Preliminary evaluation of the in vitro release and in vivo absorption in rabbits of the modified-release dosage forms

References

• Furlanetto S, Cirri M, Maestrelli F, Corti G, Mura P. (2006). Study of formulation variables influencing the drug release rate from matrix tablets by experimental design. Eur J Pharm Biopharm, 62:77–84.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• USP-30; NF-25. (2007). The United States Pharmacopeia/The National Formulary. Rockville, USA: United States Pharmacopeial Convention Inc.
   Google Scholar
• EMEA/CPMP. (2000). Note for Guidance on quality of modified release products: A. oral dosage forms; B: transdermal dosage forms.
   Google Scholar
• FDA/CDER. (1997). Guidance for Industry: Extended Release Oral Dosage Forms: Development, Evaluation and Application of InVitro/InVivo Correlations.
   Google Scholar
• Emami J. (2006). In vitro – in vivo correlation: from theory to applications. J Pharm Pharm Sci, 9:169–189.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Qui Y. (2009). Chapter 17: In vitro – In vivo correlations: Fundamentals, Development Consideration, and Application. In: Qui Z, Chen Z, Zhang G, eds. Developing Solid Oral Dosage Forms, Pharmaceutical Theory and Practice, first edition. USA: Elsevier, 379–406.
   Google Scholar
• Wagner JG, Nelson E. (1964). Kinetic analysis of blood levels and urinary excretion in the absorptive phase after single doses of drug. J Pharm Sci, 53:1392–1403.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Souliman S, Blanquet S, Beyssac E, Cardot JM. (2006). A level A in vitro/in vivo correlation in fasted and fed states using different methods: applied to solid immediate release oral dosage form. Eur J Pharm Sci, 27:72–79.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ghimire M, McInnes FJ, Watson DG, Mullen AB, Stevens HN. (2007). In-vitro/in-vivo correlation of pulsatile drug release from press-coated tablet formulations: a pharmacoscintigraphic study in the beagle dog. Eur J Pharm Biopharm, 67:515–523.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kararli TT. (1995). Comparison of the gastrointestinal anatomy, physiology, and biochemistry of humans and commonly used laboratory animals. Biopharm Drug Dispos, 16:351–380.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ikegami K, Tagawa K, Osawa T. (2006). Bioavailability and in vivo release behavior of controlled-release multiple-unit theophylline dosage forms in beagle dogs, cynomolgus monkeys, and göttingen minipigs. J Pharm Sci, 95:1888–1895.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Zhou H, Seitz K. (2009). Chapter 16: In vivo Evaluation of Oral Dosage Form Performance – Animal Species Selection. In: Qui Z, Chen Z, Zhang G eds. Developing Solid Oral Dosage Forms, Pharmaceutical Theory and Practice, first edition. USA: Elsevier, 366–368.
   Google Scholar
• He H, Yang R, Tang X. (2010). In vitro and in vivo evaluation of fenofibrate solid dispersion prepared by hot-melt extrusion. Drug Dev Ind Pharm, 36:681–687.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Yin L-F, Huang S-J, Jiang S-G, Zhao C-J, Pei Z-Q. (2011). In vitro and in vivo evaluation of levofloxacin sustained-release capsules. Drug Dev Ind Pharm, 36:681–687.
   Google Scholar
• Huang YB, Tsai YH, Yang WC, Chang JS, Wu PC, Takayama K. (2004). Once-daily propranolol extended-release tablet dosage form: formulation design and in vitro/in vivo investigation. Eur J Pharm Biopharm, 58:607–614.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Yu Z, Schwartz JB, Sugita ET. (1996). Theophylline controlled-release formulations: in vivo-in vitro correlations. Biopharm Drug Dispos, 17:259–272.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Löbenberg R, Kim JS, Amidon GL. (2005). Pharmacokinetics of an immediate release, a controlled release and a two pulse dosage form in dogs. Eur J Pharm Biopharm, 60:17–23.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hayashi T, Kanbe H, Okada M, Kawase I, Ikeda Y, Onuki Y et al. (2007). In vitro and in vivo sustained-release characteristics of theophylline matrix tablets and novel cluster tablets. Int J Pharm, 341:105–113.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Chiou WL, Jeong HY, Chung SM, Wu TC. (2000). Evaluation of using dog as an animal model to study the fraction of oral dose absorbed of 43 drugs in humans. Pharm Res, 17:135–140.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Davis SS, Illum L, Hinchcliffe M. (2001). Gastrointestinal transit of dosage forms in the pig. J Pharm Pharmacol, 53:33–39.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sakuma S, Ogura R, Masaoka Y, Kataoka M, Tanno FK, Kokubo H et al. (2009). Correlation between in vitro dissolution profiles from enteric-coated dosage forms and in vivo absorption in rats for high-solubility and high-permeability model drugs. J Pharm Sci, 98:4141–4152.