Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Incorporation of lipolysis in monolayer permeability studies of lipid-based oral drug delivery systems

  • Original Article
  • Published:
Drug Delivery and Translational Research Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Lipid-based drug delivery systems, a well-tolerated class of formulations, have been evaluated extensively to enhance the bioavailability of poorly soluble drugs. However, it has been difficult to predict the in vivo performance of lipid dosage forms based on conventional in vitro techniques such as cell monolayer permeability studies because of the complexity of the gastrointestinal processing of lipid formulations. In the current study, we explored the feasibility of coupling Caco-2 and Madin-Darby canine kidney monolayer permeability studies with lipolysis, a promising in vitro technique to evaluate lipid systems. A self-emulsifying lipid delivery system was formulated using a blend of oil (castor oil), surfactant (Labrasol® or PL497), and co-surfactant (lecithin). Formulations demonstrating high drug solubility and rapid self-emulsification were selected to study the effect of lipolysis on in vitro cell permeability. Lipolysis of the formulations was carried out using pancreatin as the digestive enzyme. All the digested formulations compromised monolayer integrity as indicated by lowered trans-epithelial electrical resistance (TEER) and enhanced Lucifer yellow (LY) permeability. Further, the changes in TEER value and LY permeability were attributable to the digestion products of the formulation rather than the individual lipid excipients, drug, digestion enzyme, or the digestion buffer. The digested formulations were fractionated into pellet, oily phase, and aqueous phase, and the effect of each of these on cell viability was examined. Interestingly, the aqueous phase, which is considered important for in vivo drug absorption, was responsible for cytotoxicity. Because lipid digestion products lead to disruption of cell monolayer, it may not be appropriate to combine lipolysis with cell monolayer permeability studies. Additional in vivo studies are needed to determine any potential side effects of the lipolysis products on the intestinal permeability barrier, which could determine the suitability of lipid-based systems for oral drug delivery.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Lindenberg M, Kopp S, Dressman JB. Classification of orally administered drugs on the World Health Organization model list of essential medicines according to the biopharmaceutics classification system. Eur J Pharm Biopharm. 2004;58:265–78.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Gupta S, Kesarla R, Omri A. Formulation strategies to improve the bioavailability of poorly absorbed drugs with special emphasis on self-emulsifying systems. ISRN Pharmaceutics. 2013;2013:848043.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  3. Stegemann S, Leveiller F, Franchi D, de Jong H, Linden H. When poor solubility becomes an issue: from early stage to proof of concept. Eur J Pharm Sci. 2007;31:249–61.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Elsayed A, Remawi MA, Qinna N, Farouk A, Badwan A. Formulation and characterization of an oily-based system for oral delivery of insulin. Eur J Pharm Biopharm. 2009;73:269–79.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Kawakami K, Yoshikawa T, Hayashi T, Nishihara Y, Masuda K. Microemulsion formulation for enhanced absorption of poorly soluble drugs. II. In vivo study. J Control Release. 2002;81:75–82.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Patel V, Kukadiya H, Mashru R, Surti N, Mandal S. Development of microemulsion for solubility enhancement of clopidogrel. Iran J Pharm Res. 2010;9:327–34.

    CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  7. Luo Y, Chen D, Ren L, Zhao X, Qin J. Solid lipid nanoparticles for enhancing vinpocetine’s oral bioavailability. J Control Release. 2006;114:53–9.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Potta SG, Minemi S, Nukala RK, Peinado C, Lamprou DA, Urquhart A, et al. Development of solid lipid nanoparticles for enhanced solubility of poorly soluble drugs. J Biomed Nanotechnol. 2010;6:634–40.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Borkar N, Holm R, Yang M, Mullertz A, Mu H. In vivo evaluation of lipid-based formulations for oral delivery of apomorphine and its diester prodrugs. Int J Pharm. 2016;513:211–7.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Charman SA, Charman WN, Rogge MC, Wilson TD, Dutko FJ, Pouton CW. Self-emulsifying drug delivery systems: formulation and biopharmaceutic evaluation of an investigational lipophilic compound. Pharm Res. 1992;9:87–93.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Pouton CW. Lipid formulations for oral administration of drugs: non-emulsifying, self-emulsifying and ‘self-microemulsifying’ drug delivery systems. Eur J Pharm Sci. 2000;11(Suppl 2):S93–8.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Gershanik T, Benita S. Self-dispersing lipid formulations for improving oral absorption of lipophilic drugs. Eur J Pharm Biopharm. 2000;50:179–88.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Gursoy RN, Benita S. Self-emulsifying drug delivery systems (SEDDS) for improved oral delivery of lipophilic drugs. Biomed Pharmacother. 2004;58:173–82.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Constantinides PP. Lipid microemulsions for improving drug dissolution and oral absorption: physical and biopharmaceutical aspects. Pharm Res. 1995;12:1561–72.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Wakerly MG, Pouton CW, Meakin BJ, Morton FS. Self-emulsification of vegetable oil-nonionic surfactant mixtures. In: Phenomena in mixed surfactant systems. American Chemical Society. 1986. p. 242–55.

