AAPS PharmSciTech

, Volume 14, Issue 1, pp 53–59 | Cite as

Assessment of Isomalt for Colon-Specific Delivery and Its Comparison with Lactulose

  • Mohamed Hassan G. Dehghan
  • V. Rama Mohan Gupta
  • Shaikh Mohammed Asif
  • Yusrida Darwis
  • Mohammad Rizwan
  • Veenu Piyush Mundada
Research Article


Lactulose is used as a triggering substance in a unique colon-specific delivery technology called CODESTM. Colonic microflora degrades lactulose and forms short-chain fatty acids to activate the CODESTM system. However, lactulose has been reported to cause a Maillard-type reaction with substances containing primary or secondary amino groups that may produce carcinogenic compounds. Thus, the aim of this study was to look into the possibility to substitute lactulose with isomalt for fabrication of CODESTM. The in vitro degradation of both sugars before incorporating them into the CODESTM system was evaluated with the help of rat caecal microflora. The results showed that isomalt was less efficient with regard to its rate and extent of degradation into short-chain fatty acids by the microflora compared to lactulose. However, the in vitro dissolution study did not show a significant difference in the performance between lactulose and isomalt when they were incorporated separately in CODESTM. A similar result was also obtained in the in vivo study. Based on the above results, isomalt could be used as an alternative to lactulose for colonic delivery system utilizing the principles of CODESTM.


5-amino salicylic acid CODESTM system colon-specific delivery system isomalt Maillard reaction 



The authors would like to thank Universiti Sains Malaysia for providing Research University grant (1001/PFARMASI/815004) to support this work. The authors also would like to thank all manufacturers/suppliers for providing excipients free of cost for this study. Encouragement and support of Mrs. Fatema Rafiq Zakaria, chairperson, Maulana Azad Educational Trust, India is also greatly acknowledged.

Declarations of Interests

The authors report no declaration of interest.


