Contents
ABSTRACT
Background
This study’s objective was to create and assess diacerein-loaded microsponges incorporated into a topical gel formulation for enhanced skin delivery. Diacerein is a potent anti-inflammatory agent used in the management of various dermatological conditions, including osteoarthritis and psoriasis.
Materials and Methods
The optimized diacerein-loaded Additionally, a gel basis was enhanced using microsponges and the resulting topical. The gel’s pH, viscosity, spreadability and homogeneity of drug content were assessed and skin permeation studies. The topical gel’s pH was changed to make sure compatibility with the skin pH for enhanced drug delivery. The prepared diacerein-loaded microsponges incorporated into a topical gel formulation showed promising characteristics for enhanced skin delivery.
Results
Evaluation parameters like viscosity, drug content, spreadability for all the prepared formulations were assessed. Formulation F2 and F4 shows the most optimized result from all the six formulations.
Conclusion
The sustained release pattern achieved through the microsponges technology offers the potential for prolonged therapeutic effects and improved patient outcomes in the treatment of dermatological conditions.
INTRODUCTION
The novel drug delivery system
The innovative medicine delivery system’s objective is to quickly carry the required drug concentration to the proper room in the body in a therapeutic amount (Figure 1). The medication should be delivered by the drug delivery system promptly. Throughout a predetermined treatment period, the body is in a regulated manner.1
Two distinct systems can be used for novel drug delivery:
Sustained release medication delivery systems.
Controlled-release drug delivery system.
Sustained Release Medication Delivery Systems
It is a medication dosage form intended to postpone the onset of a curative effect in order to maintain the plasma profile. For a extended period of time and the effect appears delayed in the systemic circulation. Its pharmaceutical activity frequently takes time to begin and its therapeutic effects last a sustained amount of time.1
Controlled Release Drug Delivery System
This system’s significance extends beyond the realm of prolonged pharmacological action; instead, it displays probability and repeatability in the kinetically of drug release. Drug release from a controlled release drug delivery system happens at a frequency profile that is predictable from one component to the next and kinetically likely.1
Topical drug delivery system
Topical therapy is a targeted medication delivery approach that can be applied topically, subcutaneously, vaginally, or through the eyes. The main route for topical medicine delivery is the epidermis, which is also one of the human body’s easiest organs to apply cosmetically. Topical medications are applied to the skin for effects that are surface, local, or systemic in nature. The base’s medicinal qualities, such as its emollient, calming, or protecting function, may occasionally allow for its exclusive usage. The therapeutically effective components in many topical treatments are, however, dispersed or disintegrated into the foundation. A vast array of topical drugs that can be utilized for a variety of drug delivery and therapeutic procedures are made possible by the combination of active ingredients and substrates. Classification of topical therapies containing therapeutically active substances can be done according to composition (hydrophilic creams), physical qualities (suspension), or intended usage (liniments).In addition to being an important advance over conventional methods (creams, moisturizers, applications and pastes), These delivery methods have the power to improve efficacy and tolerability, boost patient acceptance (including the quality of life for those with dermatitis) and address other unmet needs in the market for topical dermatological.2
Gels
Gels are a more recent category of dosage forms that are created when large amounts of an aqueous or hydroalcoholic fluid are trapped in a network of irregular solid particles. These particles can be made of synthetic or natural organic polymers, inorganic chemicals like aluminum salts, or both. The sort of colloidal components and amount of liquid in the composition will determine the gel’s physical appearance. The majority of topical gels are made with natural polymers like carbomers, which provide the product a nice, glittery, transparent appearance and are simple to remove with water from the skin. Gels are semisolid liquid-rich two-component systems. In a typical polar gel, an organic or synthetic polymeric forms a three-dimensional matrix over anhydrous liquid.3
Types
Single phase gels- Gels in which there are no visible barriers separating the particles from the liquid and biomolecules are uniformly distributed throughout the liquid.
Double phase gels- Gel material is made up of bubbles of little unique pieces known as the magma. (Magnesia milk).
