↓ Skip to main content

In vitro dissolution models for the prediction of in vivo performance of an oral mesoporous silica formulation

Overview of attention for article published in Journal of Controlled Release, March 2017
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 (70th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (92nd percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
8 tweeters
facebook
1 Facebook page

Citations

dimensions_citation
24 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
62 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
In vitro dissolution models for the prediction of in vivo performance of an oral mesoporous silica formulation
Published in
Journal of Controlled Release, March 2017
DOI 10.1016/j.jconrel.2016.12.043
Pubmed ID
Authors

Carol A. McCarthy, Waleed Faisal, Joseph P. O'Shea, Colm Murphy, Robert J. Ahern, Katie B. Ryan, Brendan T. Griffin, Abina M. Crean

Abstract

Drug release from mesoporous silica systems has been widely investigated in vitro using USP Type II (paddle) dissolution apparatus. However, it is not clear if the observed enhanced in vitro dissolution can forecast drug bioavailability in vivo. In this study, the ability of different in vitro dissolution models to predict in vivo oral bioavailability in a pig model was examined. The fenofibrate-loaded mesoporous silica formulation was compared directly to a commercial reference product, Lipantil Supra®. Three in vitro dissolution methods were considered; USP Type II (paddle) apparatus, USP Type IV (flow-through cell) apparatus and a USP IV Transfer model (incorporating a SGF to FaSSIF-V2 media transfer). In silico modelling, using a physiologically based pharmacokinetic modelling and simulation software package (Gastroplus™), to generate in vitro/in vivo relationships was also investigated. The study demonstrates that the in vitro dissolution performance of a mesoporous silica formulation varies depending on the dissolution apparatus utilised and experimental design. The findings show that the USP IV transfer model was the best predictor of in vivo bioavailability. The USP Type II (paddle) apparatus was not effective at forecasting in vivo behaviour. This observation is likely due to hydrodynamic differences between the two apparatus and the ability of the transfer model to better simulate gastrointestinal transit. The transfer model is advantageous in forecasting in vivo behaviour for formulations which promote drug supersaturation and as a result are prone to precipitation to a more energetically favourable, less soluble form. The USP IV transfer model could prove useful in future mesoporous silica formulation development. In silico modelling has the potential to assist in this process. However, further investigation is required to overcome the limitations of the model for solubility enhancing formulations.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 8 tweeters who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 62 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Italy 1 2%
Unknown 61 98%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 13 21%
Student > Master 8 13%
Researcher 6 10%
Student > Doctoral Student 4 6%
Other 4 6%
Other 12 19%
Unknown 15 24%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 26 42%
Chemistry 6 10%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 3 5%
Engineering 3 5%
Business, Management and Accounting 1 2%
Other 4 6%
Unknown 19 31%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 6. 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 13 April 2018.
All research outputs
#4,544,928
of 18,655,878 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Controlled Release
#2,318
of 7,905 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#78,242
of 269,983 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Controlled Release
#7
of 77 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 18,655,878 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 75th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 7,905 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.0. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 70% 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 269,983 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 70% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 77 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 92% of its contemporaries.