|
|||||
|
Click here for information on how to order reprints of this article. | ||||
Design and Development
of Topical Microemulsion for Poorly Water-Soluble Antifungal Agents* P. Puranajoti R. T. Patil P. D. Sheth G. Bommareddy P. Dondeti K. Egbaria *This study was sponsored by Research and
Development,
KEY WORDS: topical microemulsion, water-soluable antifungal agents ABSTRACT Topical microemulsions for poorly soluble
antifungal agents (miconazole, ketoconazole, and itraconazole) were
designed and developed using either mineral oil or olive oil as an
oil phase. Various combinations of surfactant and cosurfactant were
used, including Labrafil® M 1944 CS and Plurol® Oleique
(1:1); Labrafil® M 1944 CS and Plurol® Oleique
(1:2); or Labrafil® M 1944 CS, Capmul® MCM C-8, Pluro® Oleique,
and dehydrated ethyl alcohol (3:3:1:1), to design microemulsions by
constructing pseudoternary phase diagrams. Water-in-oil microemulsions
were obtained using oil and surfactant concentrations that ranged
from 8.3% to 33.3% v/v and 16.7% to 75.8% v/v, respectively. The surfactant:cosurfactant
combination of Labrafil® M 1944 CS and Plurol® Oleique
(1:1) and the oil phase of olive oil were chosen for preparing ketoconazole
microemulsion containing 10% v/v alcohol. The ketoconazole gel was
prepared using Carbopol® 974P and 90% v/w alcohol. The release profiles of ketoconazole
from both formulations were investigated using Franz diffusion apparatus.
The release rates of ketoconazole from microemulsion and gel formulation
were 766.8 and 677.6 µg/hour, respectively (n = 6, P . .05). No significant difference was seen between the release rates of
ketoconazole from both formulations despite their differences in alcohol
content. Microemulsions of poorly water-soluble antifungal agents
were successfully developed with in vitro release rates comparable
to that of the gel formulation. INTRODUCTION Most pharmaceutical drug substances are
lipophilic compounds, which are practically insoluble in water. Researchers
have developed drug delivery systems, such as tablets, capsules, ointments,
creams, gels, suspensions, solutions, and emulsions, in many dosage
forms to deliver these lipophilic substances to patients. A microemulsion,1-5
one of the pharmaceutical interests for new drug delivery, is normally
composed of oil, water, surfactant, and cosurfactant. Hoar and Schulman6
were the first to introduce the word microemulsion, which they defined
as a transparent solution obtained by titrating a normal coarse emulsion
with medium-chain alcohols. The short to medium-chain alcohols are
generally considered as cosurfactants in the microemulsion system.
The presence of surfactant and cosurfactant
in the system makes the interfacial tension very low. Therefore, the
microemulsion is thermodynamically stable and forms spontaneously,
with an average droplet diameter of 1 to 100 µm.7-9 Advantages of
microemulsion over coarse emulsion include its ease of preparation
due to spontaneous formation, thermodynamic stability, transparent
and elegant appearance, increased drug loading, enhanced penetration
through the biological membranes, increased bioavailability,4,10 and
less inter- and intra-individual variability in drug pharmacokinetics.11
These advantages make microemulsions attractive drug delivery systems. Recently, microemulsions were reviewed
for several applications, such as topical use, oral use, parenteral
use, and cosmetics.1-5 The objective of the present study was to design
and develop topical microemulsions for poorly water-soluble compounds
using antifungal agents such as miconazole, ketoconazole, and itraconazole
as model drugs. Three sets of surfactant and cosurfactant phase were
used: Labrafil® M 1944 CS
and Plurol® Oleique (1:1); Labrafil® M 1944 CS
and Plurol® Oleique (1:2); Labrafil® M 1944 CS,
Capmul® MCM C-8, Plurol® Oleique, and dehydrated ethyl
alcohol (3:3:1:1). These were evaluated individually. Either olive
oil or mineral oil was used as the oil phase. A pseudoternary phase
diagram was constructed for each microemulsion system. Additionally,
a gel formulation of ketoconazole (about 1% w/w) containing 90% v/w
of alcohol was also developed. The release profiles of ketoconazole
from the microemulsion (containing about 10% v/v alcohol) and the
gel formulation were compared using Franz diffusion apparatus, and
the release rates were calculated. EXPERIMENTAL SECTION Materials
and Reagents Olive oil and mineral oil
were obtained from Croda Inc. (Itasca, IL) while Labrafil® M 1944 CS
was purchased from Gatefosse (Westwood, NJ). Plurol® Oleique,
Capmul® MCM C-8, and Carbopol® 974P were
generously given by Gatefosse (Westwood, NJ), Abitec Corporation (Columbus,
OH), and B F Goodrich Specialty Chemicals (Cleveland, OH), respectively.
