| Literature DB >> 26579386 |
Huiyi Wu1, Xiaoying Long1, Fei Yuan1, Li Chen1, Sujing Pan1, Yunjun Liu1, Yoshiko Stowell2, Xiaoling Li2.
Abstract
The aim of this study was to develop a formulation to improve the oral absorption of baicalin (BA) by combining a phospholipid complex (PC) and self-emulsifying microemulsion drug delivery system (SMEDDS), termed BA-PC-SMEDDS. BA-PC was prepared by a solvent evaporation method and evaluated by complexation percentage (CP). The physicochemical properties of BA-PC were determined. The synergistic effect of PC and SMEDDS on permeation of BA was studied in vitro with Caco-2 cells and in situ with a single pass intestinal perfusion model. The improved bioavailability of BA in BA-PC-SMEDDS was confirmed in an in vivo rat model. The CP of BA-PC reached 100% when the molar ratio of drug to phospholipid (PP) was ≥1:1. The solubility of BA-PC increased in both water and octanol, and the log P o/w of BA-PC was increased significantly. BA-PC-SMEDDS could be dispersed more evenly in water, compared to BA and BA-PC. Both the Caco-2 cell uptake and single-pass intestinal perfusion models illustrated that transport of BA in BA-PC was lower than that of free BA, while improved significantly in BA-PC-SMEDDS. The relative bioavailability of BA-PC(1:2)-SMEDDS was 220.37%. The combination system of PC and SMEDDS had a synergistic effect on improving the oral absorption of BA.Entities:
Keywords: Baicalin; Bioavailability; Caco-2 cell; Phospholipid complex; SMEDDS; Single-pass intestinal perfusion
Year: 2014 PMID: 26579386 PMCID: PMC4629064 DOI: 10.1016/j.apsb.2014.03.002
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Acta Pharm Sin B ISSN: 2211-3835 Impact factor: 11.413
Figure 1The chemical structure of BA.
The complexation percentage (CP), solubility and apparent oil–water partition coefficient (log Po/w) in various formulations.
| Formulation | Molar ratio of BA to PP | CP (%) | Solubility of BA (mg/mL) | log | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Water | Octanol | ||||
| BA | — | N/A | 0.052±0.0015 | 0.136±0.012 | −1.032±0.014 |
| BA–PC | 1:0.5 | 80 | N/A | N/A | N/A |
| 1:1 | 100 | 0.092±0.0066 | 6.542±0.96 | −0.105±0.005 | |
| 1:1.5 | 100 | 0.129±0.0028 | 9.065±0.76 | −0.024±0.009 | |
| 1:2 | 100 | 0.157±0.0003 | 11.68±1.13 | 0.182±0.006 |
Data were expressed as mean±SD, n=3.
P<0.05 compared to BA. N/A, no data available.
Figure 2The concentration change of BA in the upper solution part of water over time when BA, BA–PC, BA–PC–SMEDDS were dispersed in water at 37 °C. Data are expressed as mean±SD (n=3).
Figure 3Particle size of BA–PC–SMEDDS.
Figure 4Cumulative permeation quantity (a) and apparent permeability coefficients (b) of BA through a Caco-2 monolayer at different concentrations. Data were expressed as mean±SD (n=3).
Apparent permeability coefficients (Papp) and efflux ratio (ER) of BA with or without verapamil.
| Formulation | ER | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| AP–BL | BL–AP | ||
| BA | 0.119±0.092 | 0.365±0.096 | 3.067 |
| BA+verapamil | 0.622±0.101 | 0.174±0.000 | 0.280 |
Data were expressed as mean±SD, n=3.
P<0.05 compared to BA.
Figure 5Comparison of cumulative permeation quantity (Q) through a Caco-2 monolayer between BA and BA–PC (a), BA and BA–PC–SMEDDS (b) at various molar ratios of drug to PP. Data were expressed as mean±SD (n=3).
Apparent permeability coefficients (Papp) through Caco-2 monolayer of BA, BA–PC and BA–PC–SMEDDS at various molar ratios of drug to PP.
| Formulation | |
|---|---|
| BA | 0.037±0.012 |
| BA–PC(1:1) | 0.045±0.012 |
| BA–PC(1:1.5) | 0.024±0.008 |
| BA–PC(1:2) | 0.017±0.002 |
| BA–PC(1:1)–SMEDDS | 0.328±0.036 |
| BA–PC(1:1.5)–SMEDDS | 0.690±0.057 |
| BA–PC(1:2)–SMEDDS | 0.774±0.084 |
Data were expressed as mean±SD, n=3.
P<0.05 compared with BA.
Figure 6Schematic diagram of PC.
Effects of BA–PC and BA–PC–SMEDDS at different molar ratios on effective permeability coefficients (Peff) of BA in different intestine segments.
| Formulation | BA:PP | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Duodenum+jejunum | Ileum | Colon | ||
| BA | – | 0.139±0.035 | 0.252±0.081 | 0.506±0.088 |
| BA–PC | 1:1 | 0.078±0.021 | 0.152±0.033 | 0.504±0.075 |
| 1:2 | 0.129±0.019 | 0.297±0.054 | 0.456±0.033 | |
| BA–PC–SMEDDS | 1:1 | 0.159±0.034 | 0.583±0.099 | 1.459±0.235 |
| 1:2 | 0.513±0.040 | 1.173±0.119 | 2.229±0.284 | |
Data were expressed as mean±SD, n=6.
P<0.05 compared to colon.
P<0.05 compared to BA.
Figure 7Plasma concentration–time profiles of BA in rats after oral administration BA and BA–PC(1:2)–SMEDDS. Data were expressed as mean±SD (n=6).
Pharmacokinetic parameters in rats after oral administration of BA and BA–PC(1:2)–SMEDDS.
| Formulation | AUC (μg·h/mL) | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| BA | 1.5±0.0 | 1.84±0.47 | 7.61±1.58 | 220.37±49.93 |
| BA–PC(1:2)–SMEDDS | 2.0±0.0 | 3.74±1.15 | 17.28±3.62 |
Data were presented as mean±SD, n=6.
P<0.05 compared to BA group.
P<0.01 compared to BA group.