Cited by 28Drug Solubulity and Delivery SystemsAdvanced Drug Delivery SystemsNanoparticle-Based Drug Delivery

Novel Biphasic Lipolysis Method To Predict in Vivo Performance of Lipid-Based Formulations

O’Dwyer, Patrick J., Box, Karl J., Koehl, Niklas J., Bennett-Lenane, Harriet, Reppas, Christos, Holm, Rene, Kuentz, Martin, Griffin, Brendan T.·2020·Molecular Pharmaceutics

Abstract

The absence of an intestinal absorption sink is a significant weakness of standard in vitro lipolysis methods, potentially leading to poor prediction of in vivo performance and an overestimation of drug precipitation. In addition, the majority of the described lipolysis methods only attempt to simulate intestinal conditions, thus overlooking any supersaturation or precipitation of ionizable drugs as they transition from the acidic gastric environment to the more neutral conditions of the intestine. The aim of this study was to develop a novel lipolysis method incorporating a two-stage gastric-to-intestinal transition and an absorptive compartment to reliably predict in vivo performance of lipid-based formulations (LBFs). Drug absorption was mimicked by in situ quantification of drug partitioning into a decanol layer. The method was used to characterize LBFs from four studies described in the literature, involving three model drugs (i.e., nilotinib, fenofibrate, and danazol) where in vivo bioavailability data have previously been reported. The results from the novel biphasic lipolysis method were compared to those of the standard pH-stat method in terms of reliability for predicting the in vivo performance. For three of the studies, the novel biphasic lipolysis method more reliably predicted the in vivo bioavailability compared to the standard pH-stat method. In contrast, the standard pH-stat method was found to produce more predictive results for one study involving a series of LBFs composed of the soybean oil, glyceryl monolinoleate (Maisine CC), Kolliphor EL, and ethanol. This result was surprising and could reflect that increasing concentrations of ethanol (as a cosolvent) in the formulations may have resulted in greater partitioning of the drug into the decanol absorptive compartment. In addition to the improved predictivity for most of the investigated systems, this biphasic lipolysis method also uses in situ analysis and avoids time- and resource-intensive sample analysis steps, thereby facilitating a higher throughput capacity and biorelevant approach for characterization of LBFs.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1021/acs.molpharmaceut.0c00427

Cites

2 of 2 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • A two-stage biphasic lipolysis setup with a decanol absorptive compartment more reliably predicted in vivo bioavailability compared to the standard pH-stat method.

    “This setup was tested using LBDDS containing three model drugs (nilotinib, fenofibrate and danazol) and was found to more reliably predict in vivo bioavailability compared to the standard pH-stat method (O'Dwyer et al., 2020).”

    From Exploring impact of supersaturated lipid-based drug delivery systems of celecoxib on in vitro permeation across PermeapadⓇ membrane and in vivo absorption (2020) · cites this paper as O'Dwyer et al., 2020

    The Abstract (p. 2) says the two-stage method used a decanol absorptive layer and was tested against the pH-stat method using formulations of nilotinib, fenofibrate, and danazol. It more reliably predicted in vivo bioavailability in three of four studies, but the standard pH-stat method performed better in the fourth. The claim omits that exception. (LLM, conf=0.88)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 35

