparticles Taguchi Cefuroxime axetil Poorly water-soluble drug Nanomedicine 



The authors are grateful to Bruce Oliver (Mechanical Engineering) and Bill Rae (Pharmacy) for the technical assistance rendered during the course of this study. This study was supported by a grant from the Australian Research Council (ARC Linkage Project LP 0561675 with Nanomaterials Technology Pty. Ltd).


  1. Adams DH, Wood MJ, Farrell ID (1985) Oral cefuroxime axetil: clinical pharmacology and comparative dose studies in urinary tract infection. J Antimicrob Chemother 16:359–366CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  2. Aguiar AJ, Zelmer JE, Kinkel AW (1967) Deaggregation behavior of a relatively insoluble substituted benzoic acid and its sodium salt. J Pharm Sci 56(10):1243–1252CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  3. Alderborn G (2005) Tablets and compaction. In: Aulton ME (ed) Pharmaceutics. The science of dosage form design, 2nd edn. Elsevier, London, pp 397–440Google Scholar
  4. Ashford M (2005) Bioavailability—physicochemical and dosage form factors. In: Aulton ME (ed) Pharmaceutics. The science of dosage form design, 2nd edn. Elsevier, London, pp 234–252Google Scholar
  5. Attwood D, Florence AT (1983) Surfactant systems, their chemistry, pharmacy and biology. Chapman & Hall, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  6. Brown CK, Chokshi HP, Nickerson B, Reed RA, Rohrs BR, Shah PA (2004) Acceptable analytical practices for dissolution testing of poorly soluble compounds. Pharm Technol 28: 56–65Google Scholar
  7. Busignies V, Leclerc B, Porion P, Evesque P, Couarraze G, Tchoreloff P (2006) Compaction behaviour and new predictive approach to the compressibility of binary mixtures of pharmaceutical excipients. Eur J Pharm Biopharm 64:66–74CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  8. Chen JF, Zhang JY, Shen ZG, Zhong J, Yun J (2006) Preparation and characterisation of amorphous cefuroxime axetil drug nanoparticles with novel technology: high-gravity antisolvent precipitation. Ind Eng Chem Res 45(25):8723–8727CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Date AA, Patravale VB (2004) Current strategies for engineering drug nanoparticles. Curr Opin Colloid Interface Sci 9:222–235CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. David ST, Augsburger LL (1974) Flexure test for determination of tablet tensile strength. J Pharm Sci 63:933–936CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  11. Diemunsch AM, Pabst JY, Constant C, Mathis C, Stamm A (1993) Tablet formulation: Genichi Taguchi’s approach. Drug Dev Ind Pharm 19(12):1461–1477CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Dokoumetzidis A, Macheras P (2006) A century of dissolution research: from Noyes and Whitney to the biopharmaceutics classification system. Int J Pharm 321:1–11CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  13. Dressman JB, Amidon GL, Reppas C, Shah VP (1998) Dissolution testing as a prognostic tool for oral drug absorption: immediate release dosage forms. Pharm Res 15(1):11–22CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  14. Edge S, Steele DF, Chen A, Tobyn MJ, Staniforth JN (2000) The mechanical properties of compact of microcrystalline cellulose and silicified microcrystalline cellulose. Int J Pharm 200:67–72CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  15. Edge S, Steele DF, Tobyn MJ, Staniforth JN, Chen A (2001) Directional bonding in compacted microcrystalline cellulose. Drug Dev Ind Pharm 27(7):613–621CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  16. Eerikainen H, Watanabe W, Kauppinen EI, Ahonen PP (2003) Aerosol flow reactor method for synthesis of drug nanoparticles. Eur J Pharm Biopharm 55:357–360CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  17. El-Shabouri MH (2002) Nanoparticles for improving the dissolution and oral bioavailability of spironolactone, a poorly-soluble drug. STP Pharm Sci 12(2):97–101Google Scholar
