10.1007/s40204-014-0029-4

In vitro–in vivo correlation from lactide-co-glycolide polymeric dosage forms

Show Details XML HTML PDF
  • Susan D’Souza*1,
  • Jabar A. Faraj2,
  • Stefano Giovagnoli3,
  • Patrick P. DeLuca4,
  1. University of Kentucky College of Pharmacy, Lexington, KY, 40536, US Sunovion Pharmaceuticals Inc, Marlborough, MA, 01752, US
  2. University of Kentucky College of Pharmacy, Lexington, KY, 40536, US Evonik Inc, Birmingham, AL, 35211, US
  3. University of Kentucky College of Pharmacy, Lexington, KY, 40536, US Department of Chemistry and Technology of Drugs, Università degli Studi di Perugia, Perugia, 06123, IT
  4. University of Kentucky College of Pharmacy, Lexington, KY, 40536, US
Cover Image

Published in Issue 2014-12-02

How to Cite

D’Souza, S., Faraj, J. A., Giovagnoli, S., & DeLuca, P. P. (2014). In vitro–in vivo correlation from lactide-co-glycolide polymeric dosage forms. Progress in Biomaterials, 3(2-4 (December 2014). https://doi.org/10.1007/s40204-014-0029-4
Crossref
Scopus
Google Scholar
Europe PMC

Abstract

Abstract The objective of this study was to compare the in vitro behavior of four long-acting subcutaneous risperidone formulations with in vivo performance, with the intent of establishing an IVIVC. Two copolymers of PLGA (50:50 and 75:25) were used to prepare four microsphere formulations of risperidone, an atypical antipsychotic. In vitro behavior was assessed at the physiological temperature (37 °C) using the ‘modified dialysis’ technique. The in vitro release profile demonstrated rank order behavior with Formulations A and B , prepared using the 50:50 copolymer, exhibiting rapid drug release, while Formulations C and D , prepared using 75:25 PLGA, released drug in a slower manner. In vivo profiles were obtained by two approaches, i.e., deconvolution using the Nelson–Wagner equation (the FDA recommended approach) and using fractional AUC. With both in vivo approaches, the 50:50 PLGA preparations released drug faster than the 75:25 PLGA microspheres, exhibiting the same rank order observed in vitro. Additionally, profiles for the four formulations obtained using the deconvolution approach were nearly superimposable with fractional AUC, implying that the latter procedure could be used as a substitute for the Nelson–Wagner method. A comparison of drug release profiles for the four formulations revealed that in three of the four formulations, in vivo release was slightly faster than that in vitro, but the results were not statistically significant ( P  > 0.0001). An excellent linear correlation ( R 2 values between 0.97 and 0.99) was obtained when % in vitro release for each formulation was compared with its corresponding in vivo release profile, obtained by using fraction absorbed (Nelson–Wagner method) or fractional AUC. In summary, using the four formulations that exhibited different release rates, a Level A IVIVC was established using the FDA-recommended deconvolution method and fractional AUC approach. The excellent relationship between in vitro drug release and the amount of drug absorbed in vivo in this study was corroborated by the nearly 1:1 correlation ( R 2 greater than 0.97) between in vitro release and in vivo performance. Thus, the results of the current study suggest that proper selection of an in vitro method to assess drug release from long-acting injectables will aid in obtaining a Level A IVIVC.

Keywords

  • Risperidone,
  • PLGA microspheres,
  • In vitro–in vivo correlation,
  • Level A,
  • Modified dialysis method,
  • Nelson–Wagner,
  • Fractional AUC
HTML PDF

