Silymarin: Comparison
View Latest Version
Please note this is a comparison between Version 3 by Camila Xu and Version 2 by Camila Xu.

Silymarin (SLM) is a health-food active ingredient that is good for immunosuppression and tumor suppression.

  • silymarin
  • hydroxypropyl-β-cyclodextrin
  • nanoparticles

1. Introduction

The oral bioavailability of a drug is limited by factors, such as membrane permeability, solubility, and dissolution rate [1][2]. In general, miniaturization of compound crystals and solid dispersions are known to improve the solubility of poorly water-soluble compounds [3][4][5][6] and is advantageous by increasing dissolution rate due to increased surface area. According to the Noyes-Whitney equation, an increase in the surface area results in fast rates of drug dissolution [7]. For poorly water-soluble drugs, such as sirolimus [8], aprepitant [9], and fenofibrate [10], micronization technology has been applied to improve the solubility of compounds. There are two types of miniaturization methods: top-down [11][12][13] and the bottom-up. The bottom-up method can produce nano-sized particles by crystallization from a solution or coacervation with a sharp size distribution. We have pPreviously it is prepared nanocrystal suspensions of poorly water-soluble drugs using a continuous crystallizer (PureNanoTM) [14]. In the PureNanoTM system, crystallization is immediately performed by a high shearing force, which is generated after the rapid feeding of aqueous and organic solutions to the collision jet field. Therefore, well-size-controlled particles can be prepared using PureNanoTM, compared with the usual crystallization method. However, nanoparticles gradually aggregate and induce crystal growth because of the high surface energy of nanoparticles, which is concerning [15]. To overcome these concerns, a dispersion stabilizer is necessary to avoid particle aggregation and crystal growth.
Silymarin (SLM) is an ingredient extracted from milk thistle [16], which contains the most effective silybin A and silybin B, as well as is silydianin, silychristin, taxifolin, and quercetin [17][18]. SLM has beneficial pharmacological activities such as immunosuppressive action, antitumor action [16], and hepatoprotective action [19]. However, SLM is poorly water-soluble, which limits its absorption after oral administration. Methods to improve the absorption of SLM after oral administration have been reported, including micronization, such as nanocrystals, nanosuspensions, and solid dispersions, and the use of carriers, such as cyclodextrins, liposomes, and lipid nanoparticles [20][21][22][23]. It has been suggested that improving the solubility of SLM in either technique improves the absorbability after oral administration. However, there are few reports on the effect of improving the solubility of SLM using both miniaturization and carriers.
Cyclodextrins (CyDs) are cyclic oligosaccharides consisting of six to eight glucose units linked by α-1,4-glycosidic linkages. The potential use of natural CyDs and their synthetic derivatives has been extensively studied to improve certain properties of drugs, such as solubility, stability, and bioavailability. One of the most useful applications of CyDs in dosage form design is to enhance the solubility of poorly water-soluble drugs by complex formation [24][25]. Among them, β-CyD is widely used as a pharmaceutical additive for inclusion, but its low solubility may be a problem. Therefore, water-soluble CyD derivatives have been developed to improve their functionality. Hydroxypropyl-β-CyD (HP-β-CyD), a hydroxypropylated product, is used as a solubilizer for oral syrups and injections of itraconazole [26]. Recently, it has been reported that CyD is utilized as additives to prepare the submicron-sized drug particles by supercritical treatment or co-milling [27][28].

