Formulation and Characterization of Magnetically
Responsive Mesalamine Microspheres for Colon Targeting
Sarita Gaikwad1, Preeti K Suresh1
1University
Institute of Pharmacy, Pt. Ravishankar Shukla University, Raipur (C.G.)
*Corresponding Author: saritagaikwad687@gmail.com
Abstract
Background: Magnetically
Responsive Mesalamine Microspheres is an effective strategy for localized drug
delivery only at the target site for the treatment of Irritable Bowel Diseases
and thereby minimizing the dose and drug induced toxicity.
Objective: The
main objective of the study is to localize the drug only at the target site
thereby minimizing the dose.
Result and
Discussion: 1. The aim of present study was to formulate Magnetically
Responsive Mesalamine Microspheres by solvent evaporation method using biodegradable
polymers Chitosan and Pectin and carry out the various pharmaceutical and
magnetic characterizations, to study the effect of polymer type on in-vitro
drug release and preclinical in-vitro screening studies such as in- vitro
release studies using microflora activated system and in-vitro
anti-inflammatory activity. 2. Chemical compatibility study was performed using
FTIR spectroscopy. FTIR spectroscopy studies indicated that the Mesalamine is
compatible with polymers. The spectra showed no changes in the major peaks thus
confirming no interactions between drug and polymers. 3. Calibration curves of
Mesalamine was constructed in Phosphate Buffer Saline pH7. 4. Magnetite (Fe3O4)
(used as magnetic carrier) was chemically synthesized using precipitation
method.5. In the present study, 3 formulations were prepared in total by using
Chitosan and Pectin as polymer in different ratios (1:1,1:2 and 1:3) of each
polymer and combination of two polymers. Also, the effect of polymer type was
studied.
Conclusion:
It can be concluded that the Magnetically Responsive Mesalamine Microspheres
offer a localized drug delivery only at the target site by the combined effect
of physical approach (utilizing the principle of magnetic targeting with an
intention to produce a depot near the target organ) and biochemical approach
(using biodegradable polymers chitosan and pectin for drug release in a
controlled manner). By producing a depot near the target organ, unwanted
distribution of drug to non-target organ can be avoided.
Keywords: Inflammation, magnetically responsive microspheres,
Mesalamine, colon targeted drug delivery, ulcerative colitis
Introduction
CTDDS
means targeted delivery of drugs into the lower GIT, which occurs primarily in the large intestine (i.e.
colon). In the past two decades, the pharmaceutical scientists have extensively investigated in the area of
colonic region for targeted drug delivery.(Mukesh et al. 2013)
Colon targeting depends on exploiting a unique
feature of specific site and protecting the drug until it reaches to the site.
Fig.
1 Anatomy of colon
Targeted
drug delivery to the colon is highly desirable for local treatment of a variety of bowel diseases such as
inflammatory bowel disease, amebiasis, colonic
cancer and for local treatment of local colonic pathologies, and the
systemic delivery of protein and
peptide drugs.(“Pharmaceutical
Approaches to Colon Targeted Drug Delivery Systems.” n.d.) The advent of slow release technologies increases the chances for a drug to be released in the
colon and thus this organ has an important role to play in drug
absorption from oral sustained release
formulations.(“(PDF) Different
Approaches to Design and Evaluation of Colon Specific Drug Delivery Systems”
n.d.)
Microspheres are characteristically
free flowing powders consisting of proteins
or synthetic polymers having a particle size ranging from 1-1000µm.
Microspheres are defined as “monolithic spheres
or therapeutic agent
distributed throughout the matrix either as a molecular dispersion of
particles” or can be defined as
structure made up of one or more miscible polymers in which drug particles
are dispersed at the molecular or macroscopic level.
There are two types of microspheres:
Ø
Microcapsules
Ø Micro matrices
Microcapsules are those in which
entrapped substance is distinctly surrounded
by distinct capsule wall and micro matrices in which entrapped substance
is dispersing throughout the microsphere’s
matrix. They are made up of polymeric, waxy, or other protective materials, that is biodegradable synthetic polymers
and modified natural products.
Fig. 3 Molecular structure
of microsphere
PATHOPHYSIOLOGY (Patra,
Shukla, and Das 2020),(Ritter
et al. 2008)
Multiple etiologies have been
proposed for IBD, but the precise cause is unknown. When a luminal
antigen crosses the epithelial layer, T- lymphocytes (helper cells and cytotoxic
cells) are activated. These t-cells are normally found in gut wall but in IBD,
the normal regulation of their
activity is disturbed. Helper T-cells, type-1 (Th-1), are associated principally with CD, whereas
Th-2 cells are associated
principally with UC.
Fig
3 - Pathophysiology of IBD
In UC, with the influx of neutrophils
in lamina propia, there is localized collection of pus cells surrounded by inflamed tissues
and causes depletion
of mucin. Activation of mucosal
inflammatory cells also leads to the production of large number of inflammatory mediators such as cytokines, leukotrienes,
prostaglandins, platelet activating factor, oxygen radicals, thromboxanes
and proteases etc. which are atleast
partly responsible for tissue damage.
In CD, the accompanying inflammation
is described as irregular/ patchy, segmented,
and transmural. Most commonly, terminal ileum exhibits early lesions on
or near Peyer’s patches.(Patra, Shukla, and Das 2020)
MATERIALS AND METHOD
Mesalamine and Chitosan, Sigma Aldrich, Pectin and Magnesium Stearate, HI Media Laboratories Pvt. Ltd, Mumbai, Talc, MMC Health care, Chennai, Liquid Paraffin and Sodium Hydroxide,
Aventor performance materials, Thane,Maharashtra, Ferrous Sulphate, Finar chemicals, Ahmedabad,
Tween 80 and Span 80, Supra Chemicals, Chennai. Potassium dihydrogen ortho
Phosphate, Disodium hydrogen phosphate,
Sodium chloride, Hydrochloric acid, Glacial acetic acid, Dist. Water, Glutaraldehyde, Toluene, n-Hexane,
Span 80.
