| Literature DB >> 24140721 |
K Gradauer1, J Barthelmes, C Vonach, G Almer, H Mangge, B Teubl, E Roblegg, S Dünnhaupt, E Fröhlich, A Bernkop-Schnürch, R Prassl.
Abstract
The aim of the present study was the in vivo evaluation of thiomer-coated liposomes for an oral application of peptides. For this purpose, salmon calcitonin was chosen as a model drug and encapsulated within liposomes. Subsequently, the drug loaded liposomes were coated with either chitosan-thioglycolic acid (CS-TGA) or an S-protected version of the same polymer (CS-TGA-MNA), leading to an increase in the particle size of about 500 nm and an increase in the zeta potential from approximately -40 mV to a maximum value of about +44 mV, depending on the polymer. Coated liposomes were demonstrated to effectively penetrate the intestinal mucus layer where they came in close contact with the underlying epithelium. To investigate the permeation enhancing properties of the coated liposomes ex vivo, we monitored the transport of fluoresceinisothiocyanate-labeled salmon calcitonin (FITC-sCT) through rat small intestine. Liposomes coated with CS-TGA-MNA showed the highest effect, leading to a 3.8-fold increase in the uptake of FITC-sCT versus the buffer control. In vivo evaluation of the different formulations was carried out by the oral application of 40 μg of sCT per rat, either encapsulated within uncoated liposomes, CS-TGA-coated liposomes or CS-TGA-MNA-coated liposomes, or given as a solution serving as negative control. The blood calcium level was monitored over a time period of 24h. The highest reduction in the blood calcium level, to a minimum of 65% of the initial value after 6h, was achieved for CS-TGA-MNA-coated liposomes. Comparing the areas above curves (AAC) of the blood calcium levels, CS-TGA-MNA-coated liposomes led to an 8.2-fold increase compared to the free sCT solution if applied orally in the same concentration. According to these results, liposomes coated with S-protected thiomers have demonstrated to be highly valuable carriers for enhancing the oral bioavailability of salmon calcitonin.Entities:
Keywords: Chitosan; Liposome; Permeation enhancement; Salmon calcitonin; Thiomer
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2013 PMID: 24140721 PMCID: PMC3913890 DOI: 10.1016/j.jconrel.2013.10.011
Source DB: PubMed Journal: J Control Release ISSN: 0168-3659 Impact factor: 9.776
Fig. 1Reaction of CS–TGA with 6,6′-dinicotinamide leads to the S-protected thiomer CS–TGA–MNA. Both polymers were used for the coating of preformed liposomes.
Composition of all liposomal suspensions used within this study and characterization concerning their size, polydispersity and zeta potential after coupling the polymer to the liposomal surface (means ± SD; n ≥ 3).
| Sample description | Lipid composition | Encapsulated drug | Added polymer | Size [nm] | Polydispersity index | Zeta potential [mV] |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Uncoated liposomes | DPPC/DPPE-MCC | sCT | – | 174.8 ± 0.9 | 0.19 ± 0.01 | − 39.8 ± 2.4 |
| CS–TGA–coated liposomes | DPPC/DPPE-MCC | sCT | CS–TGA, 150kD | 709.2 ± 36.0 | 0.34 ± 0.05 | + 43.5 ± 1.6 |
| CS–TGA–MNA-coated liposomes | DPPC/DPPE-MCC | sCT | CS–TGA–MNA, 150 kDa | 604.8 ± 29.6 | 0.91 ± 0.16 | + 27.9 ± 1.1 |
The molar ratio of DPPC to DPPE-MCC was 3:0.3 in all cases.
Encapsulation efficiency: 69 ± 12%.
A polymer to lipid weight ratio of 1:1 was used for all formulations.
