Polymers in Medicine

Polim. Med.
Scopus CiteScore: 3.3 (CiteScore Tracker 3.5)
Index Copernicus (ICV 2023) – 121.14
MEiN – 70
ISSN 0370-0747 (print)
ISSN 2451-2699 (online) 
Periodicity – biannual

Download PDF

Polymers in Medicine

2009, vol. 39, nr 2, April-June, p. 49–64

Publication type: review article

Language: Polish

Zjawisko mukoadhezji i jego znaczenie w aplikacji leku

The mucoadhesion phenomena and importance in drug application

Marcin Płaczek1,, Małgorzata Sznitowska1,

1 Katedra i Zakład Farmacji Stosowanej Gdański Uniwersytet Medyczny

Streszczenie

Podstawowym celem nauk farmaceutycznych jest rozwój nowych, bezpieczniejszych, a przede wszystkim skuteczniejszych metod farmakoterapii. Jednym z narzędzi, służących realizacji tego celu są nowoczesne postaci leku, zarówno dla nowo otrzymanych, jak i znanych w lecznictwie substancji czynnych. Proponuje się wiele nowych sposobów dostarczania leku do organizmu, a w ostatnich latach szczególną uwagę poświęca się systemom wykorzystującym zjawisko mukoadhezji. Systemy te zawierają w swym składzie odpowiednie polimery, które zapewniają kilkugodzinną lub dłuższą adhezję formy leku do błony śluzowej, dzięki czemu możliwe jest uzyskanie dłuższego działania leku, zarówno miejscowego, jak również ogólnoustrojowego. Artykuł zawiera przegląd danych dotyczących mukoadhezji oraz najistotniejszych teorii opisujących to zjawisko. Omówiono w nim także obecnie stosowane metody badania oddziaływań pomiędzy formą leku i błoną śluzową oraz możliwości wykorzystania hydrożeli mukoadhezyjnych jako nośników leku, w zależności od docelowej błony śluzowej.

Abstract

The main assignment of the pharmaceutical sciences is to develop new, safer and more effective methods of pharmacotherapy. Among tools used to realize this goal are modern drug formulations, both for new and well known active substances. Different concepts have been proposed to achieve effi cient drug delivery, and mucoadhesion has received a signifi cant degree of attention during past years. Mucoadhesive systems, thanks to the presence of certain polymers, may attach for few hours to the mucosal membrane and therefore it is possible to obtain prolonged, local or systemic drug effect. This article contains an overview of data concerning the mucoadhesion phenomena and most important adhesion theories. Furthermore, methods that are frequently used to study the adhesion forces between drug and mucus as well as application of mucoadhesive hydrogels as drug carriers for different mucosal membranes are also discussed.

Słowa kluczowe

mukoadhezja, polimery, postać leku

Key words

mucoadhesion, polymers, drug formulation

References (62)

