4.7 Article

Predicting the solubility-permeability interplay when using cyclodextrins in solubility-enabling formulations: Model validation

期刊

INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF PHARMACEUTICS
卷 430, 期 1-2, 页码 388-391

出版社

ELSEVIER SCIENCE BV
DOI: 10.1016/j.ijpharm.2012.03.017

关键词

Low-solubility drugs; Cyclodextrins; Solubility-permeability interplay; Solubility-permeability tradeoff; Intestinal permeability; Oral drug delivery

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Although the extraordinary solubility advantage afforded by cyclodextrins has led to their widespread use as pharmaceutical solubilizers, several reports have emerged that cyclodextrins may also reduce the apparent permeability of the drug. With the purpose to investigate this solubility-permeability interplay, we have recently developed a mathematical mass transport model that quantitatively explains the impact of molecular complexation on the intestinal permeability. This model enabled excellent quantitative prediction of progesterone P-eff as a function of HP beta CD concentrations in several experimental methods. The purpose of the present study was to challenge the predictive capabilities of this mathematical model, assessing whether the model allows the prediction of literature permeability data, as a model validation method. The mass-transport model was applied to carbamazepine and hydrocortisone, and the predicted permeability (P-eff, P-m and P-aq) vs. HP beta CD concentration were plotted. Excellent agreement was obtained between literature experimental permeability and the predicted P-eff values for both compounds at all of the HP beta CD concentrations tested. The presented validated model that considers the opposing effects of the formulation on the solubility and the permeability, can lead to a more efficient and intelligent use of molecular complexation strategies; the formulator will be able to a priori strike the optimal solubility-permeability balance to maximize and facilitate the overall oral drug absorption. (C) 2012 Elsevier B. V. All rights reserved.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据