ABSTRACT
Eudragit® polymers are polymethacrylates highly used in pharmaceutics for the development of modified drug delivery systems. They are widely known due to their versatility with regards to chemical composition, solubility, and swelling properties. Moreover, Eudragit polymers are thermoplastic, and their use has been boosted in some production processes, such as hot melt extrusion (HME) and fused deposition modelling 3D printing, among other 3D printing techniques. Therefore, this review covers the studies using Eudragit polymers in the development of drug delivery systems produced by HME and 3D printing techniques over the last 10 years. Eudragit E has been the most used among them, mostly to formulate immediate release systems or as a taste-masker agent. On the other hand, Eudragit RS and Eudragit L100-55 have mainly been used to produce controlled and delayed release systems, respectively. The use of Eudragit polymers in these processes has frequently been devoted to producing solid dispersions and/or to prepare filaments to be 3D printed in different dosage forms. In this review, we highlight the countless possibilities offered by Eudragit polymers in HME and 3D printing, whether alone or in blends, discussing their prominence in the development of innovative modified drug release systems.
ABSTRACT
Fused deposition modelling (FDM) is the most explored three-dimensional (3D) printing technique in pharmaceutics. However, there is still a lack of knowledge about the factors influencing the properties of the printed forms. Here, the main and combined effects of the presence of a pore former (mannitol, 0% or 10%), the infill percentage (50% or 100%) and the drug percentage (5% or 10%) on the pharmaceutical properties of 3D-printed forms were evaluated by a design of experiments (DoE) approach. Poly(Æ-caprolactone) filaments were produced by hot-melt extrusion and dexamethasone was used as a hydrophobic model drug. The 23 factorial design afforded eight formulations printed at 105 °C. The drug content ranged from 9.87 to 25.59 mg/unit, depending on the drug and infill percentages. The drug release profiles followed the Higuchi model. The infill percentage modulated the drug release rate, whereas the pore former had a combined effect on this parameter, depending on the drug and infill percentage levels. According to the DoE data, besides the changes in the infill percentage, the addition of a pore former can also tailor the drug release rate from 3D-printed solid forms. These findings may assist the development of personalised tumour implants by 3D printing.
