ISSN: 2320-5407 Int. J. Adv. Res.

6(5), 891-900

Journal Homepage: -www.journalijar.com

Article DOI:10.21474/IJAR01/7109
DOI URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.21474/IJAR01/7109

RESEARCH ARTICLE

TRANSDERMAL DRUG DELIVERY SYSTEMS: A MINI REVIEW.

Rakesh Patel1, Ankita Patel1, Bijal Prajapati1, Gajanan Shinde2 and Abhay Dharamsi1.
1. Faculty of Pharmacy, Parul Institute of Pharmacy, Parul University, Vadodara -391760, Gujarat, India.
2. Mil Laboratories Pvt. Ltd., Manjusar GIDC, Plot no – 541-542 Taluka- Savali, Vadodara Gujarat.
……………………………………………………………………………………………………....
Manuscript Info Abstract
……………………. ………………………………………………………………
Manuscript History Skin has traditionally been used by various means to apply the
medicaments for various purposes. Recent years have witnessed
Received: 15 March 2018 transdermal as a main route of delivery for various drugs which are
Final Accepted: 17 April 2018 difficult to deliver otherwise. Transdermal drug delivery offers several
Published: May 2018
advantages mainly avoidance of first pass metabolism and gastric
Keywords:- environment which would inactivate the drug. This review
Transdermal, drug delivery, skin, encompasses the basic anatomy of skin relevant to the transdermal
stratum corneum. route as a drug delivery and discuss in detail the various formulation
strategies and permeation enhancement for better therapeutic effect.
Finally, the review sumps up with the current technologies in the
market and also discuss the future direction.

Copy Right, IJAR, 2018,. All rights reserved.

……………………………………………………………………………………………………....
Introduction:-
Although drug delivery technology has made significant advances, oral route is still preferred even though it is not
as effective as it should be for several drugs. These drugs are mainly those which has low solubility and high first
pass metabolism(O‟Driscoll and Griffin 2008; M. Shah 2017; Hu, Tang, and Cui 2004). To improve the drug
delivery of these difficult molecules, several formulation strategies have been tried such as polymeric
nanoparticles(Gaumet et al. 2008; Soppimath et al. 2001), solid lipid nanoparticles (M. K. Shah, Madan, and Lin
2014; Sanjula et al. 2009), liposomes (S. Moghimi and Szebeni 2003), dendrimers (Puri et al. 2009), nanocrystals
(Muller and Keck 2004), solid dispersion (Khatri et al. 2018), self-micro emulsifying systems (Porter, Trevaskis,
and Charman 2007). Another approach could be to change the route for the drug delivery which is through skin(Jain
et al. 2017). Transdermal drug delivery has many advantages to offer over oral routes such as avoidance of first pass
metabolism, avoidance of harsh gastric environment, patient compliance, easy to withdraw in case of unexpected
situation, controlled and programmable delivery, easy to use and patient compliance for unconscious, vomiting and
pediatric patients as well (Morales et al. 2017; Vora, Lin, and Madan 2013). This mini review covers the important
characteristics of skin pertaining to the transdermal delivery of drugs and absorption pathways through skin. Most
importantly, will enlighten the readers on the various methods of skin permeation enhancement available and focus
more in details for transdermal drug delivery formulation strategies.

Human Skin:-
Anatomy and function:-
Skin is the largest organ of the human body, covering a surface area of 2 m2 and receiving one-third of the total
blood supply. It has important protective and homeostatic roles, and consists of epidermis, dermis and hypodermis
which anchor the skin to underlying tissues. Each layer of the skin is physically and functionally distinct with

891
Corresponding Author:-Rakesh Patel.
Address:-Faculty of Pharmacy, Parul Institute of Pharmacy, Parul University, Vadodara -391760,
Gujarat, India.
ISSN: 2320-5407 Int. J. Adv. Res. 6(5), 891-900

appendages, including hair follicles, sweat ducts, and sebaceous glands, which account for 0.1% of the total human
skin surface (Wang et al. 2005; Mills and Cross 2006).

