Literature DB >> 26175342

The Effect of Additives on the Behavior of Phase Sensitive In Situ Forming Implants.

Luis Solorio1, Divya Sundarapandiyan2, Alex Olear3, Agata A Exner3,4.   

Abstract

Phase-sensitive in situ forming implants (ISFI) are a promising platform for the controlled release of therapeutic agents. The simple manufacturing, ease of placement, and diverse payload capacity make these implants an appealing delivery system for a wide range of applications. Tailoring the release profile is paramount for effective treatment of disease. In this study, three innovative formulation modifications were used to control drug release. Specifically, water, 1,1'-dioctadecyl-3,3,3',3'-tetramethylindocarbocyanine perchlorate (DiI), and bovine serum albumin (BSA) were incorporated into an ISFI solution containing the small molecular weight mock drug, sodium fluorescein. The effects of these additives on drug release, swelling, phase inversion, erosion, and implant microstructure were evaluated. Diagnostic ultrasound was used to monitor changes in swelling and phase inversion over time noninvasively. Water, DiI, and the combination of BSA/DiI functioned to reduce burst release 47.6%, 76.6%, and 59.0%, respectively. Incorporation of water into the casting solution also enhanced the release of drug during the diffusion period of release by 165.2% relative to the excipient free control. Incorporation of BSA into the polymer solution did not significantly alter the burst release (p < 0.05); however, the onset of degradation facilitated release was delayed relative to the excipient-free control by 5 days. This study demonstrates that the use of excipients provides a facile method to tailor the release profile and degradation rate of implants without changing the polymer or solvent used in the implant formulation, providing fine control of drug dissolution during distinct phases of release.
© 2015 Wiley Periodicals, Inc. and the American Pharmacists Association.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Biomaterials; Casting; Controlled release; Drug delivery systems; Encapsulation; Excipients; Image analysis; Injectables; Phase transition; Ultrasound

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2015        PMID: 26175342      PMCID: PMC4564324          DOI: 10.1002/jps.24558

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Pharm Sci        ISSN: 0022-3549            Impact factor:   3.534


  30 in total

1.  Role of crystallization in the phase inversion dynamics and protein release kinetics of injectable drug delivery systems.

Authors:  J R DesNoyer; A J McHugh
Journal:  J Control Release       Date:  2001-02-23       Impact factor: 9.776

2.  Effect of injection site on in situ implant formation and drug release in vivo.

Authors:  Ravi B Patel; Luis Solorio; Hanping Wu; Tianyi Krupka; Agata A Exner
Journal:  J Control Release       Date:  2010-08-20       Impact factor: 9.776

Review 3.  Drug-eluting polymer implants in cancer therapy.

Authors:  Agata A Exner; Gerald M Saidel
Journal:  Expert Opin Drug Deliv       Date:  2008-07       Impact factor: 6.648

4.  Effect of co-solvents on the controlled release of calcitonin polypeptide from in situ biodegradable polymer implants.

Authors:  Sunil Prabhu; Lan P Tran; Guru V Betageri
Journal:  Drug Deliv       Date:  2005 Nov-Dec       Impact factor: 6.419

5.  In vitro and in vivo study of thymosin alpha1 biodegradable in situ forming poly(lactide-co-glycolide) implants.

Authors:  Qingfeng Liu; He Zhang; Guichen Zhou; Shaobo Xie; Hao Zou; Yuan Yu; Guodong Li; Duxin Sun; Guoqing Zhang; Ying Lu; Yanqiang Zhong
Journal:  Int J Pharm       Date:  2010-07-25       Impact factor: 5.875

6.  Effect of polymer type on the dynamics of phase inversion and drug release in injectable in situ gelling systems.

Authors:  Hui Liu; Subbu S Venkatraman
Journal:  J Biomater Sci Polym Ed       Date:  2011-01-18       Impact factor: 3.517

7.  The effect of Pluronic on the protein release kinetics of an injectable drug delivery system.

Authors:  J R DesNoyer; A J McHugh
Journal:  J Control Release       Date:  2003-01-09       Impact factor: 9.776

8.  Do in situ forming PLG/NMP implants behave similar in vitro and in vivo? A non-invasive and quantitative EPR investigation on the mechanisms of the implant formation process.

Authors:  Sabine Kempe; Hendrik Metz; Karsten Mäder
Journal:  J Control Release       Date:  2008-06-17       Impact factor: 9.776

9.  Changes in morphology of in situ forming PLGA implant prepared by different polymer molecular weight and its effect on release behavior.

