Elsevier

Journal of Controlled Release

Volume 239, 10 October 2016, Pages 118-127
Journal of Controlled Release

Review article
Inherent formulation issues of kinase inhibitors

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jconrel.2016.08.036Get rights and content

Abstract

The small molecular Kinase Inhibitor (smKI) drug class is very promising and rapidly expanding. All of these drugs are administered orally. The clear relationship between structure and function has led to drugs with a general low intrinsic solubility. The majority of the commercial pharmaceutical formulations of the smKIs are physical mixtures that are limited by the low drug solubility of a salt form. This class of drugs is therefore characterized by an impaired and variable bioavailability rendering them costly and their therapies suboptimal. New formulations are sparingly being reported in literature and patents. The presented data suggests that continued research into formulation design can help to develop more efficient and cost-effective smKI formulation. Moreover, it may also be of help in the future design of the formulations of new smKIs.

Introduction

Small molecular Kinase Inhibitors (smKIs) form a promising and rapidly expanding class of drugs [1], [2]. The drugs target specific parts of Kinase receptor proteins that play an important part in the intracellular growth signaling pathways in tumor and immune cells [3], [4], [5]. After the first drug approval by the United States Food and Drug Administration (FDA) of Imatinib in 2001 [6], [7], the number of drugs approved by both the FDA and European Medicines Agency (EMA) are now nearing 30, listed in Table 1. Many more smKIs are being investigated in clinical trials and are expected to be approved in the coming years. A range of small molecular inhibitors have proven to be useful in the therapy of certain types of cancer. Additionally, smKIs may be prescribed as alternatives when other therapeutic options have failed or are deemed inappropriate [8]. A few compounds are (also) applied in the therapy of immunomodulated diseases [9], [10], [11], [12] and may even have a future in the therapy of diseases such as diabetes mellitus [13].

All of the smKIs are without exception administered orally. This has great advantages in terms of patient convenience and cost reduction [14], [15], [16]. It presents however serious difficulties for compounds with a low solubility and/or permeability. These drugs are hindered by a reduced and variable bioavailability. This may cause drug plasma concentrations to be ineffectively low or toxically high with all due consequences [17]. Understanding and controlling the parameters of solubility and permeability can therefore have a profound influence on patient plasma drug levels.

The smKIs have been designed using high-throughput screening and combinatorial chemistry from which the intricate structures and inherent solubility issues originate [18]. These means are used in the drug discovery of other drug classes as well, e.g. drugs acting on the central nervous system that also experience a problematic solubility [19].

Drug solubility and the dissolution process are affected by a plethora of factors with clinical implications. A number of these factors are inherent to the smKI structure and function. It follows that, as drug dissolution is most often the primary determinant for the smKI bioavailability, there is an apparent link between the high specificity of the smKIs and their impaired absorption into the systemic circulation.

This article will first present the overall problematic biopharmaceutical properties of the smKI drug group. Secondly, it will discuss the characteristic structural elements that are responsible for the solubility behavior of the smKIs. It will continue by reviewing the current commercial formulations along with alternative investigational formulations. This article aims to underline that although high specificity can, in many cases, place a challenging strain on drug solubility and bioavailability, different and innovative formulation techniques may present possible solutions to some of these issues. Literature offers several reviews that address (pre)formulation challenges for poorly soluble drugs in general [20], [21], [22]. This article focuses on smKIs in particular. To the authors' knowledge, this review is the first to combine literature and patent research on the solubility and formulation of smKI compounds from a pharmaceutical perspective.

Section snippets

Bioavailability

In the process of reaching the therapeutic target, the first step after oral administration and the disintegration of the dosage form is always the dissolution of the drug substance [75]. The second step, absorption, only takes place with the dissolved portion of the drug. Thus, poor drug solubility can be one of the main causes for a low and variable uptake of a drug into the systemic circulation, i.e. a low and variable bioavailability. This is generally true for the smKIs, as listed in Table

Essential structures

In the past few decades the role of signal proteins in the homeostasis of tumors became more and more apparent [80], [81]. The advancement of the diverse techniques and possibilities of molecular modelling have led to a therapeutic target-based drug discovery regime [82], [83]. With it, structure-activity relations for inhibitory molecules for these proteins were assessed. Key in these relations is the binding of the lead drug molecule to the receptor and the inhibitory action thereon [84]. The

Formulations

Partly as a consequence of the before-mentioned factors, the solubility of a drug salt polymorph can be described thermodynamically. The following combined equation illustrates this [137]:logX=Hf2.303RTT0TT0T+2.303RTδ1δ22X, dissolved molar fraction; ΔHf, latent heat of fusion (heat absorbed during melting); R, gas constant; T, temperature; T0, melting point of solute; V, molar volume of liquid solute; Φ, volume fraction of the solvent; δ, solubility parameter (expression of cohesion

New formulations in literature and patents

Patents and exclusivities are still covering all of the smKIs, except for Imatinib [184], [185]. While registered and approved alternative formulations are a long way off, there is a limited body of research published and patented at the time of writing. This section will briefly discuss the most frequently reported and patented oral formulation types.