References

  1. Amann et al. (2010) In vitro-in vivo correlations of scalable PLGA-Risperidone implants for the treatment of schizophrenia 27(8) (pp. 1730-1737) https://doi.org/10.1007/s11095-010-0152-4
  2. Aubert-Pouessel et al. (2002) A novel in vitro delivery system for assessing the biological integrity of protein upon release from PLGA microspheres 19(7) (pp. 1046-1051) https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1016482809810
  3. Aubert-Pouessel et al. (2004) In vitro study of GDNF release from biodegradable PLGA microspheres 95(3) (pp. 463-475) https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jconrel.2003.12.012
  4. Bain et al. (1999) Modulation of rifampicin release from spray-dried microspheres using combinations of poly-(D, L-lactide) 16(3) (pp. 369-385) https://doi.org/10.1080/026520499289086
  5. Blanco-Prieto et al. (2004) Importance of single or blended polymer types for controlled in vitro release and plasma levels of a somatostatin analogue entrapped in PLA/PLGA microspheres 96(3) (pp. 437-448) https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jconrel.2004.02.015
  6. Capan et al. (1999) Preparation and characterization of poly (D, L-lactide-co-glycolide) microspheres for controlled release of poly(l-lysine) complexed plasmid DNA 16(4) (pp. 509-513) https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1018862827426
  7. Chaubal (2002) Polylactides/glycolides—excipients for injectable drug delivery and beyond 5(2) (pp. 34-36)
  8. Chu et al. (2006) Pharmacokinetics and in vitro and in vivo correlation of huperzine A loaded poly(lactic-co-glycolic acid) microspheres in dogs 325(1–2) (pp. 116-123) https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijpharm.2006.06.032
  9. DeLuca PP, Mehta RC, Hausberger AG, Thanoo BC (1993) Biodegradable polyesters for drug and polypeptide delivery. Polymer delivery systems, properties and applications
  10. Diaz et al. (1999) One-month sustained release microspheres of 125I-bovine calcitonin: in vitro-in vivo studies 59(1) (pp. 55-62) https://doi.org/10.1016/S0168-3659(98)00179-5
  11. D’Souza and DeLuca (2006) Methods to assess in vitro drug release from injectable polymeric particulate systems 23(3) (pp. 460-474) https://doi.org/10.1007/s11095-005-9397-8
  12. D’Souza et al. (2013) Microsphere delivery of risperidone as an alternative to combination therapy 85(3) (pp. 631-639) https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejpb.2013.07.012
  13. D’Souza S, Faraj JA, Giovagnoli S, DeLuca PP (2013b) Development of risperidone PLGA microspheres. J Drug Deliv 2013:620464
  14. D’Souza S, Faraj JA, Giovagnoli S, DeLuca PP (2013c) Preparation, characterization and in vivo evaluation of olanzapine poly(D, L-lactide-co-glycolide) (PLGA) microspheres. J Pharm 2013:831381
  15. D’Souza et al. (2014) A short term quality control tool for biodegradable microspheres 15(3) (pp. 530-541) https://doi.org/10.1208/s12249-013-0052-0
  16. D’Souza S, Faraj JA, Giovagnoli S, DeLuca PP (2014b) IVIVC from long acting olanzapine microspheres. Int J Biomater 2014:407065
  17. Ertl et al. (1999) Poly(d, l-lactic-co-glycolic acid) microspheres for sustained delivery and stabilization of camptothecin 61(3) (pp. 305-317) https://doi.org/10.1016/S0168-3659(99)00122-4
  18. FDA guidance for industry: extended release oral dosage forms: development, evaluation and application of in vitro/in vivo correlations (1997)
  19. FDA guidance for industry: SUPAC-SS nonsterile semisolid dosage forms. Scale-up and post approval changes: chemistry, manufacturing, and controls; in vitro release testing and in vivo bioequivalence documentation (1997)
  20. He et al. (2011) Stabilization and encapsulation of recombinant human erythropoietin into PLGA microspheres using human serum albumin as a stabilizer 416(1) (pp. 69-76) https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijpharm.2011.06.008
  21. Heya et al. (1994) Controlled release of thyrotropin releasing hormone from microspheres: evaluation of release profiles and pharmacokinetics after subcutaneous Administration 83(6) (pp. 798-801) https://doi.org/10.1002/jps.2600830608
  22. Hora et al. (1990) Release of human serum albumin from poly(lactide-co-glycolide) microparticles 7(11) (pp. 1190-1194) https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1015948829632
  23. Jiang et al. (2002) Assessment of protein release kinetics, stability and protein polymer interaction of lysozyme encapsulated poly(D, L,-lactide-co-glycolide) microspheres 79(1–3) (pp. 137-145) https://doi.org/10.1016/S0168-3659(01)00533-8
  24. Jiang et al. (2003) Preparation and in vitro/in vivo evaluation of insulin-loaded poly(acryloyl-hydroxyethyl starch)-PLGA composite microspheres 20(3) (pp. 452-459) https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1022668507748
  25. Kostanski JW, DeLuca PP (2000) A novel in vitro release technique for peptide-containing biodegradable microspheres. AAPS Pharm Sci Tech 1(1):4
