Use of biorelevant media for assessment of a poorly soluble weakly basic drug in the form of liquisolid compacts: <i>in vitro</i> and <i>in vivo</i> study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The purpose of this work is to use biorelevant media to evaluate the robustness of a poorly water soluble weakly basic drug to variations along the gastrointestinal tract (GIT) after incorporation in liquisolid compacts and to assess the success of these models in predicting the in vivo performance. Liquisolid tablets were prepared using mosapride citrate as a model drug. A factorial design experiment was used to study the effect of three factors, namely: drug concentration at two levels (5% and 10%), carriers at three levels (avicel, mannitol and lactose) and powder excipients ratio (R) of the coating material at two levels (25 and 30). The in vitro dissolution media utilized were 0.1 N HCl, hypoacidic stomach model and a transfer model simulating the transfer from the stomach to the intestine. All compacts released above 95% of drug after 10 min in 0.1 N HCl. In the hypoacidic model, the compacts with R 30 were superior compared to R 25, where they released >90% of drug after 10 min compared to 80% for R 25. After the transfer of the optimum compacts from Simulated gastric fluid fast (SGFfast) to fasted state simulated intestinal fluid, slight turbidity appeared after 30 min, and the amount of drug dissolved slightly decreased from 96.91% to 90.59%. However, after the transfer from SGFfast to fed state simulated intestinal fluid, no turbidity or precipitation occurred throughout time of the test (60 min). In vivo pharmacokinetic study in human volunteers proved the success of the in vitro models with enhancement of the oral bioavailability (121.20%) compared to the commercial product.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 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".