  1. MATHIOWITZ E., CHICKERING D., JACOB J. S., SANTOS C.: Bioadhesive drug delivery systems. W: Encyclopedia of Controlled Drug Delivery, Mathiowitz E. (red.), John Wiley & Sons, Nowy Jork (1999), 9 – 45.
  2. ROBINSON J. R.: Rationale of bioadhesion/mucoadhesion. W: Bioadhesion – Possibilities and Future Trends, Gurny R., Junginger H. E., Wiss. Verl.-Ges., Stuttgart (1990), 13 – 15.
  3. JUNGINGER H. E., VERHOEF J. C., THANOU M.: Drug delivery: mucoadhesive hydrogels. W: Encyclopedia of Pharmaceutical Technology, Swarbrick J. (red.), Informa Healthcare, Nowy Jork (2007), 1169 – 1182.
  4. PEPPAS N. A., HUANG Y.: Nanoscale technology of mucoadhesive interactions. Adv. Drug Del. Rev., (2004), 56, 1675 – 1687.
  5. MARRIOTT C., HUGHES D. R. L.: Mucus physiology and pathology. W: Bioadhesion – Possibilities and Future Trends, Gurny R., Junginger H. E., Wiss. Verl.-Ges., Stuttgart (1990), 29 – 43.
  6. SAWICKI W.: Histologia, PZWL, Warszawa (2003)
  7. BRUSCHI M. L., FREITAS O.: Oral bioadhesive drug delivery systems. Drug Dev. Ind. Pharm., (2005), 31, 293 – 310.
  8. SMART J. D.: The basics and underlying mechanisms of mucoadhesion. Adv. Drug Del. Rev., (2005), 57, 1556 – 1568.
  9. LEE J. W., PARK J. H, ROBINSON J. R.: Bioadhesivebased dosage forms: the next generation. J. Pharm. Sci., (2000), 89, 850 – 866.
  10. SALAMAT-MILLER N., CHITTCHANG M., JOHNSTON T. P.: The use of mucoadhesive polymers in buccal drug delivery. Adv. Drug Del. Rev., (2005), 57, 1666 – 1691.
  11. PEPPAS N. A., SAHLIN J. J.: Hydrogels as mucoadhesive and bioadhesive materials: a review. Biomaterials, (1996), 17, 1553 – 1561.
  12. SUDHAKAR Y., KUOTSU K., BANDYOPADHYAY A. K.: Buccal bioadhesive drug delivery – a promising option for orally less effi cient drugs. J. Control. Release, (2006), 114, 15 – 40.
  13. BERNKOP-SCHNÜRCH A.: Mucoadhesive polymers. W: Polymeric Biomaterials, Dumitriu S. (red.), Marcel Dekker, Nowy Jork (2001), 147 – 165.
  14. BERNKOP-SCHNÜRCH A.: Thiomers: a new generation of mucoadhesive polymers. Adv. Drug Del. Rev., (2005), 57, 1569 – 1582.
  15. BERNKOP-SCHNÜRCH A., STEININGER S.: Synthesis and characterisation of mucoadhesive thiolated polymers. Int. J. Pharm., (2000), 194, 239 – 247.
  16. BERNKOP-SCHNÜRCH A.: Mucoadhesive systems in oral drug delivery. Drug Discov. Today: Technol., (2005), 2, 83 – 87.
  17. KELLAWAY I. W., WARREN S. J.: Mucoadhesive hydrogels for buccal delivery, w: Oral Mucosal Drug Delivery, Rathbone M. J. (red.), Marcel Dekker, Nowy Jork (1996), 221 – 239.
  18. ALI J., KHAR R., AHUJA A., KALRA R.: Buccoadhesive erodible disk for treatment of orodental infections: design and characterisation. Int. J. Pharm., (2002), 238, 93 – 103.
  19. SINGH B., AHUJA N.: Development of controlledrelease buccoadhesive hydrophilic matrices of diltiazem hydrochloride: optimization of bioadhesion, dissolution and diffusion parameters. Drug Dev. Ind. Pharm., (2002), 28, 431 – 442.
  20. DESAI K. G. H., KUMAR T. M. P.: Preparation and evaluation of a novel buccal adhesive system. AAPS Pharm. Sci. Tech., (2004), 5, art. 35.
  21. CHOI H. G., KIM CH. K.: Development of omeprazole buccal adhesive tablets with stability enhancement in human saliva. J. Control. Release (2000), 68, 397 – 404
  22. LANGOTH N., KALBE J., BERNKOP-SCHNÜRCH A.: Development of buccal drug delivery systems based on a thiolated polymer. Int. J. Pharm., (2003), 252, 141 – 148.
  23. LLABOT J. M., MANZO R. H., ALLEMANDI D. A.: Double-layered mucoadhesive tablets containing nystatin. AAPS Pharm. Sci. Tech., (2002), 3, art. 22.
