The synthesis and grafting degree calculation of CMCTS-CEDA
CMCTS, decylalkyl dimethyl ammonium and epichlorohydrin were to synthesize CMCTSCEDA by the grafting reaction under the alkaline condition. The reaction steps are shown in
Figure 1.
Synthesis steps of CMCTS-CEDA
The results of elemental analysis with CMCTS and CMCTS-CEDA are shown in
Table 5. Since the target product didn’t have any other small molecules, the grafting degree could be calculated according to the ratio of n
C and n
H. The grafting degree was calculated according to the equation as follows:
(3)
Where x is the grafting degree, nCMCTS, nCEDA and nC-O are the ratio of nC and nH in CMCTS, epoxypropyl decyl dimethyl ammonium chloride and CMCTS-CEDA, respectively. According to the elemental analysis and scientific calculation performed, the final product with 10.27% of the maximum grafting degree was obtained after process optimized.
| Elements | CMCTS % | CMCTS-CEDA % |
|---|
| C | 28.63 | 30.09 |
| H | 4.21 | 5.22 |
| N | 2.35 | 4.58 |
Biocompatible evaluation
The relative growth rate (RGR) of the cell was calculated by the equation as follows.
(4)
A570-- Absorbance of the experimental group,
A0570-- Absorbance of the blank control experimental group,
A′570-- Absorbance of the negative control experimental group.
The relative growth rate (RGR) was used to evaluate the biocompatible evaluation. Absorbance value of samples and results of biocompatible evaluation were illustrated in
Table 6. It was easy to obtain the RGR of the cell after adding different concentration test solution to the cell culture. The RGR of the cell was between 93.43% and 101.23%. Those results showed that the biological material for cell was non-toxic.
| Sample | Negative control | CMCTS-CEDA solutions (μg/mL)
|
|---|
| 0.1 | 1 | 10 | 100 |
|---|
| 1 | 1.332 | 1.349 | 1.608 | 1.484 | 1.392 |
| 2 | 1.597 | 1.583 | 1.426 | 1.335 | 1.362 |
| 3 | 1.536 | 1.486 | 1.351 | 1.489 | 1.442 |
| 4 | 1.443 | 1.507 | 1.455 | 1.424 | 1.328 |
| 5 | 1.398 | 1.471 | 1.383 | 1.406 | 1.302 |
| General average | 1.461 | 1.479 | 1.445 | 1.428 | 1.365 |
| Blank control | 0.086 | 0.083 | 0.067 | 0.075 | 0.087 |
| RGR | 1.000 | 1.012 | 0.9886 | 0.977 | 0.934 |
The evaluation of CMCTS-CEDA on drug release rate
Effect of CMCTS-CEDA addition on drug release
The similarity factors among different formulations with three viscosity grades of EC are shown in
Table 7.
| Formulation | Formulation | f2 |
|---|
| 1 | 2 | 59.6 |
| 1 | 3 | 44.5 |
| 2 | 3 | 58.7 |
| 4 | 5 | 99.9 |
| 4 | 6 | 99.8 |
| 5 | 6 | 99.9 |
The effect of CMCTSCEDA on aspirin release profiles form sustained release matrix tablets are depicted in
Figure 1. After the addition of CMCTS-CEDA, an increase in the release rate of aspirin was observed. Those results of experiment showed that the addition of CMCTS-CEDA could significantly improve the dissolution of the drug. Moreover, the final cumulative release rate of drug rose up to 90% in spite of any grade of EC. After 12 h, at the grade of 10, 20 and 50 cps, the drug release rate increased from 58.1 to 90.7%, from 64.1 to 93.9%, from 69.3 to 96.1%, respectively. We could conclude that CMCTS-CEDA had an active influence on aspirin release from the sustained-release matrix tablets.
In addition, with the increase of EC viscosity, the release rate of aspirin from tablets became slower independently from CMCTS-CEDA. When the hardness of the tablets was fixed, the low viscosity of EC was more easily compressed than the high viscosity. As a result, the drug release rate of the low viscosity was faster than the high viscosity of EC.
Effect of CMCTS-CEDA contents on drug release
The similarity factors among formulations with different content of CMCTS-CEDA were summarized in
Table 8.
| Formulation | Formulation | f2 |
|---|
| 7 | 8 | 49.5 |
| 7 | 9 | 43.1 |
| 7 | 10 | 37.2 |
| 8 | 9 | 68.8 |
| 8 | 10 | 53.5 |
| 9 | 10 | 66.8 |
The effect of different CMCTS-CEDA contents on the release rate from sustained release matrix tablet was also studied. Four levels of CMCTS-CEDA (0.1%, 0.5%, 1.0% and 2.0%) were chosen to investigate the effect of this biopolymer on aspirin delivery. Based on the four different contents of CMCTSCEDA, the release profiles were showed in
Figure 2.
The release curve of aspirin from sustained-release matrix tablets containing three grades of EC with or without CMCTS-CEDA (mean ± SD, n = 12).
