Advertisement

The AAPS Journal

, Volume 19, Issue 3, pp 754–764 | Cite as

Inclusion of Digestible Surfactants in Solid SMEDDS Formulation Removes Lag Time and Influences the Formation of Structured Particles During Digestion

  • Kapilkumar Vithani
  • Adrian Hawley
  • Vincent Jannin
  • Colin Pouton
  • Ben J. Boyd
Research Article

Abstract

Solid self-microemulsifying drug delivery systems (SMEDDS) have received considerable attention in recent times attempting to overcome the drawbacks of liquid SMEDDS. Earlier literature reports on solid SMEDDS have focussed on formulation development; however, the digestibility and propensity for self-assembly of the digested components with endogenous bile salts and phospholipids are unknown. Therefore, as a starting point, previously reported solid SMEDDS containing Gelucire® 44/14 (GEL) and the non-digestible surfactants, Vitamin E TPGS (TPGS) and Lutrol® F 127 (F 127), were prepared, and their dispersion and digestion behaviours were studied using an in vitro lipolysis model, coupled with small-angle X-ray scattering (SAXS) to determine the formed colloidal structures during digestion in real time. GEL alone was digested (89%) and formed a lamellar phase (Lα). When surfactants were added at a 40:60% w/w lipid to surfactants ratio, digestion was inhibited with a significant lag time being evident. However, increasing the fraction of GEL to 50% w/w enabled digestion with reduced lag time. The substitution of the non-digestible surfactants with digestible surfactants, sucrose esters S-1670 (S-1670) and Span® 60 (S-60), eliminated the digestion lag time, and the formation of colloidal structures was more similar to that of GEL alone.

KEY WORDS

in vitro lipolysis lipid digestion non-digestible and digestible surfactants small-angle X-ray scattering solid SMEDDS 

Notes

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

Kapilkumar’s Ph.D. research was supported by Gattefossé (Saint-Priest, France). The SAXS experiments were undertaken at the SAXS/WAXS beamline at the Australian Synchrotron, Victoria, Australia. Ben Boyd is funded under the Australian Research Council Future Fellowship scheme, and the project was partly funded by the ARC Discovery Grant scheme.

COMPLIANCE WITH ETHICAL STANDARDS

CONFLICT OF INTEREST

Vincent Jannin is an employee of Gattefossé (Saint-Priest, France), who manufactures the Gelucire® 44/14 used in this study.

