Comparison of statistical analysis and Bayesian networks in the evaluation of dissolution performance of BCS Class II model drugs

Journal of Pharmaceutical Sciences

Volumn 94, Issue 12, 2005, Pages 2764-2776

  Wilson, Wendy I ^a   Peng, Yun ^b   Augsburger, Larry L ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF MARYLAND   (United States)

^b UNIVERSITY OF MARYLAND BALTIMORE COUNTY   (United States)

Author keywords

Bayesian Networks; Biopharmaceutical Classification System; Box Behnken experimental design; Dissolution; Encapsulation; Formulation; Hard gelatin capsules; In silico modeling; Low solubility drugs; Similarity factor

Indexed keywords

BUFFER; CARBAMAZEPINE; CHLORPROPAMIDE; CROSCARMELLOSE SODIUM; DIAZEPAM; DODECYL SULFATE; EXCIPIENT; GELATIN; HYDROCHLORIC ACID; IBUPROFEN; KETOPROFEN; LACTOSE; MICROCRYSTALLINE CELLULOSE; NAPROXEN; PIROXICAM; POTASSIUM DIHYDROGEN PHOSPHATE; PRUV; STEARYL FUMARATE SODIUM; SURFACTANT; UNCLASSIFIED DRUG;

ACIDITY; ALKALINITY; APPARATUS; ARTICLE; BAYES THEOREM; BIOPHARMACEUTICS CLASSIFICATION SYSTEM; BOX BEHNKEN EXPERIMENTAL DESIGN; COMPARATIVE STUDY; DRUG CAPSULE; DRUG CLASSIFICATION; DRUG FORMULATION; DRUG SOLUBILITY; EXPERIMENT; MODEL; SIMILARITY FACTOR; STATISTICAL ANALYSIS; STATISTICAL PARAMETERS;

EID: 33144454819     PISSN: 00223549     EISSN: 15206017     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1002/jps.20358     Document Type: Article

References (15)

1. Noyes AS, Whitney WR. 1897. The rate of solution of solid substances in their own solutions. J Amer Chem Soc 19:930-934.
2. Amidon GL, Lennernas H, Shah VP, Crison JR. 1995. A theoretical basis for a Biopharmaceutic Drug Classification: The correlation of in vitro drug product dissolution and in vivo bioavailability. Pharm Res 12:413-420.
3. Jensen FV. 1996. An introduction to Bayesian networks. London: University College Press.
4. Jansen R, Yu HY, Greenbaum D, Kluger Y, Krogan NJ, Chung SB, Emili A, Snyder M, Greenblatt JF, Gerstein M. 2003. A Bayesian network approach for predicting protein-protein interactions from genomic data. Science 302:449-453.
5. de Campos LM, Gamez JA, Moral S. 2001. Accelerating chromosome evaluation for partial abductive inference in Bayesian networks by means of explanation set absorption. Int J Approx Reason 27:121-142.
6. Luciani D, Marchesi M, Bertolini G. 2003. The role of Bayesian networks in the diagnosis of pulmonary embolism. J Thromb Haemost 1:698-707.
7. Galan SF, Aguado F, Diaz FJ. 2001. NasoNet, joining Bayesian networks and time to model nasopharyngeal cancer spread. Lect Notes Artif Int 2101:207-216.
8. Richesson R, Wang W. 1999. The use of Bayesian networks and decision analysis in solving clinical decision for the administration of antiretroviral agents to prevent HIV seroconversion following an occupational percutaneous exposure. J Am Med Inform Assn:1145.
9. Kaplan SA. 1972. Biopharmaceutical considerations in drug formulation design and evaluation. Drug Metab Rev 1:15-34.
10. Polli JE, Rekhi GS, Augsburger LL, Shah VP. 1997. Methods to compare dissolution profiles and a rationale for wide dissolution specifications for metoprolol tartrate tablets. J Pharm Sci 86:690-700.
11. Guidance for Industry: 1995. Immediate release solid oral dosage forms-Scale-up and post-approval changes: Chemistry, manufacturing, and controls, in vitro dissolution testing, in vivo bioequivalence documentation CDER-FDA, Rockville, MD.
12. Box GP, Hunter JS. 1978. Statistics for experimenters. New York: John Wiley and Sons.
13. McGee BJ, Kennedy DR, Walker GCC. 1970. Some factors affecting release and availability of drugs from hard gelatin capsules. J Pharm Sci 50:1430-1433.
14. Mehta AM, Augsburger LL. 1981. A preliminary study of the effect of slug hardness on drug dissolution from hard gelatin capsules filled on an automatic capsule-filling machine. Int J Pharm 7:327-334.
15. Pan Xiahong. 2002. The application of porous adsorbents to increase the dissolution rate of low solubility drugs Ph.D. Dissertation, University of Maryland, Baltimore.