2. Preparation of Silymarin (SLM) Nanoparticles (NPs)

2.1. Preparation of SLM NPs Using PureNanoTM

SLM was dissolved in ethanol and distilled water and placed in PureNanoTM to prepare an SLM suspension. The particle size of the SLM suspension was measured immediately. The organic solvent in the SLM suspension was distilled off using a rotary evaporator, and particle size was measured. The suspension was powdered by freeze-drying (FD) to obtain SLM NPs. The redispersibility of the SLM NPs (FD product) was evaluated by measuring the particle size after redispersion in distilled water. Table 1 shows the particle size and polydispersity index (PDI) of the SLM suspensions after PureNanoTM or evaporation of the organic solvent, and SLM NPs after FD. The particle size and PDI of SLM suspensions just after nano-crystallization by PureNanoTM was 188.6 nm and 0.138, respectively. Meanwhile, the particle size of the SLM suspension after evaporation was slightly increased due to Ostwald ripening, because PDI of the nanosuspension did not change [29][30]. Moreover, the size of SLM NPs after FD was more than 1000 nm, probably due to agglomeration, suggesting poor redispersibility in water (Table 1). These data indicate the importance of water-soluble dispersion stabilizers during the FD process to obtain SLM NPs with high redispersibility.
Table 1. Particle sizes of silymarin (SLM) suspensions and freeze-dried (FD) powder of SLM.
Condition Particle Size (nm) PDI
PureNanoTM
Table 2). This might be because the weight ratio of HPMC was higher than that of S-1670, due to steric hindrance through aggregation. Moreover, the particle size of SLM/HPMC NPs after one week was slightly increased; up to 697.1 nm. In contrast, SLM/S-1670 NPs aggregated after one week, and their particle size was more than 1000 nm. Because of the interparticle interaction in SLM/S-1670 NPs was stronger than that in SLM/HPMC NPs (HLB: hydrophilic-lipophilic balance value of S-1670 was 16). Therefore, HPMC weas selected HPMC as a dispersion stabilizer rather than S-1670 in subsequent experiments.
Table 2. Effects of hypromellose (HPMC) and S-1670 on particle sizes of suspension prepared by PureNanoTM, evaporated samples, freeze drying samples (FD) and FD samples stored for one week.
Compound Stabilizer Condition Particle Size (nm) PDI
188.6 0.138
   
