Advertisement

AAPS PharmSciTech

, 20:321 | Cite as

Simultaneous Evaluation of Dissolution and Permeation of Oral Drug Solid Formulations for Predicting Absorption Rate–Limiting Factors and In Vitro–In Vivo Correlations: Case Study Using a Poorly Soluble Weakly Basic Drug

  • Ziqiang Li
  • Xin HeEmail author
  • Shuang Tian
  • Guo Feng
  • Cong Huang
  • Mingjin Xun
  • Zengguang Wu
  • Yangyang Wang
Research Article

Abstract

Combined dissolution and permeation systems are designed to simultaneously assess the dissolution of a pharmaceutical dosage form and the permeation of dissolved drugs therefrom. However, there were still some limitations on predicting the possible absorption rate–limiting steps and improving the in vitroin vivo correlation (IVIVC) of a complete dosage form. In this study, the modified biorelevant media with some solubilizers and pH modifiers were integrated into the drug dissolution/absorption simulating system (DDASS). Indapamide, a poorly soluble compound (pKa = 8.8), was selected to validate the applicability of the modified biorelevant media. The elution and permeation dynamics of indapamide were investigated by using appropriate solubilizing agents in the DDASS. The absorption behaviors were analyzed after oral administration of indapamide in beagle dogs. The absorption rate–limiting steps and IVIVCs were predicted from the dissolution–permeation–absorption dynamic parameters. As a result, the absorption fraction of indapamide in the FaSSIFmod of DDASS was estimated to be approximately 100%, in accordance with its high permeability. The ratios of permeation rate to elution rate were 2.55 and 3.34 for the immediate- and sustained-release tablets of indapamide, respectively, suggesting a dissolution rate–limiting absorption for indapamine. In addition, point-to-point correlations were established between in vitro elution and in vivo absorption by the nonlinear and linear regression analysis ways (r > 0.85). The findings indicate that DDASS is a promising technique to develop improved IVIVCs of a complete dosage form, and the FaSSIFmod is suitable to predict the possible absorption rate–limiting steps of poorly soluble drugs in DDASS.

KEY WORDS

poorly water-soluble drugs in vitro–in vivo correlation indapamide pharmacokinetic drug dissolution/absorption simulating system 

Notes

Funding information

This work was supported by grants from the Key Support Projects of Tianjin Science and Technology (16YFZCSY00440), Changjiang Scholars and Innovative Research Team (IRT_14R41), and Tianjin Natural Science Foundation (18JCQNJC83800).

Compliance with ethical standards

This study protocol was approved by the Ethical Review Committee of Second Affiliated Hospital of Tianjin University of TCM. The animal experiments were performed in accordance with the Principles of Laboratory Animal Care (NIH No. 8523).

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

Supplementary material

12249_2019_1544_MOESM1_ESM.doc (402 kb)
ESM 1 (DOC 402 kb)

