Advertisement

Pharmaceutical Research

, Volume 18, Issue 3, pp 380–388 | Cite as

Biorelevant Dissolution Testing to Predict the Plasma Profile of Lipophilic Drugs After Oral Administration

  • Eleftheria Nicolaides
  • Moira Symillides
  • Jennifer B. Dressman
  • Christos Reppas
Article

Abstract

Purpose. To quantitatively compare in vitro dissolution data in biorelevant and compendial media, to investigate whether in vitro differences are reflected in the simulated plasma profile and to specify under which circumstances prediction of the plasma profile of orally administered lipophilic drugs can be achieved.

Methods. Previously published dissolution data from seven products of four lipophilic drugs were compared using the first order model, the RRSBW distribution, and a model based on the Noyes-Whitney theory. Simulated plasma profiles were then obtained using a model-dependent approach. Simulated and observed plasma profiles were compared with the difference factor, f1.

Results. No model consistently provided the best fit to the in vitrodata, which varied significantly with medium composition. Prediction of the plasma profile was possible (9.6 ≤ f1≤ 34.2) in seven out of eleven cases.

Conclusions. Although prediction of the plasma profile of lipophilic drugs solely on the basis of in vitro data remains an ambitious target, this study shows that the plasma profile of a lipophilic drug can be predicted with appropriate in vitro dissolution data, provided that the absolute bioavailability of the drug is known and the drug has dissolution limited absorption.

prediction oral absorption lipophilic drugs troglitazone atovaquone sanfetrinem cilexetil GV150013X 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

REFERENCES

  1. 1.
    P. Macheras, C. Reppas, and J. B. Dressman. Biopharmaceutics of Orally Administered Drugs, Ellis Horwood, London, 1995.Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    G. L. Amidon, H. Lennernas, V. P. Shah, and J. R. Crison. A theoretical basis for a biopharmaceutic drug classification: The correlation of in vitro drug product dissolution and in vivo bioavailability. Pharm. Res. 12:413-420 (1995).Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    J. B. Dressman, G. L. Amidon, C. Reppas, and V. P. Shah. Dissolution testing as a prognostic tool for oral drug absorption: Immediate release forms. Pharm. Res. 15:11-22 (1998).Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    E. Nicolaides, E. Galia, C. Efthymiopoulos, J.B. Dressman, and C. Reppas. Forecasting the in vivo performance of four low solubility drugs from their in vitro dissolution data. Pharm. Res. 16: 1877-1883 (1999).Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    C. Reppas, and E. Nicolaides. Analysis of drug dissolution data. J. Dressman and H. Lennernas (eds.), In Oral Drug Absorption: Prediction and Assessment, Marcel Dekker, New York, 2000.Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    F. Langenbucher. Parametric representation of dissolution-rate curves by the RRSBW distribution. Pharm. Ind. 38:472-477 (1976).Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    M. V. Dali, and J. T. Carstensen. Effect of change in shape factor of a single crystal on its dissolution behavior. Pharm. Res. 13:155-162 (1996).Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    J. G. Wagner, Pharmacokinetics for the Pharmaceutical Scientist, Technomic Publishing Co., Inc., Basel, Switzerland, 1993.Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    P. M. Sathe, Y. Tsong, and V. P. Shah. In vitro dissolution profile comparison: Statistics and analysis, model dependent approach. Pharm. Res. 13:1799-1803 (1996).Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    J. R. Koup, S. C. Olson, and G. Ridout. Bayesian estimation of troglitazone pharmacokinetic parameters following intravenous and oral administration (Abstract). Pharm. Res. 14:S243 (1997).Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    P. E. Rolan, A. J. Mercer, B. C. Weatherley, T. Holdich, H. Meire, R. W. Peck, G. Ridout, and J. Posner. Examination of some factors responsible for a food-induced increase in absorption of atovaquone. Br. J. Clin. Pharmacol. 37:13-20 (1994).Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    S. Klein, E. Kostewicz, C. Reppas, and J. B. Dressman. Characterization of the physicochemical properties of standard breakfast meals, whole milk, and Ensure with the aim of creating a new generation of dissolution media, 27th International Symposium on Controlled Release of Bioactive Materials, July 7–13, 2000, Paris, France.Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    J. W. Moore and H. H. Flanner. Mathematical comparison of dissolution profiles. Pharm. Tech. (June issue) 64-74 (1996).Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    M. Efentakis, and J. B. Dressman. Gastric juice as a dissolution medium: Surface tension and pH. Eur. J. Drug Metab. Pharmacokin. 23:97-102 (1998).Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    P. V. Pedersen. General treatment of linear pharmacokinetics. J. Pharm. Sci. 67:187-191 (1978).Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    F. Langenbucher. Improved understanding of convolution algorithms correlating body response with drug input. Pharm. Ind. 44:1275-1278 (1982).Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    C. G. Wilson, N. Washington, J.L. Greaves, C. Washington, I.R. Wilding, T. Hoadley, and E. E. Sims. Predictive modelling of the behaviour of a controlled release buflomedil HCl formulation using scintigraphic and pharmacokinetic data. Int. J. Pharmac. 72:79-86 (1991).Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    L. X. Yu, and G. L. Amidon. Saturable small intestinal drug absorption in humans: Modelling and interpretation of cefatrizine data. Eur. J. Pharm. Biopharm. 45:199-203 (1998).Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    G. M. Grass. Simulation models to predict oral drug absorption from in vitro data. Adv. Drug Del. Rev. 23:199-219 (1997).Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    L. X. Yu. An integrated model for determining causes of poor oral drug absorption. Pharm. Res. 16:1883-1887 (1999).Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    L. X. Yu, E. Lipka, J. P. Crison, and G. L. Amidon. Transport approaches to the biopharmaceutical design of oral drug delivery systems: Prediction of intestinal absorption. Adv. Drug Del. Rev. 19:359-376 (1996).Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    A. Kalampokis, P. Argyrakis, and P. Macheras. A heterogenous tube model of intestinal drug absorption based on probabilistic concepts. Pharm. Res. 16:1764-1769 (1999).Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    D. A. Norris, G. D. Leesman, P. J. Sinko, and G. M. Grass. Development of predictive pharmacokinetic simulation models for drug discovery. J. Control. Release. 65:55-62 (2000).Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    R. Löbenberg, J. Krämer, V. P. Shah, G. L. Amidon, and J. B. Dressman. Dissolution testing as a prognostic tool for oral drug absorption: Dissolution behavior of glibenclamide. Pharm. Res. 17:439-444 (2000).Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Plenum Publishing Corporation 2001

Authors and Affiliations

  • Eleftheria Nicolaides
    • 1
  • Moira Symillides
    • 1
  • Jennifer B. Dressman
    • 2
  • Christos Reppas
    • 1
  1. 1.Laboratory of Biopharmaceutics and PharmacokineticsUniversity of AthensAthensGreece
  2. 2.Institut für Pharmazeutische TechnologieJW Goethe UniversitätFrankfurtGermany

Personalised recommendations