Hydrochloric acid and dehydrated alcohol were of reagent grade, but
methanol, acetonitrile, and all other reagents were of HPLC grade. Pseudoternary Phase
Diagram The oil phase was mixed with the surfactant:cosurfactant
phase, and the mixture was titrated with water until it turned turbid.
The volume of water used was then recorded. Water titration was continued
until the mixture turned clear and, again, the water volume was recorded.
The pseudoternary phase diagram was constructed by plotting the amounts
of water phase, oil phase, and surfactant:cosurfactant phase used
in the experiment. Preparation of Microemulsion A water-in-oil microemulsion of ketoconazole was prepared
by mixing about 1.1 g of ketoconazole with the proportion of olive
oil, water, and Labrafil® M 1944 CS and Plurol® Oleique
(1:1) in the microemulsion region to obtain 100 mL in volume as shown
in Figure 1. Then, 11.1 mL dehydrated alcohol was added to help make
ketoconazole soluble in the system. Preparation of Gel A gel formulation of ketoconazole was prepared by dissolving
about 1 g of ketoconazole in 90 mL of dehydrated alcohol. Then 30%
w/w Carbopol® 974P solution in water was used to make up 100 g of
gel formulation. HPLC Analysis of
Ketoconazole HPLC apparatus (Hewlett
Packard Series 1050) was set at the wavelength of 254 nm. The analysis
was performed using a 3.9 x 300 mm stainless steel column packed with
10-micron particles (µBondapack C18, Alltech, Eke, Belgium). A composition
of 60% v/v Acetonitrile, 40% v/v deionized water containing 0.2% v/v
diethylamine was used as a mobile phase to elute ketoconazole. A 25-µL
volume each of standard and sample solutions was injected, and ketoconazole
was eluted isocratically using a flow rate of 1.0 mL/min at room temperature. Standard Preparations USP standard stock solution was prepared by weighing
approximately 10 mg of ketoconazole into a 10-mL volumetric flask
containing 8 mL of methanol. The volume was then adjusted to 10 mL
with methanol, and this solution was used as the standard stock solution.
Standard solutions with ketoconazole concentrations of 10, 50, 100,
150 and 200 µg/mL were prepared accordingly by diluting the standard
stock solution with methanol. Each standard solution was filtered
through a 0.45 µm membrane filter before injection onto the HPLC column. Sample Preparations About 0.1 mL of the microemulsion was transferred into
a 10-mL volumetric flask and adjusted to volume with methanol. For
the gel formulation, 0.1 g of gel was weighed into a 10-mL volumetric
flask and adjusted to volume with methanol. Each sample solution was
filtered through a 0.45 µm membrane filter before injection onto the
HPLC column. Drug Release Studies The release profiles of ketoconazole from both microemulsion
and gel formulations were generated from the percentage of ketoconazole
released into the receptor chamber of the Franz Diffusion Apparatus
(Crown Glass Company, Inc.) at each sampling time point. A test formulation
(either microemulsion or gel formulation) at an equivalent amount
of ketoconazole, approximately 10 mg, was placed on the Durapore Membrane
(Millipore) in each donor chamber of the Franz Diffusion cell (n56). A 20% v/v of methanol in water containing 0.04% v/v of hydrochloric
acid was used as a receptor medium for all tests. The temperature
of the receptor medium was maintained at 37 6 0.2ºC throughout
the experiment. Samples were taken at 1, 2, 3.5, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 22,
and 24 hours and injected onto the HPLC column to determine the content
of ketoconazole in the receptor medium at each time point. RESULTS AND DISCUSSION Pseudoternary Phase
Diagram In general, a pseudoternary phase diagram was constructed
to determine the composition of an aqueous phase, an oil phase, and
a surfactant:cosurfactant phase that will yield a microemulsion (transparent
solution). Microemulsion preparation requires adjusting the HLB (hydrophilic
lipophilic balance) value of the formulation by including a cosurfactant,
which makes the polar solvent less hydrophilic. In this study, the
common non-ionic cosurfactant in all the microemulsion systems was
Plurol® Oleique.