  24. LLABOT J. M., MANZO R. H., ALLEMANDI D. A.: Drug release from carbomer:carbomer sodium salt matrices with potential use as mucoadhesive drug delivery system. Int. J. Pharm., 276 (2004), 59 – 66
  25. ALUR H. H., PATHER I., MITRA A. K. et. al.: Transmucosal sustained-delivery of chlorpheniramine maleate in rabbits using a novel, natural mucoadhesive gum as an excipient in buccal tablets. Int. J. Pharm., (1999), 188, 1 – 10.
  26. ALUR H. H., BEAL J. D., PATHER S. I.: Evaluation of a novel, natural oligosaccharide gum as a sustained-release and mucoadhesive component of calcitonin buccal tablets. J. Pharm. Sci., (1999), 88, 1313 – 1319.
  27. SHOJAEI A. H., LI X.: Mechanisms of buccal mucoadhesion of novel copolymers of acrylic acid and polyethylene glycol monomethylether monomethacrylate. J. Control. Release, (1997), 47, 151 – 161.
  28. SHOJAEI A. H., PAULSON J., HONARY S.: Evaluation of poly(acrylic acid-coethylhexyl acrylate) fi lms for mucoadhesive transbuccal drug delivery: factors affecting the force of mucoadhesion. J. Control. Release, (2000), 67, 223 – 232.
  29. AKBARI J., NOKHODCHI A., FARID D. et. al.: Development and evaluation of buccoadhesive propranolol hydrochloride tablet formulations: effect of fi llers. Il Farmaco, (2004), 59, 155 – 161.
  30. BONACUCINA G., CESPI M., Misici-Falzi Met al.: Rheological, adhesive and release characterisation of semisolid Carbopol/tetraglycol systems. Int. J. Pharm., (2006), 307, 129 – 140.
  31. VARSHOSAZ J., DEHGHAN Z.: Development and characterization of buccoadhesive nifedipine tablets. Eur. J. Pharm. Biopharm., (2002), 54, 135 – 141.
  32. JAIN A. C., AUNGST B J., ADEYEYE M. CH.: Development and in vivo evaluation of buccal tablets prepared using danazol-sulfobutylether 7 β-cyclodextrin (SBE 7) complexes. J. Pharm. Sci., (2002), 91, 1659 – 1668.
  33. ROSSI S., BONFERONI M. C., FERRARI F. et al.: Characterization of mucin interaction with three viscosity grades of sodium carboxymethylcellulose. Comparison between rheological and tensile testing. Eur. J. Pharm. Sci., (1996), 4, 189 – 196.
  34. KELLY H. M., DEASY P. B., BUSQUET M. et al.: Bioadhesive, rheological, lubricant and other aspects of an oral gel formulation intended for the treatment of xerostomia. Int. J. Pharm., (2004), 278, 391 – 406.
  35. GAVINI E., SANNA V., JULIANO C. et al.: Mucoadhesive vaginal tablets as veterinary delivery system for the controlled release of an antimicrobial drug, acrifl avine. AAPS Pharm. Sci. Tech., (2002), 3, art. 20.
  36. JONES D. S., WOOLFSON A. D., BROWN A. F. et al.: Design, characterisation and preliminary clinical evaluation of a novel mucoadhesive topical formulation containing tetracycline for the treatment of periodontal disease. J. Control. Release, (2000), 67, 357 – 368.
  37. PARK C. R., MUNDAY D. L.: Development and evaluation of a biphasic buccal adhesive tablet for nicotine replacement therapy. Int. J. Pharm., (2002), 237, 215 – 226.
  38. IKINCI G., SENEL S., AKINCIBAY H. et al.: Effect of chitosan on a periodontal pathogen Porphyromonas gingivalis. Int. J. Pharm., (2002), 235, 121 – 127.
  39. ACCILI D., MENGHI G., BONACUCINA G. et al.: Mucoadhesion dependence of pharmaceutical polymers on mucosa characteristics. Eur. J. Pharm. Sci., (2004), 22, 225 – 234.
  40. EOUANI C., PICCERELLE PH., PRINDERRE P. et al.: In-vitro comparative study of buccal mucoadhesive performance of different polymeric fi lms. Eur. J. Pharm. Biopharm., (2001), 52, 45 – 55.
  41. BREDENBERG S., NYSTRÖM CH.: In-vitro evaluation of bioadhesion in particulate systems and possible improvement using interactive mixtures. J. Pharm. Pharmacol., (2003), 55, 169 – 177.
  42. TOBYN M., JOHNSON J., GIBSON S.: Use of a TA.XT2 Texture Analyser in mucoadhesive research. International Labmate, (1994), 17, 6.
