Bioequivalence of Topical Clotrimazole Formulations: An Improved Tape Stripping Method
Bibliographic record
Abstract
PURPOSE: Investigations were carried out to assess the use of tape stripping (TS) for the determination of bioequivalence of topical products containing 1% clotrimazole. METHODS: The study design involved the establishment of an appropriate application time, which was determined by conducting a dose duration study. Subsequently, two bioequivalence studies were conducted: i) using the brand (Canesten Topical - 1% clotrimazole cream) as both the test and the reference product and ii) comparing Canesten cream with a gel product containing the same concentration of clotrimazole (1%). Each tape strip was individually analyzed for clotrimazole content using an HPLC method and Transepidermal Water Loss (TEWL) measurements were used to normalize the stratum corneum thicknesses between subjects. RESULTS: The results of the TS investigations showed that, if the study is sufficiently powered, tape stripping may be used to determine bioequivalence according to the conventional bioequivalence limits of 0.8-1.25, as well as detect formulation differences between different clotrimazole products. CONCLUSIONS: The data from this study provided compelling evidence that tape stripping has the necessary attributes and potential to be used as a tool for the bioequivalence assessment of topical clotrimazole and/or other topical formulations, thereby circumventing the need to undertake expensive and time-consuming clinical trials for such products. This article is open to POST-PUBLICATION REVIEW. Registered readers (see "For Readers") may comment by clicking on ABSTRACT on the issue's contents page.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.004 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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 teacher head, 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".