| Title |
Process optimization and evaluation of novel baicalin solid nanocrystals
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
International Journal of Nanomedicine, August 2013
|
| DOI | 10.2147/ijn.s44924 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Peng-Fei Yue, Yu Li, Jing Wan, Yong Wang, Ming Yang, Wei-Feng Zhu, Chang-Hong Wang, Hai-Long Yuan |
| Abstract |
The objective of this study was to prepare baicalin solid nanocrystals (BCN-SNS) to enhance oral bioavailability of baicalin. A Box-Behnken design approach was used for process optimization. The physicochemical properties and pharmacokinetics of the optimal BCN-SNS were investigated. Multiple linear regression analysis for process optimization revealed that the fine BCN-SNS was obtained wherein the optimal values of homogenization pressure (bar), homogenization cycles (cycles), amount of TPGS to drug (w/w), and amount of MCCS to drug (w/w) were 850 bar, 25 cycles, 10%, and 10%, respectively. Transmission electron microscopy and scanning electron microscopy results indicated that no significant aggregation or crystal growth could be observed in the redispersed freeze-dried BCN-SNS. Differential scanning calorimetry and X-ray diffraction results showed that BCN remained in a crystalline state. Dissolution velocity of the freeze-dried BCN-SNS powder was distinctly superior compared to those of the crude powder and physical mixture. The bioavailability of BCN in rats was increased remarkably after oral administration of BCN-SNS (P < 0.05), compared with those of BCN or the physical mixture. The SNS might be a good choice for oral administration of poorly soluble BCN, due to an improvement of the bioavailability and dissolution velocity of BCN-SNS. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 4 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 4 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 4 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 18 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 18 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 3 | 17% |
| Professor > Associate Professor | 3 | 17% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 3 | 17% |
| Lecturer | 1 | 6% |
| Student > Bachelor | 1 | 6% |
| Other | 2 | 11% |
| Unknown | 5 | 28% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 3 | 17% |
| Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science | 2 | 11% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 2 | 11% |
| Chemistry | 2 | 11% |
| Physics and Astronomy | 1 | 6% |
| Other | 2 | 11% |
| Unknown | 6 | 33% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. 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 30 October 2013.
All research outputs
#15,879,822
of 25,584,565 outputs
Outputs from International Journal of Nanomedicine
#1,779
of 4,077 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#119,639
of 210,451 outputs
Outputs of similar age from International Journal of Nanomedicine
#49
of 101 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,584,565 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 36th percentile – i.e., 36% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 4,077 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.8. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 53% 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 210,451 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 42nd percentile – i.e., 42% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 101 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 51% of its contemporaries.