REFERENCES

  1. 1.
    Vonderscher J, Meinzer A, editors. Rationale for the development of Sandimmune Neoral. Transplantation proceedings; 1994.Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Pouton CW. Lipid formulations for oral administration of drugs: non-emulsifying, self-emulsifying and ’self-microemulsifying’ drug delivery systems. Eur J Pharm Sci. 2000;11(Supplement 2):S93–8.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Balakumar K, Raghavan CV, Selvan NT, Prasad RH, Abdu S. Self nanoemulsifying drug delivery system (SNEDDS) of rosuvastatin calcium: design, formulation, bioavailability and pharmacokinetic evaluation. Colloids Surf, B. 2013;112:337–43.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Gursoy RN, Benita S. Self-emulsifying drug delivery systems (SEDDS) for improved oral delivery of lipophilic drugs. Biomed Pharmacother. 2004;58(3):173–82.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Čerpnjak K, Zvonar A, Gašperlin M, Vrečer F. Lipid-based systems as a promising approach for enhancing the bioavailability of poorly water-soluble drugs. Acta Pharm. 2013;63(4):427–45.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Truong DH, Tran TH, Ramasamy T, Choi JY, Lee HH, Moon C, et al. Development of solid self-emulsifying formulation for improving the oral bioavailability of Erlotinib. AAPS PharmSciTech. 2015:1-8.Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Cerpnjak K, Zvonar A, Vrecer F, Gasperlin M. Development of a solid self-microemulsifying drug delivery system (SMEDDS) for solubility enhancement of naproxen. Drug Dev Ind Pharm. 2015;41(9):1548–57.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Pouton CW, Porter CJH. Formulation of lipid-based delivery systems for oral administration: materials, methods and strategies. Adv Drug Delivery Rev. 2008;60(6):625–37.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Strickley RG. Solubilizing excipients in oral and injectable formulations. Pharm Res. 2004;21(2):201–30.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Nazzal S, Wang Y. Characterization of soft gelatin capsules by thermal analysis. Int J Pharm. 2001;230(1–2):35–45.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Mei X, Etzler FM, Wang Z. Use of texture analysis to study hydrophilic solvent effects on the mechanical properties of hard gelatin capsules. Int J Pharm. 2006;324(2):128–35.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Kalepu S, Manthina M, Padavala V. Oral lipid-based drug delivery systems—an overview. Acta Pharmaceutica Sinica B. 2013;3(6):361–72.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Boltri L, Coceani N, Curto DD, Dobetti L, Esposito P. Enhancement and modification of etoposide release from crospovidone particles loaded with oil-surfactant blends. Pharm Dev Technol. 1997;2(4):373–81.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Oh DH, Kang JH, Kim DW, Lee B-J, Kim JO, Yong CS, et al. Comparison of solid self-microemulsifying drug delivery system (solid SMEDDS) prepared with hydrophilic and hydrophobic solid carrier. Int J Pharm. 2011;420(2):412–8.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Venkatesan N, Yoshimitsu J, Ito Y, Shibata N, Takada K. Liquid filled nanoparticles as a drug delivery tool for protein therapeutics. Biomaterials. 2005;26(34):7154–63.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Pouton CW. Formulation of poorly water-soluble drugs for oral administration: physicochemical and physiological issues and the lipid formulation classification system. Eur J Pharm Sci. 2006;29(3–4):278–87.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Passerini N, Albertini B, Perissutti B, Rodriguez L. Evaluation of melt granulation and ultrasonic spray congealing as techniques to enhance the dissolution of praziquantel. Int J Pharm. 2006;318(1):92–102.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Rodriguez L, Passerini N, Cavallari C, Cini M, Sancin P, Fini A. Description and preliminary evaluation of a new ultrasonic atomizer for spray-congealing processes. Int J Pharm. 1999;183(2):133–43.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Yi T, Wan J, Xu H, Yang X. A new solid self-microemulsifying formulation prepared by spray-drying to improve the oral bioavailability of poorly water soluble drugs. Eur J Pharm Biopharm. 2008;70(2):439–44.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Singh SK, Vuddanda PR, Singh S, Srivastava AK. A comparison between use of spray and freeze drying techniques for preparation of solid self-microemulsifying formulation of valsartan and in vitro and in vivo evaluation. BioMed research international. 2013;2013.Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Nanda Kishore R, Yalavarthi PR, Vadlamudi HC, Vandana K, Rasheed A, Sushma M. Solid self microemulsification of Atorvastatin using hydrophilic carriers: a design. Drug Dev Ind Pharm. 2015;41(7):1213–22.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Seo A, Holm P, Kristensen HG, Schæfer T. The preparation of agglomerates containing solid dispersions of diazepam by melt agglomeration in a high shear mixer. Int J Pharm. 