Formulation development of gastroretentive tablets of lamivudine using the floating-bioadhesive potential of optimized polymer blends

Journal of Pharmacy and Pharmacology

Volumn 64, Issue 5, 2012, Pages 654-669

  Singh, Bhupinder ^a   Garg, Babita ^a   Chaturvedi, Subhash Chand ^c   Arora, Sharry ^d   Mandsaurwale, Rachana ^c   Kapil, Rishi ^a   Singh, Baljinder ^b  

^a PANJAB UNIVERSITY   (India)

^b POSTGRADUATE INSTITUTE OF MEDICAL EDUCATION AND RESEARCH   (India)

^c DEVI AHILYA UNIVERSITY   (India)

^d RANBAXY RESEARCH LABORATORIES   (India)

Author keywords

bioavailability; experimental design; formulation by design; in vitro in vivo correlation; scintigraphy

Indexed keywords

CARBOMER; LAMIVUDINE; POLYMER; TECHNETIUM 99M;

ADULT; ANIMAL EXPERIMENT; AREA UNDER THE CURVE; ARTICLE; BIOADHESIVE STRENGTH; BUOYANCY TIME; CONTROLLED DRUG RELEASE; CONTROLLED STUDY; DRUG BIOAVAILABILITY; DRUG BLOOD LEVEL; DRUG RETENTION; DRUG SOLUBILITY; EFFERVESCENT TABLET; EX VIVO STUDY; FEMALE; FLOTATION; GAMMA SCINTIGRAPHY; HUMAN; IN VITRO STUDY; IN VIVO STUDY; MALE; MAXIMUM PLASMA CONCENTRATION; MEAN RESIDENCE TIME; NONHUMAN; NORMAL HUMAN; PHYSICAL PARAMETERS; PLASMA CONCENTRATION-TIME CURVE; PROCESS OPTIMIZATION; RABBIT; RESPONSE SURFACE METHOD; STOMACH MUCOSA; TABLET FORMULATION; TIME TO MAXIMUM PLASMA CONCENTRATION;

ACRYLIC RESINS; ADHESIVES; ADULT; CELLULOSE; CHEMISTRY, PHARMACEUTICAL; DELAYED-ACTION PREPARATIONS; DRUG DELIVERY SYSTEMS; FEMALE; HUMANS; HYDROPHOBIC AND HYDROPHILIC INTERACTIONS; LAMIVUDINE; MALE; SOLUBILITY; STOMACH; YOUNG ADULT;

EID: 84859595482     PISSN: 00223573     EISSN: 20427158     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1111/j.2042-7158.2011.01442.x     Document Type: Article

References (68)