PREFORMULATION STUDIES(Kakar, Batra, and Singh 2013),(“(PDF) Lipid Nano Particulate Drug Delivery: An Overview of
the Emerging Trend” n.d.)
The
preformulation studies are the first step in the rational
development of any formulation.
It can be defined as “investigation of physical and chemical properties of drug substance alone and combined with the
excipients. “The overall objective of preformulation testing is to generate information useful to the formulator in developing stable and bioavailable dosage forms that can be mass produced.
The
goals of the study are:
Ø To establish physical
characteristics.
Ø To establish its compatibility with the excipients.
Ø To determine kinetic
rate profile.
DRUG-POLYMER
INCOMPATIBILITY STUDIES
Fourier Transform Infra-Red Spectroscopy(“(PDF) Lipid Nano Particulate Drug
Delivery: An Overview of the Emerging Trend” n.d.),(Sharma et al. 2012)
The compatibility between pure drug
and polymer was detected by FT- IR spectra. 1-2mg of Mesalamine alone, mixture
of drug and excipients were weighed and mixed
properly with Potassium bromide uniformly. The spectra were recorded over the wave number
4000- 500cm-
CALIBRATION CURVE FOR MESALAMINE(B. S. Chandra et al. 2011)
Preparation of Phosphate Buffer Saline (PBS) pH 7.4(“Home - Indian Pharmacopoeia Commission” n.d.)
2.38g of disodium hydrogen
phosphate, 0.19g of potassium di-hydrogen phosphate and 8.0g of sodium chloride was dissolved in
sufficient distilled water to produce 1000ml. Then the pH was adjusted, if necessary.
Preparation of 0.1N Hydrochloric acid (pH 1.2)(“Home -
Indian Pharmacopoeia Commission” n.d.)
8.5 ml of conc. HCl was dissolved in 1000ml of distilled water. Then the pH was adjusted, if necessary.
Standard Curve in Phosphate Buffer Saline pH 7.4(“Home - Indian Pharmacopoeia Commission” n.d.),(B. S. Chandra et al. 2011)
100 mg of Mesalamine was transferred
into a volumetric flask and dissolved in 15ml
of 0.1N hydrochloric acid and the volume was made up to 100ml with PBS
pH 7.4. The resulting solution was
labeled as stock solution 1. From this stock solution, 10ml was taken and diluted to 100ml with Phosphate buffer
saline pH 7.4 was labeled as stock 2. From this stock solution, 4ml, 8ml, 12ml, 16ml, 20ml, 24ml and 28ml were
pipetted out into separate standard
flasks and made up to 100ml with
Phosphate buffer saline pH 7.4. The
absorbance of solution was measured at 230nm using UV- Visible Spectrophotometer. The calibration curve was then plotted taking concentration on X- axis and
absorbance on Y- axis.
PREPARATION
OF MESALAMINE MAGNETIC MICROSPHERES
Preparation
of Magnetite(“Design
and Characterization of Cisplatin Magnetic Microspheres - IJPRS” n.d.)
The magnetite (Fe3O4)
was prepared by reacting 10%w/v ferrous sulphate (containing 5% tween
80) with 20%w/v sodium hydroxide solution, followed by washing of the precipitate with dilute ammonia in
order to get magnetite free of sulphate ions. This precipitate of
magnetite was then dried at 1000C and passed through sieve no.300.
Fig 25 - PREPARATION OF MAGNETITE
Fig 26 - PREPARED MAGNETITE
Fig 27 - MAGNETITE
Fig 28 - MAGNETIC
SEPARATION BEHAVIOUR
Fig 29 - AFTER 30 SEC
MAGNETITE MOVE TOWARDS THE DIRECTION OF MAGNETIC FIELD
Preparation of Glutaraldehyde saturated
toluene (GST) (Ofokansi et al. 2013)
Glutaraldehyde (100ml) and toluene (100ml) were
placed in a beaker and stirred at 1000rpm for one hour using a magnetic
stirrer. Then the solvent mixture was kept overnight for stabilization after
which the upper toluene layer saturated with glutaraldehyde was decanted and
used as glutaraldehyde saturated toluene (GST).
Fig
30 - PREPARATION OF GLUTARALDEHYDE SATURATED TOULENE IN MAGNETIC STIRRER 5MLHDX
Fig
31 - PREPARATION OF DUMMY MAGNETIC MICROSPHERES IN ULTRA TURRAX T 18
HOMOGENIZER
Preparation of Dummy Magnetic Microspheres (Kaushik, Sardana, and Mishra 2010),(“(PDF) Lipid Nano Particulate Drug Delivery: An Overview of the Emerging
Trend” n.d.),(Kakar, Batra, and Singh 2013)
Dummy magnetic microspheres were prepared by O/O
solvent evaporation with chemical cross-linking method. Accurately weighed
quantity of polymer was dissolved in 10ml of 1% glacial acetic acid. 10mg
of magnesium stearate was then added to
the polymer-drug solution. Finally, specified amount of magnetite was added to
this solution. The organic phase was drop-wise to 30ml of liquid paraffin
containing 2% Span 80 and stirred at a speed of 1500rpm at 800C using high
speed homogenizer. Stirring was continued for 1 h after the complete addition
of polymer solution into oil. After 1 h stirring, 1-2 ml of GST was added
dropwise added to the mixture with continuous stirring at 500 rpm for the next
1 h at a temperature 50-550 C. stirring was stopped after 1 h of addition of
GST. Suspension of microspheres in paraffin oil thus obtained was centrifuged
and the clear supernatant was decanted. Microspheres were then filtered and
washed 3 times with hexane to remove liquid paraffin and then with distilled
water to remove unentrapped drug from the surface of the microsphere. After
that the microspheres were air dried and stored in dessicator at room
temperature.