It is a polyglyceryl-6-dioleate, which is a short chain alcohol with
an HLB value of 10. Dehydrated alcohol was also incorporated into
the microemulsion system as another cosurfactant to increase the curvature
of the oil layer4. Labrafil® M 1944 CS and Capmul® MCM C-8
function as surfactants due to their self-emulsifying characteristics.
For simplicity, the microemulsion is assumed to be a three-component
system (oil, water, and the mixture of surfactant and cosurfactant).
Any combination of the three components can be plotted as a percent
on a pseudoternary phase diagram.4 Pseudoternary phase diagrams were
constructed and the corresponding microemulsion regions were identified
as shown in Figures 1 through 6. The results indicate that the area
of the microemulsion region increased in the system containing dehydrated
alcohol. Due to the low water-solubility of ketoconazole and the rigidity
of oily surface, some amount of alcohol was added to dissolve the
drug and increase the curvature of the oil layer4. The alcohol incorporated
into the microemulsion system not only reduces the interfacial tension
between the oil phase and the aqueous phase but also makes the lipophilic
drug soluble in the system. However, alcohol evaporates easily; therefore,
formulations containing alcohol may destabilize if their packages
are not tightly closed. According to the pseudoternary phase diagrams
shown in Figures 1 through 6, the water-in-oil microemulsion systems
of miconazole, ketoconazole, and itraconazole were obtained at oil
concentrations ranging from 8.3 to 33.3% v/v and surfactant concentrations
ranging from 16.7 to 75.8% v/v. Microemulsion and
Gel Formulation A microemulsion of ketoconazole containing approximately
60% v/v surfactant and cosurfactant, 20% v/v olive oil, and 10% v/v
dehydrated alcohol was prepared. In this case, alcohol was added to
help solubilize ketoconazole in the system. Hydrochloric acid may
be added, if necessary, to incorporate a sufficient amount of the
drug (up to 2% w/v) into a microemulsion formulation. A gel formulation
of ketoconazole containing about 3% w/w Carbopol® 974P and 90% v/w dehydrated alcohol was also formulated.
The release profiles of ketoconazole from both microemulsion and gel
formulations were generated using Franz diffusion apparatus, and the
corresponding release rates were calculated and evaluated for their
in vitro release characteristics. HPLC Analysis of
Ketoconazole To determine the amount of ketoconazole in the microemulsion
and gel formulations, a series of standard solutions were prepared,
filtered, and injected onto the HPLC column. Peak ketoconazole elution
from the C-18 column occurred at about 5.1 minutes (Figure 7). The
peak area obtained from a series of standard solutions and the corresponding
concentrations were plotted and used as a standard curve. Figure 8
shows the standard curve of ketoconazole with a correlation coefficient
(R2) of 0.999. Release Studies Each of the microemulsion and gel formulations, with
the equivalent amount of ketoconazole, was placed separately on the
membrane sandwiched between donor chamber and receptor chamber of
a Franz diffusion cell (n56). The amount of ketoconazole released at each sampling
time point was determined by HPLC, and the results are reported in
Table 1. The release profiles of ketoconazole from each formulation
were constructed by plotting the percentage of ketoconazole released
against time in hours as shown in Figures 9 through 11. As shown in the figures, the release rates
of ketoconazole from both formulations reached steady state at approximately
22 hours, and the percentage of ketoconazole retained in both formulations
was about the same. As shown in Figure 11, the release rate of ketoconazole
from microemulsion at the beginning was slightly slower than the release
rate from the gel formulation. This might be because some amount of
the drug has partitioned into the oil phase. Therefore, it takes some
time for the drug to partition out of the oil phase into the receptor
medium. Since the gel formulation has no partitioning of the drug,
the release rate is slightly faster. To compare the release rates
of the drug from both formulations, the rate of drug released was
calculated using the slope of each release profile (R2
. 0.98) from zero to the 4-hour point. The results indicate
ketoconazole release rates from microemulsion and gel formulation
of 766.8 and 677.6 µg/hour, respectively. No significant difference between the
release rates of ketoconazole from both formulations was found (P
