Health Sciences Research Centre (CICS-UBI), University of Beira Interior, Av. Infante D. Henrique, 6200-506 Covilhã, Portugal; Faculty of Health Sciences, University of Beira Interior, Av. Infante D. Henrique, 6200-506 Covilhã, Portugal.
Health Sciences Research Centre (CICS-UBI), University of Beira Interior, Av. Infante D. Henrique, 6200-506 Covilhã, Portugal; Faculty of Health Sciences, University of Beira Interior, Av. Infante D. Henrique, 6200-506 Covilhã, Portugal.
J Control Release. 2018 Jan 28;270:89-100. doi: 10.1016/j.jconrel.2017.11.047. Epub 2017 Dec 2.
The treatment of neurodegenerative and psychiatric disorders remains a challenge in medical research. Several strategies have been developed over the years, either to overcome the blood-brain barrier or to achieve a safer or faster brain delivery, one of them being intranasal (IN) administration. The possibility of direct nose-to-brain transport offers enhanced targeting and reduced systemic side effects. Nevertheless, labile, low soluble, low permeant and/or less potent drugs might need a formulation other than the common solutions or suspensions. For that, the formulation of nanosystems is considered to be a promising approach, since it can protect drugs from chemical and/or metabolic degradation, enhance their solubility, or offer transport through biological membranes. However, the understanding of the factors promoting efficient brain targeting when using nanosystems through the nasal route is currently patchy and incomplete. The main purpose of the present review was to evaluate the association between brain delivery efficacy (in terms of brain targeting, brain bioavailability and time to reach the brain) and nanosystem type. For that, we performed a systematic bibliographic search and analysis. Furthermore, study designs, nanosystem properties, and reporting quality were also analyzed and discussed. It was found a high heterogeneity in how pre-clinical brain targeting studies have been conducted, analyzed and reported in scientific literature, which surely originates a significant degree of bias and data dispersion. This review attempts to provide some systematization recommendations, which may be useful for researchers entering the field, and assist in increasing the uniformity of future reports. The analysis of literature data confirmed that there is evidence of the advantage of the IN route (when compared to the intravenous route) and in using carrier nanosystems (when compared to IN solutions) for brain delivery of a large set of drugs. Among the most represented nanosystem classes, microemulsions had some of the lowest pharmacokinetic ratios values, while polymeric micelles had some of the best. Nevertheless, brain targeting efficacy comparisons between nanosystem groups had little statistical significance, and the superiority of the polymeric micelles group disappeared when nanosystems were compared to the respective IN drug solutions. In fact, some drugs reached the brain so efficiently, even as drug solutions, that further benefit from formulating them into nanosystems became less evident.
神经退行性和精神障碍的治疗仍然是医学研究中的一个挑战。多年来,已经开发了几种策略,要么克服血脑屏障,要么实现更安全或更快的大脑输送,其中之一是鼻内(IN)给药。直接从鼻子到大脑的运输的可能性提供了增强的靶向和减少的全身副作用。然而,不稳定、低溶解度、低渗透性和/或效力较低的药物可能需要不同于常见溶液或混悬剂的制剂。为此,纳米系统的制剂被认为是一种很有前途的方法,因为它可以保护药物免受化学和/或代谢降解,提高其溶解度,或提供通过生物膜的运输。然而,目前对通过鼻腔途径使用纳米系统促进有效大脑靶向的因素的理解是不完整的。本综述的主要目的是评估脑递送功效(在脑靶向、脑生物利用度和到达大脑的时间方面)与纳米系统类型之间的关联。为此,我们进行了系统的文献检索和分析。此外,还分析和讨论了研究设计、纳米系统特性和报告质量。发现临床前脑靶向研究在科学文献中的进行、分析和报告方式存在高度异质性,这肯定会产生很大的偏差和数据分散。本综述试图提供一些系统化建议,这可能对进入该领域的研究人员有用,并有助于提高未来报告的一致性。文献数据的分析证实,有证据表明 IN 途径(与静脉途径相比)和使用载体纳米系统(与 IN 溶液相比)在将大量药物递送到大脑方面具有优势。在所代表的纳米系统类别中,微乳液具有最低的药代动力学比值值,而聚合物胶束具有最好的药代动力学比值值。然而,纳米系统组之间的脑靶向功效比较没有统计学意义,当将纳米系统与各自的 IN 药物溶液进行比较时,聚合物胶束组的优势消失。事实上,一些药物作为药物溶液如此有效地到达大脑,以至于进一步将它们制成纳米系统的好处变得不那么明显。