Home › Research › Treatments
Enhanced brain distribution and pharmacodynamics of rivastigmine by liposomes following intranasal administration
Yang ZZ, Zhang YQ, Wang ZZ, Wu K, Lou JN, Qi XR.. International journal of pharmaceutics, 2013-05-13
Topic: Brain proteins, microglia and lab models
Alzheimer's disease (AD) is a common progressive neurodegenerative disorder associated with cholinergic neurons degeneration. The blood-brain barrier (BBB) not only provides protection for the brain but also hinders the treatment and diagnosis of this neurological disease, because the drugs must cross BBB to reach the lesions. The present work was aimed at formulating rivastigmine liposomes (Lp) and cell-penetrating peptide (CPP) modified liposomes (CPP-Lp) to improve rivastigmine distribution in brain and proceed to enhance pharmacodynamics by intranasal (IN) administration and minimize side effects. The results revealed that Lp especially the CPP-Lp can enhance the permeability across the BBB by murine brain microvascular endothelial cells model in vitro. IN administration of rivastigmine solution and rivastigmine liposomes demonstrated the capacity to improve rivastigmine distribution and adequate retention in CNS regions especially in hippocampus and cortex, which were the regions most affected by AD, than that of IV administration. Importantly, the lagging but intense inhibition of acetylcholinesterase (AChE) and butyrylcholinesterase (BuChE) activities were relative to the extended release, absorption and retention. In addition, there was very mild nasal toxicity of liposomal formulations. The data suggest that rivastigmine liposomes especially CPP-Lp improve the brain delivery and enhance pharmacodynamics which respect to BBB penetration and nasal olfactory pathway into brain after IN administration, and simultaneously decrease the hepatic first pass metabolism and gastrointestinal adverse effects.
Cite this study APA, Vancouver, BibTeX · download .bib or .ris
APA 7th
Yang, Z. Z., Zhang, Y. Q., Wang, Z. Z., Wu, K., Lou, J. N., & Qi, X. R. (2013). Enhanced brain distribution and pharmacodynamics of rivastigmine by liposomes following intranasal administration. International journal of pharmaceutics. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijpharm.2013.05.009
Vancouver
Yang ZZ, Zhang YQ, Wang ZZ, Wu K, Lou JN, Qi XR. Enhanced brain distribution and pharmacodynamics of rivastigmine by liposomes following intranasal administration. International journal of pharmaceutics. 2013. doi:10.1016/j.ijpharm.2013.05.009. PMID: 23680731.
BibTeX
@article{yang2013-23680731,
author = {Yang, Z. Z. and Zhang, Y. Q. and Wang, Z. Z. and Wu, K. and Lou, J. N. and Qi, X. R.},
title = {{Enhanced brain distribution and pharmacodynamics of rivastigmine by liposomes following intranasal administration}},
journal = {International journal of pharmaceutics},
year = {2013},
doi = {10.1016/j.ijpharm.2013.05.009},
pmid = {23680731},
url = {https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijpharm.2013.05.009}
}
Built from the record alzhub holds for this paper, not looked up. Volume, issue and page numbers are not held in the record. Check the citation against the original before you use it.
Key findings
- Alzheimer's disease (AD) is a common progressive neurodegenerative disorder associated with cholinergic neurons degeneration.
- The results revealed that Lp especially the CPP-Lp can enhance the permeability across the BBB by murine brain microvascular endothelial cells model in vitro.
- IN administration of rivastigmine solution and rivastigmine liposomes demonstrated the capacity to improve rivastigmine distribution and adequate retention in CNS regions especially in hippocampus and cortex, which were the regions most affected by AD, than that of IV administration.
- The data suggest that rivastigmine liposomes especially CPP-Lp improve the brain delivery and enhance pharmacodynamics which respect to BBB penetration and nasal olfactory pathway into brain after IN administration, and simultaneously decrease the hepatic first pass metabolism and gastrointestinal adverse effects.
New to this subject? Start with our plain-English guide: Treatments →
Study details
- Evidence strengthLow
How this study scored 36/100
Published in a peer-reviewed journal. Scored zero for study design, sample size, effect reported, studied in people and randomized / blinded because the record does not state it. We have no data on journal's citation record, times cited, citations per year, impact for its field and year, cited by studies here, still being cited, senior author's track record, institution's track record and multicenter collaboration, so those were left out: it earned 21 of the 58 points we could judge it on, which is 36 out of 100.
| Component | Points | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Journal tier | 7 / 10 | Tier 3 — peer-reviewed journal (International journal of pharmaceutics) |
| Journal's citation record | — / 4 | No journal record from OpenAlex — left out of this score |
| Study design | 0 / 12 | No study design recorded — scores zero, not guessed (not stated in the record — scored 0) |
| Strength of evidence | 1 / 5 | Rated “low” in our summary |
| Peer-review validation | 10 / 10 | Peer-reviewed. Published as an article in a named peer-reviewed journal. |
| How recent | 1 / 5 | 2013 — within 20 year(s) of the newest study here |
| Sample size | 0 / 4 | Participant count not stated — scores zero (not stated in the record — scored 0) |
| Effect reported | 0 / 3 | No effect size reported — scores zero (not stated in the record — scored 0) |
| Studied in people | 0 / 3 | Not stated whether this was studied in people — scores zero (not stated in the record — scored 0) |
| Randomized / blinded | 0 / 2 | No randomization or blinding stated — scores zero (not stated in the record — scored 0) |
| Times cited | — / 7 | No citation count (not found in OpenAlex) — left out of this score |
| Citations per year | — / 5 | No citation count or no year — left out of this score |
| Impact for its field and year | — / 6 | No field-weighted citation impact (OpenAlex has none yet) — left out of this score |
| Cited by studies here | — / 6 | Not yet checked against this library's citation graph — left out of this score |
| Still being cited | — / 4 | No yearly citation counts — left out of this score |
| Senior author's track record | — / 4 | Senior author's record not available — left out of this score |
| Institution's track record | — / 3 | No institution listed in OpenAlex — left out of this score |
| Multicenter collaboration | — / 3 | Institutions not listed — left out of this score |
| Indexed in PubMed | 2 / 2 | Indexed in PubMed (PMID 23680731) |
| Free to read | 0 / 2 | Behind a paywall — scores zero |
| Points | 21 / 58 | Scored on 11 of 20 parts. We have no data for the rest, so they are left out: 21 of the 58 points we could judge it on is 36 out of 100. |
| Total | 36 / 100 | — |
What each of these 20 components measures, and what this score is not →
Read the original
Free copy unknown: no free-copy check has an answer for this record yet. That does not mean it is paywalled.
Related
Studies in the library that share something with this one. The line above each title says what.
Related studies in Treatments
Also tagged “administration”
2 studies in the library carry the topic tag “administration”; these are this study's neighbours in a fixed, alphabetical-by-hash tour of them, not the closest in content. All 2 tagged studies.