PDF herunterladen
Arzneimittelforschung 2009; 59(5): 254-262
DOI: 10.1055/s-0031-1296394
Analgesics · Anti-inflammatories · Antiphlogistics · Antirheumatic Drugs
Editio Cantor Verlag Aulendorf (Germany)

Preclinical Safety Pharmacological Studies on the Amorphous Formulation of Celecoxib

Shyam Sunder Sharma
1   National Center for Safety Pharmacology, Department of Pharmacology and Toxicology, National Institute of Pharmaceutical Education and Research (NIPER), Sector 67, S.A.S. Nagar (Mohali), Punjab, India
,
Sathish Kumar Srinivasan
1   National Center for Safety Pharmacology, Department of Pharmacology and Toxicology, National Institute of Pharmaceutical Education and Research (NIPER), Sector 67, S.A.S. Nagar (Mohali), Punjab, India
,
Srinivasan Krishnamoorthy
1   National Center for Safety Pharmacology, Department of Pharmacology and Toxicology, National Institute of Pharmaceutical Education and Research (NIPER), Sector 67, S.A.S. Nagar (Mohali), Punjab, India
,
Aditya Mohan Kaushal
2   Department of Pharmaceutical Technology (Formulation), National Institute of Pharmaceutical Education and Research (NIPER), Sector 67, S.A.S. Nagar (Mohali), Punjab, India
,
Arvind Kumar Bansal
2   Department of Pharmaceutical Technology (Formulation), National Institute of Pharmaceutical Education and Research (NIPER), Sector 67, S.A.S. Nagar (Mohali), Punjab, India
› Institutsangaben
Weitere Informationen

Publikationsverlauf

Publikationsdatum:
13. Dezember 2011 (online)

    Lizenzen und Reprints

Abstract

Safety pharmacological studies need to be performed according to ICH S7A Guidelines for finished formulations that substantially alter the pharmacokinetics and/or pharmacodynamics of the active substance in comparison to formulations previously tested (i. e. through active excipients such as penetration enhancers, liposomes, and other changes such as polymorphous system). In the present study, amorphous formulation of celecoxib (CAS 169590-42-5), a new patented formulation with altered pharmacokinetic profile was investigated in comparison with the standard crystalline celecoxib (CEL) for its undesirable pharmacodynamic effects using certain safety pharmacological studies. The effects of the new formulation on vital functions using safety pharmacology core battery like central nervous system (CNS) (functional observation battery, locomotor activity, and motor coordination) and cardiovascular system (CVS) (blood pressure, heart rate and QT interval) were investigated in laboratory rodents. In addition, supplementary safety pharmacology study on gastrointestinal system (GIT) (gastric injury potential, gastric secretion) was also carried out. Oral administration of a single dose of the amorphous celecoxib formulation (CF) varying of 50, 150 and 500 mg/kg was studied in comparison with vehicle treated control and crystalline celecoxib in animals. The maximum tolerated dose (MTD) was identified by administration of insufferable doses of amorphous formulation, extended up to 2 000 mg/kg during the experiments on physiological parameters. There were no CNS and GIT safety concerns raised with respect to use of CF except the arrythmogenic risk associated with QT interval prolongation upon the high dose of CF.

Key words

CAS 169590-42-5 - Celecoxib, amorphous formulation - Core battery safety pharmacology - COX-2 inhibitors - Functional observation battery - Non steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs
 