. 0.05). The gel formulation does not contain a surfactant; hence, there
is no partition of drug. Although partition of the drug to the oil
phase did not occur in the gel formulation as in a microemulsion system,
ketoconazole release from the cross-link of the carbopol polymer requires
some lag time. This might be one reason that the ketoconazole release
profiles from the microemulsion and the gel formulation were not much
different (Figure 11). Additionally, the percentages of alcohol used
in the gel formulation and the microemulsion were significantly different
(90% v/w in gel versus 10% v/v in microemulsion). Alcohol can help
break down the bonds between the cross-links of the polymer and thus
facilitate the release of drug from the polymer. This may also contribute
to the similar release rates. This also implies a microemulsion delivery
system for a highly lipophilic drug such as ketoconazole would require
a very low amount of alcohol, but a gel formulation made for the same
concentration would require a very high amount of alcohol. One major advantage of a microemulsion
over traditional emulsion is the ease of preparation, especially with
regard to large batch manufacturing. In general, several factors have
to be considered for a coarse emulsion, such as intensity and duration
of mixing, emulsification time (including rate and temperature), order
of adding and mixing each ingredient, heating and cooling rates, and
so on. Because microemulsion forms spontaneously with only gentle
agitation, some of these factors can be avoided. Another advantage
is the physical stability of the formulation. In a traditional emulsion
system, the larger droplet size favors a decrease in the surface area,
which in turn favors a decrease in the free energy of the system.4
However, a microemulsion system has lower interfacial tension between
water and oil due to the presence of surfactant and cosurfactant;
therefore, the surface area of the dispersed droplets is very large.4,12
The lower interfacial tension compensates the dispersion entropy;
therefore, the microemulsion system becomes thermodynamically stable
due to the low free energy of the system. As mentioned earlier, a microemulsion
normally contains droplet size diameters ranging from 1 to 100 µm;
they appear transparent or clear because the light-scattering capability
of the small droplets is weak.4 A microemulsion has a more elegant
appearance, which may increase patient compliance. In addition, the
presence of surfactant and cosurfactant in the system enables achievement
of high drug loading, especially for lipophilic compounds. Regarding
bioavailabiity,4,10,13-24 a lipophilic drug in a microemulsion system
has better penetration of the physiological membrane due to several
factors. These include the enhancing effect of surfactants, the proper
balance between hydrophilicity and lipophilicity of the formulation,
smaller particle size, the in vivo partition coefficient of the drug
between the two immiscible phases, the presence of drug in an emulsified
form, site of absorption, metabolism of the oil in the microemulsion,
effect of lipid vehicle on gastric emptying, and drug solubility in
the microemulsion excipients. CONCLUSIONS Microemulsions are potential drug delivery
systems for several applications especially oral, nasal, topical,
and transdermal. They represent an easy to manufacture, thermodynamically
stable system with improved bioavailability, less alcohol content,
and a transparent and elegant appearance. However, the toxicity of
the surfactant and cosurfactant has to be investigated thoroughly
for oral and nasal applications, especially for drugs requiring chronic
use.9 REFERENCES 1. Attwood D: Microemulsions,
in Kreuter H (ed): Colloidal Drug Delivery Systems. New York, Marcel
Decker, 1994, p 31. 2. Ogino K,
Abe M: Microemulsion formation with some typical surfactants, in Matijevic
E (ed): Surface and Colloid Science. New York, Plenum Press, 1993,
p 85. 3. Paul BK,
Moulik SP: Microemulsions: An overview. J Disp Sci 18(4):301, 1997. 4. Tenjarla
SN: Microemulsions: An overview and pharmaceutical applications. Critical
Reviews TM
in Therapeutic Drug Carrier Systems 16:461-521, 1999. 5. Jayakrishnan
A, Kalaiarasi K, Shah DO: Microemulsions: Evolving technologies for
cosmetic application. J Soc Cosmetic Chem 34:335, 1983. 6. Hoar TP,
Schulman JH: Transparent water-in-oil dispersions: The oleopathic
hydromicelle. Nature 102,152, 1943. 7. Prince: Microemulsions,
in Theory and Practice. New York, Academic Press, 1977. 8. Prince: Microemulsions.