  1. [2](2) O ' Driscoll, C. M.; Griffin, B. T. Biopharmaceutical Challenges Associated with Drugs with Low Aqueous Solubility  The Potential Impact of Lipid-Based Formulations. Adv. Drug Delivery Rev. 2008 , 60 , 617 -624. -
  2. [3](3) Kuentz, M. Lipid-Based Formulations for Oral Delivery of Lipophilic Drugs. Drug Discovery Today: Technol. 2012 , 9 , e97 -e104. -
  3. [4](4) Mu ̈ llertz, A.; Ogbonna, A.; Ren, S.; Rades, T. New Perspectives on Lipid and Surfactant Based Drug Delivery Systems for Oral Delivery of Poorly Soluble Drugs. J. Pharm. Pharmacol. 2010 , 62 , 1622 -1636. -
  4. [5](5) Mu, H.; Holm, R.; Mu ̈ llertz, A. Lipid-Based Formulations for Oral Administration of Poorly Water-Soluble Drugs. Int. J. Pharm. 2013 , 453 , 215 -224. -
  5. [6](6) Hauss, D. J. Oral Lipid-Based Formulations. Adv. Drug Delivery Rev. 2007 , 59 , 667 -676. -
  6. [7](7) Pouton, C. W.; Porter, C. J. H. Formulation of Lipid-Based Delivery Systems for Oral Administration: Materials, Methods and Strategies. Adv. Drug Delivery Rev. 2008 , 60 , 625 -637. -
  7. [8](8) Strickley, R. G. Solubilizing Excipients in Oral and Injectable Formulations. Pharm. Res. 2004 , 21 , 201 -230. -
  8. [9](9) [Pouton, C. W. Formulation of Poorly Water-Soluble Drugs for Oral Administration: Physicochemical and Physiological Issues and the Lipid Formulation Classification System. Eur. J. Pharm. Sci. 2006 , 29 , 278 -287.](https://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ejps.2006.04.016) - · DOI
  9. [10](10) Williams, H. D.; Sassene, P.; Kleberg, K.; Calderone, M.; Igonin, A.; Jule, E.; Vertommen, J.; Blundell, R.; Benameur, H.; Mu ̈ llertz, A.; Porter, C. J. H.; Pouton, C. W. Toward the Establishment of Standardized in Vitro Tests for Lipid-Based Formulations, Part 4: Proposing a New Lipid Formulation Performance Classification System. J. Pharm. Sci. 2014 , 103 , 2441 -2455. -
  10. [11](11) Griffin, B. T.; Kuentz, M.; Vertzoni, M.; Kostewicz, E. S.; Fei, Y.; Faisal, W.; Stillhart, C.; O ' Driscoll, C. M.; Reppas, C.; Dressman, J. B. Comparison of in Vitro Tests at Various Levels of Complexity for the Prediction of in Vivo Performance of Lipid-Based Formulations: Case Studies with Fenofibrate. Eur. J. Pharm. Biopharm. 2014 , 86 , 427 -437. -
  11. [12](12) Stillhart, C.; Kuentz, M. Trends in the Assessment of Drug Supersaturation and Precipitation In Vitro Using Lipid-Based Delivery Systems. J. Pharm. Sci. 2016 , 105 , 2468 -2476. -
  12. [13](13) [Pouton, C. W. Lipid Formulations for Oral Administration of Drugs: Non-Emulsifying, Self-Emulsifying and ' Self-Microemulsifying ' Drug Delivery Systems. Eur. J. Pharm. Sci. 2000 , 11 , S93 -S98.](https://dx.doi.org/10.1016/s0928-0987(00)00167-6) - · DOI
  13. [14](14) Williams, H. D.; Sassene, P.; Kleberg, K.; Bakala-N ' Goma, J.-C.; Calderone, M.; Jannin, V.; Igonin, A.; Partheil, A.; Marchaud, D.; Jule, E.; Vertommen, J.; Maio, M.; Blundell, R.; Benameur, H.; Carrie ̀ re, F.; Mu ̈ llertz, A.; Porter, C. J. H.; Pouton, C. W. Toward the Establishment of Standardized in Vitro Tests for Lipid-Based Formulations, Part 1: Method Parameterization and Comparison of in Vitro Digestion Profiles across a Range of Representative Formulations. J. Pharm. Sci. 2012 , 101 , 3360 -3380. -
  14. [15](15) Stillhart, C.; Imanidis, G.; Griffin, B. T.; Kuentz, M. Biopharmaceutical Modeling of Drug Supersaturation During LipidBased Formulation Digestion Considering an Absorption Sink. Pharm. Res. 2014 , 31 , 3426 -3444. -
  15. [16](16) Fernandez, S.; Chevrier, S.; Ritter, N.; Mahler, B.; Demarne, F.; Carrie ̀ re, F.; Jannin, V. In Vitro Gastrointestinal Lipolysis of Four Formulations of Piroxicam and Cinnarizine with the Self Emulsifying Excipients Labrasol ® and Gelucire ® 44/14. Pharm. Res. 2009 , 26 , 1901 -1910. -
