MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1995103418 · doi:10.1185/030079908x280725

In vitro disintegration and dissolution studies of once-weekly copies of alendronate sodium tablets (70  mg) and in vivo implications

2008· article· en· W1995103418 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Richard J. Dansereau, Debbie J. Crail, Alan C. Perkins

Bibliographic record

VenueCurrent Medical Research and Opinion · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicBone health and treatments
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineAlendronic acidImmediate releaseDissolutionPharmacologyDosage formBisphosphonateInternal medicineChemistryOsteoporosis

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to evaluate the in vitro disintegration and dissolution of 26 alendronic acid tablets (70 mg) on the market in Canada, Germany, the Netherlands, and the United Kingdom compared to the branded product (Fosamax). RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: The disintegration and dissolution times were determined using the methods described in the United States Pharmacopeia 30 (USP 30). The disintegration of four orally disintegrating tablets (non-bisphosphonates) and branded film-coated risedronate sodium tablets were included for comparison. RESULTS: The mean disintegration times of the alendronic acid tablets ranged from 14 s for Pharmachemie (Netherlands) to 342 s (5.7 min) for Betapharm (Germany). The mean disintegration time of the branded product tablets ranged from 43 to 78 s. Six of the 26 companies market alendronic acid tablets with very rapid disintegration times which are similar to those of orally disintegrating tablets (non-bisphosphonates). The alendronic acid tablets with very rapid mean disintegration times are as follows: Pharmachemie (Netherlands), 14 s; Novopharm (Canada), 13-24 s; GRY-Pharma (Germany), 21 s; Juta Pharma (Germany), 30 s; APS/Teva (United Kingdom), 26 and 37 s; and Teva (UK), 14-29 s. Since there is no established disintegration time for alendronic acid tablets there can be no assurance that the copy tablets are equivalent to the branded product in terms of esophageal drug exposure. However, the in vitro disintegration times have not been correlated with in vivo disintegration and performance. The dissolution of all the bisphosphonate tablets was rapid with greater than 80% dissolved in 15 min and all products conformed to the USP 30 specification. CONCLUSIONS: The dissolution of all alendronic acid tablets was rapid and complete and conformed to the established USP 30 specifications which should ensure adequate drug absorption from the copy products. However, copies of alendronic acid tablets are approved based on the results of single-dose bioavailability studies in healthy subjects and this is not adequate to establish similar disintegration characteristics.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.306
Threshold uncertainty score0.242

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.192
GPT teacher head0.489
Teacher spread0.297 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations19
Published2008
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCurrent Medical Research and OpinionSame topicBone health and treatmentsFrench-language works237,207