Figure 1:-Anatomy of the human skin. Adatped from (Brown et al. 2006)

The stratum corneum is the heterogenous outermost layer of the epidermis and is approximately 10-20µm thick.
This non-viable epidermis is surrounded by intercellular lipids consisting of cholesterol, ceramides, and free fatty
acids. It consists of 15-25 flattened, stacked, hexagonal and cornified cells and each cell is about 0.2-0.4 µm thick,
40µ wide, and undergoes a total turnover every 2-3 weeks. During desquamation, as the keratinocytes migrate
towards the stratum corneum, phospholipids are replaced with sphingolipids which constitute the majority of the
long chain, saturated fatty acids that create the lipophilic barrier. The dermis is vascularized and the thickest of all
the skin layers, about 3-4 mm thick. It possess the sweat glands, hair follicles, nerve endings, and lymph vessels. It
acts as the systemic absorption site for drugs and provides the nutritive, immune, and other support systems to the
epidermis as well as regulates temperature, pressure, and pain sensation. The hypodermis or subcutis acts as a heat
insulator, shock absorber, and energy storage region (Wang et al. 2005; Mills and Cross 2006). The detailed cross-
section of the skin is shown in Figure 1.

Mechanical and barrier properties of stratum corneum:-

Normal skin is very permeable to most substances. The very thin (1-10% of the total), outermost skin part
contributes over 80% to this transport resistance. The chief factor in this is the so-called horny region. This
outermost stratum corneum layer is quite dry and is best suited for the purposes of a permeability barrier: it consists
of one to two dozen flat and partly overlapping, largely dead cells (corneocytes) organized in columns or columnar
clusters and coupled together with numerous desmosomes. Lipid material between corneocytes not only is ample but

892
ISSN: 2320-5407 Int. J. Adv. Res. 6(5), 891-900

also is highly organized and thus acts as extra intercellular „glue‟ sealing the spaces between the cells in the skin
(Gregor Cevc 1997).

It is, furthermore, important in this context that intercellular lipids in the horny layer mainly encompass the
relatively non-polar substances, such as free fatty acids, cholesterol and cholesteryl esters, in addition to more than a
dozen ceramides. Owing to the fairly long aliphatic chains of the latter, and due to the low overall lipid polarit y in
the skin, the inter-corneocyte lipids are tightly packed and at least locally appear as the lipid multi-lamellae. The
latter, moreover, in many places adhere strongly to the corneocyte (envelope) membranes. All this contributes to the
tightness and impermeability of the intact skin: it is hence very difficult to bring molecules with a high molecular
mass. Generally, material transport across the skin increases only if the stratum corneum has been eliminated from
the skin or after lipid extraction from the horny layer (G Cevc and Blume 1992).

Figure 2:-Schematic representation of stratum corneum and its intercellular and transcellular pathways of drug
permeation. Adapted from (H. Moghimi et al., n.d.).

Routes of skin penetration:-

Transport pathways: Drug molecules can cross cellular barriers either by moving across the cells (transcellular
transport) or by passing between the cells (paracellular transport). The main physical barrier of the transcellular
pathway is the lipid matrix of the membranes whereas that of the paracellular pathway is the intercellular tight
junctions (Mills and Cross 2006). The two pathways are described in the following sections and schematically
represented in Figure 2.

Transcellular transport (intracellular):-

Most common drugs traverse cellular barriers by transcellular pathways. These pathways require movement of
solutes across and through cells and include passive diffusion, and carrier mediated and vesicular transport
mechanisms (M. K. Shah, Madan, and Lin 2015). For passive diffusion there are two main potential mechanisms i.e.
either the solute becomes distributed into the apical cell membrane and diffuses within the membrane to the
basolateral side, or it diffuses across the apical cell membrane and enters the cytoplasm before exiting the cell across

893
ISSN: 2320-5407 Int. J. Adv. Res. 6(5), 891-900

the basolateral membrane. It has long been assumed that synthetic drugs pass cellular barriers by passive diffusion
only, which would favour lipophilic drugs. However, there is accumulating direct and indirect evidence that the
carrier-mediated membrane transport mechanism is not only a pathway for endogenous molecules (i.e. amino acids,
oligopeptides, monosaccharides, water soluble vitamins, etc.) but also a transport route that can be used by
xenobiotics. Integral membrane proteins present in the cell membrane serve as specific recognition sites for carrier-
mediated transport. This transcellular pathway might be energy-consuming or not. If not, the term “facilitated
diffusion” is generally used. Finally, large molecules can be transported by vesicular transport mechanisms, i.e.
transcytosis. This implies receptor-mediated or adsorptive endocytosis at the apical cell membrane, followed by
vesicle migration across the cell, and exocytosis at the basolateral membrane (Burton et al. 1993; Mills and Cross
2006).

