| Literature DB >> 24523741 |
Qiang Fu1, Hua-Lin Fu1, Luo Huan1, Wei Zhang1, Guang Shu1, Meng-Jiao Liu1, Feng-Ying Deng1, Jun Hu1.
Abstract
Cefquinome Sulfate (CS) is a fourth-generation cephalosporin, which has been developed solely for veterinary use. It shows potent antibacterial activity against a broad spectrum of bacterial species. However, Cefquinome is susceptible to hydrolysis, which limiting its clinical employment efficacies to some extent. So, in this study, to increase Cefquinome Sulfate biological half-life, a novel Cefquinome Sulfate proliposome was prepared by solid dispersion and effervescent techniques and characterized for morphology, particle size, entrapment efficiency and in vitro release. A Reversed Phase-High Performance Liquid Chromatography (RP-HPLC) method was first chosen and established to determine the drug concentration in plasma after intra muscular (IM) administrating Cefquinome Sulfate solution and liposome at a single dosage of 18 mg/kg in rabbit. Then their pharmacokinetics in vivo was compared. Results showed that the received liposome was milky white suspension, spherical or ellipsoidal in shape. The mean particle size was 203±5 nm and the entrapment efficiency was 53.5±0.16%. The cefaquinom sulfate solution and liposome both followed a two compartment model, in vivo. The pharmacokinetic parameters for the solution and liposomal formulations were measured as follows: t1/2 α were (1.214 ± 0.135) h and (1.395 ± 0.113) h, t1/2 β were (8.752 ± 0.846) h and (16.503 ± 1.275) h, AUC(0-24) were (49.582 ± 9.173) (mg·h)/L and (138.727 ± 11.034) (mg·h)/L, CL/F were (0.357 ± 0.015) L/(h·kg) and (0.127 ± 0.012) L/(h·kg), MRT(0-24) were (2.68 ± 0.229) h and (5.945 ± 0.479) h, respectively. It could be clearly seen that t1/2 β of liposome prolonged (p < 0.05), AUC and MRT both increased remarkably (p < 0.01), CL/F decreased. Results indicated that this preparation has more residence time and exhibits some sustained-release tendency.Entities:
Keywords: Cefquinome Sulfate; HPLC; Pharmacokinetics; Proliposome; Solid dispersion
Year: 2013 PMID: 24523741 PMCID: PMC3920688
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Iran J Pharm Res ISSN: 1726-6882 Impact factor: 1.696
The factor-level of orthogonal design
|
|
| |||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
|
|
|
| |
| 1 | 2:1 | 100 | 1:10 | 500/100 |
| 2 | 1.5:1 | 150 | 1:15 | 600/120 |
| 3 | 1:1 | 200 | 1:20 | 700/140 |
The results of orthogonal design
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 35.5 |
| 2 | 1 | 2 | 2 | 2 | 46.2 |
| 3 | 1 | 3 | 3 | 3 | 41.6 |
| 4 | 2 | 1 | 2 | 3 | 40.3 |
| 5 | 2 | 2 | 3 | 1 | 42 |
| 6 | 2 | 3 | 1 | 2 | 23.5 |
| 7 | 3 | 1 | 3 | 2 | 52.2 |
| 8 | 3 | 2 | 1 | 3 | 22 |
| 9 | 3 | 3 | 2 | 1 | 31 |
| 1 | 41.1 | 44.67 | 27 | 36.17 | |
| 2 | 35.26 | 36.73 | 39.17 | 42.63 | |
| 3 | 37.07 | 32.03 | 47.27 | 34.63 | |
| R | 5.84 | 12.64 | 20.27 | 8 |
The particle size, PDI value, entrapment efficiency, and hydration time of the formation of liposome. Each value represents the arithmetic mean ± Standard deviation (SD), n = 3.
