Dissolution studies
Figure 1 shows the dissolution profiles of CLA as well as ternary ground samples prepared in the presence of PVP and SLS using different grinding ball numbers and sizes.
According to
Figures 1-I and 1-II, the dissolution rate of clarithromycin was very low and only 35 % of the drug was dissolved within 60 min, which was expected due to its poor solubility. However, co-ground samples reached 75-100 % of drug dissolution during the same period. Based on
Table 1, dissolution efficiencies of all prepared samples were significantly higher (p < 0.001) than that of the intact drug (CLA). DE
10 and DE
30 values obtained for the ternary ground formulations were 4.4-8.7 and 3-5 folds higher compared to the corresponding pure drug, respectively. The increased dissolution rate of ternary ground mixtures could be attributed to two factors including particle size reduction as well as the presence of hydrophilic additives. As it is described in the XRD section, no phase transition from crystalline to amorphous state was occurred during the process. Therefore, higher dissolution rate of co-ground mixtures could not be attributed to this issue.
Dissolution profile of clarithromycin from the intact (CLA) and ternary ground mixtures prepared using different grinding balls according to Table (1) I: A and II: B (n=3).
The effect of grinding ball
Based on
Figure 1, grinding ball types and numbers influenced the drug dissolution rate of various samples. The dissolution rate of CLA from S3 (prepared by B type grinding balls) was higher than that of S1 (prepared with the same drug: additives ratio by A type grinding balls). The same result was observed for S6 in which the drug dissolution was slightly higher than that of S5. The difference in the dissolution profiles of S7 and S8 also could be attributed to the size and number of the grinding ball system.
Table 1 shows that the DE
10 and DE
30 values were significantly higher for S3, S6 and S8 in comparison with S1, S5 and S7, respectively (p ≤ 0.01). Therefore, using 10 grinding balls with 10 mm diameter could be more effective in the preparation of fine particles with higher dissolution rate when compared to the combination of 10 and 5 mm diameters balls with different numbers. It seems that the weight of grinding balls is one of the factors influencing the particles properties. Grinding balls type B with the weight of 20.5 g were more effective in reducing the drug particle size and consequently dissolution rate enhancement compared to grinding balls type A with the weight of 15.8 g. It was reported that small grinding media creates lower energy during tumbling due to the lower weight that is not sufficient to break the fine particles. Increasing the rotation speed of the grinding bowl might compensate for this phenomenon (
29).
The effect of additives ratio
Based on
Figure 1-I, incorporation of higher PVP concentration in S2 compared to S1 decreased the CLA dissolution rate. In addition, for the formulations S6, S8 and S9, (all prepared by B type grinding balls and similar drug : SLS ratio), increasing the amount of PVP from 1 to 3 and 5 parts, respectively, reduced the dissolution rate (
Figure 1-II) and also the values of dissolution efficiencies significantly (p ≤ 0.01) (
Table 1). Considering the hydrophilicity of PVP, it was expected that increasing its concentration in the ground formulations, would improve the drug dissolution rate.The opposite achievement in the present study might be attributed to the fact that PVP is a binder which could increase the cohesion of fine particles together and causes agglomeration during grinding. The formation of agglomerated particles was confirmed by SEM which is described later. Agglomeration of particles in the presence of PVP might be intensified in higher concentration and this could be a major factor in decreasing the surface area available for dissolution. On the other hand, the higher the PVP concentration, the higher the viscosity of the diffusion layer around the particles in the medium, which may hinder the drug dissolution. Based on Vogt
et al., surrounding the particles with PVP may delay the drug dissolution due to a barrier formed against water penetrating (
30). All these issues can be probably the cause of slower dissolution rate of samples containing higher PVP concentration especially at the early stages of dissolution test.
On the other hand, the drug dissolution rate of S4 was higher than that of S3, due to the increased SLS concentration (
Figure 1-II). Referring to
Table 1, significant differences was observed between DE
10 and DE
30 values of these co-ground mixtures (p = 0.049 and 0.0001, respectively). In fact, increasing the amount of SLS from 0.2 to 0.6 part of the formulation had a great effect in dissolution rate enhancement. Further increasing the SLS amount in the formulation S6 only improved the DE10 (p < 0.05) and did not affect the DE
30 values. It seems that application of higher SLS concentration (as a hydrophilic surfactant) in the formulations improved the wettability of the particles and in turn the drug dissolution rate, particularly at the beginning of the test. Hence, an optimum concentration of all additives must be applied in order to obtain desirable outcomes.