2003;259(1–2):161–71.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Gupta M, Tseng Y-C, Goldman D, Bogner R. Hydrogen bonding with adsorbent during storage governs drug dissolution from solid-dispersion granules. Pharm Res. 2002;19(11):1663–72.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Gupta MK, Goldman D, Bogner RH, Tseng Y-C. Enhanced drug dissolution and bulk properties of solid dispersions granulated with a surface adsorbent. Pharm Dev Technol. 2001;6(4):563–72.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Sethia S, Squillante E. Physicochemical characterization of solid dispersions of carbamazepine formulated by supercritical carbon dioxide and conventional solvent evaporation method. J Pharm Sci. 2002;91(9):1948–57.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Thies C, Dos Santos IR, Richard J, VandeVelde V, Rolland H, Benoit J-P. A supercritical fluid-based coating technology 1: process considerations. J Microencapsulation. 2003;20(1):87–96.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Sethia S, Squillante E. Solid dispersion of carbamazepine in PVP K30 by conventional solvent evaporation and supercritical methods. Int J Pharm. 2004;272(1):1–10.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    P. Thipsay JM, M. Repka hot melt extrusion technology for the formulation of solid self microemulsifying drug delivery systems. AAPS 2014.Google Scholar
  29. 29.
    Kossena GA, Charman WN, Boyd BJ, Porter CJH. Influence of the intermediate digestion phases of common formulation lipids on the absorption of a poorly water-soluble drug. J Pharm Sci. 2005;94(3):481–92.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Porter CJ, Kaukonen AM, Taillardat‐Bertschinger A, Boyd BJ, O’Connor JM, Edwards GA, et al. Use of in vitro lipid digestion data to explain the in vivo performance of triglyceride‐based oral lipid formulations of poorly water‐soluble drugs: studies with halofantrine. J Pharm Sci. 2004;93(5):1110–21.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Porter CJ, Trevaskis NL, Charman WN. Lipids and lipid-based formulations: optimizing the oral delivery of lipophilic drugs. Nat Rev Drug Discovery. 2007;6(3):231–48.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Kossena GA, Boyd BJ, Porter CJ, Charman WN. Separation and characterization of the colloidal phases produced on digestion of common formulation lipids and assessment of their impact on the apparent solubility of selected poorly water‐soluble drugs. J Pharm Sci. 2003;92(3):634–48.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    MacGregor KJ, Embleton JK, Lacy JE, Perry EA, Solomon LJ, Seager H, et al. Influence of lipolysis on drug absorption from the gastro-intestinal tract. Adv Drug Delivery Rev. 1997;25(1):33–46.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    Zangenberg NH, Müllertz A, Kristensen HG, Hovgaard L. A dynamic in vitro lipolysis model: I. controlling the rate of lipolysis by continuous addition of calcium. Eur J Pharm Sci. 2001;14(2):115–22.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  35. 35.
    Fernandez S, Rodier J-D, Ritter N, Mahler B, Demarne F, Carrière F, et al. Lipolysis of the semi-solid self-emulsifying excipient Gelucire® 44/14 by digestive lipases. Biochim Biophys Acta (BBA)-Mol Cell Biol Lipids. 2008;1781(8):367–75.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. 36.
    Warren DB, Anby MU, Hawley A, Boyd BJ. Real time evolution of liquid crystalline nanostructure during the digestion of formulation lipids using synchrotron small-angle X-ray scattering. Langmuir. 2011;27(15):9528–34.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  37. 37.
    Zhang Z, Tan S, Feng S-S. Vitamin E TPGS as a molecular biomaterial for drug delivery. Biomaterials. 2012;33(19):4889–906.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  38. 38.
    Kabanov AV, Batrakova EV, Alakhov VY. Pluronic® block copolymers as novel polymer therapeutics for drug and gene delivery. J Controlled Release. 2002;82(2):189–212.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. 39.
    Mitsubishi Kagaku Foods Corporation J. http://www.mfccojp/english/s1670.htm
  40. 40.
  41. 41.
    Craig D, Barker S, Banning D, Booth S. An investigation into the mechanisms of self-emulsification using particle size analysis and low frequency dielectric spectroscopy. Int J Pharm. 1995;114(1):103–10.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. 42.
    Trull A, Tan K, Tan L, Alexander G, Jamieson N, editors. Enhanced absorption of new oral cyclosporin microemulsion formulation, Neoral, in liver transplant recipients with external biliary diversion. Transplantation proceedings; 1994.Google Scholar
  43. 43.
    Chamieh J, Davanier F, Jannin V, Demarne F, Cottet H. Size characterization of commercial micelles and microemulsions by Taylor dispersion analysis. Int J Pharm. 2015;492(1–2):46–54.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  44. 44.
