PDF herunterladen
Drug Res (Stuttg) 2020; 70(08): 367
DOI: 10.1055/a-1193-4781
Original Article

Development of Nasal Mucoadhesive Microspheres of Granisetron: A Potential Drug

Jaideo Pandey
1   RRS College of Pharmacy, Amethi, UP, India
,
Ravi Shankar
2   Sheat College of Pharmacy, Varanasi, Uttar Pradesh, India
,
Manish Kumar
3   M M College of Pharmacy, Maharishi Markandeshwar (Deemed to be University), Mullana, Ambala, Haryana, India
,
Kuldeep Shukla
1   RRS College of Pharmacy, Amethi, UP, India
,
Beena Kumari
4   Department of Pharmaceutical Sciences, IGU, Meerpur, Rewari, Haryana, India
› Institutsangaben
› Weitere Informationen
Auch verfügbar auf
    Lizenzen und Reprints

Abstract

Background Granisetron is a serotonin 5-HT3 receptor antagonist used as an antiemetic to treat nausea and vomiting following chemotherapy and radiotherapy. Its main effect is to reduce the activity of the vagus nerve, which is a nerve that activates the vomiting center in the medulla oblongata.

Objectives In this research mucoadhesive microspheres were developed in order to carry out the absorption of drug through nasal mucosa with the aim to improve therapeutic efficacy, avoid hepatic first pass metabolism and increase residence time.

Material and Methods Mucoadhesive microspheres of Granisetron using chitosan as polymer were prepared by emulsification cross-linking method to increase the residence time on the mucosa. The surface of prepared microspheres was characterized by SEM (Scanning electron microscopy) and evaluated for particle size, encapsulation efficiency, production yield, swelling ability, in-vitro mucoadhesion, in-vitro drug release and stability study.

Result Among all the formulations F6 with drug/polymer ratio of 1:3 displayed the best result. On drug release kinetic model study, all the formulations follow Zero order. Stability studies revealed that the microspheres kept at 25±2°C and 60±5% RH showed the maximum stability.

Conclusion After all the evaluation parameters and result obtained it can be said that these results confirmed the suitability of Granisetron mucoadhesive chitosan microspheres for nasal delivery system.

Key words

drug delivery - pharmaceutics - pharmacokinetics


Publikationsverlauf

Eingereicht: 13. April 2020

Angenommen: 02. Juni 2020

Artikel online veröffentlicht:
19. Juni 2020

© Georg Thieme Verlag KG
Stuttgart · New York

 

