FORMULATION AND IN VITRO EVALUATION OF COMBINED FLOATING-BIOADHESIVE TABLETS OF IMATINIB MESYLATE
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Objective: Gastro retentive drug delivery system (GRDDS) pertaining to its attributes like gastric retention time and the extended drug release profile has significantly improved patient compliance. The objective of the present study is to formulate and evaluate a stomach-specific floating-bioadhesive tablet of imatinib mesylate for prolonged residence in the stomach in the treatment of gastrointestinal stromal tumors (GIST).Methods: All the tablets were prepared with hydroxypropylmethylcellulose (HPMC), guar gum, sodium alginate, and carbopol using direct compression technique. Physical characterization, in vitro dissolution, the mucoadhesive force along with data analysis was done on each tablet. Results: The pre-compression characteristics of powder mixtures found to be satisfactory for all formulation batches. The results of physical evaluation for all batches were complying with pharmacopeia specification. The swelling index for all formulation batches was approximately 100% after 8 hours. The bioadhesive force (mean ± SD) reported in a range of 0.05 ± 0.09 to 0.18 ± 0.06 N/m2. It was observed that the release rate of tablets was decreased when the viscosity and concentration of the polymer were increased. Formulation batches IB1, IB2, IB4, IB5, IB6, IB9, IB10, IB11, and IB13 follows Higuchi Matrix model kinetics; whereas IB3, IB7, IB8, and IB12 follows Korsmeyer- Peppas model kinetics.Conclusion: Formulation batch IB9 reported a considerable swelling index, floating behavior, more bioadhesive strength with uniform drug release pattern. Therefore formulation batch IB9 was selected as optimized batch and were kept for further evaluation studies.
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 | 0.006 | 0.001 |
| 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 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 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".