Elucidation of the controlled-release behavior of metoprolol succinate from directly compressed xanthan gum-chitosan polymers: computational and experimental studies

The development and evaluation of a controlled-release (CR) pharmaceutical solid dosage form comprising xanthan gum (XG), low molecular weight chitosan (LCS) and metoprolol succinate (MS) is reported. The research is, partly, based upon the utilization of computational tools; in this case molecular dynamics simulations (MDs) and response surface method (RSM), in order to underpin the design/prediction and to minimize the experimental work required to achieve the desired pharmaceutical outcomes. The capability of the system to control the release of MS was studied as a function of LCS (% w/w) and total polymer (LCS and XG) to drug ratio (P:D) at different tablet tensile strengths. MDs trajectories, obtained by using different ratios of XG:LCS as well as XG and high molecular weight CS (HCS), showed that the driving force for the interaction between XG and LCS is electrostatic in nature, the most favourable complex is formed when LCS is used at 15 % (w/w) and, importantly, that the interaction between XG and LCS is more favourable than that between XG and HCS. RSM outputs revealed that the release of the drug from the LCS/XG matrix is highly dependent on both the % LCS and the P:D ratio and that the required CR effect can be achieved when using weight fractions of LCS ≤ 20% and P:D ratios ≥ 2.6:1. Results obtained from in-vitro drug release and swelling studies on the prepared tablets showed that using LCS at the weight fractions suggested by MDs and RSM data plays a major role in overcoming the high sensitivity of the controlled drug release effect of XG on ionic strength and pH changes of the dissolution media. In addition, it was found that polymer relaxation is the major contributor to the release of MS from LCS-XG tablets. Using Raman spectroscopy, MS was shown to be localized more in the core of the tablets at the initial stages of dissolution due to film formation between LCS and XG on the tablet surface which prevents excess water penetration into the matrix. In the later stages of the dissolution process, the film starts to dissolve/erode allowing full tablet hydration and a uniform drug distribution in the swollen tablet

Identifying an indoor air exposure limit for formaldehyde considering both irritation and cancer hazards

Formaldehyde is a well-studied chemical and effects from inhalation exposures have been extensively characterized in numerous controlled studies with human volunteers, including asthmatics and other sensitive individuals, which provide a rich database on exposure concentrations that can reliably produce the symptoms of sensory irritation. Although individuals can differ in their sensitivity to odor and eye irritation, the majority of authoritative reviews of the formaldehyde literature have concluded that an air concentration of 0.3 ppm will provide protection from eye irritation for virtually everyone. A weight of evidence-based formaldehyde exposure limit of 0.1 ppm (100 ppb) is recommended as an indoor air level for all individuals for odor detection and sensory irritation. It has recently been suggested by the International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC), the National Toxicology Program (NTP), and the US Environmental Protection Agency (US EPA) that formaldehyde is causally associated with nasopharyngeal cancer (NPC) and leukemia. This has led US EPA to conclude that irritation is not the most sensitive toxic endpoint and that carcinogenicity should dictate how to establish exposure limits for formaldehyde. In this review, a number of lines of reasoning and substantial scientific evidence are described and discussed, which leads to a conclusion that neither point of contact nor systemic effects of any type, including NPC or leukemia, are causally associated with exposure to formaldehyde. This conclusion supports the view that the equivocal epidemiology studies that suggest otherwise are almost certainly flawed by identified or yet to be unidentified confounding variables. Thus, this assessment concludes that a formaldehyde indoor air limit of 0.1 ppm should protect even particularly susceptible individuals from both irritation effects and any potential cancer hazard