| Literature DB >> 26703528 |
Leena Peltonen1, Clare Strachan2.
Abstract
Poor solubility of active pharmaceutical ingredients (APIs) is a great challenge for the pharmaceutical industry and, hence, drug nanocrystals are widely studied as one solution to overcome these solubility problems. Drug nanocrystals have comparatively simple structures which make them attractive for the formulation for poorly soluble drugs, and their capability to improve the dissolution in vitro is easily demonstrated, but turning the in vitro superior properties of nanocrystals to success in vivo, is often demanding: controlled (including enhanced) drug dissolution followed by successful permeation is not guaranteed, if for example, the dissolved drug precipitates before it is absorbed. In this review critical quality attributes related to nanocrystal formulations from production to final product performance in vivo are considered. Many important parameters exist, but here physical stability (aggregation tendency and solid state form), solubility properties influencing dissolution and supersaturation, excipient use to promote the maintenance of supersaturation, and finally the fate of nanocrystals in vivo are the main subjects of our focus.Entities:
Keywords: bioavailability; drug nanocrystals; permeation; precipitation; solubility; stability; supersaturation
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2015 PMID: 26703528 PMCID: PMC6332140 DOI: 10.3390/molecules201219851
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Molecules ISSN: 1420-3049 Impact factor: 4.411
Commonly used and more recent methods for characterising nanocrystals.
| Category | Characterisation Method | Detection Principle | Information | Data Type | Variations | Sample Requirements | Considerations | References |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Solid state form | X-ray powder diffraction (XRPD) | Diffraction of x-rays from lattice planes | Polymorphic form (unique diffraction peaks), amorphous form (no peaks) | Diffractogram, qualitative and quantitative (degree of crystallinity) | Hot stage XRPD to analyse solid state form as a function of temperature | Powder, paste or slurry form, several sample presentation setups possible, amount required depends on setup | Anisotropic particle shape leads to preferred orientation effects (change in relative intensities of diffraction peaks) | [ |
| Peak broadening can occur as crystal lattice size decreases within nanoscale range | ||||||||
| Differential scanning calorimetry (DSC) | Change in heat flow due to sample changes during heat/cooling | Polymorphic form (melting temperature, crystallisation temperature) amorphous form (glass transition temperature), crystallinity (enthalpy of fusion, enthalpy of crystallisation, heat capacity change at glass transition temperature) | Thermogram, qualitative and quantitative | Modulated temperature DSC to separate overlapping irreversible and reversible thermal events, ultrafast heating | Powder form, few milligrams | Destructive. Results will be different with open or closed (hermetically sealed) pans | [ | |
| Infrared (IR) spectroscopy (mid-IR spectroscopy) | Change in dipole moment during molecular vibrations | Polymorphic form (peak shifts and relative intensities), crystallinity (broadening of bands, peak shifts and relative intensities) | Spectrum, qualitative and quantitative, suitable for multivariate analysis | Diffuse reflectance IR (DRIFTS), attenuated total reflection (ATR), microscope | Powder or tablet form, depends on sampling setup, few milligrams. Wet samples usually problematic. | Sample preparation/measurement can involve pressure which can induce solid state transformations | [ | |
| Raman spectroscopy | Change in polarisability during molecular vibrations | Polymorphic form, crystallinity | Spectrum, qualitative and quantitative, suitable for multivariate analysis | Various sample holders (within spectrometer, sampling probes, microscope) | Powder or suspension, few milligrams (usually). Fluorescent samples are problematic. | Sample heating can be problematic. Samples can be in aqueous medium. | [ | |
| Size and morphology | Dynamic light scattering (photon correlation spectroscopy) | Fluctuation of Rayleigh scattering of light associated with Brownian motion of nanoparticles | Particle size, particle size distribution | Particle size distribution (number based mean particle (hydrodynamic) size (Z-average), polydispersity index), quantitative | Suspension with suitable concentration | Suitable only for particles in nanometre size range | [ | |
