Dissolution enhancement of felodipine by amorphous nanodispersions using an amphiphilic polymer: insight into the role of drug–polymer interactions on drug dissolution

Abstract

Amorphous SDs of felodipine were prepared using soluplus resulting in substantial enhancement in the rate and extent of dissolution of felodipine.

Impact of drying on dissolution behavior of carvedilol-loaded sustained release solid dispersion: development and characterization

“…Therefore, the possible interaction among CAR, Kolliphor® P188, and Eudragit® RSPO observed by FT-IR studies corresponds to the presence of negligible hydrophobic interaction. From a theoretical point of view, this result is beneficial since some drug-polymer interactions might even decrease the dissolution rate, and the thermodynamic driving force for dissolution will be higher in case of very weak or no drug polymer interactions [ 41 , 42 ].

Figure 4 Drug-polymer interaction studies of CAR samples using FT-IR.

…”

Dissolution enhancement of tadalafil by liquisolid technique

“…The in vitro dissolution study was performed in 1000 mL of 0.5% sodium lauryl sulfate at 37 ± 0.5 C and 50 rpm, using USP II (paddle) method with a dissolution apparatus (ZRS-8G, Tianjin TDTF Technology CO., Ltd., China). Aliquots of 10 ml were withdrawn at predetermined times (5,10,20,30,45, and 60 min) and replaced with equal volumes of fresh media. The samples were filtered through 0.45 lm membrane filters and analyzed by UV-spectrophotometry, as mentioned in the section ''Solubility study''.…”

The Need for Restructuring the Disordered Science of Amorphous Drug Formulations

“…Some of the reasons given for excipient selection included reliance on previous reports of the use of similar excipients and their historical applicability in ASDs and oral dosage forms (100–125); the physicochemical properties and functions of the excipient, possible interactions between the compound and the excipient, and the miscibility/immiscibility of the compound and excipient (105–108,111,112,114,126–148); the processability or suitability of the excipient for the preparation method (73,105,119,127,149–152); and the possibility of designing a controlled-release profile and/or pH-dependent release of the compound from the amorphous formulation (99,100,107,123,153–156). An attempt to tailor and customize excipients by modifying the functional groups which could be potentially used in ASD formulations has also been reported (157).…”

“…Ninety-two of the 101 studies reported solubility and dissolution studies (71–74,77–79,81–92,95,97–107,109–111,113–119,121,123,124,126–133,135–139,141–154,156,157,160,161,166,168–176). The USP in vitro dissolution type II apparatus was the most commonly used instrument (67%), followed by the USP type I apparatus (6%), while the remaining 27% used various other apparatuses, including modified versions of the USP type I only (148) or paired with confocal Raman microscopy (98), USP types I and II apparatus (72), USP type IV (152), closed loop of USP types II and IV (152), a perspex flow cell (73,142), a rotary mixer (131), a Chinese pharmacopoeia type III apparatus (118), an in-house miniaturized USP type II apparatus (175), Sirius T3 apparatus (146), μFLUX dissolution-permeation apparatus (141), Raman UV-Vis flow cell system (99), a centrifuge (88), high throughput screening using a 96-well plate (82,115,157), Wood’s apparatus (99,137), an orbital shaking incubator (156), and another shake-flask method (171) (Fig. 6).…”