Paracellular transport (intercellular):-

Paracellular transport, the tendency of a solute to follow the aqueous extracellular route, might be the primary
pathway by which hydrophilic compounds of relatively low molecular weight cross epithelial and some endothelial
barriers (Burton et al. 1993). Transport of larger hydrophilic molecules might be enhanced by modulation of
junctional pores or addition of so-called drug absorption promoters. Translocation of solutes via the paracellular
route takes place primarily by passive diffusion, namely by an energy-independent process characterized by solute
movement in response to a chemical potential gradient. Because of ionizable side-chains in tight junction proteins,
the junctional space has an electrostatic field with a negative net charge that might affect the paracellular flux of
solutes via ionic interactions.

Polarized efflux systems:-

In recent years it has been found that the barrier function of the intestinal epithelium and of the blood brain barrier
cannot be adequately described by a combination of metabolic and physical barriers alone. Another transport-
limiting factor, which has only recently been appreciated, is the active efflux system (Burton et al. 1993). Efflux
systems are present in cancer cells and represent the major barrier to the uptake of a wide variety of
chemotherapeutic agents.

There has been much debate over the past decades on the route of penetration but experimental evidence suggests
that, under normal circumstances, the predominant route is through the intercellular spaces. The diffusional
pathlength is therefore much longer than the simple thickness of the stratum corneum (~20 µm) and has been
estimated as long as 500µm. Importantly, the intercellular spaces contain structured lipids ad a diffusing molecule
has to cross a variety of lipophilic and hydrophilic domains before it reaches the junction between the stratum
corneum and the viable epidermis. The nature of the barriers is thus very heterogenous and it is perhaps surprising
that diffusion through it can be described by simple solutions to Fick‟s laws of diffusion (Ho et al. 1995).

Methods of skin permeation enhancement:-

Due to rate-limiting barrier imposed by the stratum corneum, only drug molecules with certain characteristics such
as (i) high potency (daily systemic dose should be ≤ 20 mg), (ii) molecular weight of less than 500 Daltons, (iii) log
P in the range of 1-3, (iv) melting point less than 200 °C, (v) number of hydrogen bonding groups ≤ 2, (vi) non-
irritating potential, and (vii) non-immunogenic properties are able to passively permeate through the skin (Finnin
and Morgan 1999).
Some of the common enhancement strategies that can be envisaged include
1. formulation effects – it has been observed that using a supersaturated solution which has chemical potentials
greater than that of a saturated solution improves absorption. Moreover, some solvents can remove lipids from
the stratum corneum.
2. removal of lipids - The barrier function is reduced when the lipids are modified in this way, although the effect
has been shown to be reversible. Some topical and transdsermal products contain high concentrations of
solvents such as ethanol that may be capable to altering the lipid content of the skin.
3. lipid fluidization sometimes, if a formulation excipient permeates into the stratum corneum, it may intercalate
into the structured lipids of the skin where it can disrupt the packaging. This effect leads them more fluid
thereby increasing the diffusion coefficient of the permeant.
4. disruption of the skin lipids – the molecular characteristic that typifies an enhancer which disrupts the skin
lipids is a polar head group with a ling alkyl chain. Compounds such as the non-ionic surfactants have such
properties.

894
ISSN: 2320-5407 Int. J. Adv. Res. 6(5), 891-900

5. solvent effect – some solvents or chemical compounds modify skin permeability by shifting the solubility
parameter of the skin in the direction of that of the permeant. The solubility of the permeant in the outer layers
will be increased and this, in turn, improves the flux. Propylene glycol, ethanol, transcutol®, and N-methyl
pyrollidone are found to act in this way (Hadgraft 1999; Mehta J 2017).