Microsponges Drug Delivery Systems
Every day, a vast array of new pharmacological classes are being developed as pharmaceutical delivery technologies develop. For a drug to be successful under any circumstances, a novel medication release mechanism with computed predetermined ratios at various points of function must be developed.4 Most conventional dosage forms are unrefined and contain a number of disadvantages, including reduced bioavailability, stomach and skin irritation, unpleasant reactions and negative effects of the active components. These include tablets, capsules, creams, lotions and gels with quick release.5 Microsponges, which are similarly composed of collapsible structures loaded with an active medicinal component, are highly cross-linked, polymeric permeable microspheres with several interconnected gaps. Microsponges’ porous surface enables a range of active pharmaceutical compounds to be kept in and released in a variety of quantities at the unique absorption location. The continuous pattern of open pores in the microsponges, which varies in size, permits the medicine to be held inside and release at a controlled rate.6
This microsponges formulation has an active component that releases in a controlled manner. Medication delivery via microsponges involves the use of small, inactive spherical compositions that do not irritate the skin film. These combinations were developed to use the least amount of medication possible while delivering the active ingredients at the administration site.7 A scientist named Richard Won invented microsponges. The diameter of the bead ranges from 5 to 100 m. A human sin is about five microns in size on average. The skin is impervious to the everlasting spheres. The active chemicals encircled by the pores are progressively absorbed by the skin. The polymers used in the microsponges’ production are what allow them to form cages. The most often used polymers for manufacture are E-RS100, E-RS PO, E-S100, polyhydroxy butyrate and polyvinyl benzene.8
MATERIALS AND METHODS (TABLES 1, 2)
Sl. No. | Equipment’s | Supplier |
---|---|---|
1 | Digital Balance. | Shimadzu Corporation. |
2 | IR Spectrometer. | Perkin Elmer Spectrum. |
3 | UV Vis Spectrometer. | Aligent Technologies. |
4 | Magnetic stirrer. | Hixon Instrument Grover Enterprises. |
5 | Sonicator. | Sonar India. |
6 | Dissolution apparatus. | Electro lab. |
7 | Viscometer. | Brookfield Viscometer. |
8 | Melting point. | Neutronics. |
9 | Magnetic stirrer. | Remi Equipment. |
Sl. No. | Ingredients | Role in Formulation | Manufacturing Suppliers |
---|---|---|---|
1 | Diacerein | Active Ingredient. | Solitaire Pharmacia. |
2 | Eudragit RS 100. | Polymer | Central drug house lab. |
3 | Ethyl Cellulose. | Polymer | Central drug house lab. |
4 | Polyvinyl Alcohol. | Stabilizing Agent | Central drug house lab. |
5 | Triethyl citrate. | Plasticizer | Central drug house lab. |
6 | Dichloromethan e. | Solvent | Central drug house lab. |
Methodology
Preformulation studies related to drug (Table 3),
Solubility studies (Table 4),
Standard curve (Table 5, Figure 2),
Identification of pure drug, FTIR Analysis (Tables 6, 7),
Preparation of microsponges gel,
Evaluation of microsponges gel,
Physical properties,
pH,
Spreadability,
Viscosity,
Drug content,
Particle size,
Loading efficiency,
Production yield,
In vitro drug release study,
Evaluation of microsponges.
Sl. No. | Properties | Result |
---|---|---|
1. | Description | Solid |
2. | Appearance | Fine yellow smooth powder |
3. | Colour | Yellow |
4. | Odor | Odorless |
5. | Nature | Smooth powder |
Sl. No. | Solvents | Concentration (m g/mL) | Report |
---|---|---|---|
1. | Water | 0.010 | Insoluble |
2. | DMSO | 15 | Soluble |
3. | DMA | 0.065 | Soluble |
Sl. No. | Concentration (μg/mL) | Absorbance (nm) |
---|---|---|
1 | 2 | 0.0096 |
2 | 4 | 0.1499 |
3 | 6 | 0.2992 |
4 | 8 | 0.4101 |
5 | 10 | 0.5111 |
6 | 12 | 0.6738 |
7 | 14 | 0.8021 |
8 | 16 | 0.9224 |
Sl. No. | Drug | Drug+EC | Drug+EUD | Types of Vibration |
---|---|---|---|---|
1 | 1769.91 | 1769.84 | 1769.05 | C=O Stretching |
2 | 3428.04 | 3452.83 | 3454.04 | O-H Stretching |
3 | 1210.38 | 1210.03 | 1209.52 | C- O Stretching |
Sl. No. | Drug and Excipient | Description and condition | |||
---|---|---|---|---|---|
Initial | Room temperature (in days) | ||||
10 | 15 | 20 | |||
1 | DCN | Yellow coloured powder | NC | NC | NC |
2 | EUD | White coloured granules | NC | NC | NC |
3 | EC | White coloured powder | NC | NC | NC |
4 | PVA | White coloured powder | NC | NC | NC |
5 | DCN+EUD | Yellow coloured powder | NC | NC | NC |
6 | DCN+EC | Yellow coloured powder | NC | NC | NC |
7 | DCN+PVA | Yellow coloured powder | NC | NC | NC |
Production yield (Table 8)
By calculating the initial weight of raw materials and the final weight of microsponges, one can calculate the percentage yield. The formula can be used to get the percentage yield.