1. Longer MA, et al,. Bioadhesive polymers as platform for oral control drug delivery. III. Oral delivery of chlorthiazide using bioadhesive polymer. J Pharm Sci 1985; 74: 406-410.
2. Kohri N,. Improving the oral bioavailability of sulpiride by gastric-retained form in rabbits. J Pharm Pharmacol 1996; 48: 371-374.
3. Singh BN, Kim KH,. Floating drug delivery systems: an approach to oral controlled drug delivery via gastric retention. J Control Release 2000; 63: 235-259.
4. Ichikawa M, et al,. A new multiple-unit oral floating dosage system. II. In vivo evaluation of floating and sustained-release characteristics with p-aminobenzoic acid and isosorbide dinitrate as model drugs. J Pharm Sci 1991; 80: 1153-1156.
5. Kawashima Y, et al,. Preparation of multiple-unit hollow microspheres (microballoons) with acrylic resin containing traniplast and their drug release characteristics (in vitro) and floating behaviour (in vivo). J Control Release 1991; 16: 279-290.
6. Chitnis VS, et al,. Bioadhesive polymers-synthesis, evaluation and application in controlled release tablets. Drug Dev Ind Pharm 1991; 17: 879-892.
7. Chueh HR, et al,. Optimization of sotalol floating and bioadhesive extended release tablet formulations. Drug Dev Ind Pharm 1995; 21: 1725-1747.
8. Asnaashari S, et al,. Preparation and evaluation of novel metronidazole sustained release and floating matrix tablets. Pharm Dev Technol 2010; 16: 400-407.
9. Petrovic A, et al,. Application of mixture experimental design in the formulation and optimization of matrix tablets containing carbomer and hydroxy-propylmethylcellulose. Arch Pharm Res 2009; 32: 1767-1774.
10. Shayeda, et al,. Development of novel bioadhesive buccal formulation of diltiazem: in vitro and in vivo characterization. PDA J Pharm Sci Technol 2009; 63: 401-408.
11. Hassan N, et al,. Development and evaluation of buccal bioadhesive tablet of an anti-emetic agent ondansetron. AAPS PharmSciTech 2009; 10: 1085-1092.
12. Singh B, Ahuja N,. Development of controlled-release buccoadhesive hydrophilic matrices of diltiazem hydrochloride: optimization of bioadhesion, dissolution, and diffusion parameters. Drug Dev Ind Pharm 2002; 28: 431-442.
13. Singh B, et al,. Formulation and optimization of controlled release mucoadhesive tablets of atenolol using response surface methodology. AAPS PharmSciTech 2006; 7: E1-E10.
14. Singh B, et al,. Formulation development of oral controlled release tablets of hydralazine: optimization of drug release and bioadhesive characteristics. Acta Pharm 2009; 59: 1-13.
15. Singh B, et al,. Formulation optimization of hydrodynamically balanced oral controlled release bioadhesive tablets of tramadol hydrochloride. Sci Pharm 2010; 78: 303-323.
16. Singh B, et al,. Optimizing drug delivery systems using 'design of experiments' part 1: fundamental aspects. Crit Rev Ther Drug Carrier Syst 2005; 22: 27-106.
17. Singh B, et al,. Optimizing drug delivery systems using 'design of experiments' part II: retrospect and prospects. Crit Rev Ther Drug Carrier Syst 2005; 22: 215-292.
18. Singh B, et al,. Developing oral drug delivery systems using formulation by design: vital precepts, retrospect and prospects. Expert Opin Drug Deliv 2011; 8: 1341-1360.
19. Raffanti SP, Haas DW,. Antimicrobial Agents: Antiretroviral Agents, in Goodman & Gilman's The Pharmacological Basis of Therapeutics, 10th edn., Hardman JG, Limbird LE, eds. New York: Mc Graw Hill Medical Publishing Division, 2001: 1349-1380.
20. Willig JH, et al,. Increased regimen durability in the era of once-daily fixed-dose combination antiretroviral therapy. AIDS 2008; 22: 1951-1960.
21. Singh B, et al,. Design, development and optimization of nimesulide-loaded loiposomal systems for topical application. Curr Drug Deliv 2005; 2: 143-153.
