TY - JOUR
T1 - pH-stat versus pH-shift lipolysis model
T2 - Exploring in vitro-in vivo relationships for lipid-based formulations of nilotinib
AU - Kirschbaum, Hannah S.
AU - Koehl, Niklas J.
AU - Blechar, Johannes A.
AU - Wiesinger, Christina
AU - Koehl, Laura J.
AU - O´Dwyer, Patrick J.
AU - Kuentz, Martin
AU - Holm, René
AU - Jede, Christian
AU - Griffin, Brendan T.
N1 - Publisher Copyright:
© 2025 The Authors
PY - 2025/11/1
Y1 - 2025/11/1
N2 - The pH-stat in vitro lipolysis method is well established for evaluating lipid-based formulations (LBFs), however the absence of a simulated gastrointestinal transition may lead to an overestimation of drug precipitation particularly in the case of weakly basic drugs. This study aimed to compare the conventional pH-stat method with a pH-shift lipolysis approach by evaluating a diverse set of LBFs using nilotinib, a weakly basic model drug. Additionally, the study sought to assess in vitro–in vivo relationships (IVIVRs) and enhance understanding of the predictive capabilities of these models. Four nilotinib-containing LBFs were tested in vitro, and pharmacokinetic profiles were evaluated in Sprague Dawley rats. The formulations included a supersaturated Peceol® solution (sLBF), a Peceol® lipid suspension (type I according to the Lipid Formulation Classification System (LFCS)), a type III LFCS medium-chain suspension, and a type IV LFCS suspension. The highest bioavailability was achieved with the Peceol® sLBF and the type III LFCS formulation. Strong IVIVRs were established for both in vitro lipolysis models. In conclusion, utilizing both in vitro models offered distinct advantages depending on the stage of development and the specific questions being addressed. This approach contributes to more efficient formulation development and a reduced reliance on animal studies in early-stage drug development.
AB - The pH-stat in vitro lipolysis method is well established for evaluating lipid-based formulations (LBFs), however the absence of a simulated gastrointestinal transition may lead to an overestimation of drug precipitation particularly in the case of weakly basic drugs. This study aimed to compare the conventional pH-stat method with a pH-shift lipolysis approach by evaluating a diverse set of LBFs using nilotinib, a weakly basic model drug. Additionally, the study sought to assess in vitro–in vivo relationships (IVIVRs) and enhance understanding of the predictive capabilities of these models. Four nilotinib-containing LBFs were tested in vitro, and pharmacokinetic profiles were evaluated in Sprague Dawley rats. The formulations included a supersaturated Peceol® solution (sLBF), a Peceol® lipid suspension (type I according to the Lipid Formulation Classification System (LFCS)), a type III LFCS medium-chain suspension, and a type IV LFCS suspension. The highest bioavailability was achieved with the Peceol® sLBF and the type III LFCS formulation. Strong IVIVRs were established for both in vitro lipolysis models. In conclusion, utilizing both in vitro models offered distinct advantages depending on the stage of development and the specific questions being addressed. This approach contributes to more efficient formulation development and a reduced reliance on animal studies in early-stage drug development.
KW - In vitro digestion
KW - In vitro-in vivo relationships (IVIVR)
KW - Lipid-based formulation
KW - pH-shift lipolysis
KW - pH-stat
KW - Supersaturation
UR - https://www.scopus.com/pages/publications/105015690949
U2 - 10.1016/j.ejps.2025.107250
DO - 10.1016/j.ejps.2025.107250
M3 - Article
C2 - 40886735
AN - SCOPUS:105015690949
SN - 0928-0987
VL - 214
JO - European Journal of Pharmaceutical Sciences
JF - European Journal of Pharmaceutical Sciences
M1 - 107250
ER -