  16. Weerapol Y, Limmatvapirat S, Nunthanid J, Sriamornsak P. Self-nanoemulsifying drug delivery system of nifedipine: impact of hydrophilic-lipophilic balance and molecular structure of mixed surfactants. AAPS PharmSciTech. 2014;15:456–64.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  17. Carriere F. Impact of gastrointestinal lipolysis on oral lipid-based formulations and bioavailability of lipophilic drugs. Biochimie. 2016;125:297–305.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Khoo S-M, Humberstone AJ, Porter CJH, Edwards GA, Charman WN. Formulation design and bioavailability assessment of lipidic self-emulsifying formulations of halofantrine. Int J Pharm. 1998;167:155–64.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  19. Julianto T, Yuen KH, Noor AM. Improved bioavailability of vitamin E with a self emulsifying formulation. Int J Pharm. 2000;200:53–7.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Kommuru TR, Gurley B, Khan MA, Reddy IK. Self-emulsifying drug delivery systems (SEDDS) of coenzyme Q10: formulation development and bioavailability assessment. Int J Pharm. 2001;212:233–46.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Mueller EA, Kovarik JM, van Bree JB, Tetzloff W, Grevel J, Kutz K. Improved dose linearity of cyclosporine pharmacokinetics from a microemulsion formulation. Pharm Res. 1994;11:301–4.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. Porter CJ, Trevaskis NL, Charman WN. Lipids and lipid-based formulations: optimizing the oral delivery of lipophilic drugs. Nat Rev Drug Discov. 2007;6:231–48.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  23. Kalepu S, Manthina M, Padavala V. Oral lipid-based drug delivery systems—an overview. Acta Pharm Sin B. 2013;3:361–72.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  24. Feinle C, Rades T, Otto B, Fried M. Fat digestion modulates gastrointestinal sensations induced by gastric distention and duodenal lipid in humans. Gastroenterology. 2001;120:1100–7.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  25. Fried M, Mayer EA, Jansen JB, Lamers CB, Taylor IL, Bloom SR, et al. Temporal relationships of cholecystokinin release, pancreatobiliary secretion, and gastric emptying of a mixed meal. Gastroenterology. 1988;95:1344–50.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  26. Chakraborty S, Shukla D, Mishra B, Singh S. Lipid—an emerging platform for oral delivery of drugs with poor bioavailability. Eur J Pharm Biopharm. 2009;73:1–15.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  27. Khoo SM, Shackleford DM, Porter CJ, Edwards GA, Charman WN. Intestinal lymphatic transport of halofantrine occurs after oral administration of a unit-dose lipid-based formulation to fasted dogs. Pharm Res. 2003;20:1460–5.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  28. Constantinides PP, Wasan KM. Lipid formulation strategies for enhancing intestinal transport and absorption of P-glycoprotein (P-gp) substrate drugs: in vitro/in vivo case studies. J Pharm Sci. 2007;96:235–48.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  29. Sek L, Porter CJ, Charman WN. Characterisation and quantification of medium chain and long chain triglycerides and their in vitro digestion products, by HPTLC coupled with in situ densitometric analysis. J Pharm Biomed Anal. 2001;25:651–61.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  30. Armand M, Borel P, Pasquier B, Dubois C, Senft M, Andre M, et al. Physicochemical characteristics of emulsions during fat digestion in human stomach and duodenum. Am J Phys. 1996;271:G172–83.