A. Roda et al., IMPROVED INTESTINAL-ABSORPTION OF AN ENTERIC-COATED SODIUM URSODEOXYCHOLATE FORMULATION, Pharmaceutical research, 11(5), 1994, pp. 642-647
A new enteric-coated formulation of sodium ursodeoxycholate was prepar
ed and administered to man. The barrier film disintegrates and release
s the drug only at pH greater than or equal to 5.5. The sodium salt of
glycoursodeoxycholate was also prepared and encapsulated like ursodeo
xycholate. Serum levels of ursodeoxycholate and glycoursodeoxycholate
were measured by specific enzyme immunoassay after oral administration
of their sodium salts in an enteric-coated formulation at equimolar d
oses of 475 and 540 mg. The same subjects also received in separate ex
periments ursodeoxycholic acid, sodium ursodeoxycholate, and glycourso
deoxycholic acid in gelatin capsules. The mean area under the curve (m
u mol/L.hr) following administration of enteric-coated sodium ursodeox
ycholate (45 +/- 8) was significantly higher than that of either ursod
eoxycholic acid (26 +/- 5; P < 0.01) or sodium ursodeoxycholate (25 +/
- 6; P < 0.001) administered in a conventional gelatin capsule. No dif
ferences were found when glycoursodeoxycholic acid was administered as
an enteric-coated sodium salt or in acid form in gelatin capsules. Ur
sodeoxycholic was administered at a dose of 10 mu mol/min/kg over 1 hr
to bile fistula rats both intraduodenally (i.d.) and intravenously (i
.v.). The experiment included administration of the sodium salt in sol
ution and the acid as a suspension. A similar experiment was performed
with glycoursodeoxycholic acid. The ratio of the amount recovered fro
m bile in the i.d. to that in the i.v. experiment is almost 1 for the
sodium salt of ursodeoxycholate in solution, while it drops to 0.55 fo
r ursodeoxycholic acid. No differences were found between i.v. and i.d
. administration when glycoursodeoxycholic acid was administered in ac
id form and as a soluble sodium salt. The results in rats point out th
at the limiting factor for ursodeoxycholic acid intestinal absorption
is its poor solubility and the high pH (8.4) it requires for micellar
solubilization. On the other hand, glycoursodeoxycholic acid is well a
bsorbed either in acid form or as a sodium salt because of its higher
solubility at lower pH (6.4). The new enteric-coated sodium ursodeoxyc
holate formulation resulted in complete solubilization and increased a
bsorption.