TY - JOUR
T1 - Systemic Delivery of Peptides by the Oral Route:
T2 - Formulation and Medicinal Chemistry Approaches
AU - Brayden, David J
AU - Hill, T. A.
AU - Fairlie, D. P.
AU - Maher, S.
AU - Mrsny, Randy
N1 - Funding Information:
DB is funded by the Science Foundation Ireland (SFI) CÚRAM Centre for Medical Devices , grant number 13/RC/2073 , by the SFI BiOrbic Centre for Bioeconomy , grant number 16/RC/3889 , and by the EU Regional Development Fund . DF was supported by grants from the ARC ( DP180103244 , CE200100012 ) and NHMRC ( 1128908 , 1143601 ) and an NHMRC Senior Principal Research Fellowship ( 1117017 ). We thank Maciek Doczyk of the SFI CÚRAM Centre at NUI Galway for the artwork in Fig. 4 .
Publisher Copyright:
© 2020 The Authors
PY - 2020
Y1 - 2020
N2 - In its 33 years, ADDR has published regularly on the po5tential of oral delivery of biologics especially peptides and proteins. In the intervening period, analysis of the preclinical and clinical trial failures of many purported platform technologies has led to reflection on the true status of the field and reigning in of expectations. Oral formulations of semaglutide, octreotide, and salmon calcitonin have completed Phase III trials, with oral semaglutide being approved by the FDA in 2019. The progress made with oral peptide formulations based on traditional permeation enhancers is against a background of low and variable oral bioavailability values of ~1%, leading to a current perception that only potent peptides with a viable cost of synthesis can be realistically considered. Desirable features of candidates should include a large therapeutic index, some stability in the GI tract, a long elimination half-life, and a relatively low clearance rate. Administration in nanoparticle formats have largely disappointed, with few prototypes reaching clinical trials: insufficient particle loading, lack of controlled release, low epithelial particle uptake, and lack of scalable synthesis being the main reasons for discontinuation. Disruptive technologies based on engineered devices promise improvements, but scale-up and toxicology aspects are issues to address. In parallel, medicinal chemists are synthesizing stable hydrophobic macrocyclic candidate peptides of lower molecular weight and with potential for greater oral bioavailability than linear peptides, but perhaps without the same requirement for elaborate drug delivery systems. In summary, while there have been advances in understanding the limitations of peptides for oral delivery, low membrane permeability, metabolism, and high clearance rates continue to hamper progress.
AB - In its 33 years, ADDR has published regularly on the po5tential of oral delivery of biologics especially peptides and proteins. In the intervening period, analysis of the preclinical and clinical trial failures of many purported platform technologies has led to reflection on the true status of the field and reigning in of expectations. Oral formulations of semaglutide, octreotide, and salmon calcitonin have completed Phase III trials, with oral semaglutide being approved by the FDA in 2019. The progress made with oral peptide formulations based on traditional permeation enhancers is against a background of low and variable oral bioavailability values of ~1%, leading to a current perception that only potent peptides with a viable cost of synthesis can be realistically considered. Desirable features of candidates should include a large therapeutic index, some stability in the GI tract, a long elimination half-life, and a relatively low clearance rate. Administration in nanoparticle formats have largely disappointed, with few prototypes reaching clinical trials: insufficient particle loading, lack of controlled release, low epithelial particle uptake, and lack of scalable synthesis being the main reasons for discontinuation. Disruptive technologies based on engineered devices promise improvements, but scale-up and toxicology aspects are issues to address. In parallel, medicinal chemists are synthesizing stable hydrophobic macrocyclic candidate peptides of lower molecular weight and with potential for greater oral bioavailability than linear peptides, but perhaps without the same requirement for elaborate drug delivery systems. In summary, while there have been advances in understanding the limitations of peptides for oral delivery, low membrane permeability, metabolism, and high clearance rates continue to hamper progress.
KW - Drug-device combination products
KW - Epithelial permeability
KW - Nanoparticles
KW - Oral bioavailability
KW - Oral peptide delivery
KW - Tight junctions
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85087519552&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1016/j.addr.2020.05.007
DO - 10.1016/j.addr.2020.05.007
M3 - Review article
SN - 0169-409X
VL - 157
SP - 2
EP - 36
JO - Advanced Drug Delivery Reviews
JF - Advanced Drug Delivery Reviews
ER -