| Literature DB >> 34977558 |
Yahya H Dallal Bashi1, Diarmaid J Murphy1, Clare F McCoy1, Peter Boyd1, Leeanne Brown2, Matthew Kihara2, François Martin2, Nicole McMullen2, Kyle Kleinbeck3, Bindi Dangi3, Patrick Spence3, Bashir Hansraj3, Brid Devlin3, R Karl Malcolm1.
Abstract
A dapivirine-releasing silicone elastomer vaginal ring for reducing women's risk of HIV acquisition has recently been approved. A next-generation multipurpose vaginal ring releasing dapivirine and levonorgestrel is currently in development, offering hormonal contraception and HIV prevention from a single device. Previously, we reported challenges with incorporating levonorgestrel into rings manufactured from addition-cure silicone elastomers due to an irreversible chemical reaction between the levonorgestrel molecule and the hydride-functionalised crosslinker component of the silicone elastomer formulation, leading to low drug content assay, cure inhibition, and reduced ring mechanical properties (which may account for the increased incidence of ring expulsion in vivo). Here, we report on the development and testing of various custom silicone elastomer materials specifically formulated to circumvent these issues. After extensive testing of the custom silicones and subsequent manufacture and testing (Shore M hardness, pot life, content assay, oscillatory rheology, mechanical testing) of rings containing both dapivirine and levonorgestrel, a lead candidate formulation was selected that was amenable to practical ring manufacture via injection molding, exhibited no substantial levonorgestrel binding, and offered suitable mechanical properties.Entities:
Keywords: HIV microbicide; Hormonal contraception; Mechanical properties; Multipurpose prevention technology (MPT); Rheology; Silicone elastomer; Vaginal rings
Year: 2021 PMID: 34977558 PMCID: PMC8683669 DOI: 10.1016/j.ijpx.2021.100091
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Int J Pharm X ISSN: 2590-1567
Fig. 1Representation of the typical silicone elastomer addition-cure reaction (i.e., a hydrosilylation reaction between the PDMS–PMHS and VPDMS components) and the competing reaction between levonorgestrel (LNG; note the ethynyl group) and the hydride-functionalised crosslinker component (PDMS-PMHS). PDMS–PMHS represents the poly(dimethylsiloxane)-co-poly(methylhydrosiloxane) component, and VPDMS the vinyl-terminated poly(dimethylsiloxane) component of the elastomer formulation. The size of the coloured items in the figure represent the relative molecular weight of the components (VPDMS > PDMS–PHMS > LNG), but are not to scale.
Formulation changes for each silicone elastomer compared to the composition of the addition-cure silicone elastomer Silbione™ LSR D135-QB.
| Silicone elastomer formulation | Silica filler (%) | Base (%) | Crosslinker (%) | Polymer MW | Functional additive (%) |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| I | – | – | ↑↑ | ↓ | – |
| II | – | ↑↑ | ↑ | ↓ | ↑ |
| III | ↑ | – | ↑↑ | – | – |
| IV | ↑ | ↑ | ↑ | ↓ | – |
| V | ↑ | – | ↑↑ | ↓ | – |
| VI | ↑ | ↑ | ↑↑ | – | – |
| VII | ↑ | ↑ | ↑↑ | ↓ | ↑ |
↑ moderately increased, ↓ moderately decreased, ↑↑ significantly increased, − unchanged.
Fig. 2Method for preparation of DPV-LNG active elastomer mixes prior to ring manufacture.
Shore M hardness (mean ± SD of n = 6 measurements for a single slab) of blank slabs (B) and active slabs (A) (2.5% w/w DPV + 4% w/w nmLNG), and drug content recovery values for active formulations cured at room temperature (RT) for 60 h and then post-cured at 100 °C for 3 h. LNG recovery values were calculated with respect to weight-corrected percentage loadings.