References

  1. 1.
    Guerra A, Etienne-Mesmin L, Livrelli V, Denis S, Blanquet-Diot S, Alric M. Relevance and challenges in modeling human gastric and small intestinal digestion. Trends Biotechnol. 2012;30:591–600.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tibtech.2012.08.001.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Cascone S, De SF, Lamberti G, Titomanlio G. The influence of dissolution conditions on the drug ADME phenomena. Eur J Pharm Biopharm. 2011;79:382–91.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejpb.2011.04.003.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Raina SA, Zhang GGZ, Alonzo DE, Wu J, Zhu D, Catron ND, et al. Impact of solubilizing additives on supersaturation and membrane transport of drugs. Pharm Res. 2015;32:3350–64.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s11095-015-1712-4.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Borbás E, Nagy ZK, Nagy B, Balogh A, Farkas B, Tsinman O, et al. The effect of formulation additives on in vitro dissolution-absorption profile and in vivo bioavailability of telmisartan from brand and generic formulations. Eur J Pharm Sci. 2018;114:310–7.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejps.2017.12.029.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Dahan A, Miller JM. The solubility–permeability interplay and its implications in formulation design and development for poorly soluble drugs. AAPS J. 2012;14:244–51.  https://doi.org/10.1208/s12248-012-9337-6.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Miller JM, Beig A, Carr RA, Webster GK, Dahan A. The solubility-permeability interplay when using cosolvents for solubilization: revising the way we use solubility-enabling formulations. Mol Pharm. 2012;9:581–90.  https://doi.org/10.1021/mp200460u.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Beig A, Fine-Shamir N, Lindley D, Miller JM, Dahan A. Advantageous solubility-permeability interplay when using amorphous solid dispersion (ASD) formulation for the BCS class IV P-gp substrate rifaximin: simultaneous increase of both the solubility and the permeability. AAPS J. 2017;19:806–13.  https://doi.org/10.1208/s12248-017-0052-1.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Ginski MJ, Taneja R, Polli JE. Prediction of dissolution-absorption relationships from a continuous dissolution/Caco-2 system. AAPS Pharm Sci. 1999;1:27–38.  https://doi.org/10.1016/S0378-5173(98)00330-5.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Kobayashi M, Sada N, Sugawara M, Iseki K, Miyazaki K. Development of a new system for prediction of drug absorption that takes into account drug dissolution and pH change in the gastro-intestinal tract. Int J Pharm. 2001;221:87–94.  https://doi.org/10.1016/S0378-5173(01)00663-9.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Kataoka M, Masaoka Y, Yamazaki Y, Sakane T, Sezaki H, Yamashita S. In vitro system to evaluate oral absorption of poorly water-soluble drugs: simultaneous analysis on dissolution and permeation of drugs. Pharm Res. 2003;20:1674–80.  https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1026107906191.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Motz SA, Schaefer UF, Balbach S, Eichinger T, Lehr CM. Permeability assessment for solid oral drug formulations based on Caco-2 monolayer in combination with a flow through dissolution cell. Eur J Pharm Biopharm. 2007;66:286–95.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejpb.2006.10.015.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Li Z, He X. Physiologically based in vitro models to predict the oral dissolution and absorption of a solid drug delivery system. Curr Drug Metab. 2015;16:777–806.  https://doi.org/10.2174/1389200216666150812123836.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Buch P, Langguth P, Kataoka M, Yamashita S. IVIVC in oral absorption for fenofibrate immediate release tablets using a dissolution/permeation system. J Pharm Sci. 2009;98:2001–9.  https://doi.org/10.1002/jps.21576.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Buch P, Holm P, Thomassen JQ, Scherer D, Branscheid R, Kolb U, et al. IVIVC for fenofibrate immediate release tablets using solubility and permeability as in vitro predictors for pharmacokinetics. J Pharm Sci. 2010;99:4427–36.  https://doi.org/10.1002/jps.22148.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Li ZQ, He X, Gao X, Xu YY, Wang YF, Gu H, et al. Study on dissolution and absorption of four dosage forms of isosorbide mononitrate: level A in vitro-in vivo correlation. Eur J Pharm Biopharm. 2011;79:364–71.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejpb.2011.04.015.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Li ZQ, Tian S, Gu H, Wu ZG, Nyagblordzro M, Feng G, et al. In vitro-in vivo predictive dissolution-permeation-absorption dynamics of highly permeable drug extended-release tablets via drug dissolution/absorption simulating system and pH alteration. AAPS PharmSciTech. 2018;19:1–12.  https://doi.org/10.1208/s12249-018-0996-1.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Wojnarowska Z, Grzybowska K, Hawelek L, Dulski M, Wrzalik R, Gruszka I, et al. Molecular dynamics, physical stability and solubility advantage from amorphous indapamide drug. Mol Pharm. 2013;10:3612–27.  https://doi.org/10.1021/mp400116q.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Stetinova V, Kubant P, Svoboda Z, Kopecky J, Smetanova L, Kvetina J. In vitro and in vivo prediction of indapamide gastrointestinal absorption. Toxicol Lett. 2007;172:S56-S56.