CHEWING GUM: CONFECTIONARY TO A POPULAR TRANSBUCCAL DOSAGE FORM

Chewing gum is a highly convenient and controlled release transbuccal drug delivery system taken without water. It is gaining popularity as a selfadministrable carrier for the medication used for motion sickness, smoke cessation, hypertension, xerostomia, dental caries, pain, as nutritive and energy supplements. Functional chewing gum favors both local and systemic effects intended to be chewed about half an hour. It has emerged out with a fast onset of action either by direct absorption or swallowed with saliva into gastrointestinal tract.It has better bioavailability that lowers the doses and reduces the gastric side-effects. Gums adhere with ease and compliance of administration to children and dysphagia patients. Chewing gums are formulated using a water-insoluble gum base with water-soluble excipients with the active ingredient in the case of medicated gums. European Pharmacopeia standards used for release studies, there are no other particular official standards. It has attracted the researchers as successful potential drug delivery system in coming future. The present article reviews it as novel drug delivery system including its merits and limitations, material and methods of formulation and evaluation

Selective Micellar Extraction of Ultratrace Levels of Uranium in Aqueous Samples by Task Specific Ionic Liquid Followed by Its Detection Employing Total Reflection X‑ray Fluorescence Spectrometry

A task specific ionic liquid (TSIL) bearing phosphoramidate group, viz., <i>N</i>-propyl­(diphenylphosphoramidate)­trimethylammonium bis­(trifluoromethanesulfonyl)­imide, was synthesized and characterized by ¹H NMR, ¹³C NMR, ³¹P NMR, and IR spectroscopies, elemental (C H N S) analysis, and electrospray ionization mass spectrometry (ESI-MS). Using this TSIL a cloud point extraction (CPE) or micelle mediated extraction procedure was developed for preconcentration of uranium (U) in environmental aqueous samples. Total reflection X-ray fluorescence spectrometry was utilized to determine the concentration of U in the preconcentrated samples. In order to understand the mechanism of the CPE procedure, complexation study of the TSIL with U was carried out by isothermal calorimetric titration, liquid–liquid extraction, ³¹P NMR and IR spectroscopies, and ESI-MS. The developed analytical technique resulted in quantitative extraction efficiency of 99.0 ± 0.5% and a preconcentration factor of 99 for U. The linear dynamic range and method detection limit of the procedure were found to be 0.1–1000 ng mL^–1 and 0.02 ng mL^–1, respectively. The CPE procedure was found to tolerate a higher concentration of commonly available interfering cations and anions, especially the lanthanides. The developed analytical method was validated by determining the concentration of U in a certified reference material, viz., NIST SRM 1640a natural water, which was found to be in good agreement at a 95% confidence limit with the certified value. The method was successfully applied to the U determination in three natural water samples with ≤4% relative standard deviation (1σ)

Guidelines for the use and interpretation of assays for monitoring autophagy (4th edition)

In 2008, we published the first set of guidelines for standardizing research in autophagy. Since then, this topic has received increasing attention, and many scientists have entered the field. Our knowledge base and relevant new technologies have also been expanding. Thus, it is important to formulate on a regular basis updated guidelines for monitoring autophagy in different organisms. Despite numerous reviews, there continues to be confusion regarding acceptable methods to evaluate autophagy, especially in multicellular eukaryotes. Here, we present a set of guidelines for investigators to select and interpret methods to examine autophagy and related processes, and for reviewers to provide realistic and reasonable critiques of reports that are focused on these processes. These guidelines are not meant to be a dogmatic set of rules, because the appropriateness of any assay largely depends on the question being asked and the system being used. Moreover, no individual assay is perfect for every situation, calling for the use of multiple techniques to properly monitor autophagy in each experimental setting. Finally, several core components of the autophagy machinery have been implicated in distinct autophagic processes (canonical and noncanonical autophagy), implying that genetic approaches to block autophagy should rely on targeting two or more autophagy-related genes that ideally participate in distinct steps of the pathway. Along similar lines, because multiple proteins involved in autophagy also regulate other cellular pathways including apoptosis, not all of them can be used as a specific marker for bona fide autophagic responses. Here, we critically discuss current methods of assessing autophagy and the information they can, or cannot, provide. Our ultimate goal is to encourage intellectual and technical innovation in the field