| Literature DB >> 31540519 |
Maria J Faria1, Raul Machado2,3, Artur Ribeiro4, Hugo Gonçalves5, Maria Elisabete C D Real Oliveira1, Teresa Viseu6, José das Neves7,8,9, Marlene Lúcio10,11.
Abstract
HIV/AIDS stands as a global burden, and vaginal microbicides constitute a promising strategy for topical pre-exposure prophylaxis. Preceding the development of a microbicide containing tenofovir disoproxil fumarate (TDF) and emtricitabine (FTC), in silico and in vitro studies were performed to evaluate the physicochemical characteristics of both drugs, and to study their biophysical impact in lipid model systems. Results from these pre-formulation studies defined hydrogels as adequate vehicles to incorporate TDF-loaded liposomes and FTC. After studying interactions with mucin, zwitterionic liposomes with a mean diameter of 134 ± 13 nm, an encapsulation TDF efficiency of approximately 84%, and a transition temperature of 41 °C were selected. The chosen liposomal formulation was non-cytotoxic to HEC-1-A and CaSki cells, and was able to favor TDF permeation across polysulfone membranes (Jss = 9.9 μg·cm-2·h-1). After the incorporation of TDF-loaded liposomes and FTC in carbomer hydrogels, the drug release profile was sustained over time, reaching around 60% for both drugs within 3-6 h, and best fitting the Weibull model. Moreover, liposomal hydrogels featured pseudoplastic profiles that were deemed suitable for topical application. Overall, the proposed liposomal hydrogels may constitute a promising formulation for the vaginal co-delivery of TDF/FTC.Entities:
Keywords: drug release; emtricitabine; hydrogels; liposomes; microbicides; nanomedicine; tenofovir disoproxil fumarate; topical PrEP
Year: 2019 PMID: 31540519 PMCID: PMC6781289 DOI: 10.3390/pharmaceutics11090485
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Pharmaceutics ISSN: 1999-4923 Impact factor: 6.321
Lipid composition of the different liposomal formulations used throughout the work as well as the concentration and hydration and extrusion temperature used for their preparation. CHOL: cholesterol; DMPC: 1,2-dimyristoyl-sn-glycero-3-phosphocholine, DMPG: 1,2-dimyristoyl-sn-glycero-3-phosphorylglycerol, DODAB: dioctadecyldimethylammonium bromide, DOPC: 1,2-dioleoyl-sn-glycero-3-phosphocholine, DPPC: 1,2-dipalmitoyl-sn-glycero-3-phosphocholine, DSPC: 1,2-distearoyl-sn-glycero-3-phosphocholinephosphatidylcholine, TDF: tenofovir disoproxil fumarate.
| Type of Studies | Lipid Composition | Concentration (mM) | Temperature Used in Hydration and Extrusion Process (°C) |
|---|---|---|---|
| Mucoadhesion studies | Zwitterionic liposomes:DMPC | 0.4 | 40 |
| Anionic liposomes:DMPG | 40 | ||
| Cationic liposomes:DODAB | 60 | ||
| Encapsulation of TDF (40 μM) | DOPC | ||
| DOPC:CHOL (7:3) | 4 | Room temperature | |
| DOPC:CHOL (6:4) | |||
| DMPC | |||
| DMPC:CHOL (7:3) | 4 | 40 | |
| DMPC:CHOL (6:4) | |||
| DPPC | |||
| DPPC:CHOL (7:3) | 4 | 55 | |
| DPPC:CHOL (6:4) | |||
| DSPC | |||
| DSPC:CHOL (7:3) | 4 | 65 | |
| DSPC:CHOL (6:4) |
Figure 1Three-dimensional (3D) chemical structures of tenofovir disoproxil fumarate (TDF) and emtricitabine (FTC). Chemical structures were generated with ‘Chemicalize’ tool from Chemaxon® software.
In silico prediction of several physicochemical descriptors obtained from TDF and FTC chemical structure using Chemaxon® software.
| Drug | MW (g·mol−1) | PSA (Å2) | VWSA (Å2) | logP | S (mg·mL−1) | pKa | H Donors | H Acceptors |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| TDF | 635.52 | 185.44 | 753.35 | 2.65 | 1.24 | 3.75 | 1 | 10 |
| FTC | 247.24 | 88.15 | 279.83 | -0.90 | 7.67 | 1.75 | 2 | 5 |
Abbreviations: logP—log10 of the octanol/water partition coefficient; S—intrinsic aqueous solubility; MW—molecular weight; pKa—negative log10 of the ionization constant; PSA—polar surface area; VWSA—Van der Waals surface area.
Figure 2Small angle X-ray diffraction silver behenat (SAXS) patterns of DPPC (black) or DPPC containing TDF (yellow), FTC (blue), or TDF and FTC (3:2 w/w) (green) measured in the Lβ′ (A) and Lα (B) phases of DPPC.
Long spacings (dL) and correlation length (ξ) determined from SAXS patterns and short spacings (dS) determined from p-bromo benzoic acid (WAXS) patterns of DPPC without or with FTC, TDF, and FTC+TDF (3:2 w/w) in the Lβ′ and Lα phases.
| Lipid Bilayers in the Absence or Presence of Drugs | Long-Spacing Values (SAXS) 1 | Short-Spacing Values (WAXS) | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| dL 1 (Å) | ξ | dS (Å) | dS (Å) | |||
| Lβ′ | Lα | Lβ′ | Lα | Lβ′ | Lβ′ | |
| DPPC | 62.91 | 65.15 | 1084 | 1018 | 4.25 | 4.11 |
| DPPC + FTC | 51.80 | 54.21 | 41 | 24 | 4.21 | 4.11 |
| DPPC + TDF | 62.70 | 68.14 | 96 | 688 | 4.24 | 4.14 |
| DPPC + FTC + TDF | 53.36 | 53.55 | 41 | 42 | 4.19 | 4.11 |
1 The spacings were calculated for the first reflection order Bragg peak.
Figure 3Wide angle X-ray diffraction (WAXS) patterns of DPPC or DPPC containing TDF, FTC, or TDF and FTC (3:2 w/w) measured in the Lβ′ phase of DPPC. Solid red lines give the best fit of the Lorentzian’s analysis model (dashed lines) to the scattered intensities. A model of drug–membrane interaction is proposed for each diffractogram together with the resultant chain packing.
