| Literature DB >> 23316394 |
Abstract
The objective of the present study is to explore the efficient chemical penetration enhancer among the various enhancers available in overcoming the stratum corneum barrier in transdermal delivery of Alfuzosin hydrochloride (AH). The different enhancers were incorporated in 2% Carbopol gel which was selected as a control and evaluated by in vitro diffusion studies through dialysis membrane and permeation through the rat abdominal skin using Keshary-Chien diffusion cells. All the enhancers increased the release rate through the dialysis membrane when compared with control except oleic acid which decreased the release rate but showed maximum solubility of the drug. Among the various enhancers Transcutol 20% and tween-20 (2%) showed the highest cumulative amount (Q(24)) of 702.28 ± 6.97 μg/cm(2) and 702.74 ± 7.49 μg/cm(2), respectively. A flux rate of 31.08 ± 0.21 μg/cm(2)/hr by Transcutol 20% and 30.38 ± 0.18 μg/cm(2)/hr by tween-20 (2%) was obtained. Transcutol 20% showed decreased lag time of 0.13 ± 0.05 hr. The lowest skin content of 342.33 ± 5.30 μg/gm was seen with oleic acid 2.5%. Maximum enhancement of flux by 3.94-fold was obtained with transcutol 20%. Primary skin irritation studies were performed with rabbit. Histopathological studies of transcutol 20% showed marked changes such as degeneration and infiltration of mononuclear cells in dermis indicating the effect of transcutol on the skin. Among the different enhancers transcutol is efficient in enhancing transdermal delivery of AH.Entities:
Year: 2012 PMID: 23316394 PMCID: PMC3539352 DOI: 10.5402/2012/965280
Source DB: PubMed Journal: ISRN Pharm ISSN: 2090-6145
Composition of base gel (control) formulation.
| Ingredient | %w/w |
|---|---|
| Drug (Alfuzosin hydrochloride) | 1% |
| Carbopol-980 | 2% |
| Propanol | 5% |
| Glycerin | 5% |
| Triethanolamine | q.s. |
| Methylparaben and propyl paraben | q.s. |
| Distilled water upto | 10 g |
Formulations with different chemical enhancers and respective concentrations used.
| Formulation Code | Enhancer | Concentration |
|---|---|---|
| CA1 | Citric acid | 1% |
| CA2 | Citric acid | 2.5% |
| CA3 | Oleic acid | 2.5% |
| CA4 | Oleic acid | 5% |
| CA5 | Isopropylmyristate | 5% |
| CA6 | Isopropylmyristate | 10% |
| CA7 |
| 1% |
| CA8 |
| 2% |
| CA9 | Tween-20 | 1% |
| CA10 | Tween-20 | 2% |
| CA11 | Transcutol | 10% |
| CA12 | Transcutol | 20% |
| CA13 | Dimethyl sulfoxide | 5% |
| CA14 | Dimethyl sulfoxide | 10% |
| CA15 |
| 5% |
| CA16 |
| 10% |
Solubility of AH in different chemical enhancers and release rate of formulations through dialysis membrane.
| Formulation code | Solubilitya (mg/mL) | ERsol b | Release rate ( |
|---|---|---|---|
| Control | 23.34 ± 1.07 | 1 | 143.41 ± 0.10 |
| CA1 | 26.42 ± 1.05 | 1.13 | 223.37 ± 0.21 |
| CA2 | 29.34 ± 1.12 | 1.25 | 230.99 ± 0.05 |
| CA3 | 42.92 ± 0.65 | 1.83 | 58.95 ± 0.39 |
| CA4 | 27.65 ± 1.02 | 1.18 | 20.81 ± 0.28 |
| CA5 | 25.44 ± 1.08 | 1.08 | 194.75 ± 0.21 |
| CA6 | 33.53 ± 1.10 | 1.43 | 241.47 ± 0.08 |
| CA7 | 30.86 ± 1.43 | 1.32 | 205.35 ± 0.43 |
| CA8 | 35.32 ± 1.02 | 1.51 | 219.79 ± 0.25 |
| CA9 | 20.92 ± 1.12 | 0.89 | 396.36 ± 0.53 |
| CA10 | 28.67 ± 1.05 | 1.22 | 254.44 ± 0.18 |
| CA11 | 38.27 ± 1.03 | 1.63 | 197.61 ± 0.37 |
| CA12 | 42.60 ± 1.15 | 1.82 | 214.94 ± 0.25 |
| CA13 | 35.88 ± 0.87 | 1.53 | 324.07 ± 0.52 |
| CA14 | 26.90 ± 0.93 | 1.15 | 221.29 ± 0.32 |
| CA15 | 32.74 ± 1.15 | 1.40 | 219.26 ± 0.24 |
| CA16 | 40.61 ± 1.32 | 1.73 | 224.50 ± 0.29 |
aSolubility is the solubility of AH in the hydrogel solvent mixture at 25°C. bERsol is enhancement ratio of AH solubility over control solubility. Values represent mean ± S.D (n = 3).