Table 11: Formulation of Dummy Magnetic Microspheres
Form ulatio n code
|
Polymer (mg)
|
Magn etite
(mg)
|
Magnesiu m Stearate 5%
(mg)
|
Liq. paraffin (ml)
|
Span 80
(ml)
|
Drug: Polymer ratio
|
|
Chitosan
|
Pectin
|
|
|
|
|
|
F1
|
125
|
-
|
50
|
10
|
30
|
0.6
|
1:1
|
F2
|
-
|
125
|
50
|
10
|
30
|
0.6
|
1:1
|
F3
|
62.5
|
62.5
|
50
|
10
|
30
|
0.6
|
1:1
|
Preparation of Mesalamine Magnetic
Microspheres, (Kaushik,
Sardana, and Mishra 2010),(“(PDF)
Lipid Nano Particulate Drug Delivery: An Overview of the Emerging Trend” n.d.),(Kakar,
Batra, and Singh 2013)
A Magnetic Microsphere of Dummy was
prepared by O/O solvent evaporation with chemical
crosslinking method. Accurately weighed quantity of polymer was dissolved in 10ml of 1% glacial acetic acid and accurately weighed drug was
dissolved in minimum quantity of 0.1N HCl and added into the polymer solution.
10mg of magnesium stearate was then added to the polymer-drug
solution. Finally, specified amount of magnetite was added to this solution. The organic phase was drop-wise to 30ml
of liquid paraffin containing 2% Span
80 and stirred at a speed of 1500rpm
at 800C using high speed homogenizer. Stirring was continued for 1 h after the complete addition of
polymer-drug solution into oil. After
1 h stirring, 1-2 ml of GST was added
dropwise to the mixture with continuous stirring at 500 rpm for the next 1 h at a temperature 50-550
C. Stirring was stopped after 1 h of addition of GST. Suspension of microspheres in paraffin
oil thus obtained was centrifuged and
the clear supernatant was decanted. Microspheres were then filtered and washed
3 times with hexane to remove liquid
paraffin and then with distilled
water to remove unentrapped drug from
the surface of the microsphere. After
that the microspheres were air dried and stored in dessicator at room temperature.
Table 12: Formulation of Mesalamine Magnetic Microspheres
Formulation code
|
Drug (mg)
|
Polymer
0(mg)
|
Magn etite
(mg)
|
Magnesium Stearate
5%(mg)
|
Liq. paraffin (ml)
|
Span 80
(ml)
|
Drug: Polymer ratio
|
|
|
Chitosan
|
Pectin
|
|
|
|
|
|
F1
|
125
|
125
|
-
|
50
|
10
|
30
|
0.6
|
1:1
|
F2
|
125
|
-
|
125
|
50
|
10
|
30
|
0.6
|
1:1
|
F3
|
125
|
62.5
|
62.5
|
50
|
10
|
30
|
0.6
|
1:1
|
Fig 32 - PREPARATION OF
MESALAMINE MAGNETIC MICROSPHERES IN ULTRA TURRAX T 18 HOMOGENIZER
Fig
33 - CENTRIFUGE- EPPENDORF
Fig
34 - BEFORE CENTRIFUGATION
Fig
35 - AFTER CETRIFUGATION
Fig
36 - FORMULATED MESALAMINE MAGNETIC MICROSPHERES
EVALUATION
OF MAGNETIC MICROSPHERES (Patel et al. 2010)
PHYSICOCHEMICAL
CHARACTERIZATION(Kakar, Batra, and Singh 2013)
Shape and surface
morphology studies using Optical
Microscope
The
shape and surface
morphology of magnetic
microspheres were investigated using optical
microscopy. The samples for EM study were prepared by lightly sprinkling the formulation on a slide and
then covered with a cover slip and the prepared slide was then observed under
the optical microscope.
Particle
Size Analysis(“(PDF) Lipid Nano Particulate Drug Delivery: An Overview of the Emerging
Trend” n.d.),(Kakar* and Singh 2014),(Paharia et al. 2007)
The
Mesalamine Magnetic Microsphere were analyzed for their size and polydispersity
index on Zetasizer Nano ZS, Malvern instruments, based on photon correlation
spectroscopy, at a scattering angle of 90° and temperature of 25°. Measurements
were carried out both for fresh and air-dried samples. Before counting, the
samples were diluted with a phosphate buffer at pH 7.4 and 0.1N HCl and were
sonicated in order to prevent precipitation during the measurements.
Surface
charge (Zeta-potential)
The surface
charge of the mesalamine magnetic microspheres was determined with Zetasizer
Nano ZS, Malvern instruments. The measurements were carried out in an aqueous
solution of KCl 0.1N solution. The measured values were corrected to a standard
reference for temperature of 20°.
Drug- Excipient Interaction(Kakar, Batra, and Singh 2013),(Sharma et al. 2012)
The FT-IR
spectrum was recorded on Shimadzu FT-IR spectrophotometer, for the prepared
mesalamine magnetic microspheres. The samples were prepared by grinding samples (5mg) with KBr (100mg) and then
pressing the mixtures into pellets, further placed on a crystal
sample holder and scanned from 4000cm-1 to 400cm-1.
Melting
point
Melting
point of drug sample was performed to determine the purity of the sample. The
impurity present in small amount was detected using capillary method in Melting
Point Apparatus, Electronics India and model no. 931.
Partition
coefficient
Partition
coefficient was performed by taking 10mg of drug dissolved in 10ml of octanol
and 10 ml of distilled water and kept for 24 hrs. After then, the separated
distilled water was analyzed spectrophotometrically in UV spectroscopy at 230
nm.
Fig
44 - PARTITION COEFFICIENT DETERMINATION
Solubility
studies
Solubility
profile of drug determined using different solvents such as distilled water,
phosphate buffer at different pH 4.5, 6.0, 7.2, 7.5 and 0.1N HCl. A saturated
solution was prepared by adding 10mg drug in 10ml of solution and then analyzed
using UV spectrophotometer at 230 nm.
Fig 45 - DETERMINATION OF
SOLUBILITY IN DIFFERENT SOLVENT
PHARMACEUTICAL CHARACTERIZATION
Percentage Yield(Kakar* and Singh 2014)
Microspheres were weighed and the
percentage yield was calculated by taking into
consideration the total weight of the drug and excipients used for preparation of microspheres.