Figure 4(A) DPPC phospholipid showing the chemical groups responsible for the main infrared vibration modes; (B–E) show attenuated total reflection–Fourier transform infrared (ATR–FTIR) spectra obtained for DPPC membranes in the absence (black) or in the presence of TDF (yellow) or FTC (blue) for different vibration modes: υ(CH2) stretching modes (B); δ(CH2)n scissoring vibration mode (C); υas(PO2) stretching mode (D); and υ(C=O) stretching mode (E). In panel (D), dashed lines represent the deconvolution of the bands performed to determine with precision the area of the band located at 1221 cm−1 required to subsequent calculation of the ratio a1221/a1201.
Figure 5The effect of the surface charge of liposomes in zeta potential (A) and hydrodynamic diameter or Z-average (B), before (indicated by the letter B in x-axis) and after (indicated by the letter A in x-axis) interaction with a mucin suspension. Fluorescence emission spectra of mucin before interaction with liposomes and after interaction with cationic, anionic, or zwitterionic liposomes are presented in (C) (spectra follow the same color code used in bars of panels (A,B)).
Physicochemical and biophysical characterization of empty DPPC liposomes and DPPC liposomes loaded with TDF by different methods (incubation, hydration, and direct mixing), including: Encapsulation efficiency (EE%), mean hydrodynamic diameter (Z-average), polydispersity index (PDI), zeta potential, main phase transition temperature (Tm), and cooperativity of the phase transition (B). R2 is the coefficient of determination of Tm and B after fitting data with Equation (1).
| Type of Characterization | Parameters Evaluated | DPPC | DPPC+TDF | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Incubation | Hydration | Direct Mixing | |||
| Physicochemical | EE (%) | - | 84.63 ± 5.09 ns | 87.31 ± 4.68 ns | 84.79 ± 6.51 ns |
| Z-average (nm) | 123.97 ± 3.62 | 113.13 ± 0.38 ns | 113.47 ± 1.07 ** | 129.83 ± 6.69 ** | |
| PDI | 0.11 ± 0.01 | 0.06 ± 0.01 ** | 0.10 ± 0.01 *** | 0.24 ± 0.01 *** | |
| Zeta potential (mV) | −3.55 ± 0.29 | +6.00 ± 0.28 *** | +0.80 ± 0.33 *** | −5.29 ± 0.280 ns | |
| Biophysical | Tm | 41.05 ± 0.03 | 41.19 ± 0.05 ns | 41.27 ± 0.02 ns | 41.49 ± 0.03 ns |
| B | 2781 ± 234 | 4117 ± 724 ns | 3922 ± 238 ns | 3135 ± 298 ns | |
| R2 | 0.999 | 0.999 | 0.999 | 0.999 | |
Results are the mean ± standard deviation of at least three independent measurements, and comparisons were performed using one-way ANOVA with the Tukey–Kramer post-test for the following paired observations: 1) EE% obtained with the incubation method vs. EE% obtained with the hydration method; EE% obtained with the hydration method vs. EE% obtained with the direct mixing method; EE% obtained with the direct mixing method vs. EE% obtained with the incubation method; 2) Z-average, PDI, zeta potential, Tm, or B of: liposomes of DPPC loaded with TDF by the incubation method vs. liposomes of DPPC loaded with TDF by the hydration method; liposomes of DPPC loaded with TDF by the hydration method vs. liposomes of DPPC loaded with TDF by the direct mixing method; liposomes of DPPC loaded with TDF by the direct mixing method vs. liposomes of DPPC loaded with TDF by the incubation method; *** p < 0.001; ** p < 0.01; * p < 0.05; ns, not significant.
Figure 6In vitro studies to evaluate the pharmaceutical performance of the developed formulation. In vitro TDF permeation across a polysulfone membrane in the free from (TDF) or when encapsulated in the DPPC liposomal formulation (TDF+DPPC) performed in aqueous medium at 37 °C (A). Release profile of TDF from DPPC liposomes included in hydrogels ((DPPC+TDF)@HG) and release profile of FTC from the hydrogels (FTC@HG) performed in aqueous medium at 37 °C (B). Flow rheograms of hydrogels without drugs or liposomes (HG), hydrogels with drug-free DPPC liposomes (DPPC@HG), and hydrogels containing FTC and TDF-loaded DPPC liposomes ((DPPC+TDF)/FTC@HG) (C). Viability of human HEC-1-A endometrial cell line was tested with increasing concentrations of FTC (D), liposomes of DPPC without drug (DPPC) or loaded with TDF (DPPC+TDF) (E), and liposomes of DODAB without drug (DODAB) or loaded with TDF (DODAB+TDF) (F). Concentrations in (E,F) are in TDF (real or virtual in the case of drug-free liposomes). Results are presented as mean ± standard deviation values (n = 3). Lines in (A,B) and (D–F) represent the Weibull model and log-logistic regression fits, respectively.