Several physical and chemical means of assisting trasdermal delivery have been explored so far(Bijal and Rakesh
2017). Some of the commonly used physical techniques include microneedles, needleless injectors, heat as a means
of increasing skin permeation, iontophoresis, electroporation, sonophoresis, use of liposomes in transdermal
applications and molecular absorption enhancement (Tanner and Marks 2008).
Several classes of the chemical enhancers (water, sulfoxides, azone, pyrrolidones, fatty acids, alcohols (along with
fatty alcohols and glycols), surfactants, essential oils (including terpened and terpenoids), urea, phospholipids and
certain solvents at high concentrations) have been identified as penetration enhancers (S Mansuri and B Vaghela
2014). However, their inclusion into topical or transdermal formulations is limited since the underlying mechanisms
of action of these agents are seldom clearly defined (Williams and Barry 2004).

Transdermal drug delivery (TDD):-

The usage of intact skin as a portal of entry for drugs into the systemic circulation attracted tremendous interest after
the introduction of the first transdermal patch containing scopolamine. Transdermal drug delivery is a viable
administration route for potent, low-molecular weight therapeutic agents which cannot withstand the hostile
environment of the gastrointestinal tract and/or are subject to considerate first-pass metabolism by the liver (Vora,
Lin, and Madan 2013).
The release of a drug from the formulation applied to the skin surface and its subsequent transport to the systemic
circulation involves several steps:
1. dissolution within and release from the formulation,
2. partitioning into the skin‟s outermost layer, the stratum corneum (SC),
3. diffusion through the SC, principally via a lipidic intercellular pathway, (i.e., the rate-limiting step for most
compounds),
4. partitioning from the SC into the aqueous viable epidermis,
5. diffusion through the viable epidermis and into the upper dermis, and
6. uptake into the local capillary network and eventually the systemic circulation.

Therefore, an ideal drug candidate would have sufficient lipophilicity to partition into the SC, but also sufficient
hydrophilicity to enable the second partitioning step into the viable epidermis and eventually the systemic
circulation. For most drugs, except those possessing extreme lipophilicty (log K .5), the rate-determining step for
drug transport is o/w port across the skin is transit across the SC. However, from a drug delivery standpoint, it is far
better that rate control resides within the delivery device in order to attain uniform input rates and reduce inter-
individual variability (Kalia and Guy 2001).
A transdermal drug delivery system (TDDS) is thus a formulation or device (for example, a transdermal patch) that
maintains the blood concentration of the drug within the therapeutic window ensuring that drug levels neither fall
below the minimum effective concentration nor exceed the minimum toxic dose (Kalia and Guy 2001).

Developmental strategies and formulation development:-

The development of transdermal systems requires judicious selection of polymeric material whose diffusive
characteristics will be such that a desirable permeation rate of a specific drug can be achieved. Therefore,
understanding of diffusion in polymers and the mechanism of drug transport through them are important in
controlled release analysis. The type of solute release is established by transport mechanism (Fickian or other). The
solute size and polymer structure control the solute diffusion coefficient, and therefore, the magnitude of solute
release.

In transdermal systems the release occurs by molecular diffusion that is related to molecular size and polarity of the
drug, its solubility in the polymer phase, and the structure of the polymer. Control of solute diffusion coefficient
may be achieved by controlling the degree of cross-linking, degree of branching degree of crystallinity, size of
crystallites of the macromolecular carrier, and by adding adjuvants, which may slow down diffusional process either
by hindering the diffusion or due to thermodynamic changes (Jain et al. 2017).

895
ISSN: 2320-5407 Int. J. Adv. Res. 6(5), 891-900

Design considerations of the transdermal therapeutics systems:-

To date there is no universal transdermal sytem design. Each system is formulated to meet specific
biopharmaceutical and functional criteria, which dictate that the materials of construction, configuration of drug
with the poor cosolvents, excipients, and enhancers are matched to optimize adhesive properties and drug delivery
requirements. The success of formulation development may depend upon the proper selection of the transdermal
technology or system design and its component. The main components of a transdermal patch are:
1. Liner- It protects the patch during storage. The liner is removed prior to use.
2. Drug - Drug solution in direct contact with release liner.
3. Adhesive - Serves to adhere the components of the patch together along with adhering the patch to the skin.
4. Membrane – It controls the release of the drug from the reservoir and multi-layer patches and hence one of the
most important component as well.
5. Backing – This component protects the patch from the outer environment.

