Main Article Content
proper dissolution medium for glyburide (BCS Class II drug). Results of solubility data revealed that solubility increased with an increase in pH. Sink conditions were exhibited in the 0.05 M borate buffer pH 9.6, 0.05 M phosphate buffer pH 6.5 containing 0.1-2% (w/v) cetyl trimethyl ammonium bromide (CTAB) and 0.05 M phosphate buffer pH 7.4 containing 0.1- 2% CTAB (w/v), respectively. The 0.05 M phosphate buffer at pH 6.5 containing 0.1% CTAB (w/v) with an agitation speed of 50 rpm (USP II) showed a more discriminating drug release profile when compared with 0.05 M phosphate buffer at pH 7.4 containing 0.1% CTAB (w/v) with an agitation speed of 75 rpm. The spiked samples have shown better recovery at 50, 100 and 150% levels. There was no degradation, as observed in the mass spectrum of recovered dissolution samples when compared with the mass spectrum of standard drug solution, which promised that the method was specific and can be used for routine Quality Control analysis as well as for assessment of formulation variables in future dissolution studies of glyburide.
This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Attribution-Noncommercial 4.0 International License [CC BY-NC 4.0], which requires that reusers give credit to the creator. It allows reusers to distribute, remix, adapt, and build upon the material in any medium or format, for noncommercial purposes only.
Carstensen JT. Physico-chemical aspects of drug release. In Formulation
and Preparation of Dosage Forms, Proceedings of the 37th International
Congress of Pharmaceutical Sciences of F.I.P., The Hague, Netherlands,
Elsevier: Amsterdam; Sept 5â€“9, 1977.
Shah VP, Konecny JJ, Everett RL, McCullough B, Noorizadeh AC, Skelly
JP. In vitro dissolution profile of water-insoluble drug dosage forms in
the presence of surfactants. Pharm Res 1989;6:612-8.
Amidon GL, Lennernas H, Shah VP, Crison JR. A theoretical basis for a
biopharmaceutic drug classification: The correlation of in vitro drug
product dissolution and in vivo bioavailability. Pharm Res 1995;12:
Jinno J, Oh D, Crison JR, Amidon GL. Dissolution of ionizable water-
insoluble drugs: the combined effect of pH and surfactant. J Pharm
HoenerB, Benet LZ. In: Banker GS, Rhodes CT, editors. Modern
pharmaceutics. New York: Marcel Dekker; 1990. p. 143.
JorgensenED. Bhagwat. Pharm Sci Technol Today 1998;1:128-35.
Available from: http://www.drugscard.com. [cited in 2009].
Dissolution Method for Drugs, 2004, U.S. Department of Health and
Human Services, Food and Drug Administration, Center for Drug
Evaluation and Research (CDER)
Klein S, Wunderlich M, Dressman J, Stippler E. Development of
dissolution tests the basis of gastrointestinal physiology. Pharmaceutical
dissolution testing. In: Dressman J, editor. 1st ed. Taylor and Francis;
Gray V. Compendial testing equipment: Calibration, qualification and
sources of pharmaceutical dissolution testing. In: Dressman J, editor.
st ed. Taylor and Francis; 2005. p. 63.
Kramer J, Grady L, Gajendran J. Historical development of dissolution
testing. Pharmaceutical Dissolution Testing. In: Dressman J, editor. 1st
ed. Taylor and Francis; 2005. p. 28.
Moore JW, Flanner HH. Mathematical comparison of dissolution profiles.
Pharm Technol 1996;20:64-74.
Brown CK. Dissolution method development: An industry perspective.
Pharmaceutical Dissolution Testing. In: Dressman J, editor. 1st ed. Taylor
and Francis; 2005. p. 28.