Discussion

The currently approved smKIs have important places in clinical practice for registered indications. A large fraction of these compounds is under investigation for additional indications. The new and upcoming smKIs target many of the same kinases and are designed in a similar fashion as the already marketed ones. Their general physicochemical properties might not differ significantly from those of the older smKIs. A low and variable bioavailability is an enormous problem and may also lead to

Conclusions

Due to the very distinct targeting of the smKIs, biocompatible physicochemistry is driven to the edge. This places a strain upon bioavailability and presents challenges to formulation scientists.

‘Classical’ physical mixtures may work to achieve a relatively high bioavailability for some compounds, namely Imatinib, Ruxolitinib and Dabrafenib. This is certainly not the case for the majority of smKIs however. Bearing patents and exclusivities in mind, the past experiences can lead to new and

References (205)

  • M. Herbrink et al.

    Variability in bioavailability of small molecular tyrosine kinase inhibitors

    Cancer Treat. Rev.

    (2015)
  • M. Estudante et al.

    Intestinal drug transporters: an overview

    Adv. Drug Deliv. Rev.

    (2013)
  • I. Pereira de Sousa et al.

    Pre-systemic metabolism of orally administered drugs and strategies to overcome it

    J. Control. Release

    (2014)
  • C.J. Tynan et al.

    A tale of the epidermal growth factor receptor: the quest for structural resolution on cells

    Methods

    (2016)
  • R. Roskoski

    Classification of small molecule protein kinase inhibitors based upon the structures of their drug-enzyme complexes

    Pharmacol. Res.

    (2016)
  • L. Hu et al.

    Design, synthesis, and biological activity of phenyl-pyrazole derivatives as BCR–ABL kinase inhibitors

    Bioorg. Med. Chem.

    (2015)
  • R. Roskoski

    ErbB/HER protein-tyrosine kinases: structures and small molecule inhibitors

    Pharmacol. Res.

    (2014)
  • Y. Yosaatmadja et al.

    Binding mode of the breakthrough inhibitor AZD9291 to epidermal growth factor receptor revealed

    J. Struct. Biol.

    (2015)
  • W.M. Eldehna et al.

    Indoline ureas as potential anti-hepatocellular carcinoma agents targeting VEGFR-2: synthesis, in vitro biological evaluation and molecular docking

    Eur. J. Med. Chem.

    (2015)
  • Y. Shan et al.

    Expanding the structural diversity of diarylureas as multi-target tyrosine kinase inhibitors

    Bioorg. Med. Chem.

    (2016)
  • M. Hojjat-Farsangi

    Targeting non-receptor tyrosine kinases using small molecule inhibitors: an overview of recent advances

    J. Drug Target.

    (2016)
  • A.K.A. Gaumann et al.

    Receptor tyrosine kinase inhibitors: are they real tumor killers?

    Int. J. Cancer

    (2016)
  • R.R. Kudchadkar et al.

    Targeted therapy in melanoma

    Clin. Dermatol.

    (2012)
  • S.W. Tas et al.

    Targeting of proangiogenic signalling pathways in chronic inflammation

    Nat. Rev. Rheumatol.

    (2015)
  • US Food and Drug administration (FDA)

    CDER 2001 Report to the Nation

    (2001)
  • US Food and Drug administration (FDA)

    FDA Prescribing Information Gleevec

    (2001)
  • European Medicines Agency (EMA)

    Assessment Report Jakavi (EPAR)

    (2012)
  • US Food and Drug administration (FDA)

    Clinical Pharmacology and Biopharmaceutics Review Jakafi

    (2011)
  • US Food and Drug administration (FDA)

    Clinical Pharmacology and Biopharmaceutics Review Xeljanz

    (2012)
  • European Medicines Agency (EMA)

    Assessment report Xeljanz (EPAR)

    (2013)
  • G. Liu et al.

    Patient preferences for oral versus intravenous palliative chemotherapy

    J. Clin. Oncol.

    (1997)
  • N. Eckstein et al.

    Clinical pharmacology of tyrosine kinase inhibitors becoming generic drugs: the regulatory perspective

    J. Exp. Clin. Cancer Res.

    (2014)
  • K. Nikolic et al.

    Drug design for CNS diseases: polypharmacological profiling of compounds using cheminformatic, 3D-QSAR and virtual screening methodologies

    Front. Neurosci.

