Skip to main content
Log in

Mucoadhesive Polymers in Peroral Peptide Drug Delivery. VI. Carbomer and Chitosan Improve the Intestinal Absorption of the Peptide Drug Buserelin In Vivo

  • Published:
Pharmaceutical Research Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Purpose. To evaluate the effect of the crosslinked poly(acrylate) carbomer 934P (C934P) and its freeze-dried neutralized sodium salt (FNaC934P) as well as chitosan hydrochloride on the intestinal absorption of the peptide drug buserelin.

Methods. Buserelin was applied intraduodenally in control buffer, 0.5% (w/v) C934P, 0.5% (w/v) FNaC934P, 1.5% (w/v) chitosan hydrochloride or FNaC934P/chitosan hydrochloride (1:1 (v/v)) mixture in rats.

Results. All polymer preparation showed a statistically significant improvement of buserelin absorption compared to the control solution. The absolute bioavailabilities for the different polymer preparations were: control, 0.1%; 0.5% FNaC934P, 0.6%; 0.5% C934P, 2.0%; chitosan hydrochloride, 5.1% and FNaC934P/chitosan hydrochloride (1:1 (v/v)) mixture, 1.0%. The higher bioavailability with chitosan hydrochloride compared to C934P and FNaC934P indicates that for buserelin the intestinal transmucosal transport enhancing effect of the polymer plays a more dominant role than the protection against proteases such as α-chymotrypsin.

Conclusions. The mucoadhesive polymers carbomer 934P and chitosan hydrochloride are able to enhance the intestinal absorption of buserelin in vivo in rats, and may therefore be promising excipients in peroral delivery systems for peptide drugs.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Similar content being viewed by others

REFERENCES

  1. R. T. Borchardt. Capsugel Liberary, 11–19 (1991).

  2. H. Vilhardt and S. Lundin. Gen. Pharmac. 17:481–483 (1986).

    Google Scholar 

  3. C. Larsen, M. Niebuhr Jørgensen, B. Tommerup, N. Mygind, E. E. Dagrosa, H. G. Grigoleit, and V. Malerczyk. Eur. J. Clin. Pharmacol. 33:155–159 (1987).

    Google Scholar 

  4. A. S. Harris. J. Drug Targeting 1:101–116 (1993).

    Google Scholar 

  5. I. Matthes, F. Nimmerfall, and H. Sucker. Pharmazie 47:609–613 (1992).

    Google Scholar 

  6. X. H. Zhou. J. Controlled Rel. 29:239–252 (1994).

    Google Scholar 

  7. H. L. Lueßen, B. J. de Leeuw, D. Pérard, C.-M. Lehr, A. G. de Boer, J. C. Verhoef, and H. E. Junginger. Eur. J. Pharm. Sci. 4:117–128 (1996).

    Google Scholar 

  8. H. L. Lueßen, G. Borchard, J. C. Verhoef, C.-M. Lehr, A. G. de Boer, and H. E. Junginger. Pharm. Res. 12:1293–1298 (1995).

    Google Scholar 

  9. G. Borchard, H. L. Lueßen, A. G. de Boer, J. C. Verhoef, C.-M. Lehr, and H. E. Junginger. J. Controlled Rel. 39:131–138 (1996).

    Google Scholar 

  10. H. L. Lueßen, C.-O. Rentel, A. F. Kotzé, C.-M. Lehr, A. G. de Boer, J. C. Verhoef, and H. E. Junginger. J. Controlled Rel., (in press) (1996).

  11. L. Illum, N. F. Farraj, and S. S: Davis. Pharm. Res. 11:1186–1189 (1994).

    Google Scholar 

  12. J.-M. Gu, J. R. Robinson, and A.-H. S. Leung. Crit. Rev. Therap. Drug Carrier Sys. 5:21–67 (1988).

    Google Scholar 

  13. C.-M. Lehr, J. A. Bouwstra, E. H. Schacht, and H. E. Junginger. Int. J. Pharm. 78:43–48 (1992).

    Google Scholar 

  14. Y. Akiyama, H. L. Lueßen, A. G. de Boer, J. C. Verhoef, and H. E. Junginger. Int. J. Pharm., 136:155–163 (1996).

    Google Scholar 

  15. H. M. Behre, J. Sandow, and E. Nieschlag. Arzneim.-Forsch./Drug Res. 42:80–84 (1992).

    Google Scholar 

  16. J. B. M. M. van Bree, A. G. de Boer, M. Danhof, J. Verhoef, T. B. van Wimersma Greidanus, and D. D. Breimer. Peptides 9:555–559 (1988).

    Google Scholar 

  17. M. Gibaldi and D. Perrier. In: J. Swarbrick (ed.), Drugs and the pharmaceutical sciences, Vol. 1, Marcel Dekker, New York, 1975, pp. 409–424.

    Google Scholar 

  18. J. Sandow. In A. E. Schindler and K. W. Schweppe (eds.), Endometriose—Neue Therapiemöglichkeiten durch Buserelin. Walter de Gryter, Berlin-New York, 1989, 23–42.

    Google Scholar 

  19. M. J. Brownstein. In G. J. Siegel (ed.), Basic neurochemistry: molecular, cellular, and medical aspects. Raven Press, New York, 1989, 287–309.

    Google Scholar 

  20. F. J. Holland, L. Fishman, D. C. Costigan, L. Luna, and S. Leeder. J. Clin. Endocrinol. Metab. 63:1065–1070 (1986).

    Google Scholar 

  21. A. J. Hoogstraate, J. C. Verhoef, A. Pijpers, L. A. M. G. van Leengoed, J. H. M. Verheijden, H. E. Junginger, and H. E. Boddé. Pharm. Res. 13:1233–1237 (1996).

    Google Scholar 

  22. Suprecur®Hoechst Fachinformation.

  23. Y. Akiyama, H. L. Lueßen, A. G. de Boer, J. C. Verhoef, and H. E. Junginger. Int. J. Pharm., 138:13–23 (1996).

    Google Scholar 

  24. B. J. de Leeuw, H. L. Lueßen, A. F. Kotzé, A. G. de Boer, J. C. Verhoef, and H. E. Junginger. Proceed. Intern. Symp. Control. Rel. Bioact. Mater. 23:845–846 (1996).

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Lueßen, H.L., de Leeuw, B.J., Langemeÿer, M.W.E. et al. Mucoadhesive Polymers in Peroral Peptide Drug Delivery. VI. Carbomer and Chitosan Improve the Intestinal Absorption of the Peptide Drug Buserelin In Vivo . Pharm Res 13, 1668–1672 (1996). https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1016488623022

Download citation

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1016488623022

Navigation