AAPS PharmSciTech

, Volume 19, Issue 4, pp 1882–1893 | Cite as

In Vitro-In Vivo Predictive Dissolution-Permeation-Absorption Dynamics of Highly Permeable Drug Extended-Release Tablets via Drug Dissolution/Absorption Simulating System and pH Alteration

  • Zi-qiang Li
  • Shuang Tian
  • Hui Gu
  • Zeng-guang Wu
  • Makafui Nyagblordzro
  • Guo Feng
  • Xin He
Research Article


Each of dissolution and permeation may be a rate-limiting factor in the absorption of oral drug delivery. But the current dissolution test rarely took into consideration of the permeation property. Drug dissolution/absorption simulating system (DDASS) valuably gave an insight into the combination of drug dissolution and permeation processes happening in human gastrointestinal tract. The simulated gastric/intestinal fluid of DDASS was improved in this study to realize the influence of dynamic pH change on the complete oral dosage form. To assess the effectiveness of DDASS, six high-permeability drugs were chosen as model drugs, including theophylline (pKa1 = 3.50, pKa2 = 8.60), diclofenac (pKa = 4.15), isosorbide 5-mononitrate (pKa = 7.00), sinomenine (pKa = 7.98), alfuzosin (pKa = 8.13), and metoprolol (pKa = 9.70). A general elution and permeation relationship of their commercially available extended-release tablets was assessed as well as the relationship between the cumulative permeation and the apparent permeability. The correlations between DDASS elution and USP apparatus 2 (USP2) dissolution and also between DDASS permeation and beagle dog absorption were developed to estimate the predictability of DDASS. As a result, the common elution-dissolution relationship was established regardless of some variance in the characteristic behavior between DDASS and USP2 for drugs dependent on the pH for dissolution. Level A in vitro-in vivo correlation between DDASS permeation and dog absorption was developed for drugs with different pKa. The improved DDASS will be a promising tool to provide a screening method on the predictive dissolution-permeation-absorption dynamics of solid drug dosage forms in the early-phase formulation development.


drug dissolution/absorption simulating system (DDASS) dynamic pH change extended-release tablets in vitro-in vivo correlation (IVIVC) USP apparatus 2 (USP 2) 



active pharmaceutical ingredient


biopharmaceutical classification system


drug dissolution/absorption simulating system


diclofenac sodium




extended-release tablet


in vitro-in vivo correlation


isosorbide 5-mononitrate


USP apparatus 2


Funding Information

This study was supported by the grants from Key Support Projects of Tianjin Science and Technology (No. 16YFZCSY00440), Natural Science Foundation of China (No. 81303141), Integrative Chinese Medicine Research Project of Tianjin Municipal Commission Health and Family Planning (No. 2017144), and Program for Changjiang Scholars and Innovative Research Team in University (No. IRT_14R41).

Compliance with Ethical Standards

The study was performed in accordance with the Principles of Laboratory Animal Care (NIH No. 8523) and was approved by the Ethical Review Committee of Tianjin University of Traditional Chinese Medicine.

Conflict of Interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.


