ArticleAAPS PharmSciTech2015
The influence of secondary processing on the structural relaxation dynamics of fluticasone propionate.
Article in AAPS PharmSciTech, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
6 citing papers in PubMed.
- Scale-Up and Postapproval Changes in Orally Inhaled Drug Products: Scientific and Regulatory Considerations.Journal of aerosol medicine and pulmonary drug delivery · 2025Review
- Complexities related to the amorphous content of lactose carriers.International journal of pharmaceutics: X · 2023Review
- Advancements in the Design and Development of Dry Powder Inhalers and Potential Implications for Generic Development.Pharmaceutics · 2022Review
- A Systematic Approach in the Development of the Morphologically-Directed Raman Spectroscopy Methodology for Characterizing Nasal Suspension Drug Products.The AAPS journal · 2021Article
- Addressing the Regulatory and Scientific Challenges with Generic Orally Inhaled Drug Products.Pharmaceutical medicine · 2020Review
- Physical stability of dry powder inhaler formulations.Expert opinion on drug delivery · 2020Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
This study investigated the structural relaxation of micronized fluticasone propionate (FP) under different lagering conditions and its influence on aerodynamic particle size distribution (APSD) of binary and tertiary carrier-based dry powder inhaler (DPI) formulations. Micronized FP was lagered under low humidity (LH 25 C, 33% RH [relative humidity]), high humidity (HH 25°C, 75% RH) for 30, 60, and 90 days, respectively, and high temperature (HT 60°C, 44% RH) for 14 days. Physicochemical, surface interfacial properties via cohesive-adhesive balance (CAB) measurements and amorphous disorder levels of the FP samples were characterized. Particle size, surface area, and rugosity suggested minimal morphological changes of the lagered FP samples, with the exception of the 90-day HH (HH90) sample. HH90 FP samples appeared to undergo surface reconstruction with a reduction in surface rugosity. LH and HH lagering reduced the levels of amorphous content over 90-day exposure, which influenced the CAB measurements with lactose monohydrate and salmeterol xinafoate (SX). CAB analysis suggested that LH and HH lagering led to different interfacial interactions with lactose monohydrate but an increasing adhesive affinity with SX. HT lagering led to no detectable levels of the amorphous disorder, resulting in an increase in the adhesive interaction with lactose monohydrate. APSD analysis suggested that the fine particle mass of FP and SX was affected by the lagering of the FP. In conclusion, environmental conditions during the lagering of FP may have a profound effect on physicochemical and interfacial properties as well as product performance of binary and tertiary carrier-based DPI formulations.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.