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• El-Yazigi A, Sawchuk RJ. (1981). Theophylline absorption and disposition in rabbits: oral, intravenous, and concentration-dependent kinetic studies. J Pharm Sci, 70:452–456.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Muskó Z, Pintye-Hódi K, Gáspár R, Pintye J, Szabó-Révész P, Eros I et al. (2001). Study of in vitro and in vivo dissolution of theophylline from film-coated pellets. Eur J Pharm Biopharm, 51:143–146.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Zhu XJ, Yuan W, Li P, Liu X, He JQ. (2010). Pharmacokinetics of a novel nifedipine and pH-sensitive N-succinyl chitosan/alginate hydrogel bead in rabbits. Drug Dev Ind Pharm, 36:1463–1468.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Tamilvanan S, Venkatesh Babu R, Nappinai A, Sivaramakrishnan G. (2011). In vitro and in vivo evaluation of hydrophilic and hydrophobic polymers-based nicorandil-loaded peroral tablet compared with its once-daily commercial sustained-release tablet. Drug Dev Ind Pharm, 37:436–445.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Varshosaz J, Ghafghazi T, Raisi A, Falamarzian M. (2000). Biopharmaceutical characterization of oral theophylline and aminophylline tablets. Quantitative correlation between dissolution and bioavailability studies. Eur J Pharm Biopharm, 50:301–306.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Petrovic A, Ibric S, Trajkovic S, Popovic R, Djuric Z, Popadic D. (2009). An investigation into effects of in vitro test condition on the release properties of theophylline from HPMC matrices using factorial design. Arch Pharm Res, 32:1087–1096.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Petrovic A, Cvetkovic N, Ibric S, Trajkovic S, Djuric Z, Popadic D et al. (2009). Application of mixture experimental design in the formulation and optimization of matrix tablets containing carbomer and hydroxy-propylmethylcellulose. Arch Pharm Res, 32:1767–1774.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Petrović A, Popović R, Djurić Z, Trajković S, Dželetović D, Popadić D. (2004). An in vitro comparison of controlled release aminophylline tablets, Proc. 4 th International Meeting on Pharmaceutics, Biopharmaceutics, Pharmaceutical Technology, Nurberg 15/18 Marc 2004, ADRITELF/APGI/APV Abstract book 593–594.
   Google Scholar
• Petrović A, Trajković S, Ibrić S, Popadić D, Cvetković N, Djurić Z. (2006). Comparative evaluation of in vitro drug release from comercially available aminophylline sustained release products by model-dependent and independent methods, 33th international Symposium on Controlled Release of Bioactive Materials, Vien 22/25, July 2006, Abstract book on CD PO-269.
   Google Scholar
• Donovan J, Brown P. (2006). Blood collection. In: Current Protocols in Immunology. USA: John Wiley & Sons. Inc, 1.7.1–1.7.9.
   Google Scholar
• Yuksel A. (2000). Comparison of in vitro dissolution profiles by Anova based model dependent and independent methods. Int J Pharm, 209:57–67.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Costa P, Sousa Lobo JM. (2001). Modeling and comparison of dissolution profiles. Eur J Pharm Sci, 13:123–133.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Siepmann J, Peppas NA. (2001). Modeling of drug release from delivery systems based on hydroxypropyl methylcellulose (HPMC). Adv Drug Deliv Rev, 48:139–157.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kiortsis S, Kachrimanis K, Broussali T, Malamataris S. (2005). Drug release from tableted wet granulations comprising cellulosic (HPMC or HPC) and hydrophobic component. Eur J Pharm Biopharm, 59:73–83.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ritger PL, Peppas NS. (1987). A simple equation for disposition of solute release II: Fickian and anomalous release from swellable devices. J Control Release, 5:37–42.
   Google Scholar
• Cardot J-M. (2007). Introduction to the in vitro – In vivo Correlation (IVIVC). Post-Conference Workshop organized by Informa Life Sciences, 25 May, Budapest.
   Google Scholar
• Bourne DWA. (2002). Chapter 3: Pharmacokinetics. In: Banker S, Rhodes C eds. Modern Pharmaceutics 4th edition. NewYork: Marcel Dekker Inc, 77–101.
   Google Scholar
• Shah HJ, Subbaiah G, Patel DM, Patel CN. (2009). In vitro-in vivo correlation of modified release dosage form of lamotrigine. Biopharm Drug Dispos, 30:524–531.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• el-Yazigi A, Sawchuk RJ. (1985). In vitro-in vivo correlation and dissolution studies with oral theophylline dosage forms. J Pharm Sci, 74:161–164.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Tse FL, Szeto DW. (1982). Theophylline bioavailability in the dog. J Pharm Sci, 71:1301–1303.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Torrent J, Izquierdo I, Barbanoj MJ, Obach R, Nomen M, Jane F. (1988). Theophylline pharmacokinetics following single and repeated administration of slow-release capsules. Eur J Drug Metab Pharmacokinet, 3:225–230.
