In vitro oslobađanje hidrofilnih i hidrofobnih ljekovitih tvari iz liposomskih disperzija i gelova

A method for determining the rate of hydrophilic and hydrophobic drug entities release from different types of liposomal dispersions and gels using a dialysis method is described. Dibucaine base and 5-fluorouracil were used as model drugs for a hydrophobic and hydrophilic drug, respectively. A dialysis technique was employed. Release rates were affected by the rate of rotation of the paddles of the tablet dissolution tester, temperature, and volume of release medium. The method was used to evaluate the in vitro drug release from hydrophilic and hydrophobic drug entities from liposomal dispersions and gels. The in vitro release study of dibucaine base showed no burst effect, while the in vitro release study of 5-fluorouracil showed a clear burst effect with an initial fast release phase followed by a sustained release phase.Opisana je metoda za određivanje brzine oslobađanja hidrofilnih i hidrofobnih ljekovitih tvari iz različitih vrsta liposomskih disperzija i gelova koristeći dijalizu. Dibukain baza i 5-fluorouracil upotrebljeni su kao modeli hidrofobnog, odnosno hidrofilnog lijeka. Na brzinu oslobađanja utjecala je brzina rotacije lopatica u aparatu u koje je pokus izvođen, temperatura i volumem medija za oslobađanje. Metoda je upotrebljena in vitro praćenje oslobađanja ljekovite tvari iz liposomskih disperzija i gelova. In vitro oslobađanje dibukain baze ne pokazuje učinak naglog oslobađanja, a 5-fluorouracila pokazuje, s brzim inicijalnim oslobađanjem iza kojeg slijedi usporeno oslobađanje

In vitro oslobađanje hidrofilnih i hidrofobnih ljekovitih tvari iz liposomskih disperzija i gelova

A method for determining the rate of hydrophilic and hydrophobic drug entities release from different types of liposomal dispersions and gels using a dialysis method is described. Dibucaine base and 5-fluorouracil were used as model drugs for a hydrophobic and hydrophilic drug, respectively. A dialysis technique was employed. Release rates were affected by the rate of rotation of the paddles of the tablet dissolution tester, temperature, and volume of release medium. The method was used to evaluate the in vitro drug release from hydrophilic and hydrophobic drug entities from liposomal dispersions and gels. The in vitro release study of dibucaine base showed no burst effect, while the in vitro release study of 5-fluorouracil showed a clear burst effect with an initial fast release phase followed by a sustained release phase.Opisana je metoda za određivanje brzine oslobađanja hidrofilnih i hidrofobnih ljekovitih tvari iz različitih vrsta liposomskih disperzija i gelova koristeći dijalizu. Dibukain baza i 5-fluorouracil upotrebljeni su kao modeli hidrofobnog, odnosno hidrofilnog lijeka. Na brzinu oslobađanja utjecala je brzina rotacije lopatica u aparatu u koje je pokus izvođen, temperatura i volumem medija za oslobađanje. Metoda je upotrebljena in vitro praćenje oslobađanja ljekovite tvari iz liposomskih disperzija i gelova. In vitro oslobađanje dibukain baze ne pokazuje učinak naglog oslobađanja, a 5-fluorouracila pokazuje, s brzim inicijalnim oslobađanjem iza kojeg slijedi usporeno oslobađanje

Comparative Bioavailabilitv Studv of Two Brands of Terbutaline Sulphate Tablets in Healthy Human Volunteers

The purpose of this study was to evaluate the bioavailability of locally produced 2.5 mg terbutaline sulphate tablets (brand A ) relative to a reference product, Bricanyl 2.5 mg tablets (brand 6). The study was a single dose 5 mg randomized crossover one in 15 healthy volunteers in the fasting state. Urine was collected at intervals of 24 h. Total terbutaline excreted in urine as unchanged drug and as conjugates (sulphate and glucuronide) was determined by a developed and validated HPLC method. In-vitro characteristics of both brands were similar. Based on percent of the dose excreted in urine, the oral bioavailability ranged from 33.5% to 75.8% for both brands. Statistics were applied to judge bioequivalence according to USP 24 in-vivo bioequivalence guidance. Results indicated that brand A and B were bioequivalent and hence interchangeable in medical practice