Cellulosic Polymers for Enhancing Drug Bioavailability in Ocular Drug Delivery Systems
Bibliographic record
Abstract
One of the major impediments to drug development is low aqueous solubility and thus poor bioavailability, which leads to insufficient clinical utility. Around 70-80% of drugs in the discovery pipeline are suffering from poor aqueous solubility and poor bioavailability, which is a major challenge when one has to develop an ocular drug delivery system. The outer lipid layer, pre-corneal, dynamic, and static ocular barriers limit drug availability to the targeted ocular tissues. Biopharmaceutical Classification System (BCS) class II drugs with adequate permeability and limited or no aqueous solubility have been extensively studied for various polymer-based solubility enhancement approaches. The hydrophilic nature of cellulosic polymers and their tunable properties make them the polymers of choice in various solubility-enhancement techniques. This review focuses on various cellulose derivatives, specifically, their role, current status and novel modified cellulosic polymers for enhancing the bioavailability of BCS class II drugs in ocular drug delivery systems.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.002 |
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".