Formulation code | Theoretical yield (g) | Practical yield (g) | Percentage yield (%) |
---|---|---|---|
F1 | 0.6 | 0.421 | 70.12 |
F2 | 0.7 | 0.545 | 77.81 |
F3 | 1 | 0.865 | 86.52 |
F4 | 0.6 | 0.392 | 65.31 |
F5 | 1 | 0.775 | 77.53 |
F6 | 1.3 | 1.110 | 85.31 |
Loading Efficiency (Figure 3, Table 9)
Using spectrophotometry, the microsponges were identified (λmax=255 nm). After dissolving 100 mg of DCN microsponges in 100 mL of phosphate buffer (pH 6.8), the sample was stored for the entire night. The real drug content in the microsponge was calculated and expressed. The following formula was used to determine the microsponges’ loading efficiency (%).
Formulation code | Loading efficiency (%) |
---|---|
F1 | 70.41 |
F2 | 82.32 |
F3 | 92.56 |
F4 | 75.80 |
F5 | 86.38 |
F6 | 92.66 |
Particle size analysis (Tables 10-16)
Using an optical microscope and a calibrated ocular and stage micrometer, the average particle size of Diacerein-loaded microsponges was ascertained. A cover slip was placed on a spotless glass slide that had a small amount of microsponges spread out on it along with a drop of liquid paraffin. In order to determine the average particle size, measurements 100 particles of each batch. dav=Σ nd Æn Where, dav is the average diameter of particles (μm), n is a number of particles per group and d is the middle value (μm). IV.
Size range (μm) | Mean size (d) | No. of particles (n) | Standard deviation (nd) | Percentage frequency |
---|---|---|---|---|
0-15 | 7.5 | 12 | 90 | 12 |
15-30 | 22.5 | 30 | 675 | 30 |
30-45 | 37.5 | 19 | 712 | 19 |
45-60 | 52.5 | 23 | 1207 | 23 |
60-75 | 67.5 | 6 | 405 | 6 |
75-90 | 82.5 | 10 | 825 | 10 |
Size range (μm) | Mean size (d) | No. of particles(n) | Standard deviation (nd) | Percentage frequency |
---|---|---|---|---|
0-15 | 7.5 | 12 | 90 | 12 |
15-30 | 22.5 | 36 | 810 | 36 |
30-45 | 37.5 | 21 | 787.5 | 21 |
45-60 | 52.5 | 23 | 1207.5 | 23 |
60-75 | 67.5 | 4 | 270 | 4 |
75-90 | 82.5 | 4 | 330 | 4 |
Size range (μm) | Mean size (d) | No. of particles (n) | Standard deviation (nd) | Percentage frequency |
---|---|---|---|---|
0-15 | 7.5 | 11 | 82.5 | 11 |
15-30 | 22.5 | 42 | 945 | 42 |
30-45 | 37.5 | 24 | 900 | 24 |
45-60 | 52.5 | 12 | 630 | 12 |
60-75 | 67.5 | 7 | 472.5 | 7 |
75-90 | 82.5 | 4 | 330 | 4 |
Size range (μm) | Mean size (d) | No. of particles (n) | Standard deviation (nd) | Percentage frequency |
---|---|---|---|---|
0-15 | 7.5 | 6 | 45 | 6 |
15-30 | 22.5 | 10 | 225 | 10 |
30-45 | 37.5 | 29 | 1087.5 | 29 |
45-60 | 52.5 | 30 | 1575 | 30 |
60-75 | 67.5 | 20 | 1350 | 20 |
75-90 | 82.5 | 5 | 412.5 | 5 |
Size range (μm) | Mean size (d) | No. of particles (n) | Standard deviation (nd) | Percentage frequency |
---|---|---|---|---|
0-15 | 7.5 | 6 | 45 | 6 |
15-30 | 22.5 | 27 | 607.5 | 27 |
30-45 | 37.5 | 20 | 750 | 20 |
45-60 | 52.5 | 25 | 1312 | 25 |
60-75 | 67.5 | 15 | 1012.5 | 15 |
75-90 | 82.5 | 7 | 577.5 | 7 |
Size range (μm) | Mean size (d) | No. of particles (n) | Standard deviation (nd) | Percentage frequency |
