| Literature DB >> 31429691 |
Shweta Agarwal1,2, Rayasa S Ramachandra Murthy3, Sasidharan Leelakumari Harikumar4, Rajeev Garg5.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Quetiapine fumarate, a 2nd generation anti-psychotic drug has oral bioavailability of 9% because of hepatic first pass metabolism. Reports suggest that co-administration of drugs with lipids affects their absorption pathways, enhances lymphatic transport thus bypassing hepatic first-pass metabolism resulting in enhanced bioavailability.Entities:
Keywords: Quetiapine fumarate; percent entrapment efficiency; phospholipon 90G; precirol ATO5; quality by design; solid lipid nanoparticles.
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2020 PMID: 31429691 PMCID: PMC6967136 DOI: 10.2174/1573409915666190722122827
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Curr Comput Aided Drug Des ISSN: 1573-4099 Impact factor: 1.606
Fig. (7)DSC of (a) QF (b) Precirol (c) Poloxamer (d) Mannitol (e) Phospholipon 90G (f) physical mixture of QF and Precirol (g) optimised SLN.
Fig. (8)XRD of (a) QF (b) Precirol (c) Physical mixture (d) optimised SLN.
Fig. (9)In-vitro dissolution profile of optimised formulation SS2 in 0.1N Hydrochloric acid and Phosphate buffer pH 6.8.
Fig. (10)Change in (a) Mean particle size and (b) zeta potential of optimised SLN SS2 with time and temperature.
Coded and actual values of independent variables.
|
|
|
|
|---|---|---|
| Low | -1 (100mg) | -1 (90 mg) |
| Medium | 0 (200mg) | 0 (100 mg) |
| High | +1 (300mg) | +1 (110 mg) |
Solubility of drug in different solid lipids.
|
|
|
|---|---|
| DYANASAN 116 | 7.123 ±0.064 |
| DYANASAN 114 | 6.012±0.047 |
| DYANASAN 118 | 7.014±0.024 |
| Precirol ATO 5 | 4.068 ±0.011 |
| Compritol 888 | 6.121 ±0.082 |
*mean ± SD (n=3).
Design matrix table showing Actual, Predicted and Residual values for % Entrapment Efficiency (Y1).
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| F1 | 300 | 110 | 75.43495±0.194 | 77.729 | -2.294 |
| F2 | 300 | 90 | 70.69804±0.142 | 68.360 | 2.337 |
| F3 | 200 | 100 | 68.29381±1.23 | 65.983 | 2.309 |
| F4 | 200 | 110 | 70.62766±0.231 | 67.938 | 2.689 |
| F5 | 200 | 100 | 66.96071±0.112 | 65.983 | 0.977 |
| F6 | 200 | 100 | 63.82486±0.000 | 65.983 | -2.158 |
| F7 | 200 | 90 | 58.45182±0.076 | 65.026 | -6.574 |
| F8 | 200 | 100 | 65.2718±0.604 | 65.983 | -0.711 |
| F9 | 100 | 110 | 42.24389±0.347 | 42.638 | -0.394 |
| F10 | 300 | 100 | 72.50335±0.451 | 72.546 | -0.042 |
| F11 | 100 | 90 | 50.4222±0.194 | 46.184 | 4.237 |
| F12 | 100 | 100 | 40.0706±0.142 | 43.913 | -3.842 |
| F13 | 200 | 100 | 69.4527±1.23 | 65.983 | 3.469 |
* mean ± SD (n=3).
ANOVA for response surface quadratic model for checking model suitability.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| X1-Lipid concentration | 1229.791 | 1 | 1229.791 | 73.22715 | < 0.0001 | - |
| X2-Soy lecithin concentration | 12.71507 | 1 | 12.71507 | 0.757111 | 0.4131 | - |
| X1X2 | 41.70073 | 1 | 41.70073 | 2.483044 | 0.1591 | - |
| X1^2 | 166.0571 | 1 | 166.0571 | 9.887768 | 0.0163 | - |
| X2^2 | 0.687123 | 1 | 0.687123 | 0.040914 | 0.8455 | - |
| Residual | 117.5594 | 7 | 16.7942 | - | - | - |
| - | - | - | - | - | - | - |
| Lack of Fit | 97.08759 | 3 | 32.36253 | 6.323339 | 0.0534 | Not significant |
| Pure Error | 20.4718 | 4 | 5.11795 | - | - | - |
| Cor Total | 1587.297 | 12 | - | - | - | - |
| R-Squared | 0.925937 | |||||
| Std. Dev. | 4.098073 | |||||
| Mean | 62.63508 | |||||
| C.V. % | 6.542776 | |||||
| R-squared | 0.9259 | |||||
| Adjusted R Squared | 0.8730 | |||||
| Adeq Precision | 12.60405 | |||||
Batches with Desirability 1 suggested by Design Expert Software with predicted and actual % entrapment efficiencies.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| SS1 | 300 | 90 | 68.3605 | 65.12584 | 2.287254 |
| SS2 | 270 | 107 | 75.05134 | 76.53685 | 1.050413 |
| SS3 | 300 | 100 | 72.54626 | 69.30073 | 2.294935 |
| SS4 | 200 | 90 | 65.02667 | 63.03474 | 1.40851 |
| SS5 | 200 | 110 | 67.93815 | 65.92903 | 1.420663 |
| SS6 | 200 | 100 | 65.98363 | 64.02347 | 1.386041 |
Percentage drug release of optimized Formulation SS2 in 0.1N Hydrochloric acid and Phosphate buffer pH 6.8.
|
|
| |
|---|---|---|
|
|
| |
| 0 | 00 | 00 |
| 0.25 | 12.08±0.45 | - |
| 0.5 | 14.78±0.54 | - |
| 1 | 17.45±0.17 | - |
| 1.5 | 20.82±0.54 | - |
| 2 | 22.75±0.36 | - |
| 3 | - | 9.25±0.18 |
| 4 | - | 15.09±0.31 |
| 5 | - | 22.17±0.25 |
| 6 | - | 29.54±14.81 |
| 7 | - | 38.17±0.39 |
| 8 | - | 48.55±0.30 |
| 10 | - | 54.68±0.35 |
| 12 | - | 65.43±0.42 |
| 24 | - | 66.44±0.46 |
* mean ± SD (n=5).
Kinetic equation parameters for formulation SS2.
|
|
|
|
|
| ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| SS2 | 0.675 | 2.740 | 0.540 | 0.078 | 0.839 | 17.80 | 0.917 | 1.021 |
| n=0.722 | ||||||||
Table showing Stability data for optimised formulation SS2.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| SS2 | 0 month | 4 ºC | 159.8 | 0.273 | -6.60 | 76.53±1.440 |
| 25 ºC | 159.8 | 0.273 | -6.60 | 76.53±1.440 | ||
| 1 month | 4 ºC | 179.5 | 0.337 | -14.4 | 73.57±0.112 | |
| 25 ºC | 225 | 0.684 | -17.8 | 71.10±0.239 | ||
| 3 month | 4 ºC | 230.7 | 0.396 | -18.3 | 71.11±0.815 | |
| 25 ºC | 309.3 | 0.442 | -12.4 | 61.68±0.510 |
mean ± SD (n=3).