Evaporation 224.8 0.166
Freeze Dry (FD) >1000 Not detected

2.2. Effect of Dispersion Stabilizer on Preparation of SLM NPs

SLM NPs, SLM/HPMC, and SLM/S-1670 with sub-micron sizes and narrow size distributions were successfully formulated. After crystallization, particle size of the SLM NPs was approximately 300 nm, regardless of the type of additive. In contrast, the particle size of SLM/HPMC NPs after FD was increased to 677.7 nm, but smaller than that of SLM/S-1670 NPs after FD (
PureNanoTM 337.6 0.045
  HPMC Evaporation 339.0 0.165
    FD 677.7 0.463
SLM   FD after 1 week 697.1 0.478
    PureNanoTM 281.5 0.115
  S-1670 Evaporation 329.5 0.221
    FD 912.1 0.496
    FD after 1 week >1000 Not detected
Next, to examine the effect of HPMC concentration on particle size of SLM/HPMC NPs, we prepared SLM/HPMC NPs was prepared with various HPMC concentration (0.5–3%, w/w) (Table 3). The particle size of SLM/HPMC NPs increased as the HPMC content increased. Van den Mooter et al. have reported that HPMC adsorbs to the crystal surface of a drug and forms intramolecular hydrophobic interactions via the hydrophilic and hydrophobic groups of HPMC [31][32]. This is in agreement with the findings of Kayaert et al. [31][32]. Therefore, it is presumed that the increase in the particle size of the SLM/HPMC suspensions depending on the HPMC concentration was likely due to the adsorption of HPMC on the surface of silymarin and the formation of HPMC layers. Moreover, it was clarified that the particle size after FD maintained the nanoparticles only when the weight ratio of SLM to HPMC was 1:1. In contrast, particle agglutination was observed at weight ratios of SLM to HPMC of 1:0.5 and 1:3. This could be because when the HPMC concentration was low, it was presumed that the amount of HPMC adsorbed on the SLM fine particles was insufficient. The SLM/HPMC suspension was concentrated during the FD process, and contact between the particles could not be suppressed. In contrast, when the HPMC concentration was high, the viscosity of the SLM/HPMC suspension increased and the molecular motility of the particles was suppressed, resulting in agglomeration of the particles. In addition, HPMC was considered to adsorb on SLM caused an interaction between particles and aggregation. These results indicate that selecting the optimal concentration of HPMC due to the preparation of SLM/HPMC nanoparticles is important.
Table 3. Effect of hypromellose (HPMC) content on particle sizes of silymarin (SLM) suspensions prepared by PureNanoTM and their freeze-dried (FD) samples.
Compound Condition Ratio (w/w) Particle Size (nm) PDI
    1/0.5 227.5
evaluated the effect of various cryoprotectants on the aggregation of FD powder of SLM/HPMC NPs was evaluated. As shown in Table 4, the particle sizes of SLM/HPMC in the presence of cryoprotectants such as erythritol (Ery), mannitol, trehalose, α-CyD, and HP-β-CyD were smaller than those without cryoprotectants (particle size: 617 nm, Table 3), suggesting that each cryoprotectant suppressed the aggregation of SLM/HPMC NPs. It is assumed that these sugar cryoprotectants dissolve in water and suppress aggregation by interposing between the SLM/HPMC NPs. These results suggest that sugar structures have little effect on the suppression of aggregation. In addition, SLM contents in the SLM/HPMC/Ery NP, SLM/HPMC/α-CyD NP and SLM/HPMC/HP-β-CyD NP was 32.25 ± 0.01%, 31.30 ± 0.64% and 31.85 ± 0.41%, respectively, and were close to the theoretical SLM content of 33.3% (Table 5). These results imply that SLM does not disappear or decompose during particle preparation. However, in drug formulation, it is important to assess the physical and chemical stability of the formulation. Further elaborate restudyearch on nanoparticle stability is necessary.
Table 4. Effect of cryoprotectants on particle sizes of silymarin/hypromellose nanoparticles (SLM/HPMC NPs) in the presence of various cryoprotectants.
Compound Cryoprotectant Ratio (w/w/w) Theoretical Content (%)Particle Size (nm) PDI
0.045
  Erythritol 1/1/1 253.8 0.108   PureNanoTM 1/1 387.6 0.165
  Mannitol 1/1/1 271.8 SLM/HPMC   1/3 1240.9 0.463
0.170
SLM/HPMC Trehalose
SLM/HPMC/Ery FD 32.25 ± 0.01  
1/1/1
265.2 0.160
  α-CyD 1/1/1
SLM/HPMC/α-CyD FD 31.30 ± 0.64 33.33
SLM/HPMC/HP-β-CyD FD 31.85 ± 0.41     1/0.5 >1000 0.115
249.1   FD 1/1 617.0 0.221
    1/3 >1000 0.496

2.3. Effect of Cryoprotectants on Preparation of SLM NPs

In general, it is known that particles aggregate into coarse particles during the drying process. Therefore, cryoprotectants have been used to suppress particle aggregation [33][34]. Next, we
0.149
 
HP-β-CyD 1/1/1 254.8 0.225
Table 5. Silymarin (SLM) contents in silymarin/hypromellose nanoparticles (SLM/HPMC NPs) in the presence of erythritol (Ery), α-cyclodextrins (α-CyD), and hydroxypropyl (HP)-β-CyD.
Sample Content (%)