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  31. Hernell O, Staggers JE, Carey MC. Physical-chemical behavior of dietary and biliary lipids during intestinal digestion and absorption. 2. Phase analysis and aggregation states of luminal lipids during duodenal fat digestion in healthy adult human beings. Biochemistry. 1990;29:2041–56.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  32. Hofmann AF, Roda A. Physicochemical properties of bile acids and their relationship to biological properties: an overview of the problem. J Lipid Res. 1984;25:1477–89.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  33. MacGregor KJ, Embleton JK, Lacy JE, Perry EA, Solomon LJ, Seager H, et al. Influence of lipolysis on drug absorption from the gastro-intestinal tract. Adv Drug Deliv Rev. 1997;25:33–46.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  34. Hyafil F, Vergely C, Du Vignaud P, Grand-Perret T. In vitro and in vivo reversal of multidrug resistance by GF120918, an acridonecarboxamide derivative. Cancer Res. 1993;53:4595–602.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  35. Sane R, Mittapalli RK, Elmquist WF. Development and evaluation of a novel microemulsion formulation of elacridar to improve its bioavailability. J Pharm Sci. 2013;102:1343–54.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  36. Artursson P, Karlsson J. Correlation between oral drug absorption in humans and apparent drug permeability coefficients in human intestinal epithelial (Caco-2) cells. Biochem Biophys Res Commun. 1991;175:880–5.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  37. Irvine JD, Takahashi L, Lockhart K, Cheong J, Tolan JW, Selick HE, et al. MDCK (Madin-Darby canine kidney) cells: a tool for membrane permeability screening. J Pharm Sci. 1999;88:28–33.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  38. Miret S, Abrahamse L, de Groene EM. Comparison of in vitro models for the prediction of compound absorption across the human intestinal mucosa. J Biomol Screen. 2004;9:598–606.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  39. Volpe DA. Drug-permeability and transporter assays in Caco-2 and MDCK cell lines. Future Med Chem. 2011;3:2063–77.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  40. Baka E, Comer JEA, Takács-Novák K. Study of equilibrium solubility measurement by saturation shake-flask method using hydrochlorothiazide as model compound. J Pharm Biomed Anal. 2008;46:335–41.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  41. Jin X, Luong T-L, Reese N, Gaona H, Collazo-Velez V, Vuong C, et al. Comparison of MDCK-MDR1 and Caco-2 cell based permeability assays for anti-malarial drug screening and drug investigations. J Pharmacol Toxicol Methods. 2014;70:188–94.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  42. Di L, Kerns EH, Fan K, McConnell OJ, Carter GT. High throughput artificial membrane permeability assay for blood-brain barrier. Eur J Med Chem. 2003;38:223–32.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  43. Feighery LM, Cochrane SW, Quinn T, Baird AW, O'Toole D, Owens SE, et al. Myosin light chain kinase inhibition: correction of increased intestinal epithelial permeability in vitro. Pharm Res. 2008;25:1377–86.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  44. Ma B, Wang J, Sun J, Li M, Xu H, Sun G, et al. Permeability of rhynchophylline across human intestinal cell in vitro. Int J Clin Exp Pathol. 2014;7:1957–66.

    CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  45. Li C, Liu T, Cui X, Uss AS, Cheng KC. Development of in vitro pharmacokinetic screens using Caco-2, human hepatocyte, and Caco-2/human hepatocyte hybrid systems for the prediction of oral bioavailability in humans. J Biomol Screen. 2007;12:1084–91.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  46. Skolnik S, Lin X, Wang J, Chen XH, He T, Zhang B. Towards prediction of in vivo intestinal absorption using a 96-well Caco-2 assay. J Pharm Sci. 2010;99:3246–65.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  47. Cho MJ, Thompson DP, Cramer CT, Vidmar TJ, Scieszka JF. The Madin Darby canine kidney (MDCK) epithelial cell monolayer as a model cellular transport barrier. Pharm Res. 1989;6:71–7.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  48. Sane R, Agarwal S, Elmquist WF. Brain distribution and bioavailability of elacridar after different routes of administration in the mouse. Drug Metab Dispos. 2012;40:1612–9.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  49. Thomas N, Richter K, Pedersen TB, Holm R, Mullertz A, Rades T. In vitro lipolysis data does not adequately predict the in vivo performance of lipid-based drug delivery systems containing fenofibrate. AAPS J. 2014;16:539–49.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  50. Sek L, Porter CJ, Kaukonen AM, Charman WN. Evaluation of the in-vitro digestion profiles of long and medium chain glycerides and the phase behaviour of their lipolytic products. J Pharm Pharmacol. 2002;54:29–41.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  51. Feeney OM, Crum MF, McEvoy CL, Trevaskis NL, Williams HD, Pouton CW, et al. 50 years of oral lipid-based formulations: provenance, progress and future perspectives. Adv Drug Deliv Rev. 2016;101:167–94.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  52. Anby MU, Williams HD, McIntosh M, Benameur H, Edwards GA, Pouton CW, et al. Lipid digestion as a trigger for supersaturation: evaluation of the impact of supersaturation stabilization on the in vitro and in vivo performance of self-emulsifying drug delivery systems. Mol Pharm. 2012;9:2063–79.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  53. Carlert S, Palsson A, Hanisch G, von Corswant C, Nilsson C, Lindfors L, et al. Predicting intestinal precipitation—a case example for a basic BCS class II drug. Pharm Res. 2010;27:2119–30.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  54. Zangenberg NH, Mullertz A, Kristensen HG, Hovgaard L. A dynamic in vitro lipolysis model. I. Controlling the rate of lipolysis by continuous addition of calcium. Eur J Pharm Sci. 2001;14:115–22.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  55. Zangenberg NH, Mullertz A, Kristensen HG, Hovgaard L. A dynamic in vitro lipolysis model. II: Evaluation of the model. Eur J Pharm Sci. 2001;14:237–44.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  56. Griffin BT, Kuentz M, Vertzoni M, Kostewicz ES, Fei Y, Faisal W, et al. Comparison of in vitro tests at various levels of complexity for the prediction of in vivo performance of lipid-based formulations: case studies with fenofibrate. Eur J Pharm Biopharm. 2014;86:427–37.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  57. McEvoy CL, Trevaskis NL, Edwards GA, Perlman ME, Ambler CM, Mack MC, et al. In vitro–in vivo evaluation of lipid based formulations of the CETP inhibitors CP-529414 (torcetrapib) and CP-532623. Eur J Pharm Biopharm. 2014;88:973–85.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  58. Kallem R, Kulkarni CP, Patel D, Thakur M, Sinz M, Singh SP, et al. A simplified protocol employing elacridar in rodents: a screening model in drug discovery to assess P-gp mediated efflux at the blood brain barrier. Drug Metab Lett. 2012;6:134–44.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  59. Williams HD, Sassene P, Kleberg K, Bakala-N'Goma J-C, Calderone M, Jannin V, et al. Toward the establishment of standardized in vitro tests for lipid-based formulations, part 1: method parameterization and comparison of in vitro digestion profiles across a range of representative formulations. J Pharm Sci. 2012;101:3360–80.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  60. Aungst BJ. Absorption enhancers: applications and advances. AAPS J. 2012;14:10–8.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  61. Koga K, Kusawake Y, Ito Y, Sugioka N, Shibata N, Takada K. Enhancing mechanism of Labrasol on intestinal membrane permeability of the hydrophilic drug gentamicin sulfate. Eur J Pharm Biopharm. 2006;64:82–91.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  62. Jia JX, Wasan KM. Effects of monoglycerides on rhodamine 123 accumulation, estradiol 17 beta-D-glucuronide bidirectional transport and MRP2 protein expression within Caco-2 cells. J Pharm Pharm Sci. 2008;11:45–62.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  63. Kollipara S, Gandhi RK. Pharmacokinetic aspects and in vitro–in vivo correlation potential for lipid-based formulations. Acta Pharm Sin B. 2014;4:333–49.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

The authors would like to greatly acknowledge the financial support provided by College of Pharmacy Seed Grant, University of Minnesota.

Author information

Author notes

  1. Tanmoy Sadhukha

    Present address: Albany Molecular Research Inc., 21 Corporate Circle, Albany, NY, 12203, USA

  2. T.S. and B.L. contributed equally to this work.

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Pharmaceutics and Center for Translational Drug Delivery, College of Pharmacy, University of Minnesota, 308 Harvard Street SE, Minneapolis, MN, 55455, USA

    Tanmoy Sadhukha, Buddhadev Layek & Swayam Prabha

  2. Department of Experimental and Clinical Pharmacology, College of Pharmacy, University of Minnesota, 308 Harvard Street SE, Minneapolis, MN, 55455, USA

    Buddhadev Layek & Swayam Prabha

Authors
  1. Tanmoy Sadhukha
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Buddhadev Layek
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Swayam Prabha
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Swayam Prabha.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

None.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Sadhukha, T., Layek, B. & Prabha, S. Incorporation of lipolysis in monolayer permeability studies of lipid-based oral drug delivery systems. Drug Deliv. and Transl. Res. 8, 375–386 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1007/s13346-017-0383-6

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s13346-017-0383-6

Keywords

Search

Navigation