  • References

  • 1 Vino S, Paryani P, Lulu SS. et al. Formulation and evaluation of chitosan beads of levocetirizine dihydrochloride. J Appl Pharma Sci 2012; 02: 221-225
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 2 Rathananand M * d. S. Kumar DS, Shirwaikar A et al. Preparation of Mucoadhesive Microspheres for Nasal Delivery by Spray Drying. Indian J Pharm Sci 2007; 69: 651–657
    PubMed
  • 3 Charlton ST, Davis SS, Illum L. Evaluation of bioadhesive polymers as delivery systems for nose to brain delivery: In vitro characterization studies. J Control Rel 2007; 118: 225-234
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 4 Ahmed S, El-Setouhy DA, El-Latif Badawi AA. et al. Pro-vesicular granisetron hydrochloride buccal formulations: In vitro evaluation and preliminary investigation of in vivo performance. Eur J Pharm Sci 2014; 60: 10-23
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 5 Aapro M. Granisetron: An update on its clinical use in the management of nausea and vomiting. Oncologist 2004; 9: 673-686
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 6 Ho KY, Gan TJ. Pharmacology, pharmacogenetics, and clinical efficacy of 5-hydroxytryptamine type 3 receptor antagonists for postoperative nausea and vomiting. Curr Opin Anaesthesiol 2006; 19: 606-611
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 7 Shahi RS, Tribhuwan SD, Tawde IK. et al. Formulation of atenolol mucoadhesive microspheres for nasal delivery by spray drying technique: In vitro/Ex vivo. Der Pharmacia Sinica 2011; 2: 54-63
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 8 Blower P, Aapro M. Granisetron vs ondansetron: Is it a question of duration of 5-HT3 receptor blockade?. Br J Cancer 2002; 86: 1662
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 9 Mishra S, Patel NS, Kumar M. et al. Cross-linked mucoadhesive microspheres based on anionic eteropolysaccharide for nasal delivery of felodipine: Optimization and in vitro. Drug Deliv Lett 2013; 3: 136-148
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 10 Raftopoulos H, Cooper W, O’Boyle E. et al. Comparison of an extended-release formulation of granisetron (APF530) versus palonosetron for the prevention of chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting associated with moderately or highly emetogenic chemotherapy: Results of a prospective, randomized, double-blind, non-inferiority phase 3 trial. Support Care Cancer 2015; 23: 723-732
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 11 Alagusundaram M, Chengaiah B, Gnanaprakash K. et al. Nasal drug delivery system - an overview. Int J Res Pharm Sci 2010; 1: 454-465
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 12 Bitter C, Suter-Zimmermann K, Surber C. Nasal drug delivery in humans. Curr Probl Dermatol 2011; 40: 20-35
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 13 Dhuria SV, Hanson LR, Frey WH. Intranasal delivery to the central nervous system: mechanisms and experimental considerations. J Pharm Sci 2010; 99: 1654-1673
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 14 Sriram NM, Katakam PK. Formulation and Evaluation of Mucoadhesive Microspheres of Pioglitazone Hydrochloride prepared by Ionotropic External Gelation Technique. J Encap Ads Sci 2016; 6: 22-34
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 15 Tatiya GD, Basarkar GD. Formulation development and in vitro evaluation of mucoadhesive microspheres of simvastatin for nasal delivery. Int J Pharm Sci 2013; 21: 334-341
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 16 Shweta SV, Pandey JD. Formulation and evaluation of mucoadhesive microspheres of fexofenadine for nasal delivery. World J Pharm Pharm Sci 2016; 9: 1306-1326
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 17 Nagarajan SR, Prakash KM. Formulation and evaluation of mucoadhesive microspheres of pioglitazone hydrochloride prepared by Ionotropic external gelation technique. J of Encap and Adsorb Sci 2016; 6: 22-34
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 18 Jaideo P, Tripathi PK. Formulation and evaluation of levocetirizine loaded mucoadhesive microspheres for nasal delivery. Int J Pharm Res 2016; 7: 2242-2252
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 19 Sinha VR, Singla AK, Wadhawan S. et al. Chitosan microspheres as a potential carrier for drugs. Int J Pharm 2004; 274: 283
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 20 Patil SB, Sawant KK. Chitosan microspheres as a delivery system for nasal insufflation. Colloid Surface B 2011; 84: 384-389
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 21 Mahajan HS, Gattani SG. Gellan gum based microparticles of Metoclopramide hydrochloride for Intranasal delivery: Development and Evaluation. Chem Pharm Bull 2009; 57: 388-392
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 22 Chaurasia M, Chourasia MK, Jain NK. et al. Cross-linked guar gum microspheres: A viable approach for improved delivery of anticancer drugs for the treatment of colorectal cancer. AAPS Pharm SciTech 2006; 7: E1-E9
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 23 Medicinal and Health Care Products Vol. 2 London: Regulatory Agency (MHRA);; 2005: British Pharmacopoeia. pp 126–128
  • 24 Dubey RR, Parikh RH. Two-stage optimization process for formulation of Chitosan microspheres. AAPS Pharm SciTech 2004; 5: E5
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 25 Ramachandran S, Nandhakumar S, Dhanaraju MD. Formulation and characterization of glutaraldehyde cross linked chitosan biodegradable microspheres loaded with famotidine. Trop J of Pharm Res 2011; 10: 309-316
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 26 Yellanki SK, Singh J, Syed JA. et al. Design and characterization of amoxicillin trihydrate mucoadhesive microspheres for prolonged gastric retention. Int J of Pharm Sci and Drug Res. 2010; 2: 112-114
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 27 Jain SK, Jain NK, Gupta Y. et al. Mucoadhesive chitosan microspheres for non-invasive and improved nasal delivery of Insulin. Indian J Pharm Sci 2007; 69: 498-504
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 28 Deshmukh T, Deshmukh V, Jadhav P. et al. Formulation and Evaluation of Mucoadhesive Microspheres of Ziprasidone Hydrochloride for Oral Controlled Release. Curr. Pharm Res 2012; 497-502
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 29 Adimoodlam S, Chavda GA, Patel JN. et al. Formulation and evaluation of tizanidine hydrochloride microspheres by using 32 full factorial designs. Int Res J of Pharm 2011; 2: 110-115
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 30 Chintagunta P, Kavitha K, Anil KSN. Formulation and evaluation of trimetazidine hydrochloride loaded chitosan microspheres. Int J of Applied Pharm 2010; 2: 11-14
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 31 Gavini E, Hegge AB, Rassu G. et al. Nasal administration of Carbamazepine using chitosan microspheres: In vitro/ in vivo studies. Int J of Pharm 2006; 307: 9-15
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 32 Costa P, Lobo JM. Modeling and Comparison of dissolution profiles. Eur J Pharm Sci 2001; 13: 123-133
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 33 Ravi PR, Patil AS, Cherian L. Nasal in-situ gels for delivery of rasagiline mesylate: improvement in bioavailability and brain localization. Drug Deliv 2015; 22: 903-910
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 34 Pardesh CV, Belgamwar VS, Tekade AR. et al. surface modified polymer-lipid hybrid nanoparticles as intranasal carriers for ropinirole hydrochloride: in vitro, ex vivo and in vivo pharmacodynamic evaluation. J Mater Sci Mater Med 2013; 24: 2101-2115
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 35 Sanjay B, Patil I, Kaul A. et al. In-vivo evaluation of alginate microspheres of carvedilol for nasal delivery. J Biomed Mater Res 2012; 100 B 249-255
    PubMedGoogle Scholar