Methods: The nanoemulsion was prepared by using high and low energy emulsification technique. D-optimal mixture experimental design was generated as a tool for optimizing the composition of nanoemulsions suitable for topical delivery systems. Effects of formulation variables including KMO (2.0%-10.0% w/w), mixture of castor oil (CO):lemon essential oil (LO; 9:1) (1.0%-5.0% w/w), Tween 80 (1.0%-4.0% w/w), xanthan gum (0.5%-1.5% w/w), and deionized water (78.8%-94.8% w/w), on droplet size as a response were determined.
Results: Analysis of variance showed that the fitness of the quadratic polynomial fits the experimental data with F-value (2,479.87), a low P-value (P<0.0001), and a nonsignificant lack of fit. The optimized formulation of KMO-enriched nanoemulsion with desirable criteria was KMO (10.0% w/w), Tween 80 (3.19% w/w), CO:LO (3.74% w/w), xanthan gum (0.70% w/w), and deionized water (81.68% w/w). This optimum formulation showed good agreement between the actual droplet size (110.01 nm) and the predicted droplet size (111.73 nm) with a residual standard error <2.0%. The optimized formulation with pH values (6.28) showed high conductivity (1,492.00 µScm-1) and remained stable under accelerated stability study during storage at 4°C, 25°C, and 45°C for 90 days, centrifugal force as well as freeze-thaw cycles. Rheology measurement justified that the optimized formulation was more elastic (shear thinning and pseudo-plastic properties) rather than demonstrating viscous characteristics. In vitro cytotoxicity of the optimized KMO formulation and KMO oil showed that IC50 (50% inhibition of cell viability) value was >100 µg/mL.
Conclusion: The survival rate of 3T3 cell on KMO formulation (54.76%) was found to be higher compared to KMO oil (53.37%) without any toxicity sign. This proved that the KMO formulation was less toxic and can be applied for cosmeceutical applications.
METHODS: By adding Hydroxy Propyl Methyl Cellulose (HPMC) as a precipitation inhibitor to conventional SNEDDS, a supersaturable system was prepared. Firstly, the prepared SNEDDS played an important role in increasing the aqueous solubility and hence oral absorption due to nano-range size. Secondly, the S-SNEDDS found to be advantageous over SNEDDS for having a higher drug load and inhibition of dilution precipitation of Dutasteride. Formulated S-SNEDDS (F1-F9) ranged from 37.42 ± 1.02 to 68.92 ± 0.09 nm with PDI 0.219-0.34 and drug loading of over 95 percent.
RESULTS: The study of in-vitro dissolution revealed higher dissolution for S-SNEDDS compared to SNEDDS and Avodart soft gelatin capsule as a commercial product. In addition, higher absorption was observed for S-SNEDDS showing approximately 1.28 and 1.27 fold AUC (0-24h) and Cmax compared to commercial products. Therefore, S-SNEDDS has proven as a novel drug delivery system with a higher drug load, higher self-emulsification efficiency, higher stability, higher dissolution and pronounced absorption.
CONCLUSION: In conclusion, S-SNEDDS could be a newly emerging approach to enhance aqueous solubility in many folds for drugs belonging to BCS Class II and IV and thus absorption and oral bioavailability.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: Five polymer types, namely hydroxypropyl methylcellulose (HPMC), sodium carboxymethylcellulose (SCMC), polyvinyl alcohol (PVA), Eudragit S100, and Eudragit SR100, were used to prepare aceclofenac buccal film formulation either separately or combined by solvent-casting method. These formulations were evaluated in terms of physical appearance, folding test, film weight and thickness, drug content, percentage of elongation, moisture uptake, water vapor permeability, and in vitro drug release.
RESULTS: The addition of Eudragit polymer in most of the produced buccal films was unacceptable with low folding endurance. However, the dissolution profile of buccal films made from PVA and Eudragit SR100 provided a controlled drug release profile.
CONCLUSION: Buccal films can be formulated using different polymers either individually or in combination to obtain the drug release profile required to achieve a desired treatment goal. Furthermore, the property of the buccal films depends on the type and concentration of the polymer used.