眼科药物与多剂量滴管在模拟使用条件下的吸附研究

Y. Le Basle, P. Chennell, V. Sautou
{"title":"眼科药物与多剂量滴管在模拟使用条件下的吸附研究","authors":"Y. Le Basle, P. Chennell, V. Sautou","doi":"10.1515/pthp-2017-0026","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Abstract Preservative free ophthalmic formulations need to be packaged either as single doses, or using specially designed sterility preserving multidose eyedroppers. Our objective was to evaluate potential sorption phenomena between a device with a silicone sterility preserving membrane and the delivered drops of several ophthalmic solutions. Cyclosporine, rifamycin, latanoprost, timolol and norfloxacin were used as model drugs. Quantification of the active substance in delivered drops (1 to 4 drops per day) from low density polyethylene (LDPE) bottles without any sterility preserving device and from LDPE bottles with a sterility preserving silicone membrane (LDPE-Si) was performed for 14 days (n≥3), using validated HPLC methods. For cyclosporine, mean concentrations did not vary by more than 10 % from reference concentrations for either LDPE or LDPE-Si eyedroppers, but for LDPE-Si, the concentrations of the 1 mg.ml-1 cyclosporine micellar solution were found to be significantly lower than for those from LDPE eyedroppers (p=0.0127). For LDPE-Si, rifamycin mean concentrations decreased by 11.2 % throughout the 14 day study period, but didn’t vary by more than 10 % for LDPE and glass eyedroppers. However, rifamycin concentrations from LDPE-Si were not significantly different from those from LDPE eyedroppers. For latanoprost, whilst mean concentrations did not vary by more than 10 % from reference concentration for LDPE eyedroppers, for LDPE-Si eyedroppers concentrations decreased by 76.4 % at their lowest concentration and never returned to their initial level. For timolol and norfloxacin, mean concentrations did not vary by more than 10 % for either LDPE or LDPE-Si eyedroppers and no significant difference was found between the 2 eyedroppers concentrations. Our results are in favor of an absence of significant sorption between LDPE-Si eyedroppers for timolol or norfloxacin ophthalmic solutions. Further studies should be performed on cyclosporine ophthalmic micellar solutions and rifamycin ophthalmic solutions before any definite conclusions can be made. Finally, our results show that latanoprost ophthalmic solutions shouldn’t be used with LDPE-Si eyedroppers as the loss of active substance would cause a sever under-dosing.","PeriodicalId":19802,"journal":{"name":"Pharmaceutical Technology in Hospital Pharmacy","volume":"37 1","pages":"181 - 191"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2017-12-20","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"7","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"A Sorption Study between Ophthalmic Drugs and Multi Dose Eyedroppers in Simulated Use Conditions\",\"authors\":\"Y. Le Basle, P. Chennell, V. Sautou\",\"doi\":\"10.1515/pthp-2017-0026\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Abstract Preservative free ophthalmic formulations need to be packaged either as single doses, or using specially designed sterility preserving multidose eyedroppers. Our objective was to evaluate potential sorption phenomena between a device with a silicone sterility preserving membrane and the delivered drops of several ophthalmic solutions. Cyclosporine, rifamycin, latanoprost, timolol and norfloxacin were used as model drugs. Quantification of the active substance in delivered drops (1 to 4 drops per day) from low density polyethylene (LDPE) bottles without any sterility preserving device and from LDPE bottles with a sterility preserving silicone membrane (LDPE-Si) was performed for 14 days (n≥3), using validated HPLC methods. For cyclosporine, mean concentrations did not vary by more than 10 % from reference concentrations for either LDPE or LDPE-Si eyedroppers, but for LDPE-Si, the concentrations of the 1 mg.ml-1 cyclosporine micellar solution were found to be significantly lower than for those from LDPE eyedroppers (p=0.0127). For LDPE-Si, rifamycin mean concentrations decreased by 11.2 % throughout the 14 day study period, but didn’t vary by more than 10 % for LDPE and glass eyedroppers. However, rifamycin concentrations from LDPE-Si were not significantly different from those from LDPE eyedroppers. For latanoprost, whilst mean concentrations did not vary by more than 10 % from reference concentration for LDPE eyedroppers, for LDPE-Si eyedroppers concentrations decreased by 76.4 % at their lowest concentration and never returned to their initial level. For timolol and norfloxacin, mean concentrations did not vary by more than 10 % for either LDPE or LDPE-Si eyedroppers and no significant difference was found between the 2 eyedroppers concentrations. Our results are in favor of an absence of significant sorption between LDPE-Si eyedroppers for timolol or norfloxacin ophthalmic solutions. Further studies should be performed on cyclosporine ophthalmic micellar solutions and rifamycin ophthalmic solutions before any definite conclusions can be made. Finally, our results show that latanoprost ophthalmic solutions shouldn’t be used with LDPE-Si eyedroppers as the loss of active substance would cause a sever under-dosing.\",\"PeriodicalId\":19802,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Pharmaceutical Technology in Hospital Pharmacy\",\"volume\":\"37 1\",\"pages\":\"181 - 191\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2017-12-20\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"7\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Pharmaceutical Technology in Hospital Pharmacy\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1515/pthp-2017-0026\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Pharmaceutical Technology in Hospital Pharmacy","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1515/pthp-2017-0026","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 7

