Cargando…

Intestinal Permeation Enhancers for Oral Delivery of Macromolecules: A Comparison between Salcaprozate Sodium (SNAC) and Sodium Caprate (C(10))

Salcaprozate sodium (SNAC) and sodium caprate (C(10)) are two of the most advanced intestinal permeation enhancers (PEs) that have been tested in clinical trials for oral delivery of macromolecules. Their effects on intestinal epithelia were studied for over 30 years, yet there is still debate over...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Twarog, Caroline, Fattah, Sarinj, Heade, Joanne, Maher, Sam, Fattal, Elias, Brayden, David J.
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: MDPI 2019
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6410172/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30781867
http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/pharmaceutics11020078
_version_ 1783402179056369664
author Twarog, Caroline
Fattah, Sarinj
Heade, Joanne
Maher, Sam
Fattal, Elias
Brayden, David J.
author_facet Twarog, Caroline
Fattah, Sarinj
Heade, Joanne
Maher, Sam
Fattal, Elias
Brayden, David J.
author_sort Twarog, Caroline
collection PubMed
description Salcaprozate sodium (SNAC) and sodium caprate (C(10)) are two of the most advanced intestinal permeation enhancers (PEs) that have been tested in clinical trials for oral delivery of macromolecules. Their effects on intestinal epithelia were studied for over 30 years, yet there is still debate over their mechanisms of action. C(10) acts via openings of epithelial tight junctions and/or membrane perturbation, while for decades SNAC was thought to increase passive transcellular permeation across small intestinal epithelia based on increased lipophilicity arising from non-covalent macromolecule complexation. More recently, an additional mechanism for SNAC associated with a pH-elevating, monomer-inducing, and pepsin-inhibiting effect in the stomach for oral delivery of semaglutide was advocated. Comparing the two surfactants, we found equivocal evidence for discrete mechanisms at the level of epithelial interactions in the small intestine, especially at the high doses used in vivo. Evidence that one agent is more efficacious compared to the other is not convincing, with tablets containing these PEs inducing single-digit highly variable increases in oral bioavailability of payloads in human trials, although this may be adequate for potent macromolecules. Regarding safety, SNAC has generally regarded as safe (GRAS) status and is Food and Drug Administration (FDA)-approved as a medical food (Eligen(®)-Vitamin B(12), Emisphere, Roseland, NJ, USA), whereas C(10) has a long history of use in man, and has food additive status. Evidence for co-absorption of microorganisms in the presence of either SNAC or C(10) has not emerged from clinical trials to date, and long-term effects from repeat dosing beyond six months have yet to be assessed. Since there are no obvious scientific reasons to prefer SNAC over C(10) in orally delivering a poorly permeable macromolecule, then formulation, manufacturing, and commercial considerations are the key drivers in decision-making.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-6410172
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2019
publisher MDPI
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-64101722019-03-29 Intestinal Permeation Enhancers for Oral Delivery of Macromolecules: A Comparison between Salcaprozate Sodium (SNAC) and Sodium Caprate (C(10)) Twarog, Caroline Fattah, Sarinj Heade, Joanne Maher, Sam Fattal, Elias Brayden, David J. Pharmaceutics Review Salcaprozate sodium (SNAC) and sodium caprate (C(10)) are two of the most advanced intestinal permeation enhancers (PEs) that have been tested in clinical trials for oral delivery of macromolecules. Their effects on intestinal epithelia were studied for over 30 years, yet there is still debate over their mechanisms of action. C(10) acts via openings of epithelial tight junctions and/or membrane perturbation, while for decades SNAC was thought to increase passive transcellular permeation across small intestinal epithelia based on increased lipophilicity arising from non-covalent macromolecule complexation. More recently, an additional mechanism for SNAC associated with a pH-elevating, monomer-inducing, and pepsin-inhibiting effect in the stomach for oral delivery of semaglutide was advocated. Comparing the two surfactants, we found equivocal evidence for discrete mechanisms at the level of epithelial interactions in the small intestine, especially at the high doses used in vivo. Evidence that one agent is more efficacious compared to the other is not convincing, with tablets containing these PEs inducing single-digit highly variable increases in oral bioavailability of payloads in human trials, although this may be adequate for potent macromolecules. Regarding safety, SNAC has generally regarded as safe (GRAS) status and is Food and Drug Administration (FDA)-approved as a medical food (Eligen(®)-Vitamin B(12), Emisphere, Roseland, NJ, USA), whereas C(10) has a long history of use in man, and has food additive status. Evidence for co-absorption of microorganisms in the presence of either SNAC or C(10) has not emerged from clinical trials to date, and long-term effects from repeat dosing beyond six months have yet to be assessed. Since there are no obvious scientific reasons to prefer SNAC over C(10) in orally delivering a poorly permeable macromolecule, then formulation, manufacturing, and commercial considerations are the key drivers in decision-making. MDPI 2019-02-13 /pmc/articles/PMC6410172/ /pubmed/30781867 http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/pharmaceutics11020078 Text en © 2019 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/).
spellingShingle Review
Twarog, Caroline
Fattah, Sarinj
Heade, Joanne
Maher, Sam
Fattal, Elias
Brayden, David J.
Intestinal Permeation Enhancers for Oral Delivery of Macromolecules: A Comparison between Salcaprozate Sodium (SNAC) and Sodium Caprate (C(10))
title Intestinal Permeation Enhancers for Oral Delivery of Macromolecules: A Comparison between Salcaprozate Sodium (SNAC) and Sodium Caprate (C(10))
title_full Intestinal Permeation Enhancers for Oral Delivery of Macromolecules: A Comparison between Salcaprozate Sodium (SNAC) and Sodium Caprate (C(10))
title_fullStr Intestinal Permeation Enhancers for Oral Delivery of Macromolecules: A Comparison between Salcaprozate Sodium (SNAC) and Sodium Caprate (C(10))
title_full_unstemmed Intestinal Permeation Enhancers for Oral Delivery of Macromolecules: A Comparison between Salcaprozate Sodium (SNAC) and Sodium Caprate (C(10))
title_short Intestinal Permeation Enhancers for Oral Delivery of Macromolecules: A Comparison between Salcaprozate Sodium (SNAC) and Sodium Caprate (C(10))
title_sort intestinal permeation enhancers for oral delivery of macromolecules: a comparison between salcaprozate sodium (snac) and sodium caprate (c(10))
topic Review
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6410172/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30781867
http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/pharmaceutics11020078
work_keys_str_mv AT twarogcaroline intestinalpermeationenhancersfororaldeliveryofmacromoleculesacomparisonbetweensalcaprozatesodiumsnacandsodiumcapratec10
AT fattahsarinj intestinalpermeationenhancersfororaldeliveryofmacromoleculesacomparisonbetweensalcaprozatesodiumsnacandsodiumcapratec10
AT headejoanne intestinalpermeationenhancersfororaldeliveryofmacromoleculesacomparisonbetweensalcaprozatesodiumsnacandsodiumcapratec10
AT mahersam intestinalpermeationenhancersfororaldeliveryofmacromoleculesacomparisonbetweensalcaprozatesodiumsnacandsodiumcapratec10
AT fattalelias intestinalpermeationenhancersfororaldeliveryofmacromoleculesacomparisonbetweensalcaprozatesodiumsnacandsodiumcapratec10
AT braydendavidj intestinalpermeationenhancersfororaldeliveryofmacromoleculesacomparisonbetweensalcaprozatesodiumsnacandsodiumcapratec10