    Khan J, Hawley A, Rades T, Boyd BJ. In situ lipolysis and synchrotron small-angle X-ray scattering for the direct determination of the precipitation and solid-state form of a poorly water-soluble drug during digestion of a lipid-based formulation. Journal of Pharmaceutical Sciences.Google Scholar
  45. 45.
    Phan S, Salentinig S, Prestidge CA, Boyd BJ. Self-assembled structures formed during lipid digestion: characterization and implications for oral lipid-based drug delivery systems. Drug Deliv Transl Res. 2014;4(3):275–94.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  46. 46.
    Kaukonen AM, Boyd BJ, Charman WN, Porter CJ. Drug solubilization behavior during in vitro digestion of suspension formulations of poorly water-soluble drugs in triglyceride lipids. Pharm Res. 2004;21(2):254–60.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  47. 47.
    Sek L, Porter CJ, Kaukonen AM, Charman WN. Evaluation of the in‐vitro digestion profiles of long and medium chain glycerides and the phase behaviour of their lipolytic products. J Pharm Pharmacol. 2002;54(1):29–41.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  48. 48.
    Gargouri Y, Moreau H, Verger R. Gastric lipases: biochemical and physiological studies. Biochim Biophys Acta. 1989;1006(3):255.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  49. 49.
    Dressman JB, Berardi RR, Dermentzoglou LC, Russell TL, Schmaltz SP, Barnett JL, et al. Upper gastrointestinal (GI) pH in young, healthy men and women. Pharm Res. 1990;7(7):756–61.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  50. 50.
    Mu L, Feng S. A novel controlled release formulation for the anticancer drug paclitaxel (Taxol®): PLGA nanoparticles containing vitamin E TPGS. J Controlled Release. 2003;86(1):33–48.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. 51.
    Vitamin E TPGS, properties and applications. Eastman, USA.Publication EFC-226A(October 1998).Google Scholar
  52. 52.
    Szűts A. Study of the applicability of sucrose esters in hot-melt technology. PhD Faculty of Pharmacy, Department of Pharmaceutical Technology University of Szeged. 2003.Google Scholar
  53. 53.
    Christiansen A, Backensfeld T, Weitschies W. Effects of non-ionic surfactants on in vitro triglyceride digestion and their susceptibility to digestion by pancreatic enzymes. Eur J Pharm Sci. 2010;41(2):376–82.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  54. 54.
    Sagitani H. Making homogeneous and fine droplet O/W emulsions using nonionic surfactants. J Am Oil Chem Soc. 1981;58(6):738–43.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. 55.
    Gullapalli RP, Sheth BB. Influence of an optimized non-ionic emulsifier blend on properties of oil-in-water emulsions. Eur J Pharm Biopharm. 1999;48(3):233–8.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  56. 56.
    Jannin V, Pochard E, Chambin O. Influence of poloxamers on the dissolution performance and stability of controlled-release formulations containing Precirol® ATO 5. Int J Pharm. 2006;309(1):6–15.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  57. 57.
    Goddeeris C, Van den Mooter G. Free flowing solid dispersions of the anti-HIV drug UC 781 with Poloxamer 407 and a maximum amount of TPGS 1000: investigating the relationship between physicochemical characteristics and dissolution behaviour. Eur J Pharm Sci. 2008;35(1–2):104–13.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  58. 58.
    Guo Y, Luo J, Tan S, Otieno BO, Zhang Z. The applications of vitamin E TPGS in drug delivery. Eur J Pharm Sci. 2013;49(2):175–86.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  59. 59.
    Shah DO. Macro- and microemulsions: theory and applications: ACS Publications.Google Scholar
  60. 60.
    Wulff-Pérez M, de Vicente J, Martín-Rodríguez A, Gálvez-Ruiz MJ. Controlling lipolysis through steric surfactants: new insights on the controlled degradation of submicron emulsions after oral and intravenous administration. Int J Pharm. 2012;423(2):161–6.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  61. 61.
    Feeney OM, Williams HD, Pouton CW, Porter CJ. ‘Stealth’lipid-based formulations: poly (ethylene glycol)-mediated digestion inhibition improves oral bioavailability of a model poorly water soluble drug. J Controlled Release. 2014;192:219–27.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© American Association of Pharmaceutical Scientists 2017

Authors and Affiliations

  • Kapilkumar Vithani
    • 1
  • Adrian Hawley
    • 2
  • Vincent Jannin
    • 3
  • Colin Pouton
    • 1
  • Ben J. Boyd
    • 1
    • 4
  1. 1.Drug Delivery, Disposition and Dynamics, Monash Institute of Pharmaceutical SciencesMonash University (Parkville Campus)VictoriaAustralia
  2. 2.SAXS/WAXS BeamtimeAustralian SynchrotronVictoriaAustralia
  3. 3.Gattefossé SASSaint-PriestFrance
  4. 4.ARC Centre of Excellence in Convergent Bio-Nano Science and TechnologyMonash University (Parkville Campus)VictoriaAustralia

Personalised recommendations