A cochleate formulation optimized by D-optimal mixture design enhances oral bioavailability of Revaprazan
Bibliographic record
Abstract
A cochleate formulation was developed to enhance the oral bioavailability of revaprazan (RVP). Dimyristoyl phosphatidylcholine (DMPC) liposome containing dicetyl phosphate (DCP) successfully formed a cochleate after treatment with CaCl2, whereas that containing sodium deoxycholate did not. Cochleate was optimised using a D-optimal mixture design with three independent variables—DMPC (X1, 70.58 mol%), cholesterol (X2, 22.54 mol%), and DCP (X3, 6.88 mol%)—and three response variables: encapsulation efficiency (Y1, 76.92%), released amount of free fatty acid at 2 h (Y2, 39.82%), and released amount of RVP at 6 h (Y3, 73.72%). The desirability function was 0.616, showing an excellent agreement between the predicted and experimental values. The cylindrical morphology of the optimised cochleate was visualised, and laurdan spectroscopy confirmed the dehydrated membrane interface, showing an increased generalised polarisation value (approximately 0.5) over small unilamellar vesicle of RVP (RVP-SUV; approximately 0.1). The optimised cochleate showed greater resistance to pancreatic enzyme than RVP-SUV. RVP was released in a controlled manner, achieving approximately 94% release in 12 h. Following oral administration in rats, the optimised cochleate improved the relative bioavailability of RVP by approximately 274%, 255%, and 172% compared to RVP suspension, a physical mixture of RVP and the cochleate, and RVP-SUV, respectively. Thus, the optimised cochleate formulation might be a good candidate for the practical development of RVP.
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 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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 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".