J Soc Cosmetic Chem 21:193, 1970. 9. Baviere,
et al: The influence of alcohols on microemulsion composition. J Colloid
Interf Sci 81:266, 1981. 10. Lieberman HA,
Rieger MM, Banker GS: Pharmaceutical Dosage Forms: Disperse Systems,
second ed, Vol 1. New York, Marcel Decker, 1996, 211-281, 315-370. 11. Kovarik JM, Muller
EA, Van Bree JB, Tetzloff W, and Kathz K: Reduced inter- and intra-individual
variability in cyclosporine pharmacokinetics from a microemulsion
formulation. J Pharm Sci 83:444, 1994. 12. De Gennes PG,
Taupin C: Microemulsions and the flexibility of oil/water interfaces.
J Phys Chem 86:2294, 1982. 13. Osborne DW, Ward
AJ, O'Neil K: Microemulsions as delivery of vehicles: 1. Characterization
of a model system. Drug Dev Ind Pharm 14:1203, 1988. 14. Friedman D, Benita
S: A mathematical model for drug release from o/w emulsions: Application
to controlled release morphine emulsions. Drug Dev Ind Pharm 13:2067,
1987. 15. Gallarate M, Gasco
MR, Trotta M: Influence of octanoic acid on membrane permeability
of timolol from solutions and from microemulsions. Acta Pharm Technol
34:102, 1988. 16. Kriwet K, Muller-Goymann
CC: Diclofenac release from phospholipid drug systems and permeation
through excised human stratum corneum. Int J Pharm 125:231, 1995. 17. Ktistis G: Effect
of polysorbate 80 and sorbitol concentration on in vitro release of
indomethacin from microemulsions. J Disp Sci 18(1):49, 1997. 18. Osborne DW, Ward
AJ, O'Neil K: Microemulsions as topical delivery vehicles: In vitro
transdermal studies of a model hydrophilic drug. J Pharm Pharmacol
43:451, 1991. 19. Fevrier F, Bobin
MF, Lafforgue C, Martii MC: Advances in microemulsions and transepidermal
penetration of tyrosine. STP Pharm Sci 1:60, 1991. 20. Tenjarla SN, Puranajoti
P, Kasina R, Mandal T: Preparation, characterization, and evaluation
of miconazole-cyclodextrin complexes for improved oral and topical
delivery. J Pharm Sci 87:425-429, 1998. 21. Tarr B, Yalkowsky
SH: Enhanced intestinal absorption of cyclosporine in rats through
the reduction of emulsion droplet size. Pharm Res 6:40, 1989. 22. Ritschel WA, Ritschel
GB, Sabouni A, Wolochuk D, Schroeder T: Study on the peroral absorption
of the endekapeptide cyclosporin A. Meth Find E Clin Pharm 11:281,
1989. 23. Constantinides
PP, Scalart JP, Lancaster C, Marcello J, Marks G, Ellens H, Smith
PL: Formulation and intestinal absorption enhancement evaluation of
water-in-oil microemulsions incorporating medium-chain glycerides.
Pharm Res 11:385, 1994. 24. Constantinides
PP, Lancaster CM, Marcello J, et al: Enhanced intestinal absorption
of an RGD peptide from water-in-oil microemulsions of different composition
and particle size. J Contr Rel 34:109, 1995.
Table 1. Comparison of Ketoconazole
Release from Microemulsion and Gel Formulation Time (hr) Ketoconazole Released, % Microemulsion Gel (Mean ± SD, n = 6)
(Mean ± SD, n = 6)
1 8.2 ± 2.70 11.16
± 2.59
2 15.15 ± 3.13 19.16 ± 2.89 3.5-4 25.02 ± 3.01 (3.5 hr) 31.57 ± 3.10 (4 hr)
5 33.66 ± 3.01 34.50 ± 2.95
7 44.04 ± 4.24 40.55 ± 2.09
8 47.01 ± 5.51 42.64 ± 1.98
22 73.59 ± 2.28 64.77 ± 2.87
24 73.74 ± 1.91 65.29 ± 4.81
| |||||
©2000-2013. All Rights Reserved. Veterinary Solutions LLC
|