896
ISSN: 2320-5407 Int. J. Adv. Res. 6(5), 891-900

Figure 3:-Cross-sectional view of various transdermal delivery system designs. (a) PSA matrix device; (b)
membrane-modulate TDS; (c) adhesive-controlled TDS; (d) micro-reservoir-type TDS; (e) matrix dispersion-
type TDS Adapted from (“TRANSDERMAL DRUG DELIVERY SYSTEM,” n.d.)

Pressure sensitive adhesive matrix type TDDS:-

The design is shown in Figure 3a.In this case, the drug reservoir itself is the adhesive. The rate of drug release is
defined by Higuchi equation which can be used for drug release from a matrix-device. The adhesive (also known as
pressure-sensitive adhesive (PSA) is physically and chemically compatible with the active ingredient as well as with

897
ISSN: 2320-5407 Int. J. Adv. Res. 6(5), 891-900

other excipients like enhancers and solublizers. The most typical PSAs are acrylic, rubber or silicone adhesive.
Efforts are made to obtain PSA which is non-irritant to the skin (Cilurzo, Gennari, and Minghetti 2012).

Adhesive diffusion-controlled TDDS:-

The adhesive layer can be used as a rate-controlling layer in reservoir device. Figure 3c shows a typical type of
adhesive diffusion-controlled system. The drug reservoir is prepared by directly dispersing the drug in an adhesive
polymer which is then spread by solvent casting or heating molding onto a flat sheet of drug-impermeable backing
to form a thin drug reservoir layer. In order to formulate an adhesive diffusion-controlled drug delivery system, a
layer of nonmedicated, rate-controlling adhesive polymer with constant thickness should be spread onto it (Guyot
and Fawaz 2000).

Membrane-modulated TDDS:-
The drug formulation is either totally or partially encapsulated in a drug reservoir compartment, which has a drug-
releasing surface covered by a rate-controlling polymeric membrane. The polymeric membrane can be fabricated
from a homogenous (or heterogenous) nonporous, microporous or semi-permeable polymeric membrane. Figure 3b
shows a cross-section of a typical device under this category. Drug molecules are released across the membrane
simply by diffusion through the pores among the polymers filled with solvent in a microporous membrane such as
Millipore filters or Celgard® porous polypropylene, and through polymer itself in solution-diffusion membrane like
one of silicone. The release rate from this type of TDDS can be tailored by modulating the partition coefficient and
diffusivity of the drug molecules and the rate-controlling membrane and its thickness (Enscore, Osborne, and Shaw
1989).

Matrix-dispersion type TDDS:-

This is the simplest and the least expensive way to control the release of a drug to disperse it through an inert
polymer matrix (shown in Figure 3e). In this group of TDDS, the drug reservoir is a homogenous dispersion of drug
particles in either a lipophilic or a hydrophilic polymer matrix. The release of drug molecules from this type of rate-
controlled TDDS may be controlled at a rate preprogrammed by controlling the loading level as well as the
solubility and/or the diffusivity of the drug in the polymer matrix (Higuchi 1961).

Microreservoir type TDDS:-

In this type if rate-controlled TDDS, the drug reservoir is a suspension of drug solid particles in an aqueous solution
of a water-miscible polymer, such as polyethylene glycols. This forms a homogenous dispersion of many discrete,
unleachable, microscopic drug reservoirs in a biocompatible polymer, such as silicone elastomers. The
microdispersion is acheieved by applying a high energy dispersion technique. Figure 3d shows the general design of
this kind of the system. However, the device can be further be modified with a layer of biocompatible polymer to
obtain the desired drug release rate.

Current transdermal technologies and future direction:-

The transdermal market is dominated by HRT patches, but patches are also used for delivery of testosterone,
nicotine, nitroglycerine, and analgesics (Marwah et al. 2016). „3M markets Minitran, which is the smallest daily
nitroglycerin patch in the world while Noven‟s Vevelle-Dot is the world‟s smallest estradiol transdermal system
(ERT) patch.‟ One of the pioneers in this field is Alza, which developed the first patch in the United States. Its
brands include Duragesic, Estraderm, Transderm-Nitro, Tansderm-Scop, and Catapress-TTS® (ALZA Corporation,
Mountain View, CA, USA). Several OTC products also has transdermal patches, including those used for delivery
of nicotine, analgesics and cold and sinus remedies and travel/motion sickness (Tanner and Marks 2008).

