↓ Skip to main content

Use of Modeling and Simulation Tools for Understanding the Impact of Formulation on the Absorption of a Low Solubility Compound: Ciprofloxacin

Overview of attention for article published in The AAPS Journal, April 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (76th percentile)
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

news
1 news outlet

Citations

dimensions_citation
9 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
39 Mendeley
Title
Use of Modeling and Simulation Tools for Understanding the Impact of Formulation on the Absorption of a Low Solubility Compound: Ciprofloxacin
Published in
The AAPS Journal, April 2016
DOI 10.1208/s12248-016-9913-2
Pubmed ID
Authors

Marilyn Martinez, Bipin Mistry, Viera Lukacova, Jim Polli, Stephen Hoag, Thomas Dowling, Ravikanth Kona, Raafat Fahmy

Abstract

This study explored the utility of mechanistic absorption models to describe the in vivo performance of a low solubility/low permeability compound in normal healthy subjects. Sixteen healthy human volunteers received three oral formulations and an intravenous infusion in a randomized crossover design. Plasma ciprofloxacin concentrations were estimated by HPLC. In vitro ciprofloxacin release from the oral tablets was tested under a variety of conditions. A mechanistic model was used to explore in vivo dissolution and intestinal absorption. Although dissolution rate influenced the location of drug release, absorption challenges appeared to be associated with permeability limitations in the lower small intestine and colon. The apparent relationship between drug solubilization within the upper small intestinal and formulation overall bioavailability suggested the presence of an intestinal absorption window in many individuals. Failure to absorb drug within this window appeared to be linked with the likelihood of in vivo drug precipitation. Challenges encountered during this modeling exercise included large intersubject variability in product in vivo dissolution and the apparent limitations in ciprofloxacin absorption. Although transporter activity was not included as a model parameter, this evaluation demonstrated how identifying the location of drug absorption across several formulations provided an opportunity to identify factors to consider when formulating similar low solubility/low permeability compounds. The use of mechanistic models was invaluable for our understanding of in vivo product performance and for the assessment of individual profiles rather than means. The latter was essential for understanding the potential challenges that may be encountered when introducing a formulation into a patient population.

Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 39 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 39 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 8 21%
Student > Ph. D. Student 7 18%
Other 6 15%
Researcher 4 10%
Student > Bachelor 3 8%
Other 4 10%
Unknown 7 18%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 13 33%
Medicine and Dentistry 5 13%
Psychology 2 5%
Engineering 2 5%
Chemistry 2 5%
Other 6 15%
Unknown 9 23%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 7. 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 01 July 2016.
All research outputs
#4,191,633
of 22,880,230 outputs
Outputs from The AAPS Journal
#210
of 1,287 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#65,534
of 298,949 outputs
Outputs of similar age from The AAPS Journal
#14
of 37 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,880,230 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 80th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,287 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 6.0. This one has done well, scoring higher than 82% of its peers.
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 298,949 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 76% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 37 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 48th percentile – i.e., 48% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.