↓ Skip to main content

Dissolution and Translational Modeling Strategies Enabling Patient-Centric Drug Product Development: the M-CERSI Workshop Summary Report

Overview of attention for article published in The AAPS Journal, April 2018
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user

Citations

dimensions_citation
40 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
42 Mendeley
Title
Dissolution and Translational Modeling Strategies Enabling Patient-Centric Drug Product Development: the M-CERSI Workshop Summary Report
Published in
The AAPS Journal, April 2018
DOI 10.1208/s12248-018-0213-x
Pubmed ID
Authors

Andreas Abend, Tycho Heimbach, Michael Cohen, Filippos Kesisoglou, Xavier Pepin, Sandra Suarez-Sharp

Abstract

On May 15th-17th, 2017, the US FDA and the International Consortium for Innovation and Quality in Pharmaceutical Development (IQ) held a workshop at the University of Maryland's Center of Excellence in Regulatory Science and Innovation (M-CERSI), to discuss the role of dissolution testing and translational modeling and simulation in enabling patient-centric solid oral drug product development. This 3-day event was attended by scientists from regulatory agencies, pharmaceutical companies, and academia. The workshop included podium presentations followed by breakout session discussions. The first day of the meeting focused on the challenges in dissolution method development and the role of dissolution testing throughout drug product development. On the second day, approaches to establish a link between in vitro testing and in vivo drug product performance (e.g., systemic exposure) were presented. Overall success rates and challenges in establishing IVIVCs via traditional and modern physiologically based pharmacokinetic (PBPK) modeling and simulation approaches were discussed. Day 3 provided an opportunity to discuss the expectations for establishing clinically relevant drug product specifications (CRDPS). It was recognized that understanding the impact of formulation and process variations on dissolution and in vivo performance is critical for most drug products formulated with poorly soluble drugs to ensure consistent product performance. The breakout sessions served as platforms for discussing controversial topics such as the clarification of dissolution terminology, PBPK model development and validation expectations, and approaches to set CRDPS. The meeting concluded with a commitment to continue the dialog between regulators, industry, and academia to advance overall product quality understanding.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 42 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 42 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 7 17%
Student > Ph. D. Student 6 14%
Student > Master 6 14%
Student > Doctoral Student 3 7%
Student > Postgraduate 2 5%
Other 0 0%
Unknown 18 43%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 18 43%
Social Sciences 2 5%
Chemical Engineering 1 2%
Nursing and Health Professions 1 2%
Mathematics 1 2%
Other 2 5%
Unknown 17 40%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 21 April 2018.
All research outputs
#18,603,172
of 23,043,346 outputs
Outputs from The AAPS Journal
#1,109
of 1,296 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#255,572
of 329,299 outputs
Outputs of similar age from The AAPS Journal
#29
of 31 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,043,346 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 11th percentile – i.e., 11% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,296 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 6.0. This one is in the 2nd percentile – i.e., 2% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 329,299 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 11th percentile – i.e., 11% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 31 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.