Percentage Yield =
|
Practical yield
|
X 100
|
Theoretical yield
|
Estimation of
Drug Content and Entrapment Efficiency(Kakar, Batra, and Singh 2013),(“Design and Characterization of Cisplatin Magnetic Microspheres -
IJPRS” n.d.),(Kakar* and Singh 2014)
50mg of microspheres was weighed and
dissolved in 2.5ml of 0.1N HCl and suitably diluted
with phosphate buffer saline pH 7.4 in 50 ml standard flasks. The solution was
kept for 24hrs and filtered to
separate the fragments. Drug content was analyzed after suitable dilution by UV spectrophotometer at a wavelength
of 230 nm against phosphate buffer saline pH 7.4 as blank. The drug content of each formulation was calculated using
the following equation
Percentage Drug Entrapment Efficiency =
|
Actual Drug
Content
|
X 100
|
Theoretical Drug Content
|
Drug Loading Capacity(“(PDF)
Formulation, Development and in-Vitro Release Effects of Ethyl Cellulose Coated
Pectin Microspheres for Colon Targeting” n.d.)
Drug loaded microspheres were mixed
in 2.5ml of 0.1N HCl and suitably diluted with
phosphate buffer pH 7.4 at room temperature and kept for 24 h. After
filtration and suitable dilution, Mesalamine present in the solution
was determined.
% Drug Loading =
|
Quantity of the drug present in the microspheres
|
X 100
|
Weighed quantity of microspheres
|
in- vitro Drug Release Study(Kakar, Batra, and Singh 2013),(Tewabe et al. 2021)
The in- vitro drug release study was carried out in paddle apparatus
using a mixture of 45ml of 0.1N
HCl and 855ml of PBS pH 7.4 as the dissolution medium
maintained at 370C+
0.50C. Weighed microspheres containing 50mg of drug were introduced into the dissolution medium. Aliquots were taken at
regular time intervals and after suitable dilution, percentage drug release
analysed by UV Spectrophotometer at 230nm.
RELEASE
KINETICS OF THE OPTIMIZED FORMULATION(Lee et al. 2020), (Raj et al. 2013)
The in- vitro release data for the optimized batch was fitted to
various release kinetic models
(Zero-order, First- order, Higuchi, Hixon- Crowell and Korsmeyer- Peppas
models). The goodness of fit was found
out to describe the kinetics
of drug release.
Zero order release model
Zero order models describe the
systems where the drug release rate is independent of its concentration of the dissolved substance.
C = Ko t
Where, C-
Cumulative percentage drug released Ko – zero-order constant
t- time
A plot of time on x- axis and
cumulative percentage drug released on y-axis gives a straight line with
slope, Ko if it follows
zero-order Kinetics.
Application: This
relationship can be used to describe the drug release of several types of modified release pharmaceutical dosage
forms like transdermal systems, matrix tablets with low soluble drugs in coated forms and osmotic systems.
First order
release model
First order models describe
the systems where the release
rate is dependent
on the concentration of the dissolved substance.
Log C = log Co – K t / 2.303
Where, C –
Cumulative percentage drug remaining Co-
Initial concentration of drug
K
– First order
constant
A plot of time on x-axis
and log cumulative percentage drug remaining on y – axis gives
a straight line with slope, K / 2.303 if it follows first- order kinetics.
Application: This
relationship can be used to describe the drug dissolution in pharmaceutical dosage
forms containing water –soluble drugs in porous matrices.
Higuchi release model
The
Higuchi model describes
the release from systems where the solid drug is dispersed in an
insoluble matrix and the rate
of release is related to the
rate of drug diffusion.
Q = K √t
Where, Q – Cumulative percentage drug released
K- Constant
reflecting the design variables of the system
t – Time
A plot of square root of time on x-axis and cumulative percentage drug released
on y- axis gives a straight line if it follows
Higuchi Kinetics.
Application: This
relationship can be used to describe the drug dissolution
from several types of modified release pharmaceutical
dosage forms like some trans-dermal systems and matrix tablets with water soluble
drugs.
Hixson-Crowell
release model
The
Hixson-Crowell cube root model describes
the release from systems where there is a
change in surface area and
diameter of the tablets or particles.
Q 1/3 – Qt1/3 =
K K t
Where, Qt –
Cumulative percentage drug released in time t
Qo – initial
amount of the drug
KHC – the rate constant
for Hixson-Crowell rate equation K – Constant incorporating the
surface volume relation
A plot
of time on x-axis and cube root of cumulative percentage of drug remaining on y-axis
gives a straight line if
it follows Hixson-Crowell
kinetics.
Application: This
equation applies to dosage forms like tablets, where the dissolution occurs in planes that are parallel to the drug
surface if the tablet dimensions diminish proportionally, in such a manner
that the initial geometrical form keeps
constant.
Kors Meyer and Peppa’s
Model:
Kors Meyer and Peppa’s Model derive a simple relationship which describes the drug release
from a polymeric system.
Mt / Mα = K t n
Where, Mt
/ Mα – fraction of drug released at time t K - Release
rate constant
n
- Release exponent
A plot of log time on x-axis and log cumulative percentage
of drug released on y-axis
gives a straight line, if it follows Korsmeyer and Peppas kinetics.
DIFFUSION
COEFFICIENT
|
OVERALL SOLUTE
RELEASE MECHANISM
|
EFFECT ON DRUG11
RELEASE
|
0.45
|
Fickian diffusion
|
Only
due to diffusion
through the
matrix
|
0.45<n<0.89
|
Anomalous
(non-fickian diffusion)
|
Drug
diffusion and polymer
relaxation (erosion)
|
0.89
|
Case-II transport
|
Only
due to polymer
relaxation (erosion)
|
n>0.89
|
Super case-II transports
|
In-vitro
drug release data were fitted to various
models such as zero-order, first- order,
Higuchi equation, Kors Meyer- Peppa’s equation, and Hixson-Crowell equation to
know about the mechanism of drug release:
1.