After 12 h, with the increasing of CMCTSCEDA content, the accumulated release rate increased from 69.1% to 86.7%. Those profiles indicated that the content of CMCTS-CEDA in those formulations had significant impact on drug delivery rate from sustained release matrix tablet. The release rate curves of drug accumulation showed that an amount of drug released from tablets significantly improved as the CMCTS-CEDA content increased. Because the polymer is water-soluble, it could promote the disintegration of the matrix. With the increase of the amount of polymer, the disintegration rate of this matrix also increased. As a result, more drug was released from the tablets.
Effect of CMCTS-CEDA and CMCTS ondrug release
The dissolution enhancement by the addition of CMCTS-CEDA was compared with that by the addition of CMCTS as shown in
Figure 3. Compared to the addition of CMCTS, CMCTSCEDA could significantly increase the aspirin release rate from sustained-release matrix tablets. The release rate of tablet with CMCTSCEDA at 12 h was 31.7 % more than CMCTS ones (CMCTS: 52.3%, CMCTS-CEDA: 84.0%).
The release curve of aspirin from sustained-release matrix tablets with different CMCTS-CEDA contents (mean ± SD, n = 12).
The release curve of aspirin from sustained-release matrix tablets with addition of CMCTS-CEDA and CMCTS (mean ± SD, n = 12).
The optimization of aspirin formulation
According to the L
9 (3
4) orthogonal formulations were obtained. Besides, the formulation design and drug release rate were summarized in
Table 9.
| No. | A(%, w/w) | B(cps) | C(%, w/w) | % Drug Release
|
|---|
| 2h | 6h | 8h |
|---|
| 1 | 30 | 10 | 0.5 | 62.5 | 70.4 | 74.3 |
| 2 | 30 | 20 | 1.0 | 65.3 | 66.2 | 68.4 |
| 3 | 30 | 50 | 2.0 | 70.2 | 76.1 | 78.2 |
| 4 | 40 | 10 | 1.0 | 53.7 | 60.2 | 61.7 |
| 5 | 40 | 20 | 2.0 | 59.8 | 64.6 | 67.1 |
| 6 | 40 | 50 | 0.5 | 59.6 | 61.8 | 65.4 |
| 7 | 50 | 10 | 2.0 | 53.1 | 64.6 | 68.3 |
| 8 | 50 | 20 | 0.5 | 46.1 | 55.5 | 58.8 |
| 9 | 50 | 50 | 1.0 | 53.9 | 59.2 | 60.7 |
After using the dissolution tests above mentioned, all tablets were measured. Correlation analysis and ANOVA of orthogonal processing data are shown in
Table 10 and
Table 11, respectively. According to the data analysis value of range shown in
Table 10 and the value of F in
Table 11, the sequence of various factors’ effects on index order could be drawn as: A > B > C. And according to the value of K in
Table 10, the best level of each factor was followed as: A: 3 > 2 >1, B: 1 > 2 > 3 and C: 1 > 2 > 3. Hence, the best combination of the three factors was A
3B
1C
1, corresponding to the following formulation: the content of EC, 50%, the viscosity of EC, 10 cps and the content of CMCTS-CEDA, 0.5%.
According to the release test results of aspirin optimal formulation, preliminary release mechanism of aspirin sustained-release matrix tablets was studied. Four regression equations which fitted the percentage of the accumulated drug dissolution (Mt/M∞) on release time (t) were acquired as followed:
y = 0.0567x + 0.2488 (r= 0.9543) (5)
y = -0.2124Inx + 0.7098 (r = 0.9668) (6)
y = 0.2437x0.5 + 0.0383 (n = 0.5,r = 0.9982) (7)
y = 0.2784x0.4493(n = 0.4493,r = 0.9983) (8)
The four equations were corresponding to the four models: zero-order, first-order, Higuchi equation and the Ritger-Peppas model, respectively. The value of correlation coefficient (r) in Equation (7) and Equation (8) were more than 0.998, and the value of n in Equation (8) was less than 0.45. These results illustrated that the Higuchi equation and the Ritger-Peppas model can be fitted well for the release process of this sustained-release matrix tablets of aspirin. It can be preliminarily concluded that aspirin is released from sustained-release matrix tablets in the form of Fick diffusion mechanism. The progress depicted that the drug was dissolved in PBS through the matrix, and then spread from the matrix.
| No. | ECContent (%, w/w) | ECViscosity (cps) | CMCTS-CEDAContent (%, w/w) | K |
|---|
| 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 56.9 |
| 2 | 1 | 2 | 2 | 59.9 |
| 3 | 1 | 3 | 3 | 74.8 |
| 4 | 2 | 1 | 2 | 48.0 |
| 5 | 2 | 2 | 3 | 54.3 |
| 6 | 2 | 3 | 1 | 54.5 |
| 7 | 3 | 1 | 3 | 44.4 |
| 8 | 3 | 2 | 1 | 37.7 |
| 9 | 3 | 3 | 2 | 47.4 |
| Mean 1 | 63.9 | 49.8 | 49.7 | |
| Mean 2 | 52.3 | 50.6 | 51.8 | |
| Mean 3 | 43.2 | 58.9 | 57.8 | |
| Range | 20.7 | 9.1 | 8.1 | |
| Indicators | Factor | Squares of deviations | F | Significance |
|---|
| Drug Release % | EC Content | 645.86 | 888.39 | * |
| EC Viscosity | 152.51 | 209.78 | * |
| CMCTS-CEDA Content | 107.23 | 147.49 | * |