摘要

摘要不含防腐剂的眼科制剂需要包装为单剂量,或使用专门设计的无菌保存多剂量滴管。我们的目的是评估潜在的吸收现象之间的装置与硅胶无菌保存膜和交付的几种眼科溶液滴。以环孢素、利福霉素、拉坦前列素、替马洛尔和诺氟沙星为模型药物。采用有效的高效液相色谱法,对无无菌保存装置的低密度聚乙烯(LDPE)瓶和带无菌保存硅膜(LDPE- si)的LDPE瓶中的滴剂(每天1 - 4滴)进行14天(n≥3)的活性物质定量。对于环孢素,LDPE或LDPE- si滴眼器的平均浓度与参考浓度相差不超过10%,但对于LDPE- si滴眼器,1 mg的浓度相差不超过10%。ml-1环孢素胶束溶液的含量显著低于LDPE滴管(p=0.0127)。在14天的研究期间,LDPE- si的利福霉素平均浓度下降了11.2%,但LDPE和玻璃滴管的利福霉素平均浓度变化不超过10%。然而,从LDPE- si中提取的利福霉素浓度与从LDPE滴管中提取的利福霉素浓度没有显著差异。对于拉坦前列素,虽然LDPE滴管的平均浓度与参考浓度相差不超过10%,但LDPE- si滴管的浓度在最低浓度时下降了76.4%,并且从未恢复到初始水平。对于噻洛尔和诺氟沙星,LDPE或LDPE- si滴管的平均浓度差异不超过10%,两种滴管浓度之间无显著差异。我们的结果支持LDPE-Si滴眼液在替洛尔或诺氟沙星眼液中没有明显的吸附。环孢素眼用胶束溶液和利福霉素眼用溶液有待进一步的研究,才能得出明确的结论。最后,我们的研究结果表明,拉坦前列素眼液不应与LDPE-Si滴管一起使用,因为活性物质的损失会导致严重的剂量不足。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
A Sorption Study between Ophthalmic Drugs and Multi Dose Eyedroppers in Simulated Use Conditions
Abstract Preservative free ophthalmic formulations need to be packaged either as single doses, or using specially designed sterility preserving multidose eyedroppers. Our objective was to evaluate potential sorption phenomena between a device with a silicone sterility preserving membrane and the delivered drops of several ophthalmic solutions. Cyclosporine, rifamycin, latanoprost, timolol and norfloxacin were used as model drugs. Quantification of the active substance in delivered drops (1 to 4 drops per day) from low density polyethylene (LDPE) bottles without any sterility preserving device and from LDPE bottles with a sterility preserving silicone membrane (LDPE-Si) was performed for 14 days (n≥3), using validated HPLC methods. For cyclosporine, mean concentrations did not vary by more than 10 % from reference concentrations for either LDPE or LDPE-Si eyedroppers, but for LDPE-Si, the concentrations of the 1 mg.ml-1 cyclosporine micellar solution were found to be significantly lower than for those from LDPE eyedroppers (p=0.0127). For LDPE-Si, rifamycin mean concentrations decreased by 11.2 % throughout the 14 day study period, but didn’t vary by more than 10 % for LDPE and glass eyedroppers. However, rifamycin concentrations from LDPE-Si were not significantly different from those from LDPE eyedroppers. For latanoprost, whilst mean concentrations did not vary by more than 10 % from reference concentration for LDPE eyedroppers, for LDPE-Si eyedroppers concentrations decreased by 76.4 % at their lowest concentration and never returned to their initial level. For timolol and norfloxacin, mean concentrations did not vary by more than 10 % for either LDPE or LDPE-Si eyedroppers and no significant difference was found between the 2 eyedroppers concentrations. Our results are in favor of an absence of significant sorption between LDPE-Si eyedroppers for timolol or norfloxacin ophthalmic solutions. Further studies should be performed on cyclosporine ophthalmic micellar solutions and rifamycin ophthalmic solutions before any definite conclusions can be made. Finally, our results show that latanoprost ophthalmic solutions shouldn’t be used with LDPE-Si eyedroppers as the loss of active substance would cause a sever under-dosing.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
7
审稿时长
12 weeks
期刊最新文献
Physicochemical stability of urea-containing Mitomycin C preparations in glass vials (1.0 mg/mL) and plastic syringes (2.0, 0.4, 0.2 mg/mL) Physicochemical stability of durvalumab (Imfinzi®) concentrate for solution in original vials after first opening Semi-automatic COVID-19 vaccine preparation for upscaling of vaccination: a descriptive study Assessment of the relevance of osmolality measurement as a criterion for the stability of solutions Use of a liquid chromatography-tandem mass spectrometry method to assess the concentration of epinephrine, norepinephrine, and phenylephrine stored in plastic syringes
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1