Hostname: page-component-848d4c4894-r5zm4 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-06-27T09:23:09.212Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

A Horse of a Different Color: How Formulation Influences Medication Effects

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  09 May 2012

Meghan M. Grady  and
Stephen M. Stahl
Meghan M. Grady*
Affiliation:
Neuroscience Education Institute
Stephen M. Stahl
Affiliation:
Neuroscience Education Institute Department of Psychiatry, University of California San Diego Department of Psychiatry, University of Cambridge, UK
*
*Address for correspondence: Meghan M. Grady, BA, Director, Content Development, Neuroscience Education Institute, Phone: 760-931-8857, ext. 109 (Email mgrady@neiglobal.com)
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

A medication's pharmacokinetic properties can be as important as its efficacy in determining how successful a treatment is. Formulation plays a critical role in absorption, distribution, and elimination of a drug, which in turn can influence the clinical profile of a medication, including onset and duration of action, consistency of plasma levels, ability to cross the blood-brain barrier, and other factors. Advances in drug delivery technology mean that formulation is now an integral component in the development of a drug. Likewise, formulation is one of the factors that may influence selection of a medication to suit the needs of a particular patient. This article briefly reviews the technologies commonly applied in the development of psychotropic medications, with emphasis on the various oral modified-release formulations, and discusses how formulation can be used to optimize the efficacy and tolerability of psychotropic drugs.

Keywords

Formulationdrug deliverymodified releasematrixreservoir
Type
Review Article
Information
CNS Spectrums , Volume 17 , Issue 2 , June 2012 , pp. 63 - 69
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2012

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Footnotes

†

Stephen M. Stahl, MD, PhD, Adjunct Professor of Psychiatry at the University of California San Diego, Honorary Visiting Senior Fellow at the University of Cambridge, Chairman of the Neuroscience Education Institute (NEI).

Acknowledgment of Financial Support: The activity is supported by an educational grant from Valeant Pharmaceuticals International, Inc.

References

1.Stahl, SM, Wets, KM. Recent advances in drug delivery technology for neurology. Clin Neuropharmacol. 1988; 11(1): 1–17.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
2.Stahl, SM. At long last, long-lasting psychiatric medications: an overview of controlled-release technologies. J Clin Psychiatry. 2003; 64(4): 355–356.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
3.Chen, ML, Shah, VP, Ganes, D, et al. . Challenges and opportunities in establishing scientific and regulatory standards for assuring therapeutic equivalence of modified-release products: workshop summary report. Eur J Pharmaceutical Sci. 2010; 40: 148–153.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
4.Brannon-Peppas, L. Preparation and characterization of crosslinked hydrophilic networks. In: Absorbent polymer technology. Amsterdam: Elsevier; 1990. pp. 45–66.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
5.Colombo, P, Bettini, R, Santi, P, Peppas, NA. Swellable matrices for controlled drug delivery: gel-layer behavior, mechanisms and optimal performance. Pharm Sci Technolo Today. 2000; 3(6): 198–204.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
6.Wen, H, Park, K. Oral controlled release formulation design and drug delivery: theory to practice, Hoboken, New Jersey: John Wiley & Sons, Inc.; 2010.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
7.Tiwari, SB, Rajabi-Siahboomi, AR. Extended-release oral drug delivery: technologies: monolithic matrix systems. Methods Mol Biol. 2008; 437: 217–243.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
8.Frutos, P, Pabon, C, Lastres, JL, Frutos, G. In vitro release of metoclopramide from hydrophobic matrix tablets. Influence of hydrodynamic conditions on kinetic release parameters. Chem Pharm Bull. 2001; 49(10): 1267–1271.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
9.Roy, P, Shahiwala, A. Multiparticulate formulation approach to pulsatile drug delivery: current perspectives. J Controlled Release. 2009; 134: 74–80.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
10.Siepmann, F, Hoffman, A, Leclercq, B, Carlin, B, Siepmann, J. How to adjust desired drug release patterns from ethylcellulose-coated dosage forms. J Controlled Release. 2007; 119: 182–189.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
11.Felton, LA. Characterization of coating systems. AAPS PharmSciTech. 2007; 8(4): E1–E9.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
12.Ball, AM, Smith, KM. Optimizing transdermal drug therapy. Am J Health Syst Pharm. 2008; 65(14): 1337–1346.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
13.Keith, S. Advances in psychotropic formulations. Prog Neuro-psychopharmacol Biol Psychiatry. 2006; 30: 996–1008.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
14.Muramatsu, RS, Litzinger, MHJ, Fisher, E, Takeshita, J. Alternative formulations, delivery methods, and administration options for psychotropic medications in elderly patients with behavioral and psychological symptoms of dementia. Am J Geriatr Pharmacother. 2010; 8(2): 98–114.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
15.U.S. Food and Drug Administration. http://www.fda.gov/Drugs/ResourcesForYou/Consumers/BuyingUsingMedicineSafely/UnderstandingGenericDrugs/default.htm. Accessed October 31, 2011.Google Scholar
16.U.S. Food and Drug Administration Center for Drug Evaluation and Research. Approved drug products with therapeutic equivalence evaluations. 31st ed.; 2011.Google Scholar
17.Sankar, R, Glauser, TA. Understanding therapeutic equivalence in epilepsy. CNS Spectr. 2010; 15(2): 112–123.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
18.Wilner, AN. Therapeutic equivalency of generic antiepileptic drugs: results of a survey. Epilepsy Behav. 2004; 5: 995–998.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
19.Gilman, JT, et al. . Carbamazepine toxicity resulting from generic substitution. Neurology. 1993; 43: 2696–2697.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
20.Chenu, F, et al. . Comparison of pharmacokinetic profiles of brand-name and generic formulations of citalopram and venlafaxine: a crossover study. J Clin Psychiatry. 2009; 70(7): 958–966.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
21.U.S. Food and Drug Administration. http://www.fda.gov/AboutFDA/CentersOffices/CDER/ucm153270.htm. Accessed October 31, 2011.Google Scholar
22.Desmarais, JE, Beauclair, L, Marolese, HC. Switching from brand-name to generic psychotropic medications: a literature review. CNS Neurosci Ther. 2010; Epub ahead of print.Google Scholar
23.Endrenyi, L, Tothfalusi, L. Do regulatory bioequivalence requirements adequately reflect the therapeutic equivalence of modified-release drug products? J Pharm Pharmaceut Sci. 2010; 13(1): 107–113.Google ScholarPubMed
24.Raw, AS, Lionberger, R, Yu, LX. Pharmaceutical equivalence by design for generic drugs: modified-release products. Pharm Res. 2011; 28: 1445–1453.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed