4.3 Article

Physicochemical Stability Study on Cyclosporine A Loaded Dry-Emulsion Formulation with Enhanced Solubility

期刊

CHEMICAL & PHARMACEUTICAL BULLETIN
卷 63, 期 1, 页码 54-58

出版社

PHARMACEUTICAL SOC JAPAN
DOI: 10.1248/cpb.c14-00696

关键词

cyclosporine A; dry emulsion; physicochemical stability

资金

  1. Ministry of Education, Culture, Sports, Science and Technology of Japan [24590200]
  2. Takeda Science Foundation
  3. Grants-in-Aid for Scientific Research [24590200] Funding Source: KAKEN

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The main purpose of the present study was to evaluate the physicochemical stability of cyclosporine A (CsA)-loaded glycerol monooleate-based dry emulsion (DE). DE formulations containing 5-25% CsA (DE5-25) were stored at 25 degrees C/60% relative humidity for 4 weeks, and freeze-dried solid dispersion formulations containing 5-30% CsA (FD5-30) were also prepared as reference formulations. Even after the storage, no significant changes were observed in the appearance of any formulations. In the dissolution study, both DE and FD exhibited marked enhancement of solubility and there was at least 2.0-fold improvement in the initial dissolution rate of DE formulations compared with that of FD formulations. After storage, DE5, DE15 and FD5 maintained relatively high solubility, with 10% reduction compared with the initial state. However, the solubility of DE25 gradually decreased during storage, as evidenced by 76% reduction of the dissolution amount. No significant changes were seen in DE5-25 using powder X-ray diffraction, although thermal analysis revealed moderate changes in crystallinity in DE25 after storage, possibly leading to the decreased dissolution. Furthermore, particle size distributions of micelles in DE5 and DE15 were almost unchanged after storage for 4 weeks. From these findings, it appears that the physicochemical stability of CsA-loaded DE might vary depending on the manufacturing method and that further optimization could improve physical properties and stability.

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

4.3
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