PURPOSE: To develop fenretinide oral mucoadhesive patch formulations and evaluate their in vitro and in vivo release performance for future site-specific chemoprevention of oral cancer. METHODS: Solubilization of fenretinide in simulated saliva (SS) was studied by incorporating nonionic surfactants (Tween® 20 and 80, and Brij® 35 and 98), bile salts (sodium salt of cholic, taurocholic, glycocholic, and deoxycholic acids), phospholipid (lecithin), and novel polymeric solubilizer (Souplus®). Adhesive (polycarbophil: hydroxypropyl methylcellulose 4KM) and drug release (Fenretinide/Eudragit® RL PO with or without solubilizers) layers were prepared by solvent casting. Oral mucoadhesive patches were formed by attaching drug and adhesive layers onto backing layer (Tegaderm™ film). Physical state of drug in Eudragit® films was examined by X-ray diffraction (XRD). Evaluation of in vitro and in vivo fenretinide release from the patch was conducted in SS containing 5%w/v sodium deoxycholate and rabbits, respectively. Fenretinide was quantified by HPLC. RESULTS: Tween® 20 and 80, Brij® 98, and sodium deoxycholate exhibited the highest fenretinide solubilization potential among the solubilizers. Drug loading efficiency in Eudragit® films was 90%-97%. XRD suggested fenretinide was amorphous in solubilizer-free and solubilizer-loaded films. Solubilizer-free patch exhibited poor in vitro and in vivo controlled drug release behavior. Increases in drug loading (5-10 wt%) or changes in polymeric matrix permeability did not provide continuous drug release. Co-incorporation of either single or mixed solubilizers in fenretinide/Eudragit® patches, (20 wt% Tween® 20, Tween® 80 and sodium deoxycholate or 20 wt% Tween® 80 + 40 wt% sodium deoxycholate solubilizers) led to significantly improved continuous in vitro/in vivo fenretinide release. CONCLUSION: Fenretinide/Eudragit® RL PO patches with 20 wt% Tween® 80 + 40 wt% sodium deoxycholate solubilizers exhibit excellent release behavior for further preclinical and/or clinical evaluation in oral cancer chemoprevention.
PURPOSE: To develop fenretinide oral mucoadhesive patch formulations and evaluate their in vitro and in vivo release performance for future site-specific chemoprevention of oral cancer. METHODS: Solubilization of fenretinide in simulated saliva (SS) was studied by incorporating nonionic surfactants (Tween® 20 and 80, and Brij® 35 and 98), bile salts (sodium salt of cholic, taurocholic, glycocholic, and deoxycholic acids), phospholipid (lecithin), and novel polymeric solubilizer (Souplus®). Adhesive (polycarbophil: hydroxypropyl methylcellulose 4KM) and drug release (Fenretinide/Eudragit® RL PO with or without solubilizers) layers were prepared by solvent casting. Oral mucoadhesive patches were formed by attaching drug and adhesive layers onto backing layer (Tegaderm™ film). Physical state of drug in Eudragit® films was examined by X-ray diffraction (XRD). Evaluation of in vitro and in vivo fenretinide release from the patch was conducted in SS containing 5%w/v sodium deoxycholate and rabbits, respectively. Fenretinide was quantified by HPLC. RESULTS: Tween® 20 and 80, Brij® 98, and sodium deoxycholate exhibited the highest fenretinide solubilization potential among the solubilizers. Drug loading efficiency in Eudragit® films was 90%-97%. XRD suggested fenretinide was amorphous in solubilizer-free and solubilizer-loaded films. Solubilizer-free patch exhibited poor in vitro and in vivo controlled drug release behavior. Increases in drug loading (5-10 wt%) or changes in polymeric matrix permeability did not provide continuous drug release. Co-incorporation of either single or mixed solubilizers in fenretinide/Eudragit® patches, (20 wt% Tween® 20, Tween® 80 and sodium deoxycholate or 20 wt% Tween® 80 + 40 wt% sodium deoxycholate solubilizers) led to significantly improved continuous in vitro/in vivo fenretinide release. CONCLUSION:Fenretinide/Eudragit® RL PO patches with 20 wt% Tween® 80 + 40 wt% sodium deoxycholate solubilizers exhibit excellent release behavior for further preclinical and/or clinical evaluation in oral cancer chemoprevention.
Authors: Takao Arai; Ofra Benny; Tatsuhiro Joki; Lata G Menon; Marcelle Machluf; Toshiaki Abe; Rona S Carroll; Peter M Black Journal: Anticancer Res Date: 2010-04 Impact factor: 2.480
Authors: Franca Formelli; Elena Cavadini; Roberto Luksch; Alberto Garaventa; Maria Grazia Villani; Valentina Appierto; Stefano Persiani Journal: Cancer Chemother Pharmacol Date: 2007-12-08 Impact factor: 3.333
Authors: Carlos M Ugalde; Zhongfa Liu; Chen Ren; Kenneth K Chan; Kapila A Rodrigo; Yhonghua Ling; Peter E Larsen; Guillermo E Chacon; Gary D Stoner; Russell J Mumper; Henry W Fields; Susan R Mallery Journal: Pharm Res Date: 2009-01-10 Impact factor: 4.200
Authors: William N William; J Jack Lee; Scott M Lippman; Jack W Martin; Nitin Chakravarti; Hai T Tran; Anita L Sabichi; Edward S Kim; Lei Feng; Reuben Lotan; Vassiliki A Papadimitrakopoulou Journal: Cancer Prev Res (Phila) Date: 2009-01
Authors: Brian S Shumway; Laura A Kresty; Peter E Larsen; Jared C Zwick; Bo Lu; Henry W Fields; Russell J Mumper; Gary D Stoner; Susan R Mallery Journal: Clin Cancer Res Date: 2008-04-15 Impact factor: 12.531
Authors: Susan R Mallery; Jared C Zwick; Ping Pei; Meng Tong; Peter E Larsen; Brian S Shumway; Bo Lu; Henry W Fields; Russell J Mumper; Gary D Stoner Journal: Cancer Res Date: 2008-06-15 Impact factor: 12.701
Authors: Sandeep K Ramineni; Craig B Fowler; Paul D Fisher; Larry L Cunningham; David A Puleo Journal: Biomed Mater Date: 2015-03-02 Impact factor: 3.715
Authors: Xiao Wu; Kashappa-Goud H Desai; Susan R Mallery; Andrew S Holpuch; Maynard P Phelps; Steven P Schwendeman Journal: Mol Pharm Date: 2012-03-06 Impact factor: 4.939
Authors: Andrew S Holpuch; Maynard P Phelps; Kashappa-Goud H Desai; Wei Chen; George M Koutras; Byungdo B Han; Blake M Warner; Ping Pei; Garrett A Seghi; Meng Tong; Michael B Border; Henry W Fields; Gary D Stoner; Peter E Larsen; Zhongfa Liu; Steven P Schwendeman; Susan R Mallery Journal: Carcinogenesis Date: 2012-03-15 Impact factor: 4.944