Authors:  Reyhaneh Astaneh; Mohammad Erfan; Hamidreza Moghimi; Hamid Mobedi
Journal:  J Pharm Sci       Date:  2009-01       Impact factor: 3.534

10.  Why degradable polymers undergo surface erosion or bulk erosion.

Authors:  Friederike von Burkersroda; Luise Schedl; Achim Göpferich
Journal:  Biomaterials       Date:  2002-11       Impact factor: 12.479

View more
  9 in total

1.  Macroporous acrylamide phantoms improve prediction of in vivo performance of in situ forming implants.

Authors:  Christopher Hernandez; Natalia Gawlik; Monika Goss; Haoyan Zhou; Selva Jeganathan; Danielle Gilbert; Agata A Exner
Journal:  J Control Release       Date:  2016-10-11       Impact factor: 9.776

2.  In situ forming implants exposed to ultrasound enhance therapeutic efficacy in subcutaneous murine tumors.

Authors:  Selva Jeganathan; Emily Budziszewski; Peter Bielecki; Michael C Kolios; Agata A Exner
Journal:  J Control Release       Date:  2020-05-07       Impact factor: 9.776

3.  Noninvasive characterization of in situ forming implant diffusivity using diffusion-weighted MRI.

Authors:  Kelsey A Hopkins; Nicole Vike; Xin Li; Jacqueline Kennedy; Emma Simmons; Joseph Rispoli; Luis Solorio
Journal:  J Control Release       Date:  2019-07-16       Impact factor: 9.776

4.  Effects of Drug Physicochemical Properties on In-Situ Forming Implant Polymer Degradation and Drug Release Kinetics.

Authors:  Jordan B Joiner; Alka Prasher; Isabella C Young; Jessie Kim; Roopali Shrivastava; Panita Maturavongsadit; Soumya Rahima Benhabbour
Journal:  Pharmaceutics       Date:  2022-06-01       Impact factor: 6.525

5.  Improving Treatment Efficacy of In Situ Forming Implants via Concurrent Delivery of Chemotherapeutic and Chemosensitizer.

Authors:  Selva Jeganathan; Emily Budziszewski; Christopher Hernandez; Anshul Dhingra; Agata A Exner
Journal:  Sci Rep       Date:  2020-04-20       Impact factor: 4.379

6.  A long-acting formulation of rifabutin is effective for prevention and treatment of Mycobacterium tuberculosis.

Authors:  Manse Kim; Claire E Johnson; Alan A Schmalstig; Ayano Annis; Sarah E Wessel; Brian Van Horn; Amanda Schauer; Agata A Exner; Jason E Stout; Angela Wahl; Miriam Braunstein; J Victor Garcia; Martina Kovarova
Journal:  Nat Commun       Date:  2022-08-08       Impact factor: 17.694

7.  Delivery of radix ophiopogonis polysaccharide via sucrose acetateisobutyrate-based in situ forming systems alone or combined with itsmono-PEGylation.

Authors:  LiNa Wang; Xiao Zheng; Fei Wu; Lan Shen; Xiao Lin; Yi Feng
Journal:  Drug Deliv       Date:  2018-11       Impact factor: 6.419

8.  Ultra-long-acting tunable biodegradable and removable controlled release implants for drug delivery.

Authors:  S Rahima Benhabbour; Martina Kovarova; Clinton Jones; Daijha J Copeland; Roopali Shrivastava; Michael D Swanson; Craig Sykes; Phong T Ho; Mackenzie L Cottrell; Anush Sridharan; Samantha M Fix; Orrin Thayer; Julie M Long; Daria J Hazuda; Paul A Dayton; Russell J Mumper; Angela D M Kashuba; J Victor Garcia
Journal:  Nat Commun       Date:  2019-09-20       Impact factor: 14.919

9.  Effects of Injection Volume and Route of Administration on Dolutegravir In Situ Forming Implant Pharmacokinetics.

Authors:  Jordan B Joiner; Jasmine L King; Roopali Shrivastava; Sarah Anne Howard; Mackenzie L Cottrell; Angela D M Kashuba; Paul A Dayton; Soumya Rahima Benhabbour
Journal:  Pharmaceutics       Date:  2022-03-11       Impact factor: 6.321

  9 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.