---|---|---|---|---|
0-15 | 7.5 | 14 | 105 | 14 |
15-30 | 22.5 | 35 | 787.5 | 35 |
30-45 | 37.5 | 26 | 975 | 26 |
45-60 | 52.5 | 18 | 945 | 18 |
60-75 | 67.5 | 4 | 270 | 4 |
75-90 | 82.5 | 3 | 247.5 | 3 |
Formulation | Average particle size |
---|---|
F1 | 39.14 |
F2 | 34.95 |
F3 | 33.62 |
F4 | 46.95 |
F5 | 43.04 |
F6 | 33.30 |
Evaluation of Gel
PH measurement
A digital pH meter was utilized to ascertain the pH of the gel composition. After dissolving 1 g of gel in 100 mL of distilled water, it was kept for two hours. It was measured how acidic the formulation was.
Appearance
Color matters when it comes to patient compliance. The produced gels were examined visually to ensure they were clear, colored and free of any particles.
Drug content
1 g of microsponge gel was precisely weighed, dissolved in methanol and then sonicated for 10-15 min. The resulting mixture was then added to a one hundred millilitre volumetric flask using methanol. To reach a concentration within Beer’s range, 10 mL of this was pipetted out and diluted to 100 mL using methanol. The final dilution was made with distilled water. Using a blank gel that had been prepared in the same way as the sample, the absorbance was measured at 255 nm using a UV spectrophotometer.
Viscosity measurement (Table 17)
The viscosity of the various gel compositions was measured at 25°C using a Brookfield viscometer with spindle no. 64 running at 100 rpm. Using a Brookfield viscometer, the optimal formulation’s viscosity was ascertained without dilution. (Model-LVDV-E). The Brookfield Viscometer is made comprised of a spinning spindle and a fixed cup. Rotating spindles of varying sizes are employed and submerged in the test substance. big size spindles (big diameter and surface area) are used for low-viscosity liquids, whereas small spindles (small diameter and surface area) are used for high-viscosity liquids. Turn the spindle inside the microsponge gel until the viscometer’s dial readout remains constant. For repeatable results, repeat this process three times.
Gel Formulation | Drug content | Viscosity (cps) | Spreadability (g.cm/sec) | pH |
---|---|---|---|---|
Gel containing Ethyl cellulose (FG1) | 92.5 | 1380 | 7.4 | 6.8 |
Gel containing Eudragit RS 100 (FG2) | 93.2 | 1296 | 5.0 | 6.7 |
Spreadability studies (Table 17)
Good spreadability is one of the requirements for a gel to satisfy the ideal attributes. This phrase is used to describe the area that gel spreads easily when applied to the skin or other affected area. The spreading value of a formulation also affects how effective it is as a medicine. Spreadability is measured in terms of the number of seconds it takes for two slides to separate from gel that has been positioned between them when a specific stress is applied. Better spreadability results from separating two slides in less time. The formula below was then utilized to determine spreadability:
Where, S=Spreadibility, M=Weight in the pan, L=Length moved by the glass slide, T=Time taken to separate slide completely.
RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
Organoleptic properties of Diacerein
Calibration Curve of Diacerein (Table 5)
The calibration curve of diacerein was prepared in DMA (N, N-dimethylacetamide).
FTIR STUDY
It was investigated how the drug and the formulation’s excipients interacted. The following are the outcomes (Figures 4, 5, 6):
Prepared Microsponges: Microsponges were prepared using Quasi emulsion solvent diffusion method (Figure 7).
Internal Phase: Diacerein (100 mg) and Ethyl cellulose (200 mg F1, 250 mg F2, 300 mg F3) / Eudragit RS 100 (200 mg F4, 250 mg F5, 300 mg F6) in Dichloromethane (20 mL).
External Phase: Polyvinyl alcohol in distilled water, (0.75% w/v).
Percentage Yield
After preparing the microsponges, the yield percentage was determined. They were discovered to be between 70.12% and 86.52%. It displays rising drug usage: The percentage yield rose with the polymer ratio.
Loading Efficiency
The range of loading efficiency was 70.41 to 92.66%. The formulations F3 and F6 were determined to have the highest loading efficiency. This demonstrates that loading efficiency rose as the drug: polymer ratio grew.
Evaluation of Microsponges Gel
Visual Inspection (Table 19)
The color, texture and appearance of the obtained gel formulations of diacerein microsponges were examined visually. Each created formulation had a smooth texture, was yellow and exhibited good homogeneity-no lumps or syneresis-as well as viscosity.
Spreadability and Viscosity Studies
The value of spreadability of microsponges F1 and F2 was found to be 7.4 and 5.0 g.cm/sec respectively, indicating the acceptable spreadability of gel.
Particle size distribution
Microsponge formulation F1 was found to be more viscous than the gel loaded with microsponge using Eudragit RS 100.
In vitro diffusion study for microsponge gel (Figure 8, Table 20)
Using PBS (pH 7.4), the in vitro diffusion was done for the formulations F1 and F2 over a 12-hour period. At the end of the 12-hour period, formulation F1 was found to have more drugs diffused than the formulation F2, with percentages of 89.40% and 92.18%, respectively. As a result, the microsponge loaded gel formulation F1 was refined to provide regulated drug release with all desired characteristics.
Average particle size of microsponges formulations
In vitro drug release of microsponges: (Table 18)
Time (Hr) | F1 | F2 | F3 | F4 | F5 | F6 |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
1 | 05.30 | 05.60 | 06.70 | 03.60 | 05.10 | 05.20 |
2 | 13.20 | 14.60 | 15.30 | 08.10 | 11.36 | 12.10 |
3 | 23.24 | 24.45 | 25.52 | 13.60 | 15.40 | 22.60 |
4 | 32.56 | 33.60 | 33.72 | 26.40 | 28.60 | 27.20 |
5 | 41.20 | 41.36 | 43.30 | 29.60 | 30.20 | 30.40 |
6 | 47.24 | 49.38 | 52.65 | 37.24 | 40.06 | 42.60 |
7 | 56.66 | 56.75 | 58.60 | 44.20 | 45.55 | 46.10 |
8 | 59.25 | 59.40 | 59.75 | 54.52 | 56.40 | 56.30 |
9 | 64.36 | 66.06 | 68.50 | 62.70 | 66.60 | 67.20 |
10 | 72.40 | 74.66 | 76.20 | 72.20 | 75.25 | 76.80 |
11 | 79.39 | 80.02 | 82.30 | 78.40 | 81.48 | 82.20 |
12 | 82.78 | 88.56 | 88.60 | 82.60 | 88.40 | 88.80 |
Formulation code | Color | Consistency | Homogeneity | Appearance | Uniformity |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
F1 | Light Yellow | Less Viscous | Good | Opaque | Good |
F2 | Light Yellow | Optimum Viscous | Good | Opaque yellow | Good |
Time (min) | Cumulative % drug release | |
---|---|---|
F1 | F2 | |
0 | 0 | 0 |
30 | 5.62 | 9.42 |
60 | 9.86 | 13.67 |
120 | 14.77 | 19.22 |
180 | 23.38 | 26.82 |
240 | 30.21 | 34.14 |
300 | 37.91 | 44.71 |
360 | 45.74 | 51.18 |
420 | 54.22 | 58.53 |
480 | 62.12 | 65.11 |
540 | 71.56 | 72.34 |
600 | 77.82 | 78.43 |
660 | 81.15 | 84.65 |
720 | 89.40 | 92.18 |
CONCLUSION
Diacerein was chosen as a model drug for MDDS to address these issues and enable controlled drug release because it has a short half-life and is poorly soluble in water. Using the polymers Eudragit RS 100 and Ethyl cellulose, diacerein is prepared as microsponges by the quasi-emulsion solvent diffusion process, which is then incorporated into gels. Compatibility studies were performed for drug and excipients.