C versus
t (zero order)
2.
log C versus t (first order)
3.
Q versus
square root of t (Higuchi)
4.
Qt versus
cube root of t (Hixson-Crowell)
5.
log% Qt versus log t (Kors
Meyer- Peppa’s)
P-XRD
Analysis:
Powder XRD of formulation mixture of
mesalamine with chitosan and pectin was recorded using PANlytical X ray
diffractometer with Si (Li) PSD detector. The operation data were measuring
circle diameter – 435, 500 and 600 mm predetermined; angle range-120°, X-ray
source- Cu, wavelength 1.5406
Differential Scanning Calorimetry
The DSC analysis of pure drug was carried out
using differential scanning calorimeter (METLER TOLEDO). Sample of about 5mg
was placed in a 50 µl perforated aluminium pan and sealed. Heat runs for each
sample were set from 5°C to 300°C using nitrogen as purging gas and sample.
RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
PREFORMULATION STUDIES
Drug- Polymer Compatibility Studies using FTIR Spectroscopy(Kakar, Batra, and Singh
2013),(Sharma et al. 2012)
The
compatibility between drug and polymer
was confirmed by using FTIR spectroscopy.
Infrared
spectroscopic analysis for drug (Mesalamine), Polymers (Chitosan, Pectin), magnesium stearate and Drug-Polymer mixture were carried
out.
The
principal IR peaks of pure Mesalamine and polymers Chitosan
and Pectin are shown in table
13-16 and figure 26-29.
Fig
19 – FTIR Spectra of Mesalamine
Fig
20 – FTIR Spectra of Mesalamine and Chitosan
Fig
21 - FTIR Spectra of Mesalamine and Pectin
Fig
22 – FTIR Spectra of Mesalamine and Magnetite
Fig
23 – FTIR Spectra of Mesalamine and Magnesium Stearate
Fig 50 - FTIR
spectra of (Mesalamine + Chitosan) Vs. Mesalamine
Interpretation:
2800-2900 shows O-H stretching of carboxylic
acid, 3000-3050 shows Ar-H stretching, 1550-1600 shows C=C stretching,
3600-3700 shows phenolic O-H stretching, 1680-1700 shows C=O stretching of
carboxylic acid, 3300-3450 shows N-H stretch
Inference:
The FTIR study revealed that there is no interaction between the drug and
polymer, since the major peaks of the drugs are not
affected by the excipients
Fig 51 - FTIR spectra of (Mesalamine + Pectin) Vs.
Mesalamine
Interpretation:
2800-2950
shows O-H stretching of carboxylic acid, 3000-3050 shows Ar-H stretching,
1550-1600 shows C=C stretching, 3600-3700 shows phenolic O-H stretching,
1680-1700 shows C=O stretching of carboxylic acid, 3200-3400 shows N-H
stretching.
Inference:
The FTIR study revealed that there is
no interaction between the drug and polymer,
since the major peaks of the
drugs are not affected by the excipients.
Fig 51 - FTIR spectra of (Mesalamine +
Pectin) Vs. Mesalamine
Interpretation:
2800-2950
shows O-H stretching of carboxylic acid, 3000-3050 shows Ar-H stretching,
1550-1600 shows C=C stretching, 3600-3700 shows phenolic O-H stretching,
1680-1700 shows C=O stretching of carboxylic acid, 3200-3400 shows N-H
stretching.
Inference:
The FTIR study revealed that there is
no interaction between the drug and polymer,
since the major peaks of the
drugs are not affected by the excipients
Fig 52 - FTIR spectra
of (Mesalamine + Magnetite) Vs. Mesalamine
Interpretation:
2900-2950 shows O-H stretching of carboxylic acid, 3000-3050 shows Ar-H stretching,
1500-1600 shows C=C stretching, 3500-3700 shows phenolic O-H stretching,
1680-1700 shows C=O stretching of carboxylic acid, 3200-3300 shows N-H
stretching.
Inference:
The FTIR study revealed that there is
no interaction between the drug and polymer, since the major peaks of the drugs are not
affected by the excipients.
Fig 53 - FTIR spectra
of (Mesalamine + Magnesium Stearate) Vs. Mesalamine
Interpretation:
2800-2900 shows O-H stretching of carboxylic acid, 2950-3050 shows Ar-H
stretching, 1490-1550 shows C=C stretching, 3500-3700 shows phenolic O-H
stretching, 1680-1700 shows C=O stretching of carboxylic acid, 3300-3400 shows
N-H stretching.
Inference:
The FTIR study revealed
that there is no interaction between the drug and polymer.
Hence it can be concluded
that the major peaks of the drugs are not
affected by the excipients. (Guo et al. 2010)
Fig 53 - FTIR spectra
of (Mesalamine + Magnesium Stearate) Vs. Mesalamine
Interpretation:
2800-2900 shows O-H stretching of carboxylic acid, 2950-3050 shows Ar-H
stretching, 1490-1550 shows C=C stretching, 3500-3700 shows phenolic O-H
stretching, 1680-1700 shows C=O stretching of carboxylic acid, 3300-3400 shows
N-H stretching.
Inference:
The FTIR study revealed
that there is no interaction between the drug and polymer.
Hence it can be concluded
that the major peaks of the drugs are not
affected by the excipients. (Guo et al. 2010)
STANDARD CALIBRATION CURVE FOR MESALAMINE (“Home
- Indian Pharmacopoeia Commission” n.d.),(Mascolo,
Pei, and Ring 2013),(B.
S. Chandra et al. 2011)
The UV Spectrophotometric method was
used to analyze Mesalamine. The absorbance of
the drug in phosphate buffer saline (pH 7.4) was measured at a
wavelength of 230nm. The results are given in table 17 and figure 30.