  16. [17](17) Fernandez, S.; Carrie ̀ re, F.; Jannin, V. Gastrointestinal Lipolysis of Lipid-Based Excipients Intended for the Oral Drug Delivery of Poorly Water-Soluble Drugs. Ol., Corps Gras, Lipides 2010 , 17 , 259 -263. -
  17. [18](18) Fernandez, S.; Jannin, V.; Chevrier, S.; Chavant, Y.; Demarne, F.; Carrie ̀ re, F. In Vitro Digestion of the Self-Emulsifying Lipid Excipient Labrasol ® by Gastrointestinal Lipases and Influence of Its Colloidal Structure on Lipolysis Rate. Pharm. Res. 2013 , 30 , 3077 -3087. -
  18. [19](19) Sassene, P. J.; Fanø, M.; Mu, H.; Rades, T.; Aquistapace, S.; Schmitt, B.; Cruz-Hernandez, C.; Wooster, T. J.; Mu ̈ llertz, A. Comparison of Lipases for in Vitro Models of Gastric Digestion: Lipolysis Using Two Infant Formulas as Model Substrates. Food Funct. 2016 , 7 , 3989 -3998. -
  19. [20](20) [Shi, Y.; Gao, P.; Gong, Y.; Ping, H. Application of a Biphasic Test for Characterization of in Vitro Drug Release of Immediate](https://dx.doi.org/10.1021/mp100114a) 18. [Release Formulations of Celecoxib and Its Relevance to in Vivo Absorption. Mol. Pharm. 2010 , 7 , 1458 -1465.](https://dx.doi.org/10.1021/mp100114a) - · DOI
  20. [21](21) Pillay, V.; Fassihi, R. A New Method for Dissolution Studies of Lipid-Filled Capsules Employing Nifedipine as a Model Drug. Pharm. Res. 1999 , 16 , 333 -337. -
  21. [22](22) Bibi, H. A.; Holm, R.; Bauer-Brandl, A. Simultaneous Lipolysis/ Permeation in Vitro Model, for the Estimation of Bioavailability of Lipid Based Drug Delivery Systems. Eur. J. Pharm. Biopharm. 2017 , 117 , 300 -307. -
  22. [24](24) Alvebratt, C.; Keemink, J.; Edueng, K.; Cheung, O.; Strømme, M.; Bergstro ̈ m, C. A. S. An in Vitro Dissolution -Digestion -Permeation Assay for the Study of Advanced Drug Delivery Systems. Eur. J. Pharm. Biopharm. 2020 , 149 , 21 -29. -
  23. [25](25) Jankovic, S.; O ' Dwyer, P. J.; Box, K. J.; Imanidis, G.; Reppas, C.; Kuentz, M. Biphasic Drug Release Testing Coupled with Diffusing Wave Spectroscopy for Mechanistic Understanding of Solid Dispersion Performance. Eur. J. Pharm. Sci. 2019 , 137 , 105001. -
  24. [26](26) [O ' Dwyer, P. J.; Imanidis, G.; Box, K. J.; Reppas, C. On the Usefulness of Two Small-Scale In Vitro Setups in the Evaluation of Luminal Precipitation of Lipophilic Weak Bases in Early Formulation Development. Pharmaceutics 2020 , 12 , 272.](https://dx.doi.org/10.3390/pharmaceutics12030272) - · DOI
  25. [27](27) Koehl, N. J.; Holm, R.; Kuentz, M.; Griffin, B. T. New Insights into Using Lipid Based Suspensions for ' Brick Dust ' Molecules : Case Study of Nilotinib. Pharm. Res. 2019 , 36 , 56. -
  26. [28](28) Cuine ́ , J. F.; Charman, W. N.; Pouton, C. W.; Edwards, G. A.; Porter, C. J. H. Increasing the Proportional Content of Surfactant (Cremophor EL) Relative to Lipid in Self-Emulsifying Lipid-Based Formulations of Danazol Reduces Oral Bioavailability in Beagle Dogs. Pharm. Res. 2007 , 24 , 748 -757. -
  27. [29](29) [Fei, Y.; Kostewicz, E. S.; Sheu, M.-T.; Dressman, J. B. Analysis of the Enhanced Oral Bioavailability of Fenofibrate Lipid Formulations in Fasted Humans Using an in Vitro -in Silico -in Vivo Approach. Eur. J. Pharm. Biopharm. 2013 , 85 , 1274 -1284.](https://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ejpb.2013.03.001) - · DOI
  28. [30](30) Markopoulos, C.; Andreas, C. J.; Vertzoni, M.; Dressman, J.; Reppas, C. In-Vitro Simulation of Luminal Conditions for Evaluation of Performance of Oral Drug Products: Choosing the Appropriate Test Media. Eur. J. Pharm. Biopharm. 2015 , 93 , 173 -182. -
  29. [31](31) Thomas, N.; Richter, K.; Pedersen, T. B.; Holm, R.; Mu ̈ llertz, A.; Rades, T. In Vitro Lipolysis Data Does Not Adequately Predict the In Vivo Performance of Lipid-Based Drug Delivery Systems Containing Fenofibrate. AAPS J. 2014 , 16 , 539 -549. -