  • Literature

  • 1 Frampton JE, Keating GM. Celecoxib: a review of its use in the management of arthritis and acute pain. Drugs. 2007; 67: 2433-2472
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 2 Barden J, Edwards JE, McQuay HJ, Moore RA. Single dose oral celecoxib for postoperative pain. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2008; CD004233: 1-11
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 3 Arber N, Eagle CJ, Spicak J, Racz I, Dite P, Hajer J et al. Celecoxib for the prevention of colorectal adenomatous polyps. N Engl J Med. 2006; 355: 885-895
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 4 Paulson SK, Vaughn MB, Jessen SM, Lawal Y, Gresk CJ, Yan B et al. Pharmacokinetics of celecoxib after oral administration in dogs and humans: effect of food and site of absorption. J Pharmacol Exp Ther. 2001; 297: 638-645
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 5 Hancock BC, Parks M. What is the true solubility advantage for amorphous pharmaceuticals?. Pharm Res. 2000; 17: 397-404
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 6 Bansal AK, Gupta P, Kakumanu VK. Ternary amorphous systems for improving aqueous solubility of poorly water soluble drugs. Indian Pat. Appl 2008; IN 2002DE00682: 1-10
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 7 Gupta P, Bansal AK. Oral bioavailability advantage from stabilized amorphous systems of celecoxib. J Pharm Res. 2006; 5: 1-9
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 8 Andersohn F, Suissa S, Garbe E. Use of first- and second-generation cyclooxygenase-2-selective nonsteroidal antiinflammatory drugs and risk of acute myocardial infarction. Circulation. 2006; 113: 1950-1957
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 9 Solomon SD, McMurray JV, Pfeffer MA, Wittes J, Fowler R, Finn P et al. Cardiovascular risk associated with celecoxib in a clinical trial for colorectal adenoma prevention. N Engl J Med. 2005; 352: 1071-1080
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 10 Silverstein FE, Faich G, Goldstein JL, Simon LS, Pincus T, Whelton A et al. Gastrointestinal toxicity with celecoxib vs nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs for osteoarthritis and rheumatoid arthritis: the CLASS study: a randomized controlled trial. JAMA. 2000; 284: 1247-1255
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 11 Center for Drug Evaluation and Research (CDER), US FDA. Guidance for industry: S7A safety pharmacology studies for human pharmaceuticals. July 2001. Available at http://www.fda.gov/CDER/GUIDANCE/4461fnl.pdf
    PubMed
  • 12 Hübler N, Gottschling B, Jacobs M, von Landenberg F, Hewicker-Trautwein M. Functional observational battery and motor activity in rats after single administration of two NHE 1 inhibitors. Toxicol Appl Pharmacol. 2005; 208: 266-276
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 13 Moser VC. Neurobehavioral screening in rodents. Mahin M, Costa LG, Reed DJ, Shigeru SI, Glenn S. eds Curr Protoc Toxico. New Jersey: John Wiley & Sons, Inc; 2000
    Google Scholar
  • 14 Gupta S, Sharma SS. Neuroprotective effects of trolox in global cerebral ischemia in gerbils. Biol Pharm Bull. 2006; 29: 957-961
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 15 Kim EJ, Lee RK, Suh JE, Han SS, Kim JK. Safety pharmacology of CKD-602, a novel anticancer agent. Arzneimittelforschung. 2003; 53: 272-279
    Artikel in Thieme ConnectPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 16 Arun KHS, Kaul CL, Ramarao P. AT1 receptors and L-type calcium channels: functional coupling in supersensitivity to angiotensin II in diabetic rats. Cardiovasc Res. 2005; 65: 374-386
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 17 Hamlin RL, Kijtawornrat A, Keene BW, Hamlin DM. QT and RR intervals in conscious and anesthetized guinea pigs with highly varying RR intervals and given QTc-lengthening test articles. Toxicol Sci. 2003; 76: 437-442
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 18 Hamlin RL. Non-drug-related electrocardiographic features in animal models in safety pharmacology. J Pharmacol Toxicol Methods. 2005; 52: 60-76
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 19 Luo JC, Shin VY, Liu ESL, So WHL, Ye YN, Chang FY et al. Non-ulcerogenic dose of dexamethasone delays gastric ulcer healing in rats. J Pharmacol Exp Ther. 2003; 307: 692-698
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 20 Ito K, Kinoshita K, Tomizawa A, Inaba F, Morikawa-Inoma-ta Y, Makino M et al. Pharmacological profile of novel acid pump antagonist 7-(4-Fluorobenzyloxy)-2,3-dimethyl-l-{[(lS,2S)-2-methyl cyclopropyl]methyl}-lH-pyrrolo[2,3-d]-pyridazine (CS-526). J Pharmacol Exp Ther. 2007; 323: 308-317
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 21 Arisawa H, Fukui K, Imai E, Fujise N, Masunaga H. General pharmacological profile of the novel muscarinic receptor agonist SNI-2011, a drug for xerostomia in Sjogren’s syndrome. 4th communication: effects on gastrointestinal, urinary and reproductive systems and other effects. Arzneimittelforschung. 2002; 52: 225-232
    Artikel in Thieme ConnectPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 22 Center for Drug Evaluation and Research (CDER), US FDA. Guidance for industry: S7B nonclinical evaluation of the potential for delayed ventricular repolarization (QT interval prolongation) by human pharmaceuticals. Rockville, October 2005. Available at http://www.fda.gov/CDER/GUIDANCE/6885fnl.pdf
    PubMed
  • 23 Monro A, Mordenti J. Expression of exposure in negative carcinogenicity studies: dose/body weight, dose/body surface area, or plasma concentrations?. Toxicol Pathol. 1995; 23: 187-198
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 24 Voisin EM, Ruthsatz M, Collins JM, Hoyle PC. Extrapolation of animal toxicity to humans: interspecies comparisons in drug development. Regul Toxicol Pharmacol. 1990; 12: 107-116
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 25 Sakaguchi Y, Sugiyama A, Takao S, Akie Y, Takahara A, Hashimoto K. Halothane sensitizes the guinea-pig heart to pharmacological IKr blockade: comparison with urethane anesthesia. J Pharmacol Sci. 2005; 99: 185-190
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 26 Takahara A, Sugiyama A, Hashimoto K. Characterization of the halothane-anesthetized guinea-pig heart as a model to detect the K+ channel blocker-induced QT-interval prolongation. Biol Pharm Bull. 2006; 29: 827-829
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 27 Netzer R, Ebneth A, Bischoff U, Pongs O. Screening lead compounds for QT interval prolongation. Drug Discov Today. 2001; 6: 78-84
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 28 Peskar B. Role of cyclooxygenase isoforms in gastric mucosal defense and ulcer healing. Inflammopharmacology. 2005; 13: 15-26
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 29 Takahashi S, Shigeta J, Inoue H, Tanabe T, Okabe S. Localization of cyclooxygenase-2 and regulation of its mRNA expression in gastric ulcers in rats. Am J Physiol Gastrointest Liver Physiol. 1998; 275: G1137-1145
    PubMedGoogle Scholar