Table: 17 Standard
Curve for Mesalamine in PBS (pH 7.4) at 230nm
Sr. No.
|
Concentration (µg/ml)
|
Absorbance
|
1.
|
0
|
0
|
2.
|
10
|
0.132
|
3.
|
20
|
0.248
|
4.
|
30
|
0.375
|
5.
|
40
|
0.488
|
6.
|
50
|
0.612
|
Fig 54 - Standard Curve for Mesalamine in PBS pH 7.4 at 230nm
Inference
As shown in figure the linearity was exhibited at a concentration
range of 0- 10 µg/ml of Mesalamine indicating that it obeys Beer-Lambert’s law in this range.53, 86
EVALUATION
OF MICROSPHERES
PHYSICOCHEMICAL CHARACTERIZATION(Kakar* and Singh 2014)
Optical Microscopy(Kakar* and Singh 2014)
Morphological
analysis of the microspheres was carried out using Optical Microscopy and the
result is shown in figure 31.
Fig 55 - Micrograph
of
Optimized formulation F3
Inference
The micrograph reveals
that the microspheres were discrete and spherical in shape.
Particle Size by Zeta
sizer(Kakar, Batra, and Singh
2013),(Kakar* and Singh 2014)
The particle sizes of various formulations of
microsphere were determined by Zetasizer. The results
of particle size are depicted
in the figure 32.
Fig
56 – Particle size distribution
Fig
57 – Zeta Potential Distribution
Inference
The data revealed that average
particle size of microspheres increased with increasing polymer concentration. Higher concentration of polymer
produced a more viscous dispersion with
larger droplets and consequently larger microspheres were formed.(D. Chandra et al. n.d.),(Paharia et al. 2007),(“(PDF) Formulation, Development and in-Vitro Release Effects of Ethyl
Cellulose Coated Pectin Microspheres for Colon Targeting” n.d.) The particle sizes of
microspheres was found in the range of 33.3 to 47.85 µm.
In general, less than 5µm size is
used for intravenous route, less than 125 µm is used for intra-arterial route. Particles of this size can be
administered easily by suspending them in a
suitable vehicle and injecting them using a conventional syringe with an 18 or
20 gauge needle.(Mascolo, Pei, and Ring 2013)
Drug Excipient Interaction (Kakar, Batra, and Singh 2013),(Sharma et al. 2012)
Fig 58 - FTIR Spectra of Optimized formulation Table
Interpretation:
2900-3000 shows
O-H stretching of carboxylic acid, 2900-3000 shows Ar-H stretching, 1550-1600
shows C=C stretching, 3500-3700 shows phenolic O-H stretching ,1650-1750 shows
C=O stretching of carboxylic acid.
Inference:
The FTIR study revealed that there is
no interaction between the drug and polymer in the optimized formulation F3. Hence it can be concluded that the
major peaks of the drug are not affected
by the excipients. (Kakar, Batra, and
Singh 2013),(Sharma et al.
2012)
Melting
point determination
The melting point determined by MELTING
POINT APPARATUS, MODEL NO. 931, ELECTRONIC
INDIA using capillary method. The results are shown in table no and compared
with standard.
Identification test
|
Observed result
|
Melting point
|
278°C
|
Partition
coefficient
Partition coeffient was determined using octanol as
organic solvent and water as aqueous phase and observed in SHIMADZU UV 1800 at
a wavelength of 230nm.
noctanol :
nwater: Drug = 10ml:10ml:10mg
Partition coeffient= conc. of drug in org. phase
…..............................................
conc. of drug
in aq. Phase
Test
|
Observed
value
|
Partition
coefficient
|
1.30
|
Inference: It indicates that the compound would
exhibit roughly an equivalent preference for either a hydrophobic or
hydrophilic.
SOLUBILITY STUDY
Solubility study should be determined in various
mediums such as water (pH 7.0), 0.1N HCL (pH 1.2), acetate (pH 4.5) and phosphate buffer (pH 6.8 and pH 7.2) SHIMADZU
1800.
Media
|
Mesalamine (mg/ml)
|
0.1N HCL
|
18.2
|
pH 4.5 buffer
|
2.7
|
pH 6.0 buffer
|
3.7
|
pH 7.2 buffer
|
8.4
|
pH 7.5 buffer
|
9.7
|
Inference: Mesalamine was observed to have maximum
solubility in 0.1N HCL and increases
from pH 4.5 to pH 7.5 range.
PHARMACEUTICAL EVALUATIONS
Percentage Yield(Kakar* and Singh 2014)
Percentage yield of various formulations are depicted in the table 20
and figure 34.
Table 20: Percentage yield
Formulation code
|
Theoretical yield Practical
yield
(g) (g)
|
Percentage yield
(% w/w)
|
F1
|
1.860
|
1.48
|
79.570
|
F2
|
1.860
|
1.688
|
90.753
|
F3
|
1.860
|
1.723
|
92.634
|
Fig 59 - Percentage
yield of microspheres
Inference:
The percentage yield was found in the
range of 79.57 to 92.634% w/w. The results indicated
that the formulation containing chitosan-pectin combination (1: 1 ratio) yields better percentage of Mesalamine magnetic microspheres.
Drug Content and Entrapment Efficiency(Kakar, Batra, and Singh
2013),(“Design and
Characterization of Cisplatin Magnetic Microspheres - IJPRS” n.d.),(Kakar* and Singh 2014)
The content of active ingredients of
various formulations was analyzed using UV spectrophotometer
at 230 nm. The results of percentage drug content are depicted in table 21 and figure 35.
Table 21: Drug Content of Formulated Microspheres
Formulation code
|
Drug Content (%w/w)
|
F1
|
85.058
|
F2
|
85.698
|
F3
|
86.369
|
Fig 60 - Drug content
of formulated microspheres
Inference:
The percentage of drug content
ranged from 69.964 to 86.369%
w/w. The formulation F3 found to have highest drug content.
Drug Loading Capacity(“(PDF) Formulation,
Development and in-Vitro Release Effects of Ethyl Cellulose Coated Pectin
Microspheres for Colon Targeting” n.d.)
The
drug loading capacity
of various formulations was analyzed using UV spectrophotometer at 230 nm. The results
of percentage drug content are depicted in table 22 and figure 36.
