| Literature DB >> 31069700 |
Ifrah Jafri1, Muhammad Harris Shoaib2, Rabia Ismail Yousuf1, Fatima Ramzan Ali1.
Abstract
The drug-in-adhesive (DIA)-type matrix patches of lamotrigine are developed using variable permeation enhancers (oleic acid, PG, lemon oil and aloe vera), and drug in vitro release and its permeation are evaluated. Lamotrigine has been long used as an anti-epileptic, mood stabilizer, to treat bipolar disorder in adults and off label as an antidepressant. lamotrigine matrix patches comprising of Eudragit®RS100 (rate-controlling polymer) and DuroTak® 387-2510 (adhesive) were prepared by pouring the solution on backing membrane (3M-9720). The thickness of 120 µm was adjusted through micrometer film applicator. USP Apparatus V was used for the evaluation of release profile, which was fitted into various mathematical models. Quality characteristics of patches were determined through weight variation, moisture content, moisture uptake and drug content evaluation. FTIR studies were performed for drug-excipient compatibility; Franz diffusion cell was employed for studying in vitro permeation parameters such as flux, lag time, and ER. Skin sensitivity study of optimized patch was also performed. The release from patches comprising of PG and oleic acid was maximum, i.e., 96.24 ± 1.15% and 91.12 ± 1.11%, respectively. Formulations (A1-A5) exhibited Makoid-Banakar release profile. Formulation A3 consisting of oleic acid was optimized due to enhanced permeation of drug across skin compared to other enhancers with enhancement ratio of 3.55. Skin sensitivity study revealed patch as safe and non-allergenic. The study demonstrates that oleic acid can be used as a suitable permeation enhancer for transdermal delivery of lamotrigine from matrix-type patches.Entities:
Keywords: Eudragit®RS100; Lamotrigine; Oleic acid; Permeation enhancer; Propylene glycol; Transdermal
Year: 2019 PMID: 31069700 PMCID: PMC6556165 DOI: 10.1007/s40204-019-0114-9
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Prog Biomater ISSN: 2194-0517
Composition of the lamotrigine matrix patches
| Formulation code | Drug (lamotrigine) (mg) | Plasticizer (dibutyl phthalate) (mL) | Rate-controlling polymer (Eudragit® RS100) (mg) | Adhesive (DuroTak® 387-2510) (mg) | Permeation enhancers (PE) | Solvent (ethanol) (mL) | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| No PE | Lemon oil (mL) | Oleic acid (mL) | PG (mL) | Aloe (mL) | ||||||
| A1 | 30 | 1 | 40 | 10 | – | – | – | – | – | 10 |
| A2 | 30 | 1 | 40 | 10 | – | 2 | – | – | – | 10 |
| A3 | 30 | 1 | 40 | 10 | – | – | 2 | – | – | 10 |
| A4 | 30 | 1 | 40 | 10 | – | – | – | 2 | – | 10 |
| A5 | 30 | 1 | 40 | 10 | – | – | – | – | 2 | 10 |
Characterization of the lamotrigine matrix patches (A1–A5)
| Formulation code | Mean ± SD ( | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Weight (mg) | Moisture content (%) | Moisture uptake (%) | Drug content (%) | |
| A1 | 970 ± 4.47 | 0.52 ± 0.022 | 0.72 ± 0.014 | 95.5 ± 0.4 |
| A2 | 964 ± 6.35 | 0.21 ± 0.014 | 0.31 ± 0.020 | 97.5 ± 1.1 |
| A3 | 960 ± 9.54 | 0.21 ± 0.017 | 0.21 ± 0.026 | 97.7 ± 1.3 |
| A4 | 962 ± 9.36 | 0.10 ± 0.020 | 0.42 ± 0.017 | 97.8 ± 1.4 |
| A5 | 966 ± 8.91 | 0.10 ± 0.023 | 0.52 ± 0.019 | 98.2 ± 0.9 |
Fig. 1FTIR spectral formulations a A2, b A3, c A4 and d A5
Fig. 2In vitro release profile of lamotrigine matrix patches (A1–A5)
Model fitting of lamotrigine matrix patches (A1–A5) release profile
| Mathematical models | A1 | A2 | A3 | A4 | A5 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Zero order | |||||
| | 0.9701 | 0.9422 | 0.9701 | 0.9821 | 0.9558 |
| | 5.017 | 7.414 | 8.240 | 8.906 | 7.133 |
| First order | |||||
| | 0.9431 | 0.9230 | 0.9385 | 0.9797 | 0.9626 |
| | 0.063 | 0.125 | 0.143 | 0.170 | 0.119 |
| Higuchi model | |||||
| | 0.8934 | 0.9448 | 0.9472 | 0.9896 | 0.9783 |
| | 13.435 | 21.655 | 23.535 | 25.505 | 20.876 |
| Korsmeyer–Peppas | |||||
| | 0.9915 | 0.9404 | 0.9560 | 0.9932 | 0.9770 |
| | 1.524 | 0.365 | 0.599 | 0.600 | 0.392 |
| | 1.584 | 28.065 | 19.345 | 20.947 | 25.730 |
| Weibull | |||||
| | 0.9923 | 0.9398 | 0.9707 | 0.9932 | 0.9767 |
| | 1282.570 | 794,556.783 | 161.762 | 2,251,097.401 | 90.271 |
| | 1.975 | 0.658 | 1.368 | 0.603 | 0.398 |
| Makoid–Banakar | |||||
| | 0.9926 | 0.9959 | 0.9855 | 0.9969 | 0.9944 |
| | 2.937 | -0.002 | 0.042 | 0.312 | 0.156 |
| | 0.058 | 28.092 | 25.195 | 25.753 | 26.470 |
| | 0.066 | -0.089 | -0.105 | -0.048 | -0.054 |
Fig. 3In vitro permeation profile of lamotrigine matrix patches (A1–A5)
Permeation Parameters of (A1–A5) lamotrigine matrix patches
| Permeation parameters | A1 | A2 | A3 | A4 | A5 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Flux (mg/cm2h) | 0.258 | 0.575 | 0.916 | 0.409 | 0.416 |
| Intercept | − 0.054 | − 0.188 | − 0.044 | − 0.193 | − 0.005 |
|
| 0.9982 | 0.9935 | 0.9958 | 0.9987 | 0.9973 |
| Permeation coefficient (P) (cm/h) | 0.009 | 0.019 | 0.031 | 0.014 | 0.014 |
| Time lag (L) (min) | 12.6 | 19.8 | 3 | 1.41 | 0.6 |
| Diffusion coefficient (DC) (cm2/h) | 2.35E−04 | 1.51E−04 | 1.02E−03 | 1.05E−04 | 3.78E−03 |
| Enhancement ratio (ER) | 1.00 | 2.22 | 3.55 | 1.58 | 1.61 |
|
| 0.252 | 0.490 | 0.713 | 0.292 | 0.409 |
|
| 0.748 | 0.510 | 0.287 | 0.708 | 0.591 |
| Best-fit equation |
Fig. 4Graphical representation of skin sensitivity reaction through Draize score