| Literature DB >> 27752231 |
Hetal Patel1, Hiral Patel1, Mukesh Gohel2, Sanjay Tiwari1.
Abstract
Context: Microcrystalline cellulose (MCC) is the most widely used excipient for the production of pellets but it retards the release of poorly water soluble drugs. Objective: The present investigation reports incorporation of camphor, cross carmellose sodium (CCS) and spray dried lactose (SDL) into MCC pellets to enhance the dissolution rate of telmisartan. Materials and methods: A full factorial design (32) was used in the study. Concentration of camphor and CCS was selected as independent variables whereas percentage porosity and percentage drug release at 60 min were selected as dependent variables. Pellets were produced by extrusion-spheronization technique and evaluated for percentage yield, particle size analysis, flow characteristics, percentage porosity, drug content and in vitro drug release. Contour plots and 3-D surface plots were presented for graphical expression of the results. Results and discussion: Pellet formulations exhibited acceptable morphological, flow and mechanical properties. As against to 38.54% drug release after 60 min with MCC pellets, pellets prepared with optimized formulation, composed of proper combination of MCC, SDL, camphor and CCS, released 100% drug after 60 min.Entities:
Keywords: Camphor; Crosscarmellose sodium; Factorial design; Microcrystalline cellulose; Spray dried lactose
Year: 2015 PMID: 27752231 PMCID: PMC5059835 DOI: 10.1016/j.jsps.2015.03.007
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Saudi Pharm J ISSN: 1319-0164 Impact factor: 4.330
Composition of preliminary batches (P1–P4).
| Batches | Composition of pellets | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Drug (mg) | MCC (mg) | Spray dried lactose | Camphor (mg) | CCS (mg) | |
| 20 | 280 | – | – | – | |
| 20 | 244 | 56(20%) | |||
| 20 | 220 | – | 30(10%) | ||
| 20 | 244 | – | – | 36(12%) | |
Coding of the actual values for 32 full factorial design.
| Factors ( | Levels used | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| Low (−1) (%) | Medium (0) (%) | High (+1) (%) | |
| 2 | 6 | 10 | |
| 4 | 8 | 12 | |
Dependent variables: Y1 = % porosity; Y2 = % drug release at 60 min.
Composition of factorial batches (F1–F9).
| Batch | Telmisartan (mg) | MCC:Lactose | Camphor (%) | CCS (%) | Ethanol:Water |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 20 | 80:20 | 2 | 4 | 60:40 | |
| 20 | 80:20 | 2 | 8 | 60:40 | |
| 20 | 80:20 | 2 | 12 | 60:40 | |
| 20 | 80:20 | 6 | 4 | 60:40 | |
| 20 | 80:20 | 6 | 8 | 60:40 | |
| 20 | 80:20 | 6 | 12 | 60:40 | |
| 20 | 80:20 | 10 | 4 | 60:40 | |
| 20 | 80:20 | 10 | 8 | 60:40 | |
| 20 | 80:20 | 10 | 12 | 60:40 |
Figure 1DSC thermogram of: (a) telmisartan, (b) telmisartan + MCC, and (c) telmisartan + optimized formulation.
Figure 2IR spectra of: (a) telmisartan, (b) MCC, and (c) physical mixture of telmisartan and MCC.
Figure 3IR spectra of: (a) telmisartan, (b) CCS, and (c) physical mixture of telmisartan and CCS.
Figure 4In vitro drug release of preliminary batches (P1–P4).
Results of flow properties and particle size of pellets of batches F1–F9.
| Batches | % Yield | Bulk density | Tapped density | Carr′s index (%) | Hausner’s ratio | Angle of repose (°) | Avg. particle size (μm) |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 83.64 | 0.701 ± 0.023 | 0.723 ± 0.045 | 1.98 | 1.03 | 18.43 ± 1.25 | 950.06 | |
| 88.24 | 0.817 ± 0.019 | 0.825 ± 0.068 | 1.01 | 1.01 | 18.26 ± 2.35 | 955.84 | |
| 86.32 | 0.649 ± 0.026 | 0.656 ± 0.48 | 1.02 | 1.01 | 18.72 ± 3.15 | 948.07 | |
| 81.42 | 0.656 ± 0.098 | 0.67 ± 0.015 | 2.04 | 1.02 | 16.47 ± 1.87 | 935.67 | |
| 81.67 | 0.618 ± 0.064 | 0.625 ± 0.027 | 1.02 | 1.01 | 18.14 ± 1.54 | 940.45 | |
| 86.9 | 0.670 ± 0.078 | 0.698 ± 0.059 | 3.99 | 1.04 | 18.26 ± 3.25 | 947.72 | |
| 71.99 | 0.798 ± 0.098 | 0.831 ± 0.014 | 3.99 | 1.04 | 18.43 ± 1.53 | 948.88 | |
| 83.56 | 0.659 ± 0.056 | 0.68 ± 0.049 | 3 | 1.03 | 19.87 ± 1.49 | 991.42 | |
| 89.44 | 0.701 ± 0.065 | 0.716 ± 0.020 | 1.99 | 1.02 | 18.43 ± 1.66 | 913.50 |
Mean (n = 3) ± SD.
% Porosity and % drug content of batches (F1–F9).
| Batches | % Porosity | % Drug content |
|---|---|---|
| 15.01 ± 2.05 | 86.71 ± 1.69 | |
| 15.13 ± 1.05 | 88.25 ± 2.56 | |
| 16.69 ± 1.45 | 82 ± 1.98 | |
| 20.98 ± 1.98 | 83.98 ± 3.56 | |
| 22.49 ± 2.45 | 90.2 ± 2.05 | |
| 23.49 ± 1.98 | 76.55 ± 2.06 | |
| 25.1 ± 1.58 | 87.1 ± 3.45 | |
| 30.26 ± 2.36 | 80.86 ± 2.15 | |
| 32.33 ± 1.69 | 79.29 ± 2.27 |
Mean ± SD.
Figure 5In vitro drug release of factorial batches (F1–F9).
Figure 6Contour plots and 3D response surface plots for responses (a) Y1 and (b) Y2.
Composition of checkpoint formulations, the predicted and experimental values of response variables and percentage error.
| Checkpoint batches composition ( | Response variables | Experimental value | Predicted value | % Error |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 0.5:0.5 | % Porosity ( | 28.52 | 27.17 | 4.73 |
| −0.5:−0.5 | % Porosity ( | 17.79 | 18.54 | −4.21 |
| 0.5:−0.5 | % Porosity ( | 23.06 | 24.57 | −5.16 |
Figure 7SEM image of pellets of the optimized batch (F10).