  26. Kostanski JW, Dani BA, Reynolds G-A, Bowers CY, DeLuca PP (2000) Evaluation of orntide microspheres in a rat animal model and correlation to in vitro release profiles. AAPS Pharm Sci Tech 1(4):27
  27. Kwak et al. (2010) Efficacy of a new sustained-release microsphere formulation of exenatide, DA-3091, in Zucker diabetic fatty (ZDF) rats 12(40)
  28. Longo and Goldberg (1985) Hydrophilic albumin microspheres (pp. 18-26) https://doi.org/10.1016/S0076-6879(85)12004-5
  29. Martinez et al. (2008) In vitro and in vivo considerations associated with parenteral sustained release products: a review based upon information presented and points expressed at the 2007 controlled release society annual meeting 129(2) (pp. 79-87) https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jconrel.2008.04.004
  30. Mehta et al. (1994) Biodegradable microspheres as depot system for parenteral delivery of peptide drugs 29(3) (pp. 375-384) https://doi.org/10.1016/0168-3659(94)90082-5
  31. Middleton and Tipton (2000) Synthetic biodegradable polymers as orthopedic devices 21(23) (pp. 2335-2346) https://doi.org/10.1016/S0142-9612(00)00101-0
  32. Morita et al. (2001) Evaluation of in vivo release characteristics of protein-loaded biodegradable microspheres in rats and severe combined immunodeficiency disease mice 73(2–3) (pp. 213-221) https://doi.org/10.1016/S0168-3659(01)00280-2
  33. Nastruzzi et al. (1993) Kinetics of bromocriptine release from microspheres: comparative analysis between different in vitro models 11(5) (pp. 565-574) https://doi.org/10.3109/02652049409034995
  34. Park (1995) Degradation of poly(lactic-co-glycolic acid) microspheres: effect of copolymer composition 16(15) (pp. 1123-1130) https://doi.org/10.1016/0142-9612(95)93575-X
  35. Park et al. (1998) A new preparation method for protein loaded poly(D, L-lactic-co-glycolic acid) microspheres and protein release mechanism study 55(2–3) (pp. 181-191) https://doi.org/10.1016/S0168-3659(98)00050-9
  36. Park et al. (2007) In vitro release study of mono-PEGylated growth hormone-releasing peptide-6 from PLGA microspheres 343(1–2) (pp. 281-283) https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijpharm.2007.06.005
  37. Rawat et al. (2011) Validation of USP apparatus 4 method for microsphere in vitro release testing using Risperdal® Consta® 420(2) (pp. 198-205) https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijpharm.2011.08.035
  38. Rawat et al. (2012) Comparison of in vitro-in vivo release of Risperdal® Consta® microspheres 434(1–2) (pp. 115-121) https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijpharm.2012.05.006
  39. Schrier and DeLuca (1999) Recombinant human bone morphogenetic protein-2 binding and incorporation in PLGA microsphere delivery systems 4(4) (pp. 611-621) https://doi.org/10.1081/PDT-100101400
  40. Shmueli et al. (2013) Long-term suppression of ocular neovascularization by intraocular injection of biodegradable polymeric particles containing a serpin-derived peptide https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biomaterials.2013.06.044
  41. Siewert M, Dressman J, Brown CK, Shah VP (2003) FIP/AAPS guidelines to dissolution/in vitro release testing of novel/special dosage forms. AAPS Pharm Sci Tech 4(1):7
  42. Su et al. (2009) Effects of formulation parameters on encapsulation efficiency and release behavior of risperidone poly(D, L-lactide-co-glycolide) microsphere 57(11) (pp. 1251-1256) https://doi.org/10.1248/cpb.57.1251
  43. Sun et al. (2009) Preparation and characterization of porous biodegradable microspheres used for controlled protein delivery 345(1–3) (pp. 173-181) https://doi.org/10.1016/j.colsurfa.2009.04.053
  44. Uppoor (2001) Regulatory perspectives on in vitro (dissolution)/in vivo (bioavailability) correlations 72(1–3) (pp. 127-132) https://doi.org/10.1016/S0168-3659(01)00268-1
  45. Wagenaar and Muller (1994) Piroxicam release from spray-dried biodegradable microspheres 15(1) (pp. 49-54) https://doi.org/10.1016/0142-9612(94)90196-1
  46. Wagner and Nelson (1963) Per cent absorbed time plots derived from blood level and/or urinary excretion data 52(6) (pp. 610-611) https://doi.org/10.1002/jps.2600520629
  47. Washington (1990) Drug release from microdisperse systems: a critical review 58(1) (pp. 1-12) https://doi.org/10.1016/0378-5173(90)90280-H
  48. Wei et al. (2004) The release profiles and bioactivity of parathyroid hormone from poly(lactic-co-glycolic acid) microspheres 25(2) (pp. 345-352) https://doi.org/10.1016/S0142-9612(03)00528-3
  49. Woo et al. (2001) Preparation, characterization and in vivo evaluation of 120-day poly(D, L-lactide) leuprolide microspheres 75(3) (pp. 307-315) https://doi.org/10.1016/S0168-3659(01)00403-5
  50. Xuan et al. (2013) Exenatide-loaded PLGA microspheres with improved glycemic control: in vitro bioactivity and in vivo pharmacokinetic profiles after subcutaneous administration to SD rats (pp. 172-179) https://doi.org/10.1016/j.peptides.2013.06.005
  51. Yen et al. (2001) Controlled release of nalbuphine propionate from biodegradable microspheres: in vitro and in vivo studies 220(1–2) (pp. 91-99) https://doi.org/10.1016/S0378-5173(01)00649-4