A comprehensive review on the marketed products for transdermal drug delivery systems are discussed elsewhere
(Marwah et al. 2016). Several other additions to the transdermal market have been; Synera, a local anaesthetic patch
containing lidocaine and tetracaine.; the once-a-day product EmSam containing selegiline, a monoamine oxidase
inhibitor, for the treatment of depression; IONSYS TM (Janssen Pharmaceutica NV, Beerse, Belgium), a fentanyl
iontophoretic transdermal system, this is the first needle-free, patient-activated analgesic system indicated for the
short-term management of acute post-operative pain in adult patients during hospitalization. The TDS utilizes a
process in which a low intensity electric field is applied. A dose of 40 µg fentanyl can be delivered in 10 min;
Daytrana, a once-a-day patch containing methyl-phenidate for treatment of ADHD in children aged 6-12 years.
Neupro (rotigotine transdermal system) for treatment of signs and symptoms of early-stage idiopathic Parkinson‟s

898
ISSN: 2320-5407 Int. J. Adv. Res. 6(5), 891-900

disease (Tanner and Marks 2008). Interestingly, novel formulation strategies such as nanoformulations delivered
through a transdermal patch would be an interesting to explore further.

References:-
1. Brown, Marc B., Gary P. Martin, Stuart A. Jones, and Franklin K. Akomeah. 2006. “Dermal and Transdermal
Drug Delivery Systems: Current and Future Prospects.” Drug Delivery 13 (3). Taylor & Francis: 175–87.
doi:10.1080/10717540500455975.
2. Burton, P.S., R.A. Conradi, A.R. Hilgers, and N.F.H. Ho. 1993. “Evidence for a Polarized Efflux System for
Peptides in the Apical Membrane of Caco-2 Cells.” Biochemical and Biophysical Research Communications
190 (3): 760–66. doi:10.1006/bbrc.1993.1114.
3. Cevc, G, and G Blume. 1992. “Lipid Vesicles Penetrate into Intact Skin Owing to the Transdermal Osmotic
Gradients and Hydration Force.” Biochimica et Biophysica Acta 1104 (1): 226–32.
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/1550849.
4. Cevc, Gregor. 1997. “Drug Delivery across the Skin.” Expert Opinion on Investigational Drugs 6 (12): 1887–
1937. doi:10.1517/13543784.6.12.1887.
5. Cilurzo, Francesco, Chiara G M Gennari, and Paola Minghetti. 2012. “Adhesive Properties: A Critical Issue in
Transdermal Patch Development.” Expert Opinion on Drug Delivery 9 (1). Taylor & Francis: 33–45.
doi:10.1517/17425247.2012.637107.
6. Enscore, D J, J L Osborne, and J E Shaw. 1989. “In Vitro/in Vivo Functionality of Catapres-TTS.” Methods and
Findings in Experimental and Clinical Pharmacology 11 (3): 173–78.
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/2657275.
7. Finnin, B C, and T M Morgan. 1999. “Transdermal Penetration Enhancers: Applications, Limitations, and
Potential.” Journal of Pharmaceutical Sciences 88 (10): 955–58.
