Investigation of coated whey protein/alginate beads as sustained release dosage form in simulated gastrointestinal environment
Bibliographic record
Abstract
AIM: The biopharmaceutical behavior of new formulations based on both food-grade polymers, whey protein (WP) and alginate (ALG) was studied using different in vitro methods. The Biopharmaceutical Classification System (BCS) class I drug Theophylline was chosen as drug model. METHOD: Drug release was studied (i) at pH 1.2 (2 hours) followed by pH 7.5, and in simulated gastric fluid (SGF; 2 hours) followed by simulated intestinal fluid (SIF) using the paddle method and (ii) in an artificial digestive system. RESULTS: Freeze-dried mixed WP/ALG (62/38) beads were coated with WP or ALG with encapsulation efficiency 34.9% and 18.3%, respectively. At pH 1.2, coated beads exhibited gastroresistant properties (< 10% of drug released after 2 hours) followed at pH 7.5 by a sustained release behavior (< 60% of drug released at 24 hours) controlled by an erosion mechanism. In SGF, despite enzyme hydrolysis, drug release was still controlled due to ALG shrinkage. After transfer in SIF, formulations were completely degraded in less than 2 h with total drug release. In an artificial digestive system, coated beads appeared gastroresistant, intestinal part sustained drug release was controlled by erosion. CONCLUSION: Combination of in vitro methods allowed prediction of the in vivo potentialities of WP- and ALG- coated WP/ALG beads as oral sustained release systems.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".