  1. 1.
    Yang L, Chu JS, Fix JA. Colon-specific drug delivery: new approaches and in vitro/in vivo evaluation. Int J Pharm. 2002;235:1–15.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Pinto JF. Site-specific drug delivery systems within the gastro-intestinal tract: from the mouth to the colon. Int J Pharm. 2010;395:44–52.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    McConnell EL, Liu F, Basit AW. Colonic treatments and targets: issues and opportunities. J Drug Target. 2009;17:335–63.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Basit AW. Advances in colonic drug delivery. Drugs. 2005;65:1991–2007.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Jain A, Gupta Y, Jain SK. Perspectives of biodegradable natural polysaccharides for site-specific drug delivery to the colon. J Pharm Pharm Sci. 2007;10:86–128.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Sinha VR, Kumria R. Polysaccharides in colon-specific drug delivery. Int J Pharm. 2001;224:19–38.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Aurora J, Talwar N, Pathak V. Colonic drug delivery challenges and opportunities—an overview. Eur Gastroenterol Rev. 2006;1:1–4.Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Katsuma M, Watanabe S, Kawai H, Takemura S, Masuda Y, Fukui M. Studies on lactulose formulations for colon-specific drug delivery. Int J Pharm. 2002;249:33–43.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Katsuma M, Watanabe S, Takemura S, Sako K, Sawada T, Masuda Y, et al. Scintigraphic evaluation of a novel colon-targeted delivery system (CODES™) in healthy volunteers. J Pharm Sci. 2004;93:1287–99.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Katsuma M, Watanabe S, Kawai H, Takemura S, Sako K. Effects of absorption promoters on insulin absorption through colon-targeted delivery. Int J Pharm. 2006;307:156–62.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Li J, Yang L, Ferguson S, Hudson T, Watanabe S, Katsuma M, et al. In vitro evaluation of dissolution behavior for a colon-specific drug delivery system (CODES™) in multi-pH media using United States Pharmacopeia apparatus II and III. AAPS PharmSciTech. 2002;3:59–67.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Watanabe S, Kawai H, Katsuma M, Fukui M. Colon-specific drug release system. US Patent 2003; 6368629.Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Yang L, Watanabe S, Li J, Chu JS, Katsuma M, Yokohama S, et al. Effect of colonic lactulose availability on the timing of drug release onset in vivo from a unique colon-specific drug delivery system (CODES™). Pharm Res. 2003;20:429–34.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Brands CMJ, Alink GM, Van-Boekel MAJS, Jongen WMF. Mutagenicity of heated sugar-casein systems: effect of the Maillard reaction. J Agric Food Chem. 2000;48:2271–5.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Dedhiya MG, Rastogi SK, Chhettry A, Mani N, Periclou A, Rao N. Modified and immediate release formulations of memantine. US Patent App 2006; 20070065512.Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Ndindayino F, Henrist D, Kiekens F, Vervaet C, Remon JP. Characterization and evaluation of isomalt performance in direct compression. Int J Pharm. 1999;189:113–24.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Grupp U, Siebert G. Metabolism of hydrogenated palatinose, an equimolar mixture of α-D-glucopyranosido-1,6-sorbitol and α-D-glucopyranosido-1,6-mannitol. Res Exp Med (Berlin). 1978;173:261–78.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Hanauer SB. Aminosalicylates in inflammatory bowel disease. Aliment Pharmacol Ther. 2004;20:60–5.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Friend DR. New oral delivery systems for treatment of inflammatory bowel disease. Adv Drug Deliv Rev. 2005;57:247–65.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Klotz U, Schwab M. Topical delivery of therapeutic agents in the treatment of inflammatory bowel disease. Adv Drug Deliv Rev. 2005;57:267–79.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Lee EJD, Ang SB. Simple and sensitive high performance liquid chromatographic assay for 5-aminosalicylic acid and acetyl-5-aminosalicylic acid in serum. J Chromatogr B Biomed Sci Appl. 1987;413:300–4.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Nelson DL, Cox MM. Lehninger principles of biochemistry. 5th ed. New York: W.H. Freeman and Company; 2009.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Garrett RH, Grisham CM. Biochemistry. 4th ed. Massachusetts: Cengage Learning; 2008.Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    Lee A, Zumbe A, Storey D. Breath hydrogen after ingestion of the bulk sweeteners sorbitol, isomalt and sucrose in chocolate. Br J Nutr. 1994;71:731–7.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Storey D, Lee D, Bornet F, Brouns F. Gastrointestinal tolerance of erythritol and xylitol ingested in a liquid. Eur J Clin Nutr. 2007;61:349–54.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Van-Weerden EJ, Huisman J. The digestion process of the sugar alcohol isomalt in the intestinal tract of the pig. Br J Nutr. 1993;69:455–66.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Waugh A, Grant A. Ross and Wilson anatomy and physiology in health and illness. 9th ed. Edinburgh: Churchill Livingstone; 2004.Google Scholar
  28. 28.
    Topping DL, Clifton PM. Short-chain fatty acids and human colonic function: roles of resistant starch and nonstarch polysaccharides. Physiol Rev. 2001;81:1031–64.PubMedGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© American Association of Pharmaceutical Scientists 2012

Authors and Affiliations

  • Mohamed Hassan G. Dehghan
    • 1
  • V. Rama Mohan Gupta
    • 2
  • Shaikh Mohammed Asif
    • 1
    • 3
  • Yusrida Darwis
    • 4
  • Mohammad Rizwan
    • 3
    • 5
  • Veenu Piyush Mundada
    • 6
  1. 1.Y.B. Chavan College of PharmacyAurangabadIndia
  2. 2.Pulla Reddy Institute of PharmacyMedakIndia
  3. 3.Wockhardt LimitedAurangabadIndia
  4. 4.School of Pharmaceutical SciencesUniversiti Sains MalaysiaMindenMalaysia
  5. 5.Department of Pharmaceutics, Faculty of PharmacyJamia HamdardDelhiIndia
  6. 6.Dr. Reddys LaboratoriesHyderabadIndia

Personalised recommendations