| Silicone elastomer formulation | Shore M | DPV recovery (%) | LNG recovery (%) | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| RT cure | Post-cured | |||
| I B | Not cured | 55.3 ± 0.8 | – | – |
| I A | Not cured | 47.3 ± 1.6 | 101 ± 1 | 98 ± 2 |
| II B | 45.4 ± 1.9 | 51.5 ± 1.0 | – | – |
| II A | 47.0 ± 0.9 | 50.0 ± 0.8 | 101 ± 1 | 99 ± 1 |
| III B | 59.4 ± 0.5 | 62.2 ± 1.0 | – | – |
| III A | 58.0 ± 1.9 | 63.1 ± 1.0 | 101 ± 2 | 95 ± 1 |
| IV B | 51.5 ± 0.9 | 55.4 ± 0.5 | – | – |
| IV A | 49.5 ± 0.4 | 55.0 ± 1.4 | 103 ± 1 | 101 ± 2 |
| V B | 58.5 ± 1.2 | 62.8 ± 0.5 | – | – |
| V A | 55.0 ± 2.5 | 61.1 ± 0.7 | 103 ± 1 | 97 ± 1 |
| VI B | 58.6 ± 1.4 | 62.4 ± 1.8 | – | – |
| VI A | 58.9 ± 2.1 | 62.8 ± 1.1 | 104 ± 1 | 98 ± 1 |
| VII B | 18.3 ± 1.0 | 27.6 ± 0.7 | – | – |
| VII A | 19.3 ± 1.5 | 25.5 ± 0.5 | 101 ± 0.4 | 100 ± 1 |
Time to different states of cure at room temperature for active (A) Elkem formulations and the commercial comparator.
| Silicone elastomer formulation | Last uncured timepoint (h) | Partially cured timepoint (h) | Fully cured timepoint (h) |
|---|---|---|---|
| III A | 2.0 | 2.5 | 3.0 |
| IV A | 5.0 | Not cured | Not cured |
| V A | 3.0 | 3.5 | Not cured |
| VI A | 5.0 | Not cured | Not cured |
| Commercial comparator | 3.0 | 3.5 | 4.5 |
Fig. 3Plot of storage modulus vs. time for blank and active silicone formulations (A for formulation IV, B for formulation V, C for formulation VI and D for commercial comparator (CC) formulation) upon heating to 100 °C (denoted by the dashed vertical line) and holding for 10 min. Experimental parameters: 50 Pa oscillatory stress, 10 Hz frequency. In the legends, A refers to active, and B to blank formulations.
Time to 10, 50 and 90% of complete cure for custom silicone elastomer formulations IV, V, and VI, as determined from temperature ramp oscillatory rheology. A – active, B – blank.
| Silicone elastomer formulation | Mean time (min, ± SD) to reach stated percent of max storage modulus value | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| 10% | 50% | 90% | |
| IV B | 0.5 ± 0.1 | 2.2 ± 0.1 | 3.0 ± 0.1 |
| IV A | 0.1 ± 0.1 | 2.1 ± 0.1 | 3.3 ± 0.1 |
| V B | 1.0 ± 0.1 | 2.2 ± 0.2 | 3.0 ± 0.5 |
| V A | 0.7 ± 0.1 | 2.1 ± 0.1 | 3.0 ± 0.1 |
| VI B | 0.7 ± 0.1 | 1.9 ± 0.0 | 2.7 ± 0.2 |
| VI A | 0.5 ± 0.0 | 1.9 ± 0.0 | 2.6 ± 0.1 |
| Commercial comparator B | 1.6 ± 0.0 | 2.3 ± 0.0 | 4.6 ± 0.3 |
| Commercial comparator A | 1.7 ± 0.1 | 2.4 ± 0.1 | 4.3 ± 0.1 |
Fig. 4Increase in the storage modulus of the blank and active new silicone formulations and a commercial comparator under oscillatory stress at 15 and 30 °C over 6 h; A formulation IV, B formulation V, C formulation VI, D commercial comparator (CC). In the legends, A refers to active, and B to blank formulations.
Summary of the extent of silicone curing (% cure) using storage modulus values obtained after 1, 3 and 6 h under oscillatory stress at 15 or 30 °C compared with storage modulus values representing full cure. A refers to active, and B to blank formulations.
| Silicone formulation | % cure at 1 h | % cure at 3 h | % cure at 6 h | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 15 °C | 30 °C | 15 °C | 30 °C | 15 °C | 30 °C | |
| IV B | 19 | 18 | 24 | 25 | 29 | 31 |
| IV A | 26 | 31 | 32 | 44 | 38 | 74 |
| V B | 12 | 13 | 17 | 19 | 20 | 44 |
| V A | 14 | 17 | 18 | 27 | 22 | 89 |
| VI B | 17 | 19 | 23 | 30 | 28 | 81 |
| VI A | 17 | 20 | 23 | 34 | 27 | 110 |
| Commercial comparator B | 0 | 0 | 0 | 17 | 0 | 69 |
| Commercial comparator A | 0 | 0 | 0 | 21 | 1 | 71 |
Manufacturing and rheological information relating to batch manufacture of blank and active vaginal rings using lead candidate silicone elastomer formulations IV, V and VI.
| Silicone formulation | Batch size (g) | Manufacturing run time (min) | G' of T4/last available sample (Pa) | % Cure | Active mix status at end of run | Comments |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| IV B | 400 | <120 | 228,000 | 15.6 | Workable | No issues |
| V B | 400 | <120 | 140,000 | 8.3 | Workable | No issues |
| VI B | 400 | <120 | 224,000 | 15.7 | Workable | No issues |
| IV A | 200 | <50 | 327,000 | 22.7 | Not workable | Refill time 60 to >95 s e |
| V A | 200 | <50 | 175,000 | 9.9 | Workable | Refill time 49 to 60 s |
| VI A | 200 | <50 | 275,000 | 14.9 | Borderline | Refill time 69 to >95 s e |
A – active, B – blank formulations.
Calculated as the mean of the storage modulus values obtained under oscillatory rheometry at 50 Pa stress and a frequency of 10 Hz over 5 min (typically 3 values).
Calculated as a percentage of the measured maximum G' value representing full cure.
The active mix was in the workable range for 115 min. e Automatic refill incomplete after at least some injections, further manual refill required.
Summary of the mechanical testing results (mean ± standard deviation) for blank and active rings with data for the 25 mg DPV ring and a commercially available ring (Femring®) included for comparison (n = 6 rings per formulation). A – active, B – blank.
| Formulation | Mean Shore M ± SD | Mean angular rotation (°) ± SD | % Recovery original OD post 28-day static compression | % Recovery original OD post 1000-cycle compression | Mean maximum load at maximum extension (N) | Mean tensile extension at maximum load (mm) | Mean elongation at break (%) |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| IV B | 57.7 ± 0.7 | 71 ± 1 | 90–100 | 100 | 314 ± 66 | 167 ± 29 | 402 ± 70 |
| V B | 62.2 ± 0.2 | 74 ± 1 | 90–100 | 100 | 582 ± 17 | 197 ± 6 | 478 ± 14 |
| VI B | 59.4 ± 0.6 | 71 ± 2 | 90–100 | 100 | 438 ± 14 | 216 ± 7 | 523 ± 16 |
| IV A | 52.4 ± 0.7 | 71 ± 1 | 80–90 | 100 | 334 ± 8 | 239 ± 7 | 580 ± 16 |
| V A | 60.3 ± 0.2 | 74 ± 1 | 90–100 | 100 | 404 ± 17 | 167 ± 6 | 405 ± 15 |
| VI A | 49.1 ± 0.3 | 66 ± 1 | 80–90 | 100 | 396 ± 11 | 216 ± 7 | 523 ± 16 |
| Femring® | 59.8 ± 0.5 | 69 ± 3 | 90–100 | 90–100 | 283 ± 33 | 109 ± 11 | 267 ± 20 |
| 25 mg DPV ring | ND | 63 ± 2 | 90–100 | 100 | 721 ± 50 | 307 ± 21 | 749 ± 52 |
Summary (mean ± standard deviation) drug content assay data for the DPV-LNG rings, expressed as a percentage of the target loading (n = 6).
| Silicone elastomer formulation | DPV target loading % recovery | LNG target loading % recovery |
|---|---|---|
| IV A | 101.3 ± 2.7 | 102.7 ± 2.4 |
| V A | 101.3 ± 1.5 | 100.7 ± 3.4 |
| VI A | 101.5 ± 2.3 | 100.3 ± 2.5 |
A – active.
Target loading % recovery – the amount calculated relative to an expected ring content of 200 mg DPV, 320 mg LNG.
Properties of prototype rings having different DPV/LNG loadings and prepared using formulation V. All values reported as means ± standard deviations.
| Target DPV + LNG loading per ring (mg) | Mean DPV recovery (%, | Mean LNG recovery (%, n = 3) | Mean Shore M ( | Mean twist during compression (°, n = 6) | Ring outer diameter recovery post 1000-cycle compression (%, n = 3) |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 200 + 80 | 98.4 ± 0.6 | 94.2 ± 2.5 | 60.5 ± 0.1 | 69.3 ± 0.8 | 100 |
| 200 + 160 | 99.8 ± 0.7 | 96.7 ± 1.5 | 60.5 ± 0.4 | 69.8 ± 1.2 | 100 |
| 200 + 240 | 101.4 ± 1.0 | 99.7 ± 1.4 | 59.9 ± 0.7 | 69.3 ± 1.0 | 100 |
| 200 + 320 | 101.2 ± 0.4 | 99.1 ± 1.6 | 62.5 ± 0.5 | 68.8 ± 1.2 | 100 |