| Title |
Preparation of finasteride capsules-loaded drug nanoparticles: formulation, optimization, in vitro, and pharmacokinetic evaluation
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
International Journal of Nanomedicine, February 2016
|
| DOI | 10.2147/ijn.s98080 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Tarek A Ahmed |
| Abstract |
In this study, optimized freeze-dried finasteride nanoparticles (NPs) were prepared from drug nanosuspension formulation that was developed using the bottom-up technique. The effects of four formulation and processing variables that affect the particle size and solubility enhancement of the NPs were explored using the response surface optimization design. The optimized formulation was morphologically characterized using transmission electron microscopy (TEM). Physicochemical interaction among the studied components was investigated. Crystalline change was investigated using X-ray powder diffraction (XRPD). Crystal growth of the freeze-dried NPs was compared to the corresponding aqueous drug nanosuspension. Freeze-dried NPs formulation was subsequently loaded into hard gelatin capsules that were examined for in vitro dissolution and pharmacokinetic behavior. Results revealed that in most of the studied variables, some of the quadratic and interaction effects had a significant effect on the studied responses. TEM image illustrated homogeneity and shape of the prepared NPs. No interaction among components was noticed. XRPD confirmed crystalline state change in the optimized NPs. An enhancement in the dissolution rate of more than 2.5 times from capsules filled with optimum drug NPs, when compared to capsules filled with pure drug, was obtained. Crystal growth, due to Ostwald ripening phenomenon and positive Gibbs free energy, was reduced following lyophilization of the nanosuspension formulation. Pharmacokinetic parameters from drug NPs were superior to that of pure drug and drug microparticles. In conclusion, freeze-dried NPs based on drug nanosuspension formulation is a successful technique in enhancing stability, solubility, and in vitro dissolution of poorly water-soluble drugs with possible impact on the drug bioavailability. |
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 % |
|---|---|---|
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 2 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 40 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 40 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 7 | 18% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 7 | 18% |
| Student > Bachelor | 3 | 8% |
| Other | 3 | 8% |
| Professor > Associate Professor | 3 | 8% |
| Other | 6 | 15% |
| Unknown | 11 | 28% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science | 13 | 33% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 6 | 15% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 4 | 10% |
| Chemical Engineering | 2 | 5% |
| Engineering | 2 | 5% |
| Other | 2 | 5% |
| Unknown | 11 | 28% |
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 03 February 2016.
All research outputs
#17,286,379
of 25,374,647 outputs
Outputs from International Journal of Nanomedicine
#2,469
of 4,123 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#247,077
of 406,424 outputs
Outputs of similar age from International Journal of Nanomedicine
#67
of 86 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,374,647 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 21st percentile – i.e., 21% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 4,123 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.7. This one is in the 28th percentile – i.e., 28% 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 406,424 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 30th percentile – i.e., 30% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 86 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 12th percentile – i.e., 12% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.