  1. 1.
    Yuen KH. The transit of dosage forms through the small intestine. Int J Pharm. 2010;395:9–16.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Cascone S, Santis FD, Lamberti G, Titomanlio G. The influence of dissolution conditions on the drug ADME phenomena. Eur J Pharm Biopharm. 2011;79:382–91.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Huang W, Lee SL, Lawrence XY. Mechanistic approaches to predicting oral drug absorption. AAPS J. 2009;11:217–24.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Amidon GL, Lennernäs H, Shah VP, Shah VP, Crison JR. A theoretical basis for a biopharmaceutic drug classification: the correlation of in vitro, drug product dissolution and in vivo, bioavailability. Pharm Res. 1995;12:413–20.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Hörter D, Dressman JB. Influence of physicochemical properties on dissolution of drugs in the gastrointestinal tract. Adv Drug Deliv Rev. 2001;46:75–87.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Guerra A, Etienne-Mesmin L, Livrelli V, Denis S, Blanquet-Diot S, Alric M. Relevance and challenges in modeling human gastric and small intestinal digestion. Trends Biotechnol. 2012;30:591–600.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Mcallister M. Dynamic dissolution: a step closer to predictive dissolution testing? Mol Pharm. 2010;7:1374–87.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Vardakou M, Mercuri A, Barker SA, Craig DQM, Faulks RM, Wickham MSJ. Achieving antral grinding forces in biorelevant in vitro models: comparing the USP dissolution apparatus II and the dynamic gastric model with human in vivo data. AAPS PharmSciTech. 2011;12:620–6.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Puppolo MM, Hughey JR, Dillon T, Storey D, Jansenvarnum S. Biomimetic dissolution: a tool to predict amorphous solid dispersion performance. AAPS PharmSciTech. 2017;18:1–13.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Egan WJ, Lauri G. Prediction of intestinal permeability. Adv Drug Deliver Rev. 2002;54:273–89.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Ng SF, Rouse JJ, Sanderson FD, Meidan V, Eccleston GM. Validation of a static Franz diffusion cell system for in vitro permeation studies. AAPS PharmSciTech. 2010;11:1432–41.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Li ZQ, He X. Physiologically based in vitro models to predict the oral dissolution and absorption of a solid drug delivery system. Curr Drug Metab. 2015;16:777–806.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Ginski MJ, Polli JE. Prediction of dissolution–absorption relationships from a dissolution/Caco-2system. Int J Pharm. 1999;177:117–25.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Ginski MJ, Taneja R, Polli JE. Prediction of dissolution-absorption relationships from a continuous dissolution/Caco-2 system. AAPS PharmSciTech. 1999;1:1–12.Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Kataoka M, Masaoka Y, Yamazaki Y, Sakane T, Sezaki H, Yamashita S. In vitro system to evaluate oral absorption of poorly water-soluble drugs: simultaneous analysis on dissolution and permeation of drugs. Pharm Res. 2003;20:1674–80.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Kataoka M, Masaoka Y, Sakuma S, Yamashita S. Effect of food intake on the oral absorption of poorly water-soluble drugs: in vitro assessment of drug dissolution and permeation assay system. J Pharm Sci. 2006;95:2051–61.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Gao Z. Development of a continuous dissolution/absorption system—a technical note. AAPS PharmSciTech. 2012;13:1287–92.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Anderson KE, Yun KT. Simulated biological dissolution and absorption system [P]. WO, 1999, WO 1999028437 A1.Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Motz SA, Klimundova J, Schaefer UF, Balbach S, Eichinger T, Solich P, et al. Automated measurement of permeation and dissolution of propranolol HCl tablets using sequential injection analysis. Anal Chim Acta. 2007;581:174–80.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Motz SA, Schaefer UF, Balbach S, Eichinger T, Lehr CM. Permeability assessment for solid oral drug formulations based on Caco-2 monolayer in combination with a flow through dissolution cell. Eur J Pharm Biopharm. 2007;66:286–95.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Kobayashi M, Sada N, Sugawara M, Iseki K, Miyazaki K. Development of a new system for prediction of drug absorption that takes into account drug dissolution and pH change in the gastro-intestinal tract. Int J Pharm. 2001;221:87–94.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    He X, Sugawara M, Kobayashi M, Takekuma Y, Miyazaki K. An in vitro system for prediction of oral absorption of relatively water-soluble drugs and ester prodrugs. Int J Pharm. 2003;263:35–44.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    He X, Kadomura S, Takekuma Y, Sugawara M, Miyazaki K. A new system for the prediction of drug absorption using a pH-controlled Caco-2 model: evaluation of pH-dependent soluble drug absorption and pH-related changes in absorption. J Pharm Sci. 2004;93:71–7.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    He X, Sugawara M, Takekuma Y, Miyazaki K. Absorption of ester prodrugs in Caco-2 and rat intestine models. Antimicrob Agents Chemother. 2004;48:2604–9.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Li ZQ, He X, Gao XM, Xu YY, Wang YF, Gu H, et al. Study on dissolution and absorption of four dosage forms of isosorbide mononitrate: level A in vitro-in vivo correlation. Eur J Pharm Biopharm. 2011;79:364–71.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Liu W, He X, Li Z, Gao X, Ma Y, Xun M, et al. Development of a bionic system for the simultaneous prediction of the release/absorption characteristics of enteric-coated formulations. Pharm Res. 2012;30:596–605.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Davies NM, Anderson KE. Clinical pharmacokinetics of diclofenac. Clin Pharmacokinet. 