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/10514338.
8. Gaumet, Marie, Angelica Vargas, Robert Gurny, and Florence Delie. 2008. “Nanoparticles for Drug Delivery:
The Need for Precision in Reporting Particle Size Parameters.” European Journal of Pharmaceutics and
Biopharmaceutics 69 (1): 1–9. doi:10.1016/j.ejpb.2007.08.001.
9. Guyot, M, and F Fawaz. 2000. “Design and in Vitro Evaluation of Adhesive Matrix for Transdermal Delivery
of Propranolol.” International Journal of Pharmaceutics 204 (1–2): 171–82.
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/11012001.
10. Hadgraft, J. 1999. “Passive Enhancement Strategies in Topical and Transdermal Drug Delivery.” International
Journal of Pharmaceutics 184 (1): 1–6. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/10425346.
11. Higuchi, Takeru. 1961. “Rate of Release of Medicaments from Ointment Bases Containing Drugs in
Suspension.” Journal of Pharmaceutical Sciences 50 (10). Wiley-Blackwell: 874–75.
doi:10.1002/jps.2600501018.
12. Ho, N F, P S Burton, R A Conradi, and C L Barsuhn. 1995. “A Biophysical Model of Passive and Polarized
Active Transport Processes in Caco-2 Cells: Approaches to Uncoupling Apical and Basolateral Membrane
Events in the Intact Cell.” Journal of Pharmaceutical Sciences 84 (1): 21–27.
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/7714738.
13. Hu, LianDong, Xing Tang, and FuDe Cui. 2004. “Solid Lipid Nanoparticles (SLNs) to Improve Oral
Bioavailability of Poorly Soluble Drugs.” The Journal of Pharmacy and Pharmacology 56 (12): 1527–35.
14. Jain, Shashank, Niketkumar Patel, Mansi K. Shah, Pinak Khatri, and Namrata Vora. 2017. “Recent Advances in
Lipid-Based Vesicles and Particulate Carriers for Topical and Transdermal Application.” Journal of
Pharmaceutical Sciences 106 (2). Elsevier: 423–45. doi:10.1016/j.xphs.2016.10.001.
15. Kalia, Y N, and R H Guy. 2001. “Modeling Transdermal Drug Release.” Advanced Drug Delivery Reviews 48
(2–3): 159–72. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/11369080.
16. Khatri, Pinak, Mansi K. Shah, Niketkumar Patel, Shashank Jain, Namrata Vora, and Senshang Lin. 2018.
“Preparation and Characterization of Pyrimethamine Solid Dispersions and an Evaluation of the Physical
Nature of Pyrimethamine in Solid Dispersions.” Journal of Drug Delivery Science and Technology 45 (June).
Elsevier: 110–23. doi:10.1016/J.JDDST.2018.03.012.
17. Marwah, Harneet, Tarun Garg, Amit K. Goyal, and Goutam Rath. 2016. “Permeation Enhancer Strategies in
Transdermal Drug Delivery.” Drug Delivery 23 (2). Taylor & Francis: 564–78.
doi:10.3109/10717544.2014.935532.
18. Mehta J, Patel M and Stagni G. 2017. “In-Vitro and in-Vivo Evaluation of Glycerin as a Solvent for the
Iontophoretic Delivery of Diphenhydramine Hydrochloride.” Int J Pharm Sci Res 8 (3): 1028–37.
doi:10.13040/IJPSR.0975-8232.8(3).1028-37.

