MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4297222694 · doi:10.3390/pharmaceutics14102043

Formulation of Dosage Forms with Proton Pump Inhibitors: State of the Art, Challenges and Future Perspectives

2022· review· en· W4297222694 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenuePharmaceutics · 2022
Typereview
Languageen
FieldPharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutics
TopicDrug Solubulity and Delivery Systems
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersFaculté de pharmacie, Université de MontréalUniwersytet Jagielloński w Krakowie
KeywordsFormularyIntensive care medicineMedicineDosage formComputer scienceRisk analysis (engineering)Management sciencePharmacologyEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Since their introduction to pharmacotherapy, proton pump inhibitors (PPIs) have been widely used in the treatment of numerous diseases manifested by excessive secretion of gastric acid. Despite that, there are still unmet needs regarding their availability for patients of all age groups. Their poor stability hinders the development of formulations in which dose can be easily adjusted. The aim of this review is to describe the discovery and development of PPIs, discuss formulation issues, and present the contemporary solutions, possibilities, and challenges in formulation development. The review outlines the physicochemical characteristics of PPIs, connects them with pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic properties, and describes the stability of PPIs, including the identification of the most important factors affecting them. Moreover, the possibilities for qualitative and quantitative analysis of PPIs are briefly depicted. This review also characterizes commercial preparations with PPIs available in the US and EU. The major part of the review is focused on the presentation of the state of the art in the development of novel formulations with PPIs covering various approaches employed in this process: nanoparticles, microparticles, minitablets, pellets, bilayer, floating, and mucoadhesive tablets, as well as parenteral, transdermal, and rectal preparations. It also anticipates further possibilities in the development of PPIs dosage forms. It is especially addressed to the researchers developing new formulations containing PPIs, since it covers the most important formulary issues that need to be considered before a decision on the selection of the formula is made. It may help in avoiding unnecessary efforts in this process and choosing the best approach. The review also presents an up-to-date database of publications focused on the pharmaceutical technology of formulations with PPIs.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.993
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.181
GPT teacher head0.434
Teacher spread0.253 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it