  18. Esezobo S, Pilpel N (1977) Formulation factors affecting strength and dissolution of uncoated oxytetracycline tablets. J Pharm Sci 66(6):852–858CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  19. Fassihi AR (1986) Mechanisms of disintegration and compactibility of disintegrants in a direct compression system. Int J Pharm 32:93–96CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Fell JT, Newton JM (1970) Determination of tablet strength by the diametral-compression test. J Pharm Sci 59(5):688–691CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  21. Florence AT (2007) Pharmaceutical nanotechnology: more than size. Ten topics for research. Int J Pharm 339:1–2CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  22. Gupta RB (2006) Fundamentals of drug nanoparticles. In: Gupta RB, Kompella UB (eds) Drugs and the pharmaceutical sciences: nanoparticle technology for drug delivery. Taylor & Francis, London, pp 6–9Google Scholar
  23. Heng D, Cutler DJ, Chan HK, Yun J, Raper JA (2008a) Dissolution kinetic behavior of drug nanoparticles and their conformity to the diffusion model. Langmuir 24(14):7538–7544CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  24. Heng D, Cutler DJ, Chan HK, Yun J, Raper JA (2008b) What is a suitable dissolution method for drug nanoparticles? Pharm Res 25(7):1696–1701CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  25. Huang J, Bartell LS (2001) Structure and properties of potassium iodide nanoparticles. A molecular dynamics study. J Mol Struct 567–568:145–156CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Iskandarani B, Clair JH, Patel P, Shiromani PK, Dempski RE (1993) Simultaneous optimization of capsule and tablet formulation using response surface methodology. Drug Dev Ind Pharm 19(16):2089–2101CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Johnson BK, Prud’homme RK (2003) Chemical processing and micromixing in confined impinging jets. AlChE Journal 49(9):2264–2282Google Scholar
  28. Jose-Yacaman M, Gutierrez-Wing C, Miki M, Yang DQ, Piyakis KN, Sacher E (2005) Surface diffusion and coalescence of mobile metal nanoparticles. J Phys Chem B 109:9703–9711CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  29. Kanfer I (2002) Report on the international workshop on the biopharmaceutics classification system (BCS): scientific and regulatory aspects in practice. J Pharm Pharm Sci 5(1):1–4PubMedGoogle Scholar
  30. Katz LM (2007) Nanotechnology and applications in cosmetics: general overview. Am Chem Soc Symp Ser 961: 193–200Google Scholar
  31. Kesisoglou F, Panmai S, Wu Y (2007) Application of nanoparticles in oral delivery of immediate release formulations. Curr Nanosci 3:183–190CrossRefADSGoogle Scholar
  32. Kim KD, Choi DW, Choa YH, Kim HT (2007) Optimization of parameters for the synthesis of zinc oxide nanoparticles by Taguchi robust design method. Colloids Surf A 311:170–173CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Langguth P, Hanafy A, Frenzel D, Grenier P, Nhamias A, Ohlig T et al (2005) Nanosuspension formulations for low-soluble drugs: pharmacokinetic evaluation using spironolactone as model compound. Drug Dev Ind Pharm 31:319–329PubMedGoogle Scholar
  34. Larhrib H, Wells JI (1997) Compression of thermally treated polyethylene glycol 10 000. Int J Pharm 153:51–58CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Lee J (2003) Drug nano and microparticles processed into solid dosage forms: physical properties. J Pharm Sci 92(10):2057–2068CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  36. Lee J (2007) Nanoscopic friction behavior of pharmaceutical materials. Int J Pharm 340:191–197CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  37. Liu J, Stewart PJ (1998) Deaggregation during the dissolution of benzodiazepines in interactive mixtures. J Pharm Sci 87(12):1632–1638CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  38. Lopez-Quintela MA (2003) Synthesis of nanomaterials in microemulsions: formation mechanisms and growth control. Current Opin Colloid Interface Sci 8(2):137–144CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Mackay ME, Dao TT, Tuteja A, Ho DL, van Horn B, Kim H et al (2003) Nanoscale effects leading to non-Einstein-like decrease in viscosity. Nat Mater 2:762–766CrossRefPubMedADSGoogle Scholar