| Viscosity of suspension and temperature affect results | ||||||||
| Scanning electron microscopy (SEM) | Backscattering of electrons | Topographical information about particles | Scanning electron micrograph, particle morphology, size | Elemental analysis | Dry sample mounted on stage condition setup (vacuum), microgram requirement | Sample preparation destructive | [ | |
| Transmission electron microscopy | Transmission of electrons | Density information | Transmission electron micrograph, morphology of cross sections, stabilizer- nanocrystal interaction | Embedded cross section preparation, microgram requirement | Sample preparation destructive | [ | ||
| Surface properties | Zeta-potential | Dynamic electrophoretic mobility under electric field | Surface charge (zeta potential) | Zeta potential, quantitative | Suspension with suitable concentration | [ | ||
| Surface plasmon resonance (SPR) | Changes in refractive index in the vicinity of a planar sensor surface | Surface adsorption | Spectrum, interaction between stabiliser drug crystals, qualitative and quantitative | Substrate on planar surface sensor required (not direct measurement of nanocrystals) | Careful sample preparation required | [ | ||
| Drug delivery | Dissolution testing | Dissolved drug analysed over time, usually using UV spectroscopy or HPLC | Dissolution profile | Solution concentration vs time | Paddle, flow through cell (with/without membrane insert), pharmacopeial/non pharmacopeial | Separating nanocrystals from dissolution medium can be problematic | [ | |
| Fluorescence microscopy | Fluorescence by endogenous or added fluorophores | Localization of nanocrystals in relation to cells and tissues | Fluorescence (and nanocrystal) image | One or two photon (two photon fluorescence offers inherent confocality, sub-micron spatial resolution, deeper penetration in tissues) fluorescence | Non-fluorescent nanocrystals require fluorphore to physically entrapped into nanocrystals | Entrapment and leakage of fluorophore can be difficult or problematic | [ | |
| Non-linear Raman microscopy | Change in polarisability during molecular vibrations. | Label free localisation of particles | Intensity of CARS shift (narrow band) or spectrum, (multiplex or broad band). Most commonly qualitative. 2D or 3D images. | Can be dry or aqueous suspension, in cell cultures or tissue samples | Coloured and two-photon fluorescent samples can interfere with signal. Can be coupled with other nonlinear phenomena such as second harmonic generation or two photon electronic fluorescence | Label free. Optimal lateral spatial resolution approximately 300–400 nm. | [ |
Figure 1TEM figure of itraconazole nanocrystals produced by nanomilling with poloxamer F 68 as a stabilizer (left) and antisolvent precipitation with hydrophobin as a stabilizer (right). The compositions and process parameters can be found from the references [7,18], reprinted with permission).
Figure 2Binding efficiencies of different poloxamers for the indomethacin layers on SPR (grey bars) and contact angle values (black line) for 0.1% (w/v) stabilizer solutions measured on indomethacin compression surfaces (modified from [26]).
Surface concentrations after 10 min of dissolution of indomethacin compressed surfaces (modified from [6]).
| Sample | Concentration/mg/L | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| Distance from the Dissolution Surface | |||
| 0 mm | 2 mm | 3 mm | |
| Nanocrystals with Pluronic F 68, particle size 580 nm | 28.7 | 11.7 | 5.8 |
| Microcrystals with Pluronic F 68 | 11.4 | 4.0 | 2.6 |
| Nanocrystals with Pluronic F127, particle size 580 nm | 22.1 | 9.4 | 4.3 |
| Microcrystals with Pluronic F127 | 17.1 | 7.6 | 4.0 |
| Bulk indomethacin | 2.1 | 0.3 | 0.0 |
Figure 3Interactions between paliperidone palmitate (PP) nanocrystals and RAW 264.7 macrophages imaged by CARS after 2 (a–d) and 24 h (e–h). Imaged is performed using CARS signal at 2860 cm−1 and fluorescently dyed cell membranes are imaged using TPEF. (a,e) low and high magnification brightfield imaging; (b,f) forward-CARS (red)/TPEF (green) merged micrographs of stained/fixed cells; In (c,g) intracellular PP nanocrystals are seen in orthogonal projections of z-stacked F-CARS/TPEF overlays; (d,h) show 3D-reconstructions of the z-stacked F-CARS/TPEF overlays. White arrows indicate PP-NC adsorbed onto cell surface and black arrows phagocytosed PP-NCs. (From [21], reprinted from Elsevier with permission).