Histological and mucoadhesion studies on transpalatal mucoadhesive disks of Rosiglitazone maleate

Ashok K. Shakya, N.V. Satheesh Madhav, Pragati Shakya

Abstract


The present research is aimed to develop a mucoadhesive drug delivery system exhibiting a unique combination of mucoadhesion and controlled drug release in systemic manner to prolong residence in the soft palatal mucosa using rosiglitazone maleate as a model drug. In this study, a mucoadhesive disks formulation for palatal delivery were designed using a simplex lattice design with a mixture of various mucoadhesive polymers (Cp, SCMC, or HPMC, Guar gum and DPP), followed by optimization of the evaluation parameters was employed to get final optimized formulation. In vitro mucoadhesion and mucoretentability property of the formulated disks were examined and histological study was carried out to examine an ex-vivo interaction between the disks and tissue. The optimized F-11 composition showed a force of adhesion  (N)  > 3   and a mucoadhesion time >12 hours with zero order release profile as best fit model closer to the target release profile and followed  anomalous  mediated release of rosiglitazone maleate .The different concentration of mucoadhesive polymer significantly affects the drug release rate, force of adhesion and mucoretentability characteristics of the disks. No more histological changes were observed in the excised palatal mucosa after 12 h contact with the disks  Conclusion: This kind of disks extends the residence time of a dosage form at a particular site and controlling the release of drug in systemic manner from the dosage form and  useful especially for achieving controlled plasma level of the drug as well as improving bioavailability with  reduced side effects.


Keywords


Mucoadhesive drug delivery systems

Full Text:

PDF

References


Gupta PK, Leung SHS and Robinson JR. Bioadhesive Drug Delivery Systems, in : V. Lenaerts and R. Gurny (Eds.), CRC Press, Boca Raton, Florida, 1990 p.65- 92.

Madsen F, Eberth K and Smart JD. A rheological examination of mucoadhesive/mucus interaction: the effect of mucoadhesive type and concentration. J Control Rel 1998; 50: 167-178.

Jay S, Fountain W, Cui Z and Mumper RJ. Transmucosal delivery of testosterone in rabbits using novel bi-layer mucoadhesive wax-film composite disks. J Pharm Sci 2002; 91 (9): 2016-2025.

Jimenez CNR, Zia H and Rhodes CT. Mucoadhesive drug delivery systems. Drug Dev Ind Pharm 1993; 19: 143-194.

Akiyama Y and Nagahara N. Bioadhesive Drug Delivery Systems, in: E. Mathiowitz ,D. Chidckering , C.M. Lehr (Eds.), Marcel Dekker Inc., New York, 1999, p.477-505.

Harris D, Fell JT, Sharma H, Taylor DC and Linch J. Studies on potential bioadhesive systems for oral drug delivery. S T P Pharmacol 1989; 5: 852-856.

Smart JD, Kellaway IW and Worthington HE. An in vitro investigation of mucosa-adhesive materials for use in controlled drug delivery. J Pharm Pharmacol 1984; 36 (5): 295-299.

Diamant M. and Heine RJ. Thiazolidinediones in Type-II diabetes mellitus: Current clinical evidence. Drug 2003; 63 (185): 1373-1406.

BNF 51 (March 2006). Rosiglitazone Monograph. Royal Pharmaceutical Society of Great Britain, London.Available at: www.bnf.org/bnf/bnf/current/index.htm. accessed on 10 dec. 2010.

.Werner L and Travaglini M. T. A review of rosiglitazone in type 2 diabetes mellitus. Pharmacotherapy 2001; 21 (9): 1082-1099.

Phillips LS, Grunberger G, Miller E, Patwardhan R, Rappaort EB, Salzman A, Once- and twice-daily dosing with rosiglitazone improves glycemic control in patients with type 2 diabetes. Diabetes Care 2001; 24 :308–315.

Krishna S.S., Ray S., Thakur R.S., Formulation and evaluation of mucoadhesive dosage form containing rosiglitazone maleate. Pak J Pharm Sci 2006; 19: 208–213.

Feng H, Wang Z, Chen D, Studies on rosiglitazone maleate intragastric floating sustained release tablet. J China Pharm Univ 2002; 33: 196–199.

Ponchel G, Irache JM. Specific and non-specific bioadhesive particulate system for oral delivery to the gastrointestinal tract. Adv Drug Del Rev 1998; 34:191–219.

Pragati S, Satheesh Madhav NV, Ashok KS , Kuldeep S. Palatal mucosa as a route for systemic drug delivery: a review J Control Rel 2011; 151 (1) 2-9.

Satheesh Madhav N, Ashok KS , Pragati S., Kuldeep S. Orotransmucosal drug delivery systems: A review. J Control Rel 2009; 140: 2–11.

Reddy KR, Mutalik S, Reddy S, Once daily sustained release matrix tablets of nicorandil: formulation and in vitro evaluation. AAPS Pharm Sci Tech 2003; 4: 1-9.

Bolton S, The Pharmaceutical Statistics, Practical & Clinical Applications. 2nd ed. Marcel Dekker Inc., NY, (1997) p.610-619.

Soad A. Yehia, Omaima N. El-Gazayerly, and Emad B. Basalious, Design and In Vitro/In Vivo Evaluation of Novel Mucoadhesive Buccal Discs of an Antifungal Drug: Relationship Between Swelling, Erosion, and Drug Release. AAPS PharmSciTech 2008; 9 (4):1207-1217

Cartensen JT, Rhodes CT, Drug stability principles and practices 3rd edition and expanded volume 107 , second Indian reprint, Marcel Dekker. Inc 270, Madion Aveneue Ney York, 10016. 2008.

Vueba ML, Carvalhob LAEB, Veigaa F, Sousaa JJ, and Pinaa ME. Influence of cellulose ether polymers on ketoprofen release from hydrophilic matrix tablets. Eur J Pharm Biopharm 2004; 58: 51–59.

Chien YW Novel drug delivery systems. 2nd ed.Marcel Dekker Inc., NY, (1992). pp.171-176.

Han RY, Fang JY, Sung KC, Hu. OY, Mucoadhesive buccal disks for novel nalbuphine prodrug controlled delivery: Defect of formulation variables on drug release and mucoadhesive performance. Int J Pharm 1999; 177: 201–209.

Satheesh NV, Uma Shankar MS. A novel oro-soft palatal platformfor transmucosal gentamicin delivery, Proceedings of ICSS Held at Jadavpur University on 13th February 2008

Enel S, Hoogstraate S, Spies AJ, Verhoef F, Bos-van JC, Junginger A, Bodde´ H.E. Enhancementof in vitro permeability of porcine buccal mucosa by bile salts: kinetic and histological studies. J Control Rel 1994; 32 : 45–56.

Wu CY, Benet. LZ, Predicting drug disposition via application of BCS: transport/ absorption/elimination interplay and development of a biopharmaceutics drug disposition classification system. Pharm Res 2005; 22: 11–23.

Save T, Stah, MU, Ghamande AR, and Venkitachalam P. Comparative study of buccoadhesive formulations and sublin- gual capsules of nifedipine. J Pharm Pharmacol 1994; 463: 192–195.


Refbacks

  • There are currently no refbacks.




Copyright (c)

               AR Journals

18K, Street 1st, Gaytri Vihar, Pinto Park, Gwalior, M.P. India

Copyright@arjournals.org (Design) 2009-2021

 

Follow @arjournals on Twitter