| Title |
Risperidone mucoadhesive buccal tablets: formulation design, optimization and evaluation
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Drug Design, Development and Therapy, November 2017
|
| DOI | 10.2147/dddt.s150774 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Burak Çelik |
| Abstract |
The aim of this study was to design and optimize risperidone (RIS) mucoadhesive buccal tablets for systemic delivery as an alternative route. Direct compression method was used for the preparation of buccal tablets, and screening studies were conducted with different polymers to determine their effects on tablet characteristics. Carbopol® (CP) and sodium alginate (SA) were selected as two polymer types for further optimization studies by applying response surface methodology. Tablet hardness (TH), ex vivo residence time (RT), and peak detachment force (DF) from buccal mucosa were selected as three important responses. Physicochemical compatibility of formulation excipients and RIS was evaluated by using Fourier transform infrared (FT-IR) spectroscopy and differential scanning calorimetry (DSC) analysis. In vitro drug release profiles and release kinetics were investigated; swelling index and matrix erosion studies were conducted. Optimum formulation consisted of 16.4% CP and 20.3% SA, which provided 7.67±0.29 hour ex vivo RT, 45.52±4.85 N TH, and 2.12±0.17 N DF. FT-IR spectroscopy and DSC analysis revealed that there was no chemical interaction present between tablet ingredients. Cumulative RIS release of >90% was achieved after 8 hours of in vitro dissolution studies, which was supported by swelling and matrix erosion analysis. Mechanism of RIS release was fitted best to zero-order model, while release exponent (n) value of 0.77 demonstrated an anomalous (non-Fickian) release, indicating combined erosion and swelling mechanism. The results suggested that optimized buccal tablets of RIS would be a promising and alternative delivery system for the treatment of schizophrenia. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 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 | 2 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 1 | 50% |
| Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 1 | 50% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 79 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 79 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 10 | 13% |
| Researcher | 7 | 9% |
| Student > Bachelor | 6 | 8% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 3 | 4% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 3 | 4% |
| Other | 7 | 9% |
| Unknown | 43 | 54% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science | 17 | 22% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 4 | 5% |
| Chemistry | 2 | 3% |
| Engineering | 2 | 3% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 2 | 3% |
| Other | 3 | 4% |
| Unknown | 49 | 62% |
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 15 December 2017.
All research outputs
#16,881,298
of 25,604,262 outputs
Outputs from Drug Design, Development and Therapy
#1,019
of 2,271 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#207,212
of 341,404 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Drug Design, Development and Therapy
#20
of 46 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,604,262 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 32nd percentile – i.e., 32% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,271 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.3. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 50% 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 341,404 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 36th percentile – i.e., 36% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 46 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 50% of its contemporaries.