Prosper Emeh, Katarina Breitholtz, Staffan Berg, Charlotta Vedin, Maria Englund, Teresia Uggla, Malin Antonsson, Filipe Nunes, Constanze Hilgendorf, Christel A. S. Bergström and Nigel Davies*,
{"title":"评估作为渗透增强剂的己二酸酯的体外和体内模型的经验和可转化性。","authors":"Prosper Emeh, Katarina Breitholtz, Staffan Berg, Charlotta Vedin, Maria Englund, Teresia Uggla, Malin Antonsson, Filipe Nunes, Constanze Hilgendorf, Christel A. S. Bergström and Nigel Davies*, ","doi":"10.1021/acs.molpharmaceut.3c00872","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p >Transient permeation enhancers (PEs) have been widely used to improve the oral absorption of macromolecules. During pharmaceutical development, the correct selection of the macromolecule, PE, and the combination needs to be made to maximize oral bioavailability and ensure successful clinical development. Various <i>in vitro</i> and <i>in vivo</i> methods have been investigated to optimize this selection. <i>In vitro</i> methods are generally preferred by the pharmaceutical industry to reduce the use of animals according to the “replacement, reduction, and refinement” principle commonly termed “3Rs,” and <i>in vitro</i> methods typically have a higher throughput. This paper compares two <i>in vitro</i> methods that are commonly used within the pharmaceutical industry, being Caco-2 and an Ussing chamber, to two <i>in vivo</i> models, being <i>in situ</i> intestinal instillation to rats and <i>in vivo</i> administration via an endoscope to pigs. All studies use solution formulation of sodium caprate, which has been widely used as a PE, and two macromolecules, being FITC–dextran 4000 Da and MEDI7219, a GLP-1 receptor agonist peptide. The paper shares our experiences of using these models and the challenges with the <i>in vitro</i> models in mimicking the processes occurring <i>in vivo</i>. The paper highlights the need to consider these differences when translating data generated using these <i>in vitro</i> models for evaluating macromolecules, PE, and combinations thereof for enabling oral delivery.</p>","PeriodicalId":52,"journal":{"name":"Molecular Pharmaceutics","volume":"21 1","pages":"313–324"},"PeriodicalIF":4.5000,"publicationDate":"2023-12-06","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Experiences and Translatability of In Vitro and In Vivo Models to Evaluate Caprate as a Permeation Enhancer\",\"authors\":\"Prosper Emeh, Katarina Breitholtz, Staffan Berg, Charlotta Vedin, Maria Englund, Teresia Uggla, Malin Antonsson, Filipe Nunes, Constanze Hilgendorf, Christel A. S. Bergström and Nigel Davies*, \",\"doi\":\"10.1021/acs.molpharmaceut.3c00872\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p >Transient permeation enhancers (PEs) have been widely used to improve the oral absorption of macromolecules. During pharmaceutical development, the correct selection of the macromolecule, PE, and the combination needs to be made to maximize oral bioavailability and ensure successful clinical development. Various <i>in vitro</i> and <i>in vivo</i> methods have been investigated to optimize this selection. <i>In vitro</i> methods are generally preferred by the pharmaceutical industry to reduce the use of animals according to the “replacement, reduction, and refinement” principle commonly termed “3Rs,” and <i>in vitro</i> methods typically have a higher throughput. This paper compares two <i>in vitro</i> methods that are commonly used within the pharmaceutical industry, being Caco-2 and an Ussing chamber, to two <i>in vivo</i> models, being <i>in situ</i> intestinal instillation to rats and <i>in vivo</i> administration via an endoscope to pigs. All studies use solution formulation of sodium caprate, which has been widely used as a PE, and two macromolecules, being FITC–dextran 4000 Da and MEDI7219, a GLP-1 receptor agonist peptide. The paper shares our experiences of using these models and the challenges with the <i>in vitro</i> models in mimicking the processes occurring <i>in vivo</i>. The paper highlights the need to consider these differences when translating data generated using these <i>in vitro</i> models for evaluating macromolecules, PE, and combinations thereof for enabling oral delivery.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":52,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Molecular Pharmaceutics\",\"volume\":\"21 1\",\"pages\":\"313–324\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":4.5000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-12-06\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Molecular Pharmaceutics\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://pubs.acs.org/doi/10.1021/acs.molpharmaceut.3c00872\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"MEDICINE, RESEARCH & EXPERIMENTAL\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Molecular Pharmaceutics","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://pubs.acs.org/doi/10.1021/acs.molpharmaceut.3c00872","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"MEDICINE, RESEARCH & EXPERIMENTAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
Experiences and Translatability of In Vitro and In Vivo Models to Evaluate Caprate as a Permeation Enhancer
Transient permeation enhancers (PEs) have been widely used to improve the oral absorption of macromolecules. During pharmaceutical development, the correct selection of the macromolecule, PE, and the combination needs to be made to maximize oral bioavailability and ensure successful clinical development. Various in vitro and in vivo methods have been investigated to optimize this selection. In vitro methods are generally preferred by the pharmaceutical industry to reduce the use of animals according to the “replacement, reduction, and refinement” principle commonly termed “3Rs,” and in vitro methods typically have a higher throughput. This paper compares two in vitro methods that are commonly used within the pharmaceutical industry, being Caco-2 and an Ussing chamber, to two in vivo models, being in situ intestinal instillation to rats and in vivo administration via an endoscope to pigs. All studies use solution formulation of sodium caprate, which has been widely used as a PE, and two macromolecules, being FITC–dextran 4000 Da and MEDI7219, a GLP-1 receptor agonist peptide. The paper shares our experiences of using these models and the challenges with the in vitro models in mimicking the processes occurring in vivo. The paper highlights the need to consider these differences when translating data generated using these in vitro models for evaluating macromolecules, PE, and combinations thereof for enabling oral delivery.
期刊介绍:
Molecular Pharmaceutics publishes the results of original research that contributes significantly to the molecular mechanistic understanding of drug delivery and drug delivery systems. The journal encourages contributions describing research at the interface of drug discovery and drug development.
Scientific areas within the scope of the journal include physical and pharmaceutical chemistry, biochemistry and biophysics, molecular and cellular biology, and polymer and materials science as they relate to drug and drug delivery system efficacy. Mechanistic Drug Delivery and Drug Targeting research on modulating activity and efficacy of a drug or drug product is within the scope of Molecular Pharmaceutics. Theoretical and experimental peer-reviewed research articles, communications, reviews, and perspectives are welcomed.