Fig. 2Diffusion of rhodamine-labeled liposomes through porcine intestinal mucus. Mucus layers were incubated with uncoated liposomes (B), CS–TGA-coated liposomes (C), or CS–TGA–MNA coated liposomes (D) and compared with a control omitting any particles (A). Green (I) and red fluorescence (II) images were merged in order to distinguish between particles (red) and autofluorescence (yellow). The mucus layer thickness is displayed by the two dotted lines; the right side corresponds to the mucus surface, where particles have been applied.
Fig. 3Absorptive permeation studies of FITC-calcitonin across rat intestinal tissue. Effect of uncoated liposomes (△) and liposomes coated with the thiolated chitosans CS–TGA (■) and the S-protected version CS–TGA–MNA (♦) in comparison to the FITC-sCT control (×). Indicated values are the means ± SD of at least three experiments.
Comparison of Papp values of uncoated liposomes, CS–TGA-coated liposomes and CS–TGA–MNA-coated liposomes. Enhancement ratios result from the comparison of each test solution with the FITC-sCT control solution. Indicated values represent the means ± SD of at least three experiments (*p < 0.05 and **p < 0.01 compared to the buffer control). Additionally the effect of named test compounds was tested on the TEER.
| Substrate | Test compound | Papp × 10− 5 [cm/s] | Fold increase in Papp | Fold decrease in TEER |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| FITC-sCT | Buffer | 0.48 ± 0.02 | – | – |
| Uncoated liposomes | 0.86 ± 0.34 | 1.8 | 1.2 | |
| CS–TGA-coated liposomes | 1.29 ± 0.03 | 2.7** | 1.6* | |
| CS–TGA–MNA-coated liposomes | 1.80 ± 0.32 | 3.8* | 1.7* |
Fig. 4Decrease of the transepithelial electrical resistance (TEER) after adding uncoated liposomes (△) and liposomes coated with the thiolated chitosans CS–TGA (■) and its S-protected form CS–TGA–MNA (♦) in comparison to FITC-sCT control (×). Indicated values are the means ± SD of at least three experiments.
Fig. 5Effect of different application routes of sCT solution on the blood calcium level: The applied dose per rat was either 40 μg in case of an oral application (×), 2 μg in case of a s.c. application (□) or 1 μg for an i.v. injection (○). Indicated values are the means ± SD of three rats.
List of all formulations used for the in vivo study and summary of the results. Each group consists of three rats and all formulations were applied in liquid form. Blood samples were taken from the tail vain after 0, 2, 4, 6, 8, 12 and 24 h. Cmin, minimum serum calcium concentration (% of initial); tmin, time to cmin; AAC, area above the blood calcium level time curves; ER, enhancement ratio of different oral formulations (*p < 0.05, **p < 0.01 and ***p < 0.001 compared to the sCT solution in PBS).
| Groups | Application route | Dose [μg/rat] | cmin [%] | tmin [h] | AAC0–24h [% * h] | ER |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| sCT in PBS | i.v. | 1 | 60 ± 3 | 6 | 334 ± 46 | – |
| sCT in PBS | s.c. | 2 | 73 ± 4 | 6 | 296 ± 2 | – |
| sCT in PBS | Oral | 40 | 93 ± 7 | 6 | 29 ± 6 | – |
| sCT encapsulated liposomes, uncoated | Oral | 40 | 85 ± 2 | 6 | 121 ± 17 | 4.2* |
| sCT encapsulated liposomes, CS–TGA coated | Oral | 40 | 82 ± 4 | 4 | 164 ± 28 | 5.7* |
| sCT encapsulated liposomes, CS–TGA–MNA coated | Oral | 40 | 65 ± 4 | 6 | 239 ± 12 | 8.2*** |
Fig. 6Decrease in the blood calcium level as a biological response to the oral application of sCT encapsulated within different liposomal formulations or given as a solution. sCT containing liposomes were coated with either CS–TGA (■) or CS–TGA–MNA (♦) and compared to uncoated, sCT loaded liposomes (△) and free sCT in solution (×). The applied dose per rat was 40 μg sCT in all cases. Indicated values are the means ± SD of three rats.