1997;33:184–213.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Manca ML, Zaru M, Ennas G, Valenti D, Sinico C, Loy G, et al. Diclofenac-β-cyclodextrin binary systems: physicochemical characterization and in vitro dissolution and diffusion studies. AAPS PharmSciTech. 2005;6:E464–72.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Chuasuwan B, Binjesoh V, Polli JE, Zhang H, Amidon GL, Shah VP, et al. Biowaiver monographs for immediate release solid oral dosage forms: diclofenac sodium and diclofenac potassium. J Pharm Sci. 2009;98:1206–19.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Ogilvie RI. Clinical pharmacokinetics of theophylline. Clin Pharmacokinet. 1978;3:267–93.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Adeyeye CM, Rowley J, Madu D, Javadi M, Sabnis SS. Evaluation of crystallinity and drug release stability of directly compressed theophylline hydrophilic matrix tablets stored under varied moisture conditions. Int J Pharm. 1995;116:65–75.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Sriamornsak P, Sungthongjeeh S. Modification of theophylline release with alginate gel formed in hard capsules. AAPS PharmSciTech. 2007;8(3):E1–8.CrossRefPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Regårdh CG, Johnsson G. Clinical pharmacokinetics of metoprolol. Clin Pharmacokinet. 1980;5:557–69.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    Eddington N, Marroum P, Uppoor R, Hussain A, Augsburger L. Development and internal validation of an in vitro-in vivo correlation for a hydrophilic metoprolol tartrate extended release tablet formulation. Pharm Res. 1998;15:466–73.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  35. 35.
    Quan L, Fassihi R. Zero-order delivery of a highly soluble, low dose drug alfuzosin hydrochloride via gastro-retentive system. Int J Pharm. 2008;348:27–34.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. 36.
    Nicholas ME, Karunakar R, Pavan KK, Raghunadha GC. Development and evaluation of extended release matrix tablets of Alfuzosin HCl and its comparison with marketed product. J Pharm Res. 2011;4:1436–7.Google Scholar
  37. 37.
    Li X, Li X, Zhou Y, Liu Y, Guo M, Zhu Q, et al. Development of patch and spray formulations for enhancing topical delivery of sinomenine hydrochloride. J Pharm Sci. 2009;99:1790–9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. 38.
    Zhao XX, Peng C, Zhang H, Qin LP. Sinomenium acutum: a review of chemistry, pharmacology, pharmacokinetics, and clinical use. Pharm Biol. 2012;50(8):1053–61.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  39. 39.
    Lemmer B, Scheidel B, Blume H, Becker HJ. Clinical chronopharmacology of oral sustained-release isosorbide-5-mononitrate in healthy subjects. Eur J Clin Pharmacol. 1991;40:71–5.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  40. 40.
    Gunasekara NS, Noble S. Isosorbide 5-mononitrate: a review of a sustained- release formulation (Imdur) in stable angina pectoris. Drugs. 1999;57:261–77.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  41. 41.
    Baldini F, Bechi P, Bracci S, Cosi F, Pucciani F. In vivo optical-fibre pH sensor for gastro-oesophageal measurements. Sensor Actuat B-Chem. 1995;29:164–8.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. 42.
    He X, Sugawara M, Zhu XB, Kadomura S, Takekuma Y, Liu CX. Application of an in vitro dissolution and absorption system to evaluate oral absorption of ketoprofen and two preparations of ketoprofen. Asian J Pharmacodynamic Pharmacokinet. 2009;9:203–10.Google Scholar
  43. 43.
    Watanabe E, Takahashi M, Hayashi M. A possibility to predict the absorbability of poorly water-soluble drugs in humans based on rat intestinal permeability assessed by an in vitro chamber method. Eur J Pharm Biopharm. 2004;58:659–65.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  44. 44.
    Yee S. In vitro permeability across Caco-2 cells (colonic) can predict in vivo (small intestinal) absorption in man-factor myth. Pharm Res. 1997;14:763–6.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  45. 45.
    Kostewicz ES, Abrahamsson B, Brewster M, Brouwers J, Butler J, Carlert S, et al. In vitro models for the prediction of in vivo performance of oral dosage forms. Eur J Pharm Sci. 2014;57:342–66.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  46. 46.
    Mudie DM, Amidon GL, Amidon GE. Physiological parameters for oral delivery and in vitro testing. Mol Pharm. 2010;7:1388–405.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  47. 47.
    Yang Y, Manda P, Pavurala N, Khan MA, Krishnaiah YS. Development and validation of in vitro-in vivo correlation (IVIVC) for estradiol transdermal drug delivery systems. J Control Release. 2015;210:58–66.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  48. 48.
    Zakerimilani P, Valizadeh H, Tajerzadeh H, Azarmi Y, Islambolchilara Z, Barzegara S, et al. Predicting human intestinal permeability using single-pass intestinal perfusion in rat. J Pharmacy Pharm Sci. 2007;10:368–79.Google Scholar
  49. 49.
    Dunne A, O'Hara T, Devane J. Level A in vivo-in vitro correlation: nonlinear models and statistical methodology. J Pharm Sci. 1997;86:1245–9.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  50. 50.
    Polli JE, Crison JR, Amidon GL. Novel approach to the analysis of in vitro-in vivo relationships. J Pharm Sci. 1996;85:753–60.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© American Association of Pharmaceutical Scientists 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  • Zi-qiang Li
    • 1
    • 2
  • Shuang Tian
    • 2
  • Hui Gu
    • 1
  • Zeng-guang Wu
    • 1
  • Makafui Nyagblordzro
    • 1
  • Guo Feng
    • 1
  • Xin He
    • 1
    • 3
  1. 1.Tianjin University of Traditional Chinese MedicineTianjinPeople’s Republic of China
  2. 2.Second Affiliated Hospital of Tianjin University of Traditional Chinese MedicineTianjinPeople’s Republic of China
  3. 3.Tianjin State Key Laboratory of Modern Chinese MedicineTianjinPeople’s Republic of China

Personalised recommendations