References

  1. Cho, E.; Jung, S. Supramolecular Complexation of Carbohydrates for the Bioavailability Enhancement of Poorly Soluble Drugs. Molecules 2015, 20, 19620–19646.
  2. Mishra, P.R.; Al Shaal, L.; Müller, R.H.; Keck, C.M. Production and characterization of Hesperetin nanosuspensions for dermal delivery. Int. J. Pharm. 2009, 371, 182–189.
  3. Dizaj, S.M.; Vazifehasl, Z.; Salatin, S.; Adibkia, K.; Javadzadeh, Y. Nanosizing of drugs: Effect on dissolution rate. Res. Pharm. Sci. 2015, 10, 95–108.
  4. Janssens, S.; Van den Mooter, G. Review: Physical chemistry of solid dispersions. J. Pharm. Pharmacol. 2009, 61, 1571–1586.
  5. Uchiyama, H.; Tozuka, Y.; Asamoto, F.; Takeuchi, H. Fluorescence investigation of a specific structure formed by aggregation of transglycosylated stevias: Solubilizing effect of poorly water-soluble drugs. Eur. J. Pharm. Sci. 2011, 43, 71–77.
  6. Uchiyama, H.; Tozuka, Y.; Imono, M.; Takeuchi, H. Transglycosylated stevia and hesperidin as pharmaceutical excipients: Dramatic improvement in drug dissolution and bioavailability. Eur. J. Pharm. Biopharm. 2010, 76, 238–244.
  7. Noyes, A.A.; Whitney, W.R. The Rate of Solution of Solid Substances in Their Own Solutions. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 1897, 19, 930–934.
  8. Merisko-Liversidge, E.; Liversidge, G.G. Nanosizing for oral and parenteral drug delivery: A perspective on formulating poorly-water soluble compounds using wet media milling technology. Adv. Drug Deliv. Rev. 2011, 63, 427–440.
  9. Wu, Y.; Loper, A.; Landis, E.; Hettrick, L.; Novak, L.; Lynn, K.; Chen, C.; Thompson, K.; Higgins, R.; Batra, U.; et al. The role of biopharmaceutics in the development of a clinical nanoparticle formulation of MK-0869: A Beagle dog model predicts improved bioavailability and diminished food effect on absorption in human. Int. J. Pharm. 2004, 285, 135–146.
  10. Shegokar, R.; Müller, R.H. Nanocrystals: Industrially feasible multifunctional formulation technology for poorly soluble actives. Int. J. Pharm. 2010, 399, 129–139.
  11. Hu, X.; Chen, X.; Zhang, L.; Lin, X.; Zhang, Y.; Tang, X.; Wang, Y. A combined bottom-up/top-down approach to prepare a sterile injectable nanosuspension. Int. J. Pharm. 2014, 472, 130–139.
  12. Tozuka, Y.; Imono, M.; Uchiyama, H.; Takeuchi, H. A novel application of α-glucosyl hesperidin for nanoparticle formation of active pharmaceutical ingredients by dry grinding. Eur. J. Pharm. Biopharm. 2011, 79, 559–565.
  13. Zhang, Z.L.; Le, Y.; Wang, J.X.; Chen, J.F. Preparation of stable micron-sized crystalline irbesartan particles for the enhancement of dissolution rate. Drug Dev. Ind. Pharm. 2011, 37, 1357–1364.
  14. Tahara, K.; Nishikawa, M.; Matsui, K.; Hisazumi, K.; Onodera, R.; Tozuka, Y.; Takeuchi, H. In Vitro and In Vivo Characterization of Drug Nanoparticles Prepared Using PureNano™ Continuous Crystallizer to Improve the Bioavailability of Poorly Water Soluble Drugs. Pharm. Res. 2016, 33, 2259–2268.
  15. Verma, S.; Huey, B.D.; Burgess, D.J. Scanning probe microscopy method for nanosuspension stabilizer selection. Langmuir ACS J. Surf. Colloids 2009, 25, 12481–12487.
  16. Javed, S.; Kohli, K.; Ali, M. Reassessing bioavailability of silymarin. Altern. Med. Rev. J. Clin. Ther. 2011, 16, 239–249.
  17. Kren, V.; Walterová, D. Silybin and Silymarin—New Effects and Applications; Biomedical papers of the Medical Faculty of the University Palacky: Olomouc, Czech Republic, 2005; Volume 149, pp. 29–41.