  43. CARAMELLA C. M., ROSSI S., BONFERONI M. C.: A rheological approach to explain the mucoadhesive behavior of polymer hydrogels. W: Bioadhesive Drug Delivery Systems: Fundamentals, Novel Approaches and Development, Mathiowitz E., Chickering D. E., Lehr C. M. (red.), Marcel Dekker, Nowy Jork (1999), 25 – 65.
  44. HAO J., HENG P. W. S.: Buccal delivery systems. Drug Dev. Ind. Pharm., (2003), 29, 821 – 832.
  45. TUR K. M., CH’NG H. S.: Evaluation of possible mechanism(s) of bioadhesion. Int. J. Pharm., (1998), 160, 61 – 74.
  46. KOCKISCH S., REES G. D., YOUNG S. A. et al.: A direct-staining method to evaluate the mucoadhesion of polymers from aqueous dispersion. J. Control. Release, (2001), 77, 1 – 6.
  47. PATEL D., SMITH J. R., SMITH A. W. et al.: An atomic force microscopy investigation of bioadhesive polymer adsorption onto human buccal cells. Int. J. Pharm., (2000), 200, 271 – 277.
  48. KOCKISCH S., REES G. D., YOUNG S. A. et al.: In situ evaluation of drug-loaded microspheres on a mucosal surface under dynamic test conditions. Int. J. Pharm., (2004), 276, 51 – 58.
  49. NIELSEN L. S., SCHUBERT L., HANSEN J.: Bioadhesive drug delivery systems. I. Characterisation of mucoadhesive properties of system based on glyceryl monooleate and glyceryl monolinoleate. Eur. J. Pharm. Sci., (1998), 6, 231 – 239.
  50. QAQISH R. B., AMIJI M. M.: Synthesis of a fl uorescent chitosan derivative and its application for the study of chitosan-mucin interactions, Carbohydr. Polym., (1999), 38, 99 – 107.
  51. ROSSI S., SANDRI G., CARAMELLA C. M.: Buccal drug delivery: a challenge already won? Drug Discov. Today: Technol., (2005), 2, 59 – 65.
  52. ROWE R. C., SHESKEY P. J., WELLER P. J. (red.): Handbook of pharmaceutical excipients. Pharmaceutical Press, Londyn (2003).
  53. SMART J. D., KELLAWAY I. W., WORTHINGTON H. E. C.: An in-vitro investigation of mucosaadhesive materials for use in controlled drug delivery. J. Pharm. Pharmacol., (1984), 36, 295 – 299.
  54. TOBYN M. J., JOHNSON J. R., DETTMAR P. W.: Factors affecting in vitro gastric mucoadhesion. II. Physical properties of polymers. Eur. J. Pharm. Biopharm., (1996), 42, 56 – 61.
  55. WONG CH. F., YUEN K. H., PEH K. K.: An invitro method for buccal adhesion studies: importance of instrument variables. Int. J. Pharm., (1999), 180, 47 – 57.
  56. PRUDAT-CHRISTIAENS C., ARNAUD P., ALLAIN P. et al.: Aminophylline bioadhesive tablets attempted by wet granulation. Int. J. Pharm., (1996), 141, 109 – 116.
  57. TAMBURIC S., CRAIG D. Q. M.: A comparison of different in vitro methods for measuring mucoadhesive performance, Eur. J. Pharm. Biopharm., (1997), 44, 159 – 167.
  58. JACQUES Y., BURI P.: An investigation of the physical behaviour of moistureactivated mucoadhesive hydrogels upon contact with biological and non-biological substrates. Pharm. Acta Helv., (1997), 72, 225 – 232.
  59. GRABOVAC V., GUGGI D., BERNKOP-SCHNÜRCH A.: Comparison of the mucoadhesive properties of various polymers, Adv. Drug Deliv. Rev., (2005), 57, 1713 – 1723.
  60. MADSEN F., EBERTH K., SMART J. D.: Arheological examination of the mucoadhesive/mucus interaction: the effect of mucoadhesive type and concentration. J. Control. Release, (1998), 50, 167 – 178.
  61. WEBBER W.: Mucosal drug delivery, buccal. W: Encyclopedia of Controlled Drug Delivery, Mathiowitz E. (red.), John Wiley & Sons, Nowy Jork (1999), 553 – 563.
  62. ROBINSON J. R.: Mucoadhesive ocular drug delivery systems. W: Bioadhesion – Possibilities and Future Trends, Gurny R., Junginger H. E., Wiss. Verl.-Ges., Stuttgart (1990), 109 – 123.
© Wroclaw Medical University