    (2016)
  • European Medicines Agency (EMA)

    Assessment Report Glivec (EPAR)

    (2004)
  • US Food and Drug administration (FDA)

    Clinical Pharmacology and Biopharmaceutics Review Gleevec

    (2001)
  • US Food and Drug administration (FDA)

    Clinical Pharmacology and Biopharmaceutics Review Stivarga

    (2012)
  • European Medicines Agency (EMA)

    Assessment Report Stivarga (EPAR)

    (2014)
  • European Medicines Agency (EMA)

    Assessment Report Iressa (EPAR)

    (2009)
  • US Food and Drug administration (FDA)

    Clinical Pharmacology and Biopharmaceutics Review Iressa

    (2003)
  • European Medicines Agency (EMA)

    Assessment Report Tarceva (EPAR)

    (2005)
  • US Food and Drug administration (FDA)

    Clinical Pharmacology and Biopharmaceutics Review Tarceva

    (2004)
  • European Medicines Agency (EMA)

    Assessment Report Bosulif (EPAR)

    (2014)
  • US Food and Drug administration (FDA)

    Clinical Pharmacology and Biopharmaceutics Review Bosulif

    (2012)
  • European Medicines Agency (EMA)

    Assessment Report Nexavar (EPAR)

    (2006)
  • US Food and Drug administration (FDA)

    Clinical Pharmacology and Biopharmaceutics Review Nexavar

    (2005)
  • European Medicines Agency (EMA)

    Assessment Report Inlyta (EPAR)

    (2012)
  • US Food and Drug administration (FDA)

    Clinical Pharmacology and Biopharmaceutics Review Inlyta

    (2012)
  • European Medicines Agency (EMA)

    Assessment Report Sprycel (EPAR)

    (2006)
  • US Food and Drug administration (FDA)

    Clinical Pharmacology and Biopharmaceutics Review Sprycel

    (2006)
  • European Medicines Agency (EMA)

    Assessment Report Imbruvica (EPAR)

    (2014)
  • Cited by (20)

    • Trends in small molecule drug properties: A developability molecule assessment perspective

      2022, Drug Discovery Today
      Citation Excerpt :

      This was evaluated in a recent review by Herbrink et al., which highlighted the formulation challenges for small molecule kinase inhibitors (smKIs) and showed that the vast majority of smKIs are BCS class 2/4 molecules, demonstrating variable bioavailability owing to poor solubility. The authors highlight that the current commercial formulations and corresponding salt forms of smKIs are inadequate and that specialized formulation techniques might be required.107 Molecules targeting GPCRs are largely base-containing compounds (56 %), higher than any other target class (Fig. 7i).

    • Solubility and stability of cediranib maleate

      2021, Journal of Drug Delivery Science and Technology
      Citation Excerpt :

      Most TKIs are relatively lipophilic and, once in solution, permeate lipophilic biomembranes (e.g. mucosa) with relative ease. With few exceptions TKIs belong to BCS Class II or IV where poor aqueous solubility hampers their oral bioavailability [5]. However, couple of TKIs have sufficient aqueous solubility to be classified as BCS Class I or Class III drugs, one of which is the maleate salt of cediranib.

    • Aqueous solubility of kinase inhibitors: II the effect of hexadimethrine bromide on the dovitinib/γ-cyclodextrin complexation

      2020, Journal of Drug Delivery Science and Technology
      Citation Excerpt :

      Dovitinib (D) is a tyrosine kinase inhibitor (KI) that has demonstrated antitumor activity in humans [1]. Like many other small molecule KIs, dovitinib is poorly soluble in water (solubility about 0.4 mg/ml) that can lead to limited and variable oral bioavailability [2]. There are only limited data available on the oral bioavailability of dovitinib in humans but the data available indicates that the drug is slowly absorbed from the gastrointestinal tract with maximum plasma concentration (tmax) at 4–7 h after administration and bioavailability of ≥75% [3–6].

    • Thermodynamic and population balance models for solvent-mediated phase transformation of lansoprazole

      2019, Chemical Engineering Science
      Citation Excerpt :

      The model compound, Lansoprazole (CAS registry NO: 103577-45-3, C16H14F3N3O2S, Fig. 1), 2 – [[[3-methyl-4- (2,2,2-trifluoroethoxy) -2-pyridinyl] methyl] -sulfinyl] -1H-benzimidazole, is a typical BCS Ⅱ class API (Barradell et al., 1992; Scott, 2003). It is almost insoluble in water, which seriously limits the efficacy of active pharmaceutical ingredients (Wang et al., 2017; Herbrik et al., 2016). Therefore, two solvate forms (monohydrate and ethanol solvate) which have better solubility in water than other forms were obtained and investigated in this work.

    • Unlocking the full potential of lipid-based formulations using lipophilic salt/ionic liquid forms

      2019, Advanced Drug Delivery Reviews
      Citation Excerpt :

      Generally, the requirements for rapid development for anti-cancer drugs dictates that drugs in non-enabling formulations with un-optimized pharmacokinetics and food-label restrictions are overrepresented [61], leading to evidence of non-compliance and increases in safety issues [65,66]. While others have questioned the (lack of) effort by pharmaceutical companies to address these issues during development [60,67,68], it is important to recognize that anti-cancer drugs are very commonly, if not always, fast tracked to the market, and that this can place a strain on formulators limiting the ability to deeply explore alternative formulation approaches. For these products, downstream LCM is often employed to address incidences of un-optimized pharmacokinetics (that may be addressed by a formulation approach) without delaying the initial approval and patient access to the newest medicines.

    View all citing articles on Scopus
    View full text