4.5 Article

Suitability of Artificial Membranes in Lipolysis-Permeation Assays of Oral Lipid-Based Formulations

期刊

PHARMACEUTICAL RESEARCH
卷 37, 期 6, 页码 -

出版社

SPRINGER/PLENUM PUBLISHERS
DOI: 10.1007/s11095-020-02833-9

关键词

artificial membrane; digestion; lipid-based formulation; permeation; self-emulsifying oral drug-delivery systems

资金

  1. European Research Council [638965]
  2. European Research Council (ERC) [638965] Funding Source: European Research Council (ERC)

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Purpose To evaluate the performance of artificial membranes in in vitro lipolysis-permeation assays useful for absorption studies of drugs loaded in lipid-based formulations (LBFs). Methods Polycarbonate as well as PVDF filters were treated with hexadecane, or lecithin in n-dodecane solution (LiDo) to form artificial membranes. They were thereafter used as absorption membranes separating two compartments mimicking the luminal and serosal side of the intestine in vitro. Membranes were subjected to dispersions of an LBF that had been digested by porcine pancreatin and spiked with the membrane integrity marker Lucifer Yellow (LY). Three fenofibrate-loaded LBFs were used to explore the in vivo relevance of the assay. Results Of the explored artificial membranes, only LiDo applied to PVDF was compatible with lipolysis by porcine pancreatin. Formulation ranking based on mass transfer in the LiDo model exposed was the same as drug release in single-compartment lipolysis. Ranking based on observed apparent permeability coefficients of fenofibrate with different LBFs were the same as those obtained in a cell-based model. Conclusions The LiDo membrane was able to withstand lipolysis for a sufficient assay period. However, the assay with porcine pancreatin as digestive agent did not predict the in vivo ranking of the assayed formulations better than existing methods. Comparison with a Caco-2 based assay method nonetheless indicates that the in vitro in vivo relationship of this cell-free model could be improved with alternative digestive agents.

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

4.5
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