1974
DOI: 10.1002/jps.2600630405
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Controlled Drug Release from Polymeric Delivery Devices II: Differentiation Between Partition-Controlled and Matrix-Controlled Drug Release Mechanisms

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
4
1

Citation Types

1
10
0
1

Year Published

1974
1974
2012
2012

Publication Types

Select...
7
2

Relationship

0
9

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 70 publications
(12 citation statements)
references
References 12 publications
1
10
0
1
Order By: Relevance
“…At all time points, in vitro–released MIV-150 levels were >859 times the IC 50 against HIV ADA , HIV MN , and SHIV-RT (19, 23). The cumulative release profiles for all three MIV-150 IVRs in the SNaC buffer exhibited partition-controlled kinetics [typical of nonsink conditions (24)] of Q α time, where Q is the cumulative percentage of MIV-150 released. Q for the 50-mg silicone, 50-mg EVA, and 100-mg EVA IVRs was 2.8, 8.7, and 5.3%, respectively.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…At all time points, in vitro–released MIV-150 levels were >859 times the IC 50 against HIV ADA , HIV MN , and SHIV-RT (19, 23). The cumulative release profiles for all three MIV-150 IVRs in the SNaC buffer exhibited partition-controlled kinetics [typical of nonsink conditions (24)] of Q α time, where Q is the cumulative percentage of MIV-150 released. Q for the 50-mg silicone, 50-mg EVA, and 100-mg EVA IVRs was 2.8, 8.7, and 5.3%, respectively.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Typically, in vitro drug release testing utilizes sink conditions, wherein the API concentration in the release medium never exceeds one-third the equilibrium saturation concentration (42). Conversely, nonsink conditions exist when the concentration of API in the release medium nears its maximum solubility, resulting in attenuated drug release due to a smaller concentration gradient as well as API partitioning between the polymer and medium (6,17). Although utilization of sink conditions does in fact classify the device type-the most common being time dependent (matrix devices) or time independent (reservoir devices)-it seldom reflects in vivo pharmacokinetics.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…This assumption holds true only for uncharged molecules such as the PYDs, as mucus is known to bind charged molecules and thereby hinder transport (9,10). Crystallized PYD was also observed on the surface of the 14 wt% PYD2 IVR after removal, suggesting partition-controlled drug release where dissolution into vaginal fluid is the ratelimiting step as a result of the PYDs' high polymer solubility and low aqueous solubility (6). This phenomenon may be advantageous, as the matrix IVR could provide relatively constant drug release throughout the dosage duration, as suggested with the PYD2 14wt% IVR vaginal fluid levels.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Like mono-drug patches, it was found that Higuchi's model was the most suitable for describing the release kinetics of drugs from the composite patches examined in the present study. Higuchi's rate constants calculated are summarized in Table 2 (Chien and Lambert 1974).…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%