Nasal Delivery of Recombinant Human Growth Hormone: In Vivo Evaluation with Pheroid™ Technology and N-Trimethyl Chitosan Chloride
Bibliographic record
Abstract
PURPOSE: It was the aim of this study to investigate the possible enhancement of the absorption of recombinant human growth hormone (rhGH) in the nasal cavity, in the presence of a polymeric absorption enhancer, N-trimethyl chitosan chloride (TMC) and a fatty acid-based delivery system, Pheroid. METHODS: Two types of Pheroid formulations, Pheroid vesicles and Pheroid microsponges were characterized and evaluated with regard to particle size and morphology. In vivo bioavailability studies in rats were performed and the nasal bioavailability of Pheroid vesicles and Pheroid microsponges were compared relative to subcutaneous administration. The results were also compared with different N-trimethyl chitosan chloride (TMC) formulations, TMC H-L and TMC H-H, well studied absorption enhancers. RESULTS: Pheroid vesicles and Pheroid microsponges showed a size distribution of approxiamately 2-3 microm and 3-4 microm for Pheroid vesicles and Pheroid microsponges respectively. Using specific RIA, the relative bioavailability of rhGH after comparison with subcutaneous injection was determined to be 38.9, 128.5, 39.9, 136.3, and 8.3 % for Pheroid microsponges, Pheroid vesicles, TMC H-H, TMC H-L and control group (intranasal rhGH alone), respectively. All the enhancers showed significant absorption enhancement (P < 0.05) with the highest effect observed with TMC H-L. CONCLUSIONS: All the enhancers may have promising potential as safe and effective nasal absorption enhancers of rhGH.
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".