Cargando…
Fixed Dose Single Tablet Formulation with Differential Release of Amlodipine Besylate and Simvastatin and Its Pharmacokinetic Profile: QbD and Risk Assessment Approach
PURPOSE: A differential release fixed dose matrix tablet of amlodipine besylate (AML-B) and simvastatin (SIM) was formulated to enhance patient compliance. MATERIAL AND METHOD: In the first phase, release controlling parameters of AML-B and SIM granules were identified and in the second phase a fixe...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
Dove
2021
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8164448/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34079222 http://dx.doi.org/10.2147/DDDT.S240506 |
Sumario: | PURPOSE: A differential release fixed dose matrix tablet of amlodipine besylate (AML-B) and simvastatin (SIM) was formulated to enhance patient compliance. MATERIAL AND METHOD: In the first phase, release controlling parameters of AML-B and SIM granules were identified and in the second phase a fixed dose AML-B and SIM tablet formulation was prepared and optimized for a differential release of the drugs using a quality by design (QbD) and risk assessment approach. A validated HPLC method was employed for simultaneous determination of AML-B and SIM for FDC formulation. A pharmacokinetics of the above drugs was studied in healthy dogs in the third phase. RESULTS: In QbD-based optimized formulation, Eudragit(®) RSPO-dicalcium phosphate (DCP) blend controlled the release of AML-B over 8 h, though this diffusion-controlled release assumed first order kinetics. DCP and Eudragit(®) RS 100 also retarded release of SIM causing SIM release over 8 h after AML-B release from the optimized FDC tablet formulation. The HPLC retention times of AML-B and SIM were 2.10 and 15.52 min, respectively. Linearity for AML-B was 5.0–50 ng/mL and 0.01–2.0 µg/mL for SIM with percent recoveries of 92.85–101.53% and 94.51–117.75% for AML-B and SIM. AUC(0-∞) of AML-B was increased 3 fold, while AUC(0-∞) of SIM was decreased 2 fold. The t(max) values for AML-B and SIM were 12 and 6 h, respectively. AML-B was absorbed without any lag time (t(lag)) while t(lag) was 6.33 ± 0.81 h for SIM, thus met the study objective. CONCLUSION: The pharmacokinetic study showed an immediate absorption of AML-B while that of SIM was withheld for 6 h, close to the desired delay time of 8 h. |
---|