4.7 Article

Preparation and in vitro-in vivo evaluation of teniposide nanosuspensions

Journal

INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF PHARMACEUTICS
Volume 478, Issue 1, Pages 131-137

Publisher

ELSEVIER SCIENCE BV
DOI: 10.1016/j.ijpharm.2014.11.020

Keywords

Teniposide; Nanosuspensions; Anti-solvent sonication-precipitation method; Stability; Antitumor activity

Funding

  1. National Natural Science Foundation of China [U1204826]
  2. Natural Science Foundation of Henan University of Science and Technology for youth [2013QN041]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Teniposide (TEN) is a potent, broad spectrum antitumor agent, especially for cerebroma. But the application in clinic was limited because of its poor solubility. In this paper, teniposide nanosuspensions drug delivery system (TEN-NSDDS) for intravenous administration was developed for the first time. Specifically, TEN nanosuspensions were prepared by an anti-solvent sonication precipitation method and evaluated in comparison with teniposide injection (VUMON) in vitro and in vivo. TEN nanosuspensions prepared showed rod-like morphology and the size was 151 +/- 11 nm with a narrow poly dispersion index 0.138 determined by dynamic light scattering. The obtained TEN nanosuspensions were physically stable at least 10 days at 4 degrees C. And the freeze-drying preparations were stable during 3 months. The cytotoxicity of TEN nanosuspensions were considerable to that of VUMON against U87MG and C6 cells in vitro. When tested in rats bearing C6 tumors, the TEN concentration in the tumors treated by the nanosuspensions was more than 20 times than that by the TEN solution at 2 h. The TEN nanosuspensions exhibited significant tumor growth inhibition. Overall, the results suggested that nanosuspensions was an alternative formulation for teniposide to be administered intravenously, and it would be a promising formulation in clinic. (C) 2014 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available