|
|
|
| ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | 2 | 3 | ||
| Particle size (nm) | 204 ± 6 | 214 ± 8 | 191 ± 2 | 203 ± 5 |
| PDI value | 0.137 ± 0.01 | 0.128 ± 0.02 | 0.131 ± 0.02 | 0.132 ± 0.02 |
| Entrapment efficiency (%) | 53.7 ± 0.21 | 52.4 ± 0.12 | 54.4 ± 0.16 | 53.5 ± 0.16 |
| Hydration time (min) | 10 ± 0.3 | 11 ± 0.5 | 9 ± 0.4 | 10 ± 0.4 |
Figure 1Transmission electron photograph of Cefquinome Sulfate liposome
Figure 2The size and distribution of Cefquinome Sulfate liposome
The in-vitro release data of CS from solution and liposome
|
|
| |
|---|---|---|
|
|
| |
| 0.25 | 6.78 | 2.47 |
| 0.5 | 15.98 | 5.89 |
| 1 | 32.01 | 11.08 |
| 2 | 51.21 | 20.12 |
| 3 | 69.11 | 26.08 |
| 4 | 81.11 | 35.3 |
| 6 | 89.07 | 44.72 |
| 8 | 92.48 | 51.78 |
| 10 | -b | 60.15 |
| 12 | - | 67.28 |
| 18 | - | 74.18 |
| 24 | - | 79.14 |
a: Accumulative release percentage. Expressed as [(release amount)0-t/(total amount) ×100]. b: No detection
Figure 3Release profiles of CS solution (◆), and CSLS (■) in-vitro. The values are arithmetic Mean ± Standard deviation (SD), n = 5
The regression equation of CS release in-vitro
|
|
|
|
|
|---|---|---|---|
|
| Zero order kinetics equation | ARP = 0.1109t + 0.2042 | 0.8431 |
| First order kinetics equation | Ln (1-ARP) = -0.3402t - 0.0712 | 0.9798 | |
| Higuchi equation | ARP = 0.3946t1/2-0.0758 | 0.9547 | |
| Weibull equation | Ln [-ln(1-ARP)] = 1.0501lnt-1.0612 | 0.9124 | |
|
| Zero order kinetics equation | ARP = 0.0334t + 0.1515 | 0.8583 |
| First order kinetics equation | Ln (1-ARP) = -0.0682t - 0.1158 | 0.9602 | |
| Higuchi equation | ARP = 0.1906t1/2-0.0527 | 0.9751 | |
| Weibull equation | Ln [-ln(1-ARP)] = 0.9048lnt-2.2109 | 0.992 |
Figure 4HPLC chromatogram of blank plasma, Cefquinome Sulfate (CS) and plasma simple collected from rabbit at 4 h after i.m. administration of Cefquinome Sulfate proliposome (CSLS). A:Blank plasma;B:Cefquinome Sulfate (CS) (20 μg/mL);C:Plasma simple (at 4 h).
Figure 5The calibration curves of CS. A: The calibration curves of CS in plasma sample. B: The calibration curves of CS (dissolved in pH7.0 PBS) in-vitro
Figure 6Drug concentration-time curve in rabbit plasma after i.m. Administrating Cefquinome Sulfate liposome(■) and solution( ). The symbol and vertical bar represent the mean and standard error of the mean (n = 5).
pharmacokinetic parameters of Cefquinome Sulfate liposome and solution in rabbits following intravenous administration
|
|
|
| |
|---|---|---|---|
|
|
| ||
| A | μg·mL-1 | 23.644 ± 6.361 | 42.066 ± 8.402 |
|
| h-1 | 0.571 ± 0.045 | 0.497 ± 0.071 |
|
| μg·mL-1 | 0.697 ± 0.015 | 4.537 ± 0.06 |
|
| h-1 | 0.079 ± 0.008 | 0.042 ± 0.005 |
|
| h | 1.214 ± 0.135 | 1.395 ± 0.113 |
|
| h | 8.752 ± 0.846 | 16.503 ± 1.275* |
|
| h-1 | 0.093 ± 0.007 | 0.097 ± 0.009 |
|
| h-1 | 0.084 ± 0.014 | 0.196 ± 0.026 |
|
| h-1 | 0.473 ± 0.072 | 0.246 ± 0.013 |
| AUC(0-24) | mg·h·L-1 | 49.582 ± 9.173 | 138.727 ± 11.034** |
| AUC(0-∞) | mg·h·L-1 | 50.395 ± 9.270 | 141.262 ± 11.037** |
| CL/F | L·h-1·kg-1 | 0.357 ± 0.015 | 0.127 ± 0.012 |
|
| L·kg-1 | 0.751 | 0.833 ± 0.027 |
| MRT(0-24) | h | 2.68 ± 0.229 | 5.945 ± 0.479** |
| MRT(0-∞) | h | 3.146 ± 1.798 | 8.254 ± 2.571** |
Note: * means significant difference between the treatments (p < 0.05), ** means highly significant difference between treatments (p < 0.01)