Considering all prepared formulations, the best DE10 and DE30 values were obtained for S6 in which the equal concentration of PVP, SLS and CLA was used. Therefore S6 was chosen as the optimum ternary ground mixture for further studies.
Dissolution study of the physical mixture
The increased dissolution rate of ternary ground samples could be attributed to different factors including the presence of hydrophilic additives and particle size reduction. In order to find out the effect of additives on CLA dissolution properties, physical mixture (PM) of the ingredients without grinding step was prepared and analyzed for the drug dissolution. Based on
Figure 2 CLA dissolution from PM was faster than the intact drug, but slower than S6 formulation with the same composition (1: 1: 1). DE
30 (%) values calculated for the intact drug, PM and S6 were 17.81 ± 1.35, 57.25 ± 3.27 and 88.85 ± 0.85, respectively. Therefore, CLA dissolution enhancement could be also related to the other factors rather than the presence of hydrophilic additives.
Dissolution profile of untreated drug (CLA), S6 (co-ground sample) and physical mixture (n = 3).
Particle size and zeta potential measurement
Based on the results obtained from particle size analysis (
Table 2), 90 % of the intact drug particles have a size as much as 179.69 μm or less, while d (0.9) for the co-ground sample (S6) after dispersing in water was equal to 531 nm. Also, the value of d (0.5) for the prepared sample was less than 200 nm. This analysis confirmed the formation of nanoparticles by ternary ground mixtures. Therefore, nanonization of CLA could be considered as a major factor in dissolution rate enhancement.
The ZP values for the intact drug and co-ground sample (S6) were equal to −6.57 and −58.13 mV, respectively. In the other words, presence of additives in the co-ground mixture increased the ZP value significantly. Considering the anionic properties of SLS, it is probable that SLS was adsorbed onto the surface of nanoparticles. This is in accordance with the results from Itoh et al. They assumed that the particles obtained by co-ground ternary mixtures might be formed by PVP adsorption on the surface of drug nanoparticles which were in turn adsorbed by SLS (
11). Typically, a colloidal solution with ZP greater than |30mV| is considered as a stable system (
31). Therefore CLA nanoparticles prepared in the aqueous solution could be stable due to higher ZP value.
Solubility
Based on Noyes-Whitney equation enhancement of drug saturated solubility could improve its dissolution rate (
32).
Table 3 shows the saturated solubility data obtained for untreated CLA, S6 (ternary ground sample) and related physical mixture (PM) in water. The drug saturated solubility of the ground sample was significantly higher than that of the intact drug (p < 0.0001). Since the solubility obtained for S6 (consisted of drug: SLS : PVP ratio of 1:1:1) was even higher (p < 0.0001) than PM, it can be concluded that the higher drug saturated solubility was not only related to the presence of water-soluble additives in the medium, but also is associated with the drug status in co-ground sample (nanosized particles). Based on XRD analysis, crystalline form of drug was not changed during the process. Therefore higher solubility of drug nanocrystals was related to the particle size reduction rather than crystalline phase transformation.
| Sample | Particle size (μm) | Span a |
|---|
| CLA | d (0.5) | 68.82 | |
| d (0.9) | 179.69 | 2.291 |
| S6 | d (0.5) | 0.184 | |
| d (0.9) | 0.531 | 2.76 |
| Sample | CLA | S6 | PM |
|---|
| Solubility (μg/mL) | 44.49 ± 1.619 | 156.22 ± 0.576 | 90.69 ± 0.813 |
DSC analysis
The DSC thermograms of untreated drug (CLA), PVP, SLS, ternary ground sample (S6) and physical mixture (PM) were depicted in
Figure 3. A characteristic endotherm appeared for the untreated drug at the onset temperature of 227.16°C which could be attributed to the melting of clarithromycin form II (
33). A broad peak was observed in the thermogram of PVP which is related to its dehydration (
34). Also, characteristic peaks were identified in the DSC curve of SLS at 107.5°C and 192.78°C (
35). The DSC curve obtained for S6 (co-ground mixture) presented the same thermal profile as that of PM, suggesting no polymorphic changes during nanosizing process. It must be considered that a shift was appeared for the drug melting onset temperature to 211.57 and 207.81°C for S6 and PM, respectively, which could be due to the presence of additives on the surfaces of drug crystals in both samples (
36,
37). It was shown that the presence of sodium dodecyl sulfate could influence the melting temperature of nanocrystals without alteration in crystalline properties (
38). It should be noted that reduction in melting temperature could increase the drug dissolution rate.
