27
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      Self-Nano-Emulsifying Drug-Delivery Systems: From the Development to the Current Applications and Challenges in Oral Drug Delivery

      review-article

      Read this article at

      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          Approximately one third of newly discovered drug molecules show insufficient water solubility and therefore low oral bio-availability. Self-nano-emulsifying drug-delivery systems (SNEDDSs) are one of the emerging strategies developed to tackle the issues associated with their oral delivery. SNEDDSs are composed of an oil phase, surfactant, and cosurfactant or cosolvent. SNEDDSs characteristics, their ability to dissolve a drug, and in vivo considerations are determinant factors in the choice of SNEDDSs excipients. A SNEDDS formulation can be optimized through phase diagram approach or statistical design of experiments. The characterization of SNEDDSs includes multiple orthogonal methods required to fully control SNEDDS manufacture, stability, and biological fate. Encapsulating a drug in SNEDDSs can lead to increased solubilization, stability in the gastro-intestinal tract, and absorption, resulting in enhanced bio-availability. The transformation of liquid SNEDDSs into solid dosage forms has been shown to increase the stability and patient compliance. Supersaturated, mucus-permeating, and targeted SNEDDSs can be developed to increase efficacy and patient compliance. Self-emulsification approach has been successful in oral drug delivery. The present review gives an insight of SNEDDSs for the oral administration of both lipophilic and hydrophilic compounds from the experimental bench to marketed products.

          Related collections

          Most cited references367

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: not found

          Nanoparticle-Based Medicines: A Review of FDA-Approved Materials and Clinical Trials to Date

          In this review we provide an up to date snapshot of nanomedicines either currently approved by the US FDA, or in the FDA clinical trials process. We define nanomedicines as therapeutic or imaging agents which comprise a nanoparticle in order to control the biodistribution, enhance the efficacy, or otherwise reduce toxicity of a drug or biologic. We identified 51 FDA-approved nanomedicines that met this definition and 77 products in clinical trials, with ~40% of trials listed in clinicaltrials.gov started in 2014 or 2015. While FDA approved materials are heavily weighted to polymeric, liposomal, and nanocrystal formulations, there is a trend towards the development of more complex materials comprising micelles, protein-based NPs, and also the emergence of a variety of inorganic and metallic particles in clinical trials. We then provide an overview of the different material categories represented in our search, highlighting nanomedicines that have either been recently approved, or are already in clinical trials. We conclude with some comments on future perspectives for nanomedicines, which we expect to include more actively-targeted materials, multi-functional materials ("theranostics") and more complicated materials that blur the boundaries of traditional material categories. A key challenge for researchers, industry, and regulators is how to classify new materials and what additional testing (e.g. safety and toxicity) is required before products become available.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

            The Caco-2 cell line as a model of the intestinal barrier: influence of cell and culture-related factors on Caco-2 cell functional characteristics.

            The human intestinal Caco-2 cell line has been extensively used over the last twenty years as a model of the intestinal barrier. The parental cell line, originally obtained from a human colon adenocarcinoma, undergoes in culture a process of spontaneous differentiation that leads to the formation of a monolayer of cells, expressing several morphological and functional characteristics of the mature enterocyte. Culture-related conditions were shown to influence the expression of these characteristics, in part due to the intrinsic heterogeneity of the parental cell line, leading to selection of sub-populations of cells becoming prominent in the culture. In addition, several clonal cell lines have been isolated from the parental line, exhibiting in general a more homogeneous expression of differentiation traits, while not always expressing all characteristics of the parental line. Culture-related conditions, as well as the different Caco-2 cell lines utilized in different laboratories, often make it extremely difficult to compare results in the literature. This review is aimed at summarizing recent, or previously unreviewed, data from the literature on the effects of culture-related factors and the influence of line sub-types (parental vs. different clonal lines) on the expression of differentiation traits important for the use of Caco-2 cells as a model of the absorptive and defensive properties of the intestinal mucosa. Since the use of Caco-2 cells has grown exponentially in recent years, it is particularly important to highlight these methodological aspects in order to promote the standardization and optimisation of this intestinal model.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              Properties of FDA-approved small molecule protein kinase inhibitors: A 2020 update