22. USP. USP 30, NF 25. The United States Pharmacopeia and The National Formulary, The United States Pharmacopoeial Convention, INC., 12601 Twinbrook Parkway, Rockwille, MD 20852. ISSN: 0195-7996, ISBN: 1-889788-48-1. 2007.
23. Singh B, Singh S,. A comprehensive computer program for study of drug release kinetics from compressed matrices. Indian J Pharm Sci 1998; 60: 358-362.
24. Singh B, et al,. Correction of raw dissolution data for loss of drug during sampling. Indian J Pharm Sci 1997; 59: 196-199.
25. Korsemeyer RW, Peppas N,. Macromolecular and modelling aspects of swelling controlled systems. In:, Roseman TJ, Mansdorf SJ, eds. Controlled Release Delivery Systems. New York: Marcel Dekker, 1983: 77-90.
26. Korsemeyer RW, et al,. Mechanism of solute release from porous hydrophillic polymers. Int J Pharm 1983; 15: 23-35.
27. Ch'ng HS, et al,. Bioadhesive polymers as platforms for oral controlled drug delivery. Part 2. Synthesis and evaluation of some swelling, water insoluble bioadhesive polymers. J Pharm Sci 1985; 74: 399-405.
28. Baumgartner S, et al,. Optimization of floating matrix tablets and evaluation of their gastric residence time. Int J Pharm 2000; 195: 125-135.
29. Singh B, et al,. Computer assisted optimization of pharmaceutical formulations and processes. 10th Chapter. In:, Jain NK, ed. Pharmaceutical Product Development. New Delhi: CBS Publishers, 2006: 273-318.
30. Reagan-Shaw S, et al,. Dose translation from animal to human studies revisited. FASEB J 2008; 22: 659-661.
31. Dhawan S, et al,. Formulation development and systematic optimization of solid lipid nanoparticles of quercetin for improved brain delivery. J Pharm Pharmacol 2011; 63: 342-351.
32. Kano EK, et al,. Determination of lamivudine in human plasma by HPLC and its use in bioequivalence studies. Int J Pharm 2005; 297: 73-79.
33. Taccone FS, et al,. Revisiting the loading dose of amikacin for patients with severe sepsis and septic shock. Crit Care 2010; 14: R53.
34. Liu Y, et al,. A multi-mechanistic drug release approach in a bead dosage form and in vivo predictions. Pharm Dev Technol 2003; 8: 419-430.
35. Mojaverian P, et al,. In-vivo/in-vitro correlation of four extended release formulations of pseudoephedrine sulfate. J Pharm Biomed Anal 1997; 15: 439-445.
36. FDA. U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Food and Drug Administration: Center for Drug Evaluation and Research (CDER). Guidance for industry: waiver of in vivo bioavailability and bioequivalence studies for immediate-release solid oral dosage forms based on a Biopharmaceutics Classification System. 2000.
37. WMA. Ethical principles for medical research involving human subjects: World Medical Association, Declaration of Helsinki. 59th WMA General Assembly, Seoul 2008.
38. Peppas NA, Sahlin JJ,. A simple equation for the description of solute release (III): coupling of diffusion and relaxation. Int J Pharm 1989; 57: 169-172.
39. Hilton AK, Deasy PB,. In vitro and in vivo evaluation of an oral sustained-release floating dosage form of amoxycillin trihydrate. Int J Pharm 1992; 86: 79-88.
40. Kohri N,. Improving the oral bioavailability of sulpiride by gastric-retained form in rabbits. J Pharm Pharmacol 1996; 48: 371-374.
41. Nur AO, Zhang JS,. Recent progress in sustained/controlled oral delivery of captopril: an overview. Int J Pharm 2000; 194: 139-146.
42. Prudat-Christiqens C, et al,. Aminophylline bioadhesive tablets attempted by wet granulation. Int J Pharm 1996; 141: 109-116.
43. Bhanja S, et al,. Formulation and in vitro evaluation of mucoadhesive buccal tablets of timolol maleate. Int J Pharm Biomed Res 2010; 1: 129-134.
44. Nakhat PD, et al,. Development and in vitro evaluation of buccoadhesive tablets of metoprolol tartrate. Indian J Pharm Sci 2008; 70: 121-124.
45. Ali J, et al,. Formulation and development of hydrodynamically balanced system for metformin: in vitro and In vivo evaluation. Eur J Pharm Biopharm 2007; 67: 196-201.