899
 ISSN: 2320-5407 Int. J. Adv. Res. 6(5), 891-900

19. Mills, P.C., and S.E. Cross. 2006. “Transdermal Drug Delivery: Basic Principles for the Veterinarian.” The
Veterinary Journal 172 (2): 218–33. doi:10.1016/j.tvjl.2005.09.006.
20. Moghimi, HR, BW Barry, AC Williams - Drugs and the pharmaceutical, and undefined 1999. n.d. “Stratum
Corneum and Barrier Performance: A Model Lamellar Structural Approach.” Dekker.
https://scholar.google.com/scholar?hl=en&as_sdt=0,44&cluster=3977868915854855655.
21. Moghimi, SM, and J Szebeni. 2003. “Stealth Liposomes and Long Circulating Nanoparticles: Critical Issues in
Pharmacokinetics, Opsonization and Protein-Binding Properties.” Progress in Lipid Research.
http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S016378270300033X.
22. Morales, Javier O., Kristin R. Fathe, Ashlee Brunaugh, Silvia Ferrati, Song Li, Miguel Montenegro-Nicolini,
Zeynab Mousavikhamene, Jason T. McConville, Mark R. Prausnitz, and Hugh D. C. Smyth. 2017. “Challenges
and Future Prospects for the Delivery of Biologics: Oral Mucosal, Pulmonary, and Transdermal Routes.” The
AAPS Journal 19 (3). Springer US: 652–68. doi:10.1208/s12248-017-0054-z.
23. Muller, Rainer H., and Cornelia M. Keck. 2004. “Challenges and Solutions for the Delivery of Biotech Drugs –
a Review of Drug Nanocrystal Technology and Lipid Nanoparticles.” Journal of Biotechnology 113 (1): 151–
70.
24. O‟Driscoll, C M, and B T Griffin. 2008. “Biopharmaceutical Challenges Associated with Drugs with Low
Aqueous Solubility--the Potential Impact of Lipid-Based Formulations.” Advanced Drug Delivery Reviews 60
(6): 617–24. doi:10.1016/j.addr.2007.10.012.
25. Porter, Christopher J H, Natalie L Trevaskis, and William N Charman. 2007. “Lipids and Lipid-Based
Formulations: Optimizing the Oral Delivery of Lipophilic Drugs.” Nature Reviews. Drug Discovery 6 (3): 231–
48.
26. Puri, Anu, Kristin Loomis, Brandon Smith, Jae-Ho Lee, Amichai Yavlovich, Eliahu Heldman, and Robert
Blumenthal. 2009. “Lipid-Based Nanoparticles as Pharmaceutical Drug Carriers: From Concepts to Clinic.”
Critical Reviews in Therapeutic Drug Carrier Systems 26 (6). NIH Public Access: 523–80.
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/20402623.
27. Rakesh Patel, Bijal Prajapati, and Dr. Abhay Dharamsi “Intranasal Drug Delivery System “An Overview.”
European Journal of Pharmaceutical and Medical Research, 2017,4(07), 277-283
28. S Mansuri, B Vaghela, R Patel and R KS. "Formulation and Evaluation of Sublingual Film Containing Nanoparticles
of Prochlorperazine Maleate.” Inventi Impact: NDDS vol 2014(3),1-10.
29. Sanjula, Baboota, Faisal Md Shah, Ali Javed, and Ahuja Alka. 2009. “Effect of Poloxamer 188 on Lymphatic Uptake
of Carvedilol-Loaded Solid Lipid Nanoparticles for Bioavailability Enhancement.” Journal of Drug Targeting 17 (3).
Taylor & Francis: 249–56. http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/10611860902718672.
30. Shah, Mansi K., Parshotam Madan, and Senshang Lin. 2014. “Preparation, in Vitro Evaluation and Statistical
Optimization of Carvedilol-Loaded Solid Lipid Nanoparticles for Lymphatic Absorption via Oral Administration.”
Pharmaceutical Development and Technology 19 (4): 475–85. doi:10.3109/10837450.2013.795169.
31. Shah, Mansi K., Parshotam Madan, and Senshang Lin. 2015. “Elucidation of Intestinal Absorption Mechanism of
Carvedilol-Loaded Solid Lipid Nanoparticles Using Caco-2 Cell Line as an in-Vitro Model.” Pharmaceutical
Development and Technology 20 (7): 877–85. doi:10.3109/10837450.2014.938857.
32. Shah, MK. 2017. “Solid Lipid Nanoparticles (SLN) for Oral Drug Delivery: An Overview.” J Nanomed Nanosci.
http://gavinpublishers.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/06/JNAN-109.pdf.
33. Soppimath, Kumaresh S. KS, Tejraj M. TM M Aminabhavi, AR R Anandrao R. Kulkarni, and Walter E. Rudzinski.
2001. Biodegradable Polymeric Nanoparticles as Drug Delivery Devices. Journal of Controlled Release. Vol. 70.
doi:10.1016/S0168-3659(00)00339-4.
34. Tanner, T., and R. Marks. 2008. “Delivering Drugs by the Transdermal Route: Review and Comment.” Skin Research
and Technology 14 (3): 249–60. doi:10.1111/j.1600-0846.2008.00316.x.
35. “TRANSDERMAL DRUG DELIVERY SYSTEM.” n.d. https://www.slideshare.net/GajananSanap/transdermal-
drug-delivery-system-58779074.
36. Vora, Namrata, S. Lin, and P.L. Madan. 2013. “Development and in-Vitro Evaluation of an Optimized Carvedilol
Transdermal Therapeutic System Using Experimental Design Approach.” Asian Journal of Pharmaceutical Sciences
8 (1). Elsevier: 28–38. doi:10.1016/J.AJPS.2013.07.004.
37. Wang, Yiping, Rashmi Thakur, Qiuxi Fan, and Bozena Michniak. 2005. “Transdermal Iontophoresis: Combination
Strategies to Improve Transdermal Iontophoretic Drug Delivery.” European Journal of Pharmaceutics and
Biopharmaceutics 60 (2): 179–91. doi:10.1016/j.ejpb.2004.12.008.
38. Williams, Adrian C, and Brian W Barry. 2004. “Penetration Enhancers.” Advanced Drug Delivery Reviews 56 (5):
603–18. doi:10.1016/j.addr.2003.10.025.

900

View publication stats