              Because genetic alterations including mutations, overexpression, translocations, and dysregulation of protein kinases are involved in the pathogenesis of many illnesses, this enzyme family is currently the subject of many drug discovery programs in the pharmaceutical industry. The US FDA approved four small molecule protein kinase antagonists in 2019; these include entrectinib, erdafitinib, pexidartinib, and fedratinib. Entrectinib binds to TRKA/B/C and ROS1 and is prescribed for the treatment of solid tumors with NTRK fusion proteins and for ROS1-postive non-small cell lung cancers. Erdafitinib inhibits fibroblast growth factor receptors 1-4 and is used in the treatment of urothelial bladder cancers. Pexidartinib is a CSF1R antagonist that is prescribed for the treatment of tenosynovial giant cell tumors. Fedratinib blocks JAK2 and is used in the treatment of myelofibrosis. Overall, the US FDA has approved 52 small molecule protein kinase inhibitors, nearly all of which are orally effective with the exceptions of temsirolimus (which is given intravenously) and netarsudil (an eye drop). Of the 52 approved drugs, eleven inhibit protein-serine/threonine protein kinases, two are directed against dual specificity protein kinases, eleven target non-receptor protein-tyrosine kinases, and 28 block receptor protein-tyrosine kinases. The data indicate that 46 of these drugs are used in the treatment of neoplastic diseases (eight against non-solid tumors such as leukemias and 41 against solid tumors including breast and lung cancers; some drugs are used against both tumor types). Eight drugs are employed in the treatment of non-malignancies: fedratinib, myelofibrosis; ruxolitinib, myelofibrosis and polycythemia vera; fostamatinib, chronic immune thrombocytopenia; baricitinib, rheumatoid arthritis; sirolimus, renal graft vs. host disease; nintedanib, idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis; netarsudil, glaucoma; and tofacitinib, rheumatoid arthritis, Crohn disease, and ulcerative colitis. Moreover, sirolimus and ibrutinib are used for the treatment of both neoplastic and non-neoplastic diseases. Entrectinib and larotrectinib are tissue-agnostic anti-cancer small molecule protein kinase inhibitors. These drugs are prescribed for the treatment of any solid cancer harboring NTRK1/2/3 fusion proteins regardless of the organ, tissue, anatomical location, or histology type. Of the 52 approved drugs, seventeen are used in the treatment of more than one disease. Imatinib, for example, is approved for the treatment of eight disparate disorders. The most common drug targets of the approved pharmaceuticals include BCR-Abl, B-Raf, vascular endothelial growth factor receptors (VEGFR), epidermal growth factor receptors (EGFR), and ALK. Most of the approved small molecule protein kinase antagonists (49) bind to the protein kinase domain and six of them bind covalently. In contrast, everolimus, temsirolimus, and sirolimus are larger molecules (MW ≈ 1000) that bind to FK506 binding protein-12 (FKBP-12) to generate a complex that inhibits the mammalian target of rapamycin (mTOR) protein kinase complex. This review presents the physicochemical properties of all of the FDA-approved small molecule protein kinase inhibitors. Twenty-two of the 52 drugs have molecular weights greater than 500, exceeding a Lipinski rule of five criterion. Excluding the macrolides (everolimus, sirolimus, temsirolimus), the average molecular weight of the approved drugs is 480 with a range of 306 (ruxolitinib) to 615 (trametinib). More than half of the antagonists (29) have lipophilic efficiency values of less than five while the recommended optima range from 5 to 10. One of the troublesome problems with both targeted and cytotoxic drugs in the treatment of malignant diseases is the near universal development of resistance to every therapeutic modality.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Journal
                Pharmaceutics
                Pharmaceutics
                pharmaceutics
                Pharmaceutics
                MDPI
                1999-4923
                09 December 2020
                December 2020
                : 12
                : 12
                : 1194
                Affiliations
                [1 ]Advanced Drug Delivery and Biomaterials, Louvain Drug Research Institute, Université Catholique de Louvain, Avenue Mounier 73, B1.73.12, 1200 Brussels, Belgium; aristote.buya@ 123456uclouvain.be (A.B.B.); ana.beloqui@ 123456uclouvain.be (A.B.)
                [2 ]Pharmaceutics and Phytopharmaceutical Drug Development Research Group, Faculty of Pharmaceutical Sciences, University of Kinshasa, Kinshasa XI BP 212, Democratic Republic of the Congo; patrick.memvanga@ 123456unikin.ac.cd
                Author notes
                [* ]Correspondence: veronique.preat@ 123456uclouvain.be ; Tel.: +32-27647309
                Author information
                https://orcid.org/0000-0003-4365-666X
                Article
                pharmaceutics-12-01194
                10.3390/pharmaceutics12121194
                7764143
                33317067
                1527bae5-6f9f-46e6-8b0a-1bc6a467fdd2
                © 2020 by the authors.

                Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license ( http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).

                History
                : 03 November 2020
                : 05 December 2020
                Categories
                Review

                oral bio-availability,self-nano-emulsifying drug-delivery systems (sneddss),oral delivery,solubilization,food effect

                Comments

                Comment on this article