Inclusion complex of tamibarotene with hydroxypropyl-β-cyclodextrin: Preparation, characterization, in-vitro and in-vivo evaluation
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The goal of this study was to improve the solubility and oral bioavailability of tamibarotene by complexing it with hydroxypropyl-β-cyclodextrin (HP-β-CD). The inclusion complex of tamibarotene with hydroxypropyl-β-cyclodextrin (Am80-HP-β-CD) was prepared through a freeze-drying method at the mole ratio of 1:1 (Am80: HP-β-CD). Fourier transform infrared spectroscopy (FT-IR) and differential scanning calorimetry (DSC) indicated the formation of Am80-HP-β-CD. In vitro dissolution studies showed that the solubility and dissolution percentage of Am80-HP-β-CD was improved substantially compared to Am80. An improved dissolution with approximately 97% drug release in 3 min was observed, in comparison with Am80 with approximately 60% release in 45 min. In vivo studies indicated that the AUC0-∞ has increased 2.79 times and the Cmax 4.37 times after the formation of inclusion complex. The decrease of tmax indicated the Am80-HP-β-CD inclusion complex can be absorbed into blood faster. In short, the solubility and bio-availability of Am80 has notably increased with the complexation of HP-β-CD. Therefore, using the inclusion technique is a promising method to improve the solubility of insoluble drugs.
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 | 0.005 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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 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".