46. Varshosaz J, et al,. Formulation and in vitro characterization of ciprofloxacin floating and bioadhesive extended-release tablets. Drug Deliv 2006; 13: 277-285.
47. El Gamal SS, et al,. Optimization of acyclovir oral tablets based on gastroretention technology: factorial design analysis and physicochemical characterization studies. Drug 2011; 37: 855-867.
48. Ahuja N, et al,. Studies on dissolution enhancement and mathematical modeling of drug release of a poorly water-soluble drug using water-soluble carriers. Eur J Pharm Biopharm 2007; 65: 26-38.
49. Nokhodchi A, et al,. Studies on controlled release formulation of diclofenac sodium. Drug Dev Ind Pharm 1997; 23: 1019-1022.
50. Duchene D, et al,. Pharmaceutical and medical aspects of bioadhesive systems for drug administration. Drug Dev Ind Pharm 1988; 14: 283-318.
51. Gupta A, et al,. Mucoadhesive buccal drug delivery systems: a review. Indian Drugs 1992; 29: 585-588.
52. Timmermans J, Moes AJ,. Factors controlling the buoyancy and gastric retention capabilities of floating matrix capsules: new data for reconsidering the controversy. J Pharm Sci 1994; 83: 18-24.
53. Timmermans J, Moes AJ,. How well do floating dosage forms float? Int J Pharm 1990; 62: 207-216.
54. Cargill R, et al,. Controlled gastric emptying: I. Effects of physical properties on gastric residence times of nondisintegrating geometric shapes in beagle dogs. Pharm Res 1988; 5: 533-536.
55. Kumar P, Bhatia M,. Functionalization of chitosan/methylcellulose interpenetrating polymer network microspheres for gastroretentive application using central composite design. Pharm Sci Technol 2010; 64: 497-506.
56. Zhang ZH, et al,. Optimization of a floating osmotic pump system of dipyridamole using central composite design-response surface methodology. Yao Xue Xue Bao. 2009; 44: 203-207.
57. El Gamal SS, et al,. Optimization of acyclovir oral tablets based on gastroretention technology: factorial design analysis and physicochemical characterization studies. Drug Dev Ind Pharm 2011; 37: 855-867.
58. Boldhane SP, Kuchekar BS,. Gastroretentive drug delivery of metformin hydrochloride: formulation and in vitro evaluation using 3(2) full factorial design. Curr Drug Deliv 2009; 6: 477-485.
59. Badhan AC, et al,. Development and evaluation of sustained release gastroretentive minimatrices for effective treatment of H. pylori infection. AAPS PharmSciTech 2009; 10: 459-467.
60. Prajapati ST, et al,. Gastric floating matrix tablets: design and optimization using combination of polymers. Acta Pharm 2008; 58: 221-229.
61. Tremoulet AH, et al,. Population pharmacokinetics of lamivudine in human immunodeficiency virus-exposed and -infected infants. Antimicrob Agents Chemother 2007; 51: 4297-4302. Epub 2007 Sep 24.
62. Rigato HM, et al,. Bioavailability of two oral suspension and two oral tablet formulations of nimesulide 100 mg in healthy Brazilian adult subjects. Int J Clin Pharmacol Ther 2010; 48: 233-242.
63. Endrenyi L, et al,. Cmax/AUC is a clearer measure than Cmax for absorption rates in investigations of bioequivalence. Int J Clin Pharmacol Ther Toxicol 1991; 29: 394-399.
64. Schall R, et al,. Choice of characteristics and their bioequivalence ranges for the comparison of absorption rates of immediate-release drug formulations. Int J Clin Pharmacol Ther 1994; 32: 323-328.
65. Wilding IR, et al,. The role of gamma-scintigraphy in oral drug delivery. Adv Drug Deliv Rev 2001; 46: 103-124.
66. Jackson SJ, et al,. Comparative scintigraphic assessment of the intragastric distribution and residence of cholestyramine, Carbopol 934P and sucralfate. Int J Pharm 2001; 212: 55-62.
67. Arora S, et al,. Floating drug delivery systems: a review. AAPS PharmSciTech 2005; 6: E372-E390.
68. Kortejarvi H, et al,. Pharmacokinetic simulation of biowaiver criteria: the effects of gastric emptying, dissolution, absorption and elimination rates. Eur J Pharm Sci 2007; 30: 155-166.