  30. [32](32) Sassene, P. J.; Michaelsen, M. H.; Mosgaard, M. D.; Jensen, M. K.; Van Den Broek, E.; Wasan, K. M.; Mu, H.; Rades, T.; Mu ̈ llertz, A. In Vivo Precipitation of Poorly Soluble Drugs from Lipid-Based Drug Delivery Systems. Mol. Pharm. 2016 , 13 , 3417 -3426. -
  31. [33](33) Kilic, M.; Dressman, J. A Simplified Method to Screen for InVivo Performance of Oral Lipid Formulations. J. Pharm. Pharmacol. 2014 , 66 , 615 -623. -
  32. [34](34) Podczeck, F.; Course, N.; Newton, J. M.; Short, M. B. Gastrointestinal Transit of Model Mini-Tablet Controlled Release Oral Dosage Forms in Fasted Human Volunteers. J. Pharm. Pharmacol. 2007 , 59 , 941 -945. -
  33. [36](36) Jørgensen, S. D. S.; Al Sawaf, M.; Graeser, K.; Mu, H.; Mu ̈ llertz, A.; Rades, T. The Ability of Two in Vitro Lipolysis Models Reflecting the Human and Rat Gastro-Intestinal Conditions to Predict the in Vivo Performance of SNEDDS Dosing Regimens. Eur. J. Pharm. Biopharm. 2018 , 124 , 116 -124. -
  34. [35](35) Helander, H. F.; Fa ̈ ndriks, L. Surface Area of the Digestive Tract - Revisited. Scand. J. Gastroenterol. 2014 , 49 , 681 -689. -
  35. [37](37) Tran, T.; Bønløkke, P.; Rodríguez-Rodríguez, C.; Nosrati, Z.; Esquinas, P. L.; Borkar, N.; Plum, J.; Strindberg, S.; Karagiozov, S.; Rades, T.; Mu ̈ llertz, A.; Saatchi, K.; Ha ̈ feli, U. O. Using in Vitro Lipolysis and SPECT/CT in Vivo Imaging to Understand Oral Absorption of Fenofibrate from Lipid-Based Drug Delivery Systems. J. Controlled Release 2020 , 317 , 375 -384.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
O’Dwyer, P. J., Box, K. J., Koehl, N. J., Bennett-Lenane, H., Reppas, C., Holm, R., Kuentz, M., & Griffin, B. T.
Affiliations
  • National and Kapodistrian University of Athens (GR)
  • Pion Inc. (UK) Ltd., Forest Row RH18 5DW, East Sussex, U.K.
  • University College Cork (IE)
  • Drug Product Development, Janssen Research and Development, Johnson & Johnson, Turnhoutseweg 30, Beerse 2340, Belgium
  • School of Life Sciences, Institute of Pharma Technology, University of Applied Sciences Northwest Switzerland, Hofackerstrasse 30, Muttenz 4132, Switzerland
Corresponding author
  • O’Dwyer, Patrick J.
  • Box, Karl J.
Venue
Molecular Pharmaceutics
Published
2020-08-06
Volume
17
Issue
9
Pages
3342-3352
ISSN
  • 1543-8384 (ISSN-L)
  • 1543-8392
OpenAlex
W3048351201
Cited by
28
References
2
Citations by year
2026: 3 · 2025: 2 · 2024: 4 · 2023: 5 · 2022: 5 · 2021: 8 · 2020: 1
FWCI
1.85
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Molecular Pharmaceutics (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Arrow@dit (Dublin Institute of Technology) (acceptedVersion)
  • Cork Open Research Archive (University College Cork, Ireland) (submittedVersion)
  • RUCforsk (Roskilde University) (submittedVersion)
Funders
H2020 Marie Sklodowska-Curie Actions (674909)
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutics › Pharmaceutical Science › Drug Solubulity and Delivery Systems
  • Life Sciences › Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutics › Pharmaceutical Science › Advanced Drug Delivery Systems
  • Physical Sciences › Materials Science › Biomaterials › Nanoparticle-Based Drug Delivery
Keywords
lipid-based formulations, in vitro-in vivo correlation, pH-stat, drug absorption prediction, drug precipitation, supersaturation, ionizable drugs, bioavailability prediction, ethanol co-solvent, nilotinib, fenofibrate, danazol
MeSH terms
Biological Availability, Chemistry, Pharmaceutical, Pharmaceutical Preparations, Humans, Intestinal Absorption, Lipids, Lipolysis, Solubility, Soybean Oil, Reproducibility of Results

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review