DSC thermograms for the untreated drug (CLA), PVP, SLS, co-ground sample (S6) and related physical mixture (PM).
Powder X-ray diffraction (XRD)
The XRD patterns of CLA, PVP, SLS, ternary ground formulation (S6) and related physical mixture (PM) were depicted in
Figure 4. The XRD spectra of untreated CLA exhibited characteristic peaks at diffraction angles (2θ) of 8.50, 9.44, 10.84, 11.45 and 17.25 and confirms the form II crystalline structure of the drug (
19,
39) which is more thermodynamically stable than form I (
33,
40).
XRD patterns for the untreated drug (CLA), PVP, SLS, co-ground sample (S6) and related physical mixture (PM
A broad spectrum without any distinct peak could be observed in the diffractogram of PVP (
Figure 4) which confirms amorphous nature of this polymer (
41), while well-defined diffraction peaks at 2θ angles of 20.31, 20.67 and 21.84 were detected for SLS (
42).
Although grinding could induce the phase transition to amorphous state, but it depends on several factors such as milling time and ball size (
43). In this study, the distinct peaks of untreated drug as well as additives could be detected in ternary ground mixture and PM at the same 2θ values, indicating that crystalline state of drug was not changed following the grinding operation. The decrease in the peak intensity for nanocrystals in the co-ground mixture can be attributed to the particle size reduction in the sample (
44).
Infrared spectroscopy
IR spectroscopy was performed in order to identify any possible interaction between the drug and the additives in nanoparticles formulation.
Figure 5 demonstrates the IR spectra of the intact CLA, ternary ground sample (S6) and related physical mixture (PM). Characteristic peaks of CLA were found at 1690.50 cm
-1 (ketone carbonyl), 1729.22 cm
-1 (lactone carbonyl), 1420 cm
-1 (N-CH3) and 3450.15 cm
-1 (hydrogen bonding between OH Groups) (
45,
19). Also the main peaks of PVP were appeared at 1668 and 1293 cm
-1 which were related to the C = O stretching and C-N stretching vibrations, respectively (
46). SLS shows the characteristic signals at 2873 and 2955 cm
-1 related to the C-H stretching bands and 1219 and 1249 cm
-1 corresponding to SO2 vibrational features (
47).
Both co-ground sample (S6) and PM reflected the characteristics of the components present. This indicates that the IR spectra for these samples were not associated with changes at the molecular level. In fact, no interaction seems to be occurred during co-grinding process.
IR spectra for the untreated drug (CLA), PVP, SLS, co-ground sample (S6) and related physical mixture (PM).
Scanning electron microscopy
Figure 6 shows the scanning electron micrographs of untreated drug as well as co-ground formulation consisted of drug: SLS : PVP ratio of 1:1:1 (S6) in which distinct differences in the morphology of samples could be observed. The micrographs show columnar-shaped crystals for untreated CLA, while the co-ground particles were irregular in shape and aggregated into small clusters. The existence of PVP in the formulation could be considered as the cause of particles aggregation during grinding process.
Scanning electron micrographs of: A) untreated CLA (× 250), B) co-ground sample (S6) (× 250) and C) co-ground sample (S6) (× 7500).
Stability studies
Ternary ground formulation (S6) was kept in accelerated stability conditions and then the physical properties of the mixture were studied. Based on
Table 4, the CLA dissolution almost remained constant compared to the fresh sample, after exposing to the stability conditions for three months. There was not any significant difference between the DE
10 values (p > 0.05), although a slight difference was observed in DE
30. In addition, the drug assay in the co-ground mixture (95.54 ± 0.17 %) did not show any significant changes in the comparison with the fresh sample, which confirms that the formulation remains stable during the study.
The results obtained from particle size analysis (
Table 4) revealed that even after exposing to the stability conditions, the mixture could form nanoparticles with d(0.9) equal to 521 nm after dispersing in water.
| The variable | Time (months)
|
|---|
| 0 | 3 |
|---|
| DE10 (%) | 72.18 ± 1.018 | 72.33 ± 0.42 |
| DE30 (%) | 88.85 ± 0.846 | 84.95 ± 0.88 |
| Drug assay (%) | 96.21 ± 0.23 | 95.54 ± 0.17 |
| d (0.5) (μm) | 0.184 | 0.174 |
| d (0.9) (μm) | 0.531 | 0.521 |