4.7 Article

A novel theoretical strategy for predicting dissolution kinetics and mechanisms of pharmaceuticals in complex biorelevant media

期刊

出版社

ELSEVIER
DOI: 10.1016/j.ijpharm.2023.123594

关键词

Biorelevant media; Dissolution kinetics; Drug; PC-SAFT

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The influence mechanism of biorelevant media on the dissolution of active pharmaceutical ingredients (APIs) was investigated. It was found that hexadecyl trimethyl ammonium bromide (CTAB) was superior to sodium dodecyl sulfate (SDS) in promoting dissolution. High pH was favorable for the dissolution of acidic drugs, while high ionic strength benefited surface reactions.
The influence mechanism of biorelevant media on the dissolution of active pharmaceutical ingredients (APIs) is the key to their formulation design. The dissolution kinetics of naproxen (NAP) and indomethacin (IND) in biorelevant media was systematically investigated. The dissolution mechanism was analyzed by chemical po-tential gradient model to explore the influence of surfactant type, pH and ionic strength. Hexadecyl trimethyl ammonium bromide (CTAB) is superior to sodium dodecyl sulfate (SDS) in promoting the dissolution of NAP and IND by increasing the solubility and accelerating the surface reaction processes. The electrostatic repulsion between SDS and NAP and IND with the same negative charge facilitates the diffusion of API, while the mutual attraction between CTAB and NAP and IND is not conducive to diffusion. High pH was favorable for the dissolution of acidic NAP and IND, as the simultaneous increase in solubility, surface reaction constant, and diffusion constant. High ionic strength was beneficial for the surface reaction of NAP and IND, but hindered their diffusion. It was shown that the modeling results were in conformity with the in vitro experimental data. These results are expected to provide theoretical supports for the design of biorelevant media and pharmaceutical formulations in the pharmaceutical development.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据