Stability of Compounded Diltiazem Hydrochloride in Cream, Ointment, and Gel Formulations for Topical Use.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Interest in the topical use of compounded diltiazem has increased. Published information on the stability of such products is scarce. The objective of this study was to investigate the stability of diltiazem hydrochloride compounded in cream (Glaxal Base), ointment (white petrolatum), and hydroxyethyl cellulose-based gel over 90 days at room (23°C), refrigerator (4°C), and elevated (40°C) temperatures, stored in white plastic and glass amber containers. Organoleptic properties, pH changes, and United States Pharmacopeia recommendations were used for assigning beyond-use-dates. The results showed that the currently recommended United States Pharmacopeia beyond-use date of 30 days is acceptable for diltiazem (2%) in Glaxal Base at 4°C and 23°C in either white plastic or glass amber jars. The cream, however, is not recommended for use if exposed to elevated temperatures (40°C) in white plastic jars but may be used within 7 days if stored in glass amber jars. A beyond-use date of 90 days for diltiazem (2%) hydroxyethyl cellulose-based gel, when maintained at 4°C or 23°C, in either white plastic or glass amber jars, is recommended. Gels exposed to elevated temperatures (40°C) should be used within14 and 30 days in glass amber and white plastic jars, respectively. Lastly, a BUD of 90 days for diltiazem (2%) ointment (white petrolatum) at 23°C stored in either jar type is acceptable. Ointment formulations exposed to elevated temperatures (40°C) may be used within 7 days in white plastic jars. Diltiazem (2%) in white petrolatum should not be stored at 4°C.
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) | 0.000 | 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) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
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".