   Google Scholar
• Sabnis S, Adeyeye CM. (1998). Controlled-release hydrophilic tablets for individualized theophylline therapy. Drug Dev Ind Pharm, 25:187–196.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bendas ER. (2009). Two different approaches for the prediction of in vivo plasma concentration-time profile from in vitro release data of once daily formulations of diltiazem hydrochloride. Arch Pharm Res, 32:1317–1329.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Delvadia PR, Barr WH, Karnes HT. (2012). A biorelevant in vitro release/permeation system for oral transmucosal dosage forms. Int J Pharm, 430:104–113.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gohel M, Delvadia RR, Parikh DC, Zinzuwadia MM, Soni CD, et al. (2005) Simplified Mathematical Approach for Back Calculation in Wagner-Nelson Method. Pharm Rev 3(2). http://www.pharmainfo.net/reviews/simplified-mathematical-approach-back-calculation-wagner-nelson-method.
   Google Scholar
• Aronson JK, Hardman M, Reynolds DJ. (1992). ABC of monitoring drug therapy. Theophylline. BMJ, 305:1355–1358.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wagner JG. (1986). Estimation of theophylline absorption rate by means of the Wagner-Nelson equation. J Allergy Clin Immunol, 78:681–688.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Milavetz G, Vaughan LM, Weinberger MM. (1987). Stability of theophylline elimination rate. Clin Pharmacol Ther, 41:388–391.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gohel MC, Jani GK, Amin AF, Patel KV, Gupta SV. (1997). Application of classical experimental design for the development of theophylline microspheres. J Control Release, 45:265–271.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• EMEA, Committee for veterinary medicinal product. Diprophylline – Summary Report. EMEA/MRL/386/98-FINAL. April 1998.
   Google Scholar
• CDER (Center for Drug Evaluation and Research). (1997). Guidance for Industrial Extended Release Oral Dosage Forms: Development, Evaluation and Application of in vitro/In vivo Correlation. Rockville, MD: Food and Drug Administration.
   Google Scholar
• Musko Z, Pintye-Hodi K, Gaspar R, Pintye J, Szabo-Revesz P, Eros I, Falkay G. (2001). Study of in vitro and in vivo dissolution of theophylline from film-coated pellets. Eur J Pharm Biopharm, 51:143–146.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Puchun L, Tzuchi R, Yihong Q. (2005). Chapter 4: Diffusion Controlled Drug Delivery Systems. In: Xiaoling L, Bhaskara R, eds. Design of Controlled Release Drug Delivery Systems. USA: McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc, 107–138.
   Google Scholar
• Wong LP, Gilligan CA, Li-Wan PA. (1992). Preparation and characterization of sustained-release ibuprofen-cetostearyl alcohol spheres. Int J Pharm, 83:95–114.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Quadir MA, Rahman MS, Karim MZ, Akter S, Awkat MT, Reza MS. (2003). Evaluation of hydrophobic materials as matrices for controlled-release drug delivery. Pak J Pharm Sci, 16:17–28.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Islam S, Khan F, Jalil R. (2010). Sustained Release Theophylline Matrix Tablets Prepared by Direct compression I: Effect of Hydrophobic Excipients. Ban Pharm J, 13: 3–8.
   Google Scholar
• Dunne A, O’Hara T, Devane J. (1997). Level A in vivo-in vitro correlation: nonlinear models and statistical methodology. J Pharm Sci, 86:1245–1249.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Parojcic J, Ibric S, Djuric Z, Jovanovic M, Corrigan OI. (2007). An investigation into the usefulness of generalized regression neural network analysis in the development of level A in vitro-in vivo correlation. Eur J Pharm Sci, 30:264–272.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Scheubel E, Adamy L, Hoffart V, Cardot JM. (2010). Selection of the most suitable dissolution method for an extended release formulation based on IVIVC level A obtained on cynomolgus monkey. Drug Dev Ind Pharm, 36:1320–1329.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Yu LX, Amidon GL, Polli JE, Zhao H, Mehta MU, Conner DP et al. (2002). Biopharmaceutics classification system: the scientific basis for biowaiver extensions. Pharm Res, 19:921–925.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Nandy BC, Roy S, Mayumder B, Meena K, Ahuja D, et al. (2011). In vitro–in vivo Correlation: Application in pharmaceutical development of various dosage forms. J Chem Pharm Res, 3:550–564.
   Google Scholar