Table 22: Drug Loading Capacity
of Formulated Microspheres
Formulation code
|
Drug Loading (%)
|
F1
|
17.289
|
F2
|
19.131
|
F3
|
17.540
|
Fig 61 - Drug loading
of formulated microspheres
Inference
The
drug loading capacity
ranged from 17.289 – 28.209 %w/w and from the result it is clear
that the drug loading
capacity increases with increase in concentration of pectin.(Thakral et al. 2011)
in- vitro release study(Kakar, Batra, and Singh 2013),(Nasab et al. 2021)
The in- vitro release study of Mesalamine magnetic microspheres was
done using USP II type Paddle apparatus using a mixture of 45ml of 0.1N HCl and 855ml of PBS pH 7.4 as the dissolution
medium. The results are shown in table 23 and figure 37.
Table: 23 Percentage drug release of Pure Drug, Formulation F1 to F3
Time (hours)
|
Pure
Drug
|
F1
|
F2
|
F3
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
0.5
|
29.160
|
-
|
-
|
-
|
1
|
93.400
|
4.464
|
3.960
|
10.44
|
1.5
|
110.48
|
-
|
-
|
-
|
2
|
-
|
9.024
|
10.092
|
14.46
|
3
|
-
|
15.916
|
11.240
|
19.218
|
4
|
-
|
21.404
|
18.860
|
35.884
|
5
|
-
|
48.520
|
24.364
|
79.282
|
6
|
-
|
63.908
|
47.180
|
90.520
|
7
|
-
|
89.820
|
91.998
|
103.618
|
Percent Drug release
CONCLUSION:
The aim
of the present study was to formulate magnetically responsive mesalamine microspheres by solvent evaporation method
by using biodegradable polymers (Chitosan and
Pectin) and to carry out the various pharmaceutical and magnetic
characterizations, to study the
effect of polymer type on in-vitro drug
release. In the present study, 3 formulations were prepared in total by using Chitosan
and Pectin as polymer in different ratios (1:1) of
each polymer and combination of two polymers. Also, the
effect of polymer type was studied.
Among the different formulations, F3 gave satisfactory results by releasing
100.64 % in 9 hours. The results
indicate that the chitosan-pectin microspheres substantially retarded the drug release and showed the best result
for the one with higher chitosan content (i.e., F3 formulation). The inter polymer complex that could be formed
between carboxyl groups of pectin and
the amino groups of chitosan, may be responsible for such delayed drug release. The in-vitro release study of optimized formulation F3 was applied to
various kinetic models to predict the
mechanism of drug release. The drug release was found to follow zero order kinetics. In Korsemeyer Peppas
equation, the n value was 1.372, indicating anomalous
diffusion or non-fickian diffusion, probably Super-Case II transport in which the drug release
mechanism may be due to polymer relaxation(erosion) alone.
FUTURE SCOPE
Ø In- vitro screening using cell culture
models
Ø In- vivo screening using animal
models (using gamma scintillography).
Ø Pharmacokinetic and toxicity study
Ø Combinational therapies showing synergistic effect can
also need to be studied.
The adoption
of magnetic particles for targeted delivery is minimal and most of the work is in the basic research phase. Hence
their potential is yet to be
realized fully. The future holds great promise for its systematic investigation and exploitation.
REFERENCES
“(PDF) Different Approaches to
Design and Evaluation of Colon Specific Drug Delivery Systems.” n.d. Accessed
March 19, 2023. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/285906024_Different_approaches_to_design_and_evaluation_of_colon_specific_drug_delivery_systems.
“(PDF) Formulation, Development and
in-Vitro Release Effects of Ethyl Cellulose Coated Pectin Microspheres for
Colon Targeting.” n.d. Accessed March 19, 2023. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/289487942_Formulation_development_and_in-vitro_release_effects_of_ethyl_cellulose_coated_pectin_microspheres_for_colon_targeting.
“(PDF) Lipid Nano Particulate Drug
Delivery: An Overview of the Emerging Trend.” n.d. Accessed March 19, 2023.
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/335029174_Lipid_nano_particulate_drug_delivery_An_overview_of_the_emerging_trend.
Chandra, Bala Sekaran, Siva Santhosh
Bhogela, Manjusha Shaik, Chaitanya Sravanthi Vadlamudi, Meghana Chappa, and
Naga Sirisha Maddirala. 2011. “Simple and Sensitive Spectrophotometric Methods
for the Analysis of Mesalamine in Bulk and Tablet Dosage Forms.” Química
Nova 34 (6): 1068–73. https://doi.org/10.1590/S0100-40422011000600026.
Chandra, Dinesh, Indranil Kumar Yadav,
Hari Pratap Singh, and D A Jain. n.d. “Design and Development of Satranidazole
Microspheres For Colon Targeted Drug Delivery.” INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF
PHARMACEUTICAL AND CHEMICAL SCIENCES ISSN: 22775005 1 (3). Accessed March
19, 2023. www.ijpcsonline.com1510.
“Design and Characterization of
Cisplatin Magnetic Microspheres - IJPRS.” n.d. Accessed March 19, 2023.
https://www.ijprs.com/article/design-and-characterization-of-cisplatin-magnetic-microspheres/.
Guo, Liang, Guang Liu, Ruo Yu Hong, and
Hong Zhong Li. 2010. “Preparation and Characterization of Chitosan Poly(Acrylic
Acid) Magnetic Microspheres.” Marine Drugs 2010, Vol. 8, Pages 2212-2222
8 (7): 2212–22. https://doi.org/10.3390/MD8072212.
“Home - Indian Pharmacopoeia
Commission.” n.d. Accessed March 19, 2023. https://www.ipc.gov.in/.
Jayvadan, K. P., V. P. Nirav, and H. S.
Shreeraj. 2009. “Formulation and In-Vitro Evaluation of Mesalamine Matrix
Tablets Using Chitosan for Colonic Drug Delivery.”
Kakar*, Satinder, and Ramandeep Singh.
