An integrated early formulation strategy--from hit evaluation to preclinical candidate profiling.

The selection of a suitable vehicle for preclinical compound profiling is a very important task during the early developmental phases to ensure the quality of candidates and the speed of compound progression. Apart from biopharmaceutical and pharmaceutical technical considerations, i.e. solubility/dissolution improvement or route of application, other aspects have to be taken into account, as well: (i) availability and quality of the compound, (ii) tolerability of the vehicle in the selected animal model, (iii) developmental possibilities, i.e. whether the formulation can be transformed into a clinical one. The approach described in this paper is based on results of team collaboration between functions involved in the conduct of animal experiments (Pharmacology, Pharmacokinetics, Toxicology, and Pharmaceutical Sciences). Very early in vivo studies should be performed with dissolved API as available information on solid-state characteristics is usually limited at this time. Later studies should be performed with developable formulations, taking into consideration pharmacological, toxicological, and pharmaceutical requirements. At this stage, delivery strategies (i.e. advanced formulations and/or alternative routes of administration) should be considered, as well. In addition, a minimum level analytical characterization of compounds and formulations used in animal studies is required to explain unexpected results.

[1]  Mitchell N. Cayen,et al.  A guide to drug discovery: Making Better Drugs: Decision Gates in Non-Clinical Drug Development , 2003, Nature Reviews Drug Discovery.

[2]  S. Balbach,et al.  Pharmaceutical evaluation of early development candidates "the 100 mg-approach". , 2004, International journal of pharmaceutics.

[3]  J. Crison,et al.  A Theoretical Basis for a Biopharmaceutic Drug Classification: The Correlation of in Vitro Drug Product Dissolution and in Vivo Bioavailability , 1995, Pharmaceutical Research.

[4]  G. Gaviraghi,et al.  Pharmacokinetic Challenges in Lead Optimization , 2007 .

[5]  Han van de Waterbeemd,et al.  High-throughput and in silico techniques in drug metabolism and pharmacokinetics. , 2002 .

[6]  Barrett E. Rabinow,et al.  Nanosuspensions in drug delivery , 2004, Nature Reviews Drug Discovery.

[7]  J E Kipp,et al.  The role of solid nanoparticle technology in the parenteral delivery of poorly water-soluble drugs. , 2004, International journal of pharmaceutics.

[8]  R. Löbenberg,et al.  Evaluation of Various Dissolution Media for Predicting In Vivo Performance of Class I and II Drugs , 1998, Pharmaceutical Research.

[9]  M. Hashida,et al.  Molecular and pharmacokinetic properties of 222 commercially available oral drugs in humans. , 2001, Biological & pharmaceutical bulletin.

[10]  R. Borchardt,et al.  Physico‐Chemical and Biological Factors that Influence a Drug's Cellular Permeability by Passive Diffusion , 2008 .

[11]  Gerd Folkers,et al.  Pharmacokinetic optimization in drug research , 2001 .

[12]  Brian Samas,et al.  An intravenous formulation decision tree for discovery compound formulation development. , 2003, International journal of pharmaceutics.

[13]  T. Arita,et al.  Effect of polymorphism on the dissolution behavior and gastrointestinal absorption of chlortetracycline hydrochloride. , 1974, Chemical & pharmaceutical bulletin.

[14]  R. Conradi,et al.  The relationship between peptide structure and transport across epithelial cell monolayers , 1992 .

[15]  K. Luthman,et al.  Correlation of drug absorption with molecular surface properties. , 1996, Journal of pharmaceutical sciences.

[16]  F. Lombardo,et al.  Experimental and computational approaches to estimate solubility and permeability in drug discovery and development settings. , 2001, Advanced drug delivery reviews.

[17]  Kevin C. Johnson,et al.  Guidance in the Setting of Drug Particle Size Specifications to Minimize Variability in Absorption , 1996, Pharmaceutical Research.

[18]  U. Kompella,et al.  Mucosal penetration enhancers for facilitation of peptide and protein drug absorption. , 1991, Critical reviews in therapeutic drug carrier systems.

[19]  Hartmut Derendorf,et al.  Pharmacokinetic/Pharmacodynamic Modeling in Drug Research and Development , 2000, Journal of clinical pharmacology.

[20]  Hongshi Yu,et al.  ADME-Tox in drug discovery: integration of experimental and computational technologies. , 2003, Drug discovery today.

[21]  A. Leone-Bay,et al.  The Development of Delivery Agents that Facilitate the Oral Absorption of Macromolecular Drugs , 2000, Medicinal research reviews.

[22]  C. Lipinski Drug-like properties and the causes of poor solubility and poor permeability. , 2000, Journal of pharmacological and toxicological methods.

[23]  Mahesh Chaubal,et al.  Application of formulation technologies in lead candidate selection and optimization , 2004 .

[24]  M. Hussain,et al.  Enhancement of the intestinal absorption of peptides and nonpeptides , 1996 .

[25]  Li Di,et al.  Multivariate pharmaceutical profiling for drug discovery. , 2002, Current topics in medicinal chemistry.

[26]  Opportunities for integration of pharmacokinetics, pharmacodynamics, and toxicokinetics in rational drug development , 1992 .

[27]  Alex Avdeef,et al.  Physicochemical Profiling (Solubility, Permeability and Charge State) , 2001 .

[28]  G. Klebe,et al.  Transport of Peptidomimetic Thrombin Inhibitors with a 3-Amidino-Phenylalanine Structure: Permeability and Efflux Mechanism in Monolayers of a Human Intestinal Cell Line (Caco-2) , 2001, Pharmaceutical Research.