  18. Wen, Z.; Dumas, T.E.; Schrieber, S.J.; Hawke, R.L.; Fried, M.W.; Smith, P.C. Pharmacokinetics and metabolic profile of free, conjugated, and total silymarin flavonolignans in human plasma after oral administration of milk thistle extract. Drug Metab. Dispos. 2008, 36, 65–72.
  19. Das, S.; Roy, P.; Auddy, R.G.; Mukherjee, A. Silymarin nanoparticle prevents paracetamol-induced hepatotoxicity. Int. J. Nanomed. 2011, 6, 1291–1301.
  20. Di Costanzo, A.; Angelico, R. Formulation Strategies for Enhancing the Bioavailability of Silymarin: The State of the Art. Molecules 2019, 24, 2155.
  21. Ibrahim, A.H.; Rosqvist, E.; Smått, J.H.; Ibrahim, H.M.; Ismael, H.R.; Afouna, M.I.; Samy, A.M.; Rosenholm, J.M. Formulation and optimization of lyophilized nanosuspension tablets to improve the physicochemical properties and provide immediate release of silymarin. Int. J. Pharm. 2019, 563, 217–227.
  22. Zhao, X.; Deng, Y.; Zhang, Y.; Zu, Y.; Lian, B.; Wu, M.; Zua, C.; Wua, W. Silymarin nanoparticles through emulsion solvent evaporation method for oral delivery with high antioxidant activities, bioavailability, and absorption in the liver. RSC Adv. 2016, 6, 93137–93146.
  23. Yang, K.Y.; Du, H.; Yousaf, A.M.; Kim, D.W.; Shin, Y.J.; Bae, O.N.; Kim, Y.I.; Kim, J.O.; Yong, C.S.; Choi, H.G. Silymarin-loaded solid nanoparticles provide excellent hepatic protection: Physicochemical characterization and in vivo evaluation. Int. J. Nanomed. 2013, 8, 3333–3343.
  24. Szente, L.; Szejtli, J. Highly soluble cyclodextrin derivatives: Chemistry, properties, and trends in development. Adv. Drug Deliv. Rev. 1999, 36, 17–28.
  25. Uekama, K.; Otagiri, M. Cyclodextrins in drug carrier systems. Crit. Rev. Ther. Drug Carr. Syst. 1987, 3, 1–40.
  26. Ueda, K.; Higashi, K.; Kataoka, M.; Yamashita, S.; Yamamoto, K.; Moribe, K. Inhibition mechanism of hydroxypropyl methylcellulose acetate succinate on drug crystallization in gastrointestinal fluid and drug permeability from a supersaturated solution. Eur. J. Pharm. Sci. 2014, 62, 293–300.
  27. De Marco, I.; Reverchon, E. Supercritical antisolvent micronization of cyclodextrins. Powder Technol. 2008, 183, 239–246.
  28. Wongmekiat, A.; Tozuka, Y.; Oguchi, T.; Yamamoto, K. Formation of fine drug particles by cogrinding with cyclodextrins. I. The use of beta-cyclodextrin anhydrate and hydrate. Pharm. Res. 2002, 19, 1867–1872.
  29. Sinha, B.; Müller, R.H.; Möschwitzer, J.P. Bottom-up approaches for preparing drug nanocrystals: Formulations and factors affecting particle size. Int. J. Pharm. 2013, 453, 126–141.
  30. Wu, L.; Zhang, J.; Watanabe, W. Physical and chemical stability of drug nanoparticles. Adv. Drug Deliv. Rev. 2011, 63, 456–469.
  31. Kayaert, P.; Van den Mooter, G. Is the amorphous fraction of a dried nanosuspension caused by milling or by drying? A case study with Naproxen and Cinnarizine. Eur. J. Pharm. Biopharm. 2012, 81, 650–656.
  32. Kayaert, P.; Van den Mooter, G. An investigation of the adsorption of hydroxypropylmethyl cellulose 2910 5 mPa s and polyvinylpyrrolidone K90 around Naproxen nanocrystals. J. Pharm. Sci. 2012, 101, 3916–3923.
  33. Fonte, P.; Soares, S.; Costa, A.; Andrade, J.C.; Seabra, V.; Reis, S.; Sarmento, B. Effect of cryoprotectants on the porosity and stability of insulin-loaded PLGA nanoparticles after freeze-drying. Biomatter 2012, 2, 329–339.
  34. Jahan, S.T.; Haddadi, A. Investigation and optimization of formulation parameters on preparation of targeted anti-CD205 tailored PLGA nanoparticles. Int. J. Nanomed. 2015, 10, 7371–7384.
More
© Text is available under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/)
ScholarVision Creations
Feedback