A physical compatibility investigation revealed that there was no physical conflict between the medicine and the excipients.
An analysis of chemical compatibility (FT-IR) was conducted. There was no evidence of a drug-excipient interaction.
A standard graph was created for Diacerein and it was discovered that the solutions adhered to Beer Lambert’s law and demonstrated linearity (
R2=0.998).
Diacerein Microsponges were made using two different polymers to see which one best delay the release.
For every formulation, the in vitro release procedure was completed. Therefore, F2 and F4 were selected as optimized formulations.
Cite this article:
Tangri SK, Sisodiya V, Rana H, Garg M, Tangri P, Pathania V. Preparation and in vitro Characterization of Diacerein Microsponges Loaded Topical Gels. Int. J. Pharm. Investigation. 2024;14(3):794-805.
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT
We are thankful to SGRR University for providing the research facilities, also we are grateful to Department of Pharmaceutics, SGRR University for helping us in designing this novel research work.
ABBREVIATIONS
μm | Micrometre |
---|---|
m g/mL | Milligram/milliliter |
% | Percentage |
EC | Ethyl Cellulose |
EUD | Eudragit |
DCN | Diacerein |
Con/ Conc. | Concentration |
NC | No Change |
References
- Brahmankar DM, Jaiswal SB. Biopharmaceutics and Pharmcokinectics-A treatise. 2009:399-400.
- Gunasheela S, Chandrakala V, Srinivasan S. Microsponge: an adaptable topical drug delivery system. World J Adv Res Rev. 2022;15(1):396-411. [CrossRef] | [Google Scholar]
- Khattab A, Nattouf A. Microsponge-based gel as a simple and valuable strategy for formulating and releasing tazarotene in a controlled manner. Sci Rep. 2022;12(1):11414 [PubMed] | [CrossRef] | [Google Scholar]
- Singhvi G, Manchanda P, Hans N, Dubey SK, Gupta G. Microsponge: an emerging drug delivery strategy. Drug Dev Res. 2019;80(2):200-8. [PubMed] | [CrossRef] | [Google Scholar]
- Junqueira MV, Bruschi ML. A review of the drug delivery from microsponges. AAPS PharmSciTech. 2018;19(4):1501-11. [PubMed] | [CrossRef] | [Google Scholar]
- Choudhary A, Akhtar MS. Microsponge drug delivery system: emerging technique in novel drug delivery system and recent advances. Res J Pharm Technol. 2022;15(10):4835-40. [CrossRef] | [Google Scholar]
- Nidhi K, Verma S, Microsponge KS. An advanced drug delivery system. J Clin Sci Res. 2021;10(2):109 [CrossRef] | [Google Scholar]
- Arathy SA, Sunil S. Microsponges-A New Hope for drug delivery system. J Pharm Sci Res. 2020;12(7):97 [CrossRef] | [Google Scholar]
- Khule PK, Nitalikar MM, More VV, Gilhotra RM. Microsponge drug delivery: a review. [CrossRef] | [Google Scholar]
- Vitthal P, Anuradha S. A review on microsponges drug delivery system. IJRAR-Int J Res Anal Rev (IJRAR) ISSN. 2020:2348-1269. [CrossRef] | [Google Scholar]
- Parikh BN, Gothi GD, Patel TD, Chavda HV, Patel CN. Microsponge as a novel topical drug delivery system. J Glob Pharm Technol. 2010;2(1):17-29. [CrossRef] | [Google Scholar]