Ampholytic and Polyelectrolytic Starch as Matrices for Controlled Drug Delivery
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The potential of the polyampholytic and polyelectrolytic starch compounds as excipients for drug controlled release was investigated using various tracers differing in terms of solubility and permeability. Ampholytic trimethylaminecarboxymethylstarch (TMACMS) simultaneously carrying trimethylaminehydroxypropyl (TMA) cationic groups and carboxymethyl (CM) anionic groups was obtained in one-step synthesis in aqueous media. Trimethylaminestarch (TMAS) and carboxymethylstarch (CMS) powders were also synthesized separately and then homogenized at equal proportions in liquid phase for co-processing by spray drying (SD) to obtain polyelectrolytic complexes TMAS-CMS (SD). Similarly, equal amounts of TMAS and CMS powders were dry mixed (DM) to obtain TMAS:CMS (DM). Monolithic tablets were obtained by direct compression of excipient/API mixes with 60% or 80% drug loads. The in vitro dissolution tests showed that ampholytic (TMACMS) and co-processed TMAS-CMS (SD) with selected tracers (one from each class of Biopharmaceutical Classification System (BCS)), were able to control the release even at very high loading (80%). The presence of opposite charges located at adequate distances may impact the polymeric chain organisation, their self-assembling, and implicitly the control of drug release. In conclusion, irrespective of preparation procedure, ampholytic and polyelectrolytic starch materials exhibited similar behaviours. Electrostatic interactions generated polymeric matrices conferring good mechanical features of tablets even at high drug loading.
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 | 0.001 | 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) | 0.001 | 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".