Our previous study found that spray-dried glutinous rice starch (sGRS) is larger in size, rounder in shape and better in flowability than native GRS. It has the potential to be used for direct compression hydrophilic matrix (HM) tablets.
OBJECTIVE:
This study aimed to investigate the factors that affect the propranolol release from directly compressed sGRS HM tablets.
METHODS:
The effects of the amount of sGRS, the compaction pressure and the amount of magnesium stearate on the drug release rate from sGRS directly compressed HM were investigated. In vitro drug releases were performed. The dilution potential of sGRS was investigated.
RESULTS:
The higher the sGRS content, the slower the release rate of propranolol. The compaction pressure and the amount of magnesium stearate did not significantly affect the release rate of the drug. The sGRS showed plastic deformation under compaction with a dilution potential of 46%.
CONCLUSIONS:
sGRS can be used as a direct compression HM. The amount of sGRS significantly affected the release rate of the drug from the matrix.
GohelM.C. and JoganiP.D., A review of co-processed directly compressible excipients, J Pharm Sci8(1) (2005), 76–93.
2.
AldermanD.A., A review of cellulose ethers in hydrophilic matrices for oral controlled-release dosage forms, Int J Pharm Tech Prod Manuf5 (1984), 1–9.
3.
MaderueloC.ZarzueloA. and LanaoJ.M., Critical factors in the release of drugs from sustained release hydrophilic matrices, J Control Release154 (2011), 2–19.
4.
RaoK.V.R. and DeviK.P., Swelling controlled-release systems: Recent developments and applications, Int J Pharm4 (1988), 1–13.
5.
PeerapattanaJ.PhuvaritP.SrijesdarukV.PreechagoonD. and TattawasartA., Pregelatinized glutinous rice starch as a sustained release agent for tablet preparations, Carbohydr Polym80(2) (2010), 453–459.
6.
LaovachirasuwanP., Modification of glutinous rice starch as a drug release modifier for direct compression tablets in sustained release dosage forms, Dissertation, Khon Kaen University, 2010.
7.
LewisG.A.MathieuD. and Phan-Tan-LuuR., Pharmaceutical Experimental Design, Marcel Dekker, New York, 1999.
8.
The United States Pharmacopeial Convention. U.S. Pharmacopoeia-National Formulary USP 39 NF 34, vol 3, MD: Rockville, 2016, pp. 5590–5592.
9.
British Pharmacopoeia Commission. British Pharmacopoeia, vol. 5, TSO, London, 2018, p. A359, A384–385.
10.
HiguchiT., Rate of release of medicaments from ointment bases containing drugs in suspension, J Pharm Sci50 (1961), 874–875.
11.
KorsmeyerR.W.GurnyR.DoelkerE.BuriP. and PeppasN.A., Mechanism of solute release from porous hydrophilic polymers, Int J Pharm15 (1983), 25–35.
12.
FellJ.T. and NewtonJ.M., Determination of tablet strength by the diametral-compression test, J Pharm Sci59(5) (1970), 688–691.
13.
HabibY.AugsburgerL.ReierG.WheatleyT. and ShangrawR., Dilution potential: A new perspective, Pharm Dev Technol1(2) (1996), 205–212.
14.
MitrevejK.T. and AugsburgerL.L., Adhesion of tablets in a rotary tablet press. II. Effects of blending time, running time, and lubricant concentration, Drug Dev Ind Pharm8(2) (1982), 237–282.
15.
JohanssonM.E. and NicklassonM., Investigation of the film formation of magnesium stearate by applying a flow-through dissolution technique, J Pharm Pharmacol38(1) (1986), 51–54.
16.
WangJ.WenH. and DesaiD., Lubrication in tablet formulations, Eur J Pharm Biopharm75 (2010), 1–15.
17.
BolhuisG.LerkC.ZijlstraH. and De BoerA., Film formation by magnesium stearate during mixing and its effect on tableting, Pharm Weekbl110 (1975), 317–325.
18.
De BoerA.BolhuisG. and LerkC., Bonding characteristics by scanning electron microscopy of powders mixed with magnesium stearate, Powder Technol20(1) (1978), 75–82.
19.
HussainM.YorkP.TimminsP. and HumphreyP., Secondary ion massspectrometry (sims) evaluation of magnesium stearate distribution and its effects on the physico-technical properties of sodium chloride tablets, Powder Technol60(1) (1990), 39–45.
20.
ShahA.C. and MlodozeniecA.R., Mechanism of surface lubrication: Influence of duration of lubricant excipient mixing on processing characteristics of powders and properties of compressed tablets, J Pharm Sci66 (1977), 1377–1382.
21.
BolhuisG.K.SmallenbroekA.J. and LerkC.F., Interaction of tablet disintegrants and magnesium stearate during mixing I: Effect on tablet disintegration, J Pharm Sci70 (1981), 1328–1330.
22.
FloresL.E.ArellanoR.L. and EsquivelJ.J.D., Lubricant susceptibility of cellactose and Avicel PH-200: A quantitative relationship, Drug Dev Ind Pharm26 (2000), 297–305.
23.
RubinsteinM.H. and EastwoodB.A., The effect of lubricant type and concentration on the bioavailability of frusemide from 40 mg tablets, J Pharm Pharmacol30 (1978), 12.
24.
RoweR.SheskeyP.J. and OwenS.C., Handbook of Pharmaceutical Excipients, 5th edn, Pharm Press, Chicago, 1986.
25.
RizkS.GuyotJ.C.DuruC. and GaudyD., Influence of lubricant properties on compression behaviour and drug dissolution rate of scleroglucan hydrophilic matrix, Int J Pharm126 (1995), 57–63.
26.
JivrajM.MartiniL.G. and ThomsonC.M., An overview of different excipients useful for the direct compression of tablets, Pharm Sci Technolo Today3(2) (2000), 58–63.
27.
MattssonS., Pharmaceutical binders and their function in directly compressed tablets, Dissertation, Uppsala University, 2000.
28.
PatelS.KaushalA.M. and BansalA.K., Compression physics in the formulation development of tablets, Crit Rev Ther Drug Carrier Syst23(1) (2006), 1–65.
29.
RitgerP.L. and PeppasN.A., A simple equation for description of solute release. II: Fickian and anomalous from swellable devices, J Control Release5 (1987), 37–42.
30.
ColomboP.BettiniR. and PeppasN.A., Observation of swelling process and diffusion front position during swelling in hydroxypropyl methylcellulose (HPMC) matrices containing a soluble drug, J Control Release61(1–2) (1999), 83–91.
31.
ColomboP.BettiniR.SantiP. and PeppasN.A., Swellable matrices for controlled drug delivery: Gel-layer behaviour, mechanisms and optimal performance, Pharm Sci Technolo Today3(6) (2000), 198–204.
32.
CostaP. and LoboJ.M.S., Modeling and comparison of dissolution profiles, Eur J Pharm Sci13 (2001), 123–133.
33.
RekhiG.S.NelloreR.V.HussainA.S.TillmanL.G.MalinowskiH.J. and AugsburgerL.L., Identification of critical formulation and processing variables for metoprolol tartrate extended-release (ER) matrix tablets, J Control Release59 (1999), 327–342.
34.
SiepmannJ. and PeppasN.A., Modeling of drug release from delivery systems based on hydroxyl- propylmethylcellulose (HPMC), Adv Drug Deliv Rev64 (2012), 163–174.