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.toxlet.2007.05.171.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Caruso FS, Szabadi RR, Vukovich RA. Pharmacokinetics and clinical pharmacology of indapamide. Am Heart J. 1983;106:212–20.  https://doi.org/10.1016/0002-8703(83)90119-9.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Damien G, Huet DBB, Schiavi P. Galenic development and pharmacokinetic profile of indapamide sustained release 1.5 mg. Clin Pharmacokinet. 1999;37:13–9.  https://doi.org/10.2165/00003088-199937001-00003.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Polli JE, Crison JR, Amidon GL. Novel approach to the analysis of in vitro-in vivo relationships. J Pharm Sci. 1996;85:753–60.  https://doi.org/10.1021/js9503587.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Korsmeyer RW, Gurny R, Doelker EM, Buri P, Peppas NA. Mechanism of solute release from porous hydrophilic polymers. Int J Pharm. 1983;15:25–35.  https://doi.org/10.1016/0378-5173(83)90064-9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Higuchi T. Mechanism of sustained-action medication. Theoretical analysis of rate of release of solid drugs dispersed in solid matrices. J Pharm Sci. 1963;52:1145–9.  https://doi.org/10.1002/jps.2600521210.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Duizer E, Penninks AH. Comparison of permeability characteristics of the human colonic Caco-2 and rat small intestinal IEC18 cell lines. J Control Release. 1997;49:39–49.  https://doi.org/10.1016/S0168-3659(97)00058-8.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Imai T, Sakai M, Ohtake H, Azuma H, Otagiri M. In vitro and in vivo evaluation of the enhancing activity of glycyrrhizin on the intestinal absorption of drugs. Pharm Res. 1999;16:80–6.  https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1018822829302.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    He X, Sugawara M, Kobayashi M, Takekuma Y, Miyazaki K. An in vitro system for prediction of oral absorption of relatively water-soluble drugs and ester prodrugs. Int J Pharm. 2003;263:35–44.  https://doi.org/10.1016/S0378-5173(03)00343-0.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    He X, Sugawara M, Takekuma Y, Miyazaki K. Absorption of ester prodrugs in Caco-2 and Rat intestine models. Antimicrob Agents Chemother. 2004;48:2604–9.  https://doi.org/10.1128/AAC.48.7.2604-2609.2004.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Kataoka M, Yano K, Hamatsu Y, Masaoka Y, Sakuma S, Yamashita S. Assessment of absorption potential of poorly water-soluble drugs by using the dissolution/permeation system. Eur J Pharm Biopharm. 2013;85(3):1317–24.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejpb.2013.06.018.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Kataoka M, Fukahori M, Ikemura A, Kubota A, Higashino H, Sakuma S, et al. Effects of gastric ph on oral drug absorption: in vitro assessment using a dissolution/permeation system reflecting the gastric dissolution process. Eur J Pharm Biopharm. 2016;101:103–11.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejpb.2016.02.002.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Mizoguchi M, Kataoka M, Yokoyama K, Aihara R, Wada K, Yamashita S. Application of an in vitro dissolution/permeation system to early screening of oral formulations of poorly soluble, weakly basic drugs containing an acidic pH-modifier. J Pharm Sci. 2018;107:2404–10.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.xphs.2018.05.009.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Patel N, Forbes B, Eskola S, Murray J. Use of simulated intestinal fluids with Caco-2 cells and rat ileum. Drug Dev Ind Pharm. 2006;32(2):151–61.  https://doi.org/10.1080/03639040500465991.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Kristin F, Carl R, David D, Filippos K, Moritz AK, Johanna M, et al. Optimization of the Ussing chamber setup with excised rat intestinal segments for dissolution/permeation experiments of poorly soluble drugs. Drug Dev Ind Pharm. 2017;43:338–46.  https://doi.org/10.1080/03639045.2016.1251449.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Borbás E, Balogh A, Bocz K, Müller J, Kiserdei É, Vigh T, et al. In vitro dissolution–permeation evaluation of an electrospun cyclodextrin-based formulation of aripiprazole using μFlux™. Int J Pharm. 2015;491:180–9.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijpharm.2015.06.019.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    Liu WJ, He X, Li ZQ, Gao XM, Ma YT, Xun MJ, et al. Development of a bionic system for the simultaneous prediction of the release/absorption characteristics of enteric-coated formulations. Pharm Res. 2013;30:596–605.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s11095-012-0905-3.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  35. 35.
    Mudie DM, Amidon GL, Amidon GE. Physiological parameters for oral delivery and in vitro testing. Mol Pharm. 2010;7(5):1388–405.  https://doi.org/10.1021/mp100149j.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  36. 36.
    Song W, Cun D, Quan P, Liu N, Chen Y, Cui H, et al. Dual-directional regulation of drug permeating amount by combining the technique of ion-pair complexation with chemical enhancers for the synchronous permeation of indapamide and bisoprolol in their compound patch through rabbit skin. Eur J Pharm Biopharm. 2015;91:59–65.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejpb.2015.01.025.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  37. 37.