  40. Muller RH, Junghanns JAH (2006) Drug nanocrystals/nanosuspensions for the delivery of poorly soluble drugs. In: Torchilin VP (ed) Nanoparticulates as drug carriers. Imperial College Press, London, pp 308–309Google Scholar
  41. Muller RH, Runge S, Ravelli V, Mehnert W, Thunemann AF, Souto EB (2006) Oral bioavailability of cyclosporine: solid lipid nanoparticles (SLN®) versus drug nanocrystals. Int J Pharm 317:82–89CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  42. Obae K, Iijima H, Imada K (1999) Morphological effect of microcrystalline cellulose particles on tablet tensile strength. Int J Pharm 182:155–164CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  43. Palmieri GF, Wehrle P (1997) Evaluation of ethylcellulose-coated pellets optimized using the approach of Taguchi. Drug Dev Ind Pharm 23(11):1069–1077CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Peace GS (1993) Taguchi methods. A hands-on approach to quality engineering. Addison-Wesley, MassachusettsGoogle Scholar
  45. Rees JE, Rue PJ (1978) Work required to cause failure of tablets in diametral compression. Drug Dev Ind Phar 4(2):131–156CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Reverchon E, Adami R (2006) Nanomaterials and supercritical fluids. J Supercrit Fluids 37:1–22CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Ruddy SB, Matuszewska BK, Grim YA, Ostovic D, Storey DE (1999) Design and characterization of a surfactant-enriched tablet formulation for oral delivery of a poorly water-soluble immunosuppressive agent. Int J Pharm 182:173–186CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  48. Ryu JM, Cho SK, Jung SH, Seong SK, Cho EH, Ahn SH et al (2006) An oral preparation having improved bioavailability (WO 2006/057507 A1), KoreaGoogle Scholar
  49. Sager TM, Porter DW, Robinson VA, Lindsley WG, Schwegler-Berry DE, Castranova V (2007) Improved method to disperse nanoparticles for in vitro and in vivo investigation of toxicity. Nanotoxicology 1(2):118–129CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Taguchi G (1986) Introduction to quality engineering: designing quality into products and processes. Kraus International Publications, White Plains, NYGoogle Scholar
  51. Varshosaz J, Hassanzadeh F, Mahmoudzadeh M, Sadeghi A (2009) Preparation of cefuroxime axetil nanoparticles by rapid expansion of supercritical fluid technology. Powder Technol 189:97–102CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. Wang J, Flanagan DR (2002) General solution for diffusion-controlled dissolution of spherical particles. 2. Evaluation of experimental data. J Pharm Sci 91(2):534–542CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  53. Yang K, Teo E-C, Fuss FK (2007) Application of Taguchi method in optimization of cervical ring cage. J Biomech 40:3251–3256CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  54. Zhang JY, Shen ZG, Zhong J, Hu TT, Chen JF, Ma ZQ et al (2006) Preparation of amorphous cefuroxime axetil nanoparticles by controlled nanoprecipitation method without surfactants. Int J Pharm 323:153–160CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  55. Zhao N, Augsburger L (2005) Functionality comparison of 3 classes of superdisintegrants in promoting aspirin tablet disintegration and dissolution. AAPS PharmSciTech 6(4):E634–E640CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media B.V. 2009

Authors and Affiliations

  • Desmond Heng
    • 1
    • 5
    • 6
  • Keiko Ogawa
    • 2
  • David J. Cutler
    • 1
  • Hak-Kim Chan
    • 1
    Email author
  • Judy A. Raper
    • 3
  • Lin Ye
    • 4
  • Jimmy Yun
    • 5
  1. 1.Advanced Drug Delivery Group, Faculty of Pharmacy, A15The University of SydneySydneyAustralia
  2. 2.Medical DivisionNitto Denko Co. Ltd.IbarakiJapan
  3. 3.Vice Chancellor’s UnitUniversity of WollongongWollongongAustralia
  4. 4.School of Aerospace, Mechanical and Mechatronic EngineeringThe University of SydneySydneyAustralia
  5. 5.Nanomaterials Technology Pty. Ltd.SingaporeSingapore
  6. 6.Institute of Chemical and Engineering SciencesJurong IslandSingapore

Personalised recommendations