2014. “6-Thioguanine Loaded Magnetic Microspheres as a New Drug Delivery System
to Cancer Patients.” African Journal of Pharmacy and Pharmacology 8
(31): 786–92. https://doi.org/10.5897/AJPP2014.4104.
Kakar, Satinder, Deepa Batra, and
Ramandeep Singh. 2013. “Preparation and Evaluation of Magnetic Microspheres of
Mesalamine (5-Aminosalicylic Acid) for Colon Drug Delivery.” Journal of
Acute Disease 2 (3): 226–31. https://doi.org/10.1016/S2221-6189(13)60132-8.
Kaushik, Dinesh, Satish Sardana, and
DinaNath Mishra. 2010. “In-Vitro Characterization and Cytotoxicity Analysis of
5- Fluorouracil Loaded Chitosan Microspheres for Targeting Colon Cancer.” Indian
Journal of Pharmaceutical Education and Research 44 (3). https://doi.org/Nill.
Lee, Sang Hoon, Rajiv Bajracharya, Jeong
Youn Min, Ji Won Han, Byeong Ju Park, and Hyo Kyung Han. 2020. “Strategic
Approaches for Colon Targeted Drug Delivery: An Overview of Recent
Advancements.” Pharmaceutics 2020, Vol. 12, Page 68 12 (1): 68. https://doi.org/10.3390/PHARMACEUTICS12010068.
Mascolo, Maria Cristina, Yongbing Pei,
and Terry A. Ring. 2013. “Room Temperature Co-Precipitation Synthesis of
Magnetite Nanoparticles in a Large PH Window with Different Bases.” Materials
2013, Vol. 6, Pages 5549-5567 6 (12): 5549–67.
https://doi.org/10.3390/MA6125549.
Mounika, P, Dr K V Ratnamala, and M
Pharmacy. 2018. “REVIEW ARTICLE ON MAGNETIC MICROSPHERES” 5. www.jetir.org.
Mukesh, Ratnaparkhi P, Somvanshi U
Fattesingh, Pawar A Sham, Chaudhari P Shilpa, Gupta P Jyoti, and Budhavant A
Kalyani. 2013. “Colon Targeted Drug Delivery System.” International Journal
of Pharma Research & Review 2 (8): 33.
Nasab, Sara Hosayni, Amin Amani, Hossein
Ali Ebrahimi, and Ali Asghar Hamidi. 2021. “Design and Preparation of a New
Multi-Targeted Drug Delivery System Using Multifunctional Nanoparticles for
Co-Delivery of SiRNA and Paclitaxel.” Journal of Pharmaceutical Analysis
11 (2): 163–73. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.JPHA.2020.04.005.
Ofokansi, K. C., F. C. Kenechukwu, A. B.
Isah, and E. L. Okigbo. 2013. “Formulation and Evaluation of
Glutaraldehyde-Crosslinked Chitosan Microparticles for the Delivery of
Ibuprofen.” Tropical Journal of Pharmaceutical Research 12 (1): 19–25.
https://doi.org/10.4314/TJPR.V12I1.4.
Paharia, Amol, Awesh K. Yadav, Gopal
Rai, Sunil K. Jain, Shyam S. Pancholi, and Govind P. Agrawal. 2007.
“Eudragit-Coated Pectin Microspheres of 5-Fluorouracil for Colon Targeting.” AAPS
PharmSciTech 8 (1): E87. https://doi.org/10.1208/PT0801012.
Patel, N., J. Patel, S. Shah, and J.
Patel. 2010. “Design, Development and in Vitro Evaluation of Mesalamine Tablets
Containing Pectin and Chitosan for Colon-Specific Drug Delivery.”
Patra, Jayanta Kumar, Amritesh C.
Shukla, and Gitishree Das. 2020. “Advances in Pharmaceutical Biotechnology:
Recent Progress and Future Applications.” Advances in Pharmaceutical
Biotechnology: Recent Progress and Future Applications, January, 1–478.
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-15-2195-9.
“Pharmaceutical Approaches to Colon
Targeted Drug Delivery Systems.” n.d. Accessed March 19, 2023.
https://sites.ualberta.ca/~csps/JPPS6(1)/S.Chourasia/colon.htm.
Raj, Behin Sundara, Shanthi, Rajesh
Sreedharan Nair, Punitha Isaac Samraj, and Vidya. 2013. “Formulation and
Evaluation of Coated Microspheres for Colon Targeting.” Journal of Applied
Pharmaceutical Science 3, (8,): S68–74.
https://doi.org/10.7324/JAPS.2013.38.S11.
Ritter, James M, Lionel D Lewis, Timothy
GK Mant, and Albert Ferro. 2008. A Textbook of Clinical Pharmacology and
Toxicology. Hodder Arnold. Hodder Arnold.
https://www.routledge.com/A-Textbook-of-Clinical-Pharmacology-and-Therapeutics-5Ed/Ritter-Lewis-Mant-Ferro/p/book/9780340900468.
Sharma, Madhu, Baibhav Joshi, Monika
Bansal, and Manish Goswami. 2012. “Formulation and Evaluation of Colon Targeted
Tablets of Mesalazine.” Journal of Drug Delivery and Therapeutics 2 (5):
24–36. https://doi.org/10.22270/JDDT.V2I5.290.
Tewabe, Ashagrachew, Atlaw Abate, Manaye
Tamrie, Abyou Seyfu, and Ebrahim Abdela Siraj. 2021. “Targeted Drug Delivery —
From Magic Bullet to Nanomedicine: Principles, Challenges, and Future
Perspectives.” Journal of Multidisciplinary Healthcare 14: 1711.
https://doi.org/10.2147/JMDH.S313968.
Thakral, Naveen K., Alok R. Ray, Daniel
Bar-Shalom, André Huss Eriksson, and Dipak K. Majumdar. 2011. “The Quest for
Targeted Delivery in Colon Cancer: Mucoadhesive Valdecoxib Microspheres.” International
Journal of Nanomedicine 6: 1057–68. https://doi.org/10.2147/IJN.S19561.