    Yaro P, He X, Liu W, Xun M, Ma Y, Li Z, et al. In vitro-in vivo correlations for three different commercial immediate-release indapamide tablets. Drug Dev Ind Pharm. 2014;40:1670–6.  https://doi.org/10.3109/03639045.2013.842577.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  38. 38.
    Robinson DM, Wellington K. Indapamide sustained release. Drugs. 2006;66(2):257–71.  https://doi.org/10.2165/00003495-200666020-00011.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  39. 39.
    Cuine A, De Barochez BH, Guez D. Matrix tablet permitting the sustained release of indapamide after oral administration: U.S. Patent 5,334,392[P]. 1994-8-2.Google Scholar
  40. 40.
    Aungst BJ. Intestinal permeation enhancers. J Pharm Sci. 2000;89(4):429–42.  https://doi.org/10.1002/(SICI)1520-6017(200004)89:4<429::AID-JPS1>3.0.CO;2-J.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. 41.
    Berginc K, Trontelj J, Kristl A. Bio-relevant media to assess drug permeability: sodium taurocholate and lecithin combination or crude bile? Int J pharm. 2012;429(1-2):22–30.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijpharm.2012.03.015.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  42. 42.
    Sugano K, Kataoka M, da Costa MC, Yamashita S. Prediction of food effect by bile micelles on oral drug absorption considering free fraction in intestinal fluid. Eur JPharm Sci. 2010;40:118–24.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejps.2010.03.011.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. 43.
    Buckley ST, Fischer SM, Fricker G, Brandl M. In vitro models to evaluate the permeability of poorly soluble drug entities: challenges and perspectives. Eur J Pharm Sci. 2012;45(3):235–50.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejps.2011.12.007.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  44. 44.
    Saha P, Kou JH. Effect of solubilizing excipients on permeation of poorly water-soluble compounds across Caco-2 cell monolayers. Eur J Pharm Biopharm. 2000;50(3):403–11.  https://doi.org/10.1016/S0939-6411(00)00113-2.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  45. 45.
    Collnot E-M, Baldes C, Wempe MF, Hyatt J, Navarro L, Edgar KJ, et al. Influence of vitamin E TPGS poly(ethylene glycol) chain length on apical efflux transporters in Caco-2 cell monolayers. J Controlled Release. 2006;111:35–40.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jconrel.2005.11.005.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. 46.
    Lind ML, Jacobsen J, Holm R, Müllertz A. Development of simulated intestinal fluids containing nutrients as transport media in the Caco-2 cell culture model: assessment of cell viability, monolayer integrity and transport of a poorly aqueous soluble drug and a substrate of efflux mechanisms. Eur J Pharm Sci. 2007;32(4-5):261–70.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejps.2007.08.002.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  47. 47.
    Campbell DB, Taylor AR, Hopkins YW, Williams JRB. Pharmacokinetics and metabolism of indapamide: a review. Curr Med Res Opin. 2008;5:13–24.  https://doi.org/10.1185/03007997709110219.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. 48.
    Schiavi P, Jochemsen R, Guez D. Pharmacokinetics of sustained and immediate release formulations of indapamide after single and repeated oral administration in healthy volunteers. Fund Clin Pharmacol. 2010;14:139–46.  https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1472-8206.2000.tb00402.x.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. 49.
    Sassard J, Bataillard A, McIntyre H. An overview of the pharmacology and clinical efficacy of indapamide sustained release. Fund Clin Pharmacol. 2005;19(6):637–45.  https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1472-8206.2005.00377.x.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. 50.
    Kararli TT. Comparison of the gastrointestinal anatomy, physiology, and biochemistry of humans and commonly used laboratory animals. Biopharm Drug Dispos. 1995;16(5):351–80.  https://doi.org/10.1002/bdd.2510160502.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  51. 51.
    Sutton SC. Companion animal physiology and dosage form performance. Adv Drug Deliv Rev. 2004;56(10):1383–98.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.addr.2004.02.013.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  52. 52.
    Ayman E-K, Hurst S, Brodfuehrer J, Cho-Ming L. Anatomical and physiological factors affecting oral drug bioavailability in rats, dogs, and humans. In: Oral bioavailability: basic principles, advanced concepts, and applications. Hoboken: John Wiley & Sons, Inc; 2011.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© American Association of Pharmaceutical Scientists 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  • Ziqiang Li
    • 1
  • Xin He
    • 2
    • 3
    Email author
  • Shuang Tian
    • 1
  • Guo Feng
    • 3
  • Cong Huang
    • 3
  • Mingjin Xun
    • 3
  • Zengguang Wu
    • 3
  • Yangyang Wang
    • 2
    • 3
  1. 1.Second Affiliated Hospital of Tianjin University of Traditional Chinese MedicineTianjinPeople’s Republic of China
  2. 2.School of Traditional Chinese MedicineGuangdong Pharmaceutical UniversityGuangdongPeople’s Republic of China
  3. 3.School of Traditional Chinese MedicineTianjin University of Traditional Chinese MedicineTianjinPeople’s Republic of China

Personalised recommendations