Figure 1Release profile of formulations CA1 to CA8 in comparison to control through dialysis membrane.
Figure 2Release profile of formulations CA9 to CA16 in comparison to control through dialysis membrane.
Permeation parameters of AH formulations.
| Formulation |
| Flux ( | Permeability coefficient | Lag time (hr) | Skin content ( | ER |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Control | 182.84 ± 7.81 | 7.59 ± 0.27 | 1.51 ± 0.05 | 2.96 ± 0.35 | 1246.79 ± 10.63 | 1 |
| CA1 | 274.17 ± 6.17 | 11.91 ± 0.16 | 2.38 ± 0.03 | 1.06 ± 0.15 | 981.20 ± 05.65 | 1.51 |
| CA2 | 365.05 ± 4.78 | 16.16 ± 0.22 | 3.23 ± 0.04 | 2.26 ± 0.15 | 754.61 ± 16.47 | 2.05 |
| CA3 | 307.43 ± 6.40 | 14.24 ± 0.19 | 2.84 ± 0.03 | 2.70 ± 0.20 | 342.33 ± 05.30 | 1.80 |
| CA4 | 257.73 ± 6.02 | 12.56 ± 0.19 | 2.51 ± 0.03 | 2.33 ± 0.15 | 1032.36 ± 07.93 | 1.59 |
| CA5 | 267.59 ± 6.66 | 12.51 ± 0.19 | 2.50 ± 0.03 | 1.76 ± 0.15 | 1133.28 ± 11.33 | 1.58 |
| CA6 | 589.89 ± 5.05 | 25.34 ± 0.09 | 5.06 ± 0.01 | 0.76 ± 0.15 | 955.63 ± 09.41 | 3.21 |
| CA7 | 383.55 ± 7.03 | 17.08 ± 0.21 | 3.41 ± 0.04 | 0.80 ± 0.10 | 676.34 ± 09.68 | 2.16 |
| CA8 | 566.02 ± 4.71 | 25.88 ± 0.08 | 5.17 ± 0.01 | 1.10 ± 0.20 | 567.82 ± 11.96 | 3.28 |
| CA9 | 518.65 ± 6.69 | 22.39 ± 0.20 | 4.47 ± 0.04 | 1.23 ± 0.15 | 713.82 ± 12.33 | 2.84 |
| CA10 | 702.74 ± 7.49 | 30.38 ± 0.18 | 6.07 ± 0.03 | 0.30 ± 0.20 | 592.20 ± 08.54 | 3.85 |
| CA11 | 507.26 ± 6.73 | 22.67 ± 0.18 | 4.53 ± 0.03 | 0.46 ± 0.15 | 651.33 ± 09.00 | 2.87 |
| CA12 | 702.28 ± 6.97 | 31.08 ± 0.21 | 6.21 ± 0.04 | 0.13 ± 0.05 | 355.93 ± 08.60 | 3.94 |
| CA13 | 351.39 ± 6.95 | 14.87 ± 0.14 | 2.97 ± 0.02 | 0.50 ± 0.10 | 877.00 ± 08.28 | 1.88 |
| CA14 | 303.85 ± 6.08 | 12.99 ± 0.15 | 2.59 ± 0.03 | 0.83 ± 0.15 | 561.93 ± 09.26 | 1.64 |
| CA15 | 314.25 ± 4.80 | 14.79 ± 0.09 | 2.95 ± 0.01 | 1.33 ± 0.15 | 875.97 ± 08.61 | 1.87 |
| CA16 | 490.75 ± 6.04 | 21.38 ± 0.08 | 4.27 ± 0.01 | 0.43 ± 0.15 | 687.58 ± 08.30 | 2.71 |
Q 24 is the cumulative amount permeated in 24 hrs; ER is an enhancement ratio of the flux of chemical enhancers over control. Values represent mean ± S.D (n = 3).
Figure 3Permeation profile of formulations CA1 to CA8 in comparison with control through the rat abdominal skin.
Figure 4Permeation profile of formulations CA9 to CA16 in comparison with control through the rat abdominal skin.
Skin irritation effect of different chemical enhancers.
| Chemical enhancer with concentration | Skin irritation |
|---|---|
| Citric acid (2.5%) | 0 |
| Oleic acid (5%) | 0 |
| Isopropyl myristate (10%) | 0 |
|
| 2 |
| Tween-20 (2%) | 1 |
| Transcutol (20%) | 1 |
| Dimethyl sulfoxide (10%) | 2 |
|
| 3 |
Figure 5Histological slides of control (without any formulation), placebo (control gel), and CA12 (optimised chemical enhancer formulation).