Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30893852›Full record

ReviewPharmaceutics2019

Challenges and Recent Progress in Oral Drug Delivery Systems for Biopharmaceuticals.

Bahman Homayun, Xueting Lin, Hyo-Jick Choi

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Pharmaceutics, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 280 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
280citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

280 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. Article
  14. Review
  15. Article
  16. Review
  17. Review
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article

220 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors.

Bahman HomayunDepartment of Chemical and Materials Engineering, University of Alberta, Edmonton, AB T6G 1H9, Canada. homayun@ualberta.ca.
Xueting LinDepartment of Chemical and Materials Engineering, University of Alberta, Edmonton, AB T6G 1H9, Canada. xueting2@ualberta.ca.
Hyo-Jick ChoiDepartment of Chemical and Materials Engineering, University of Alberta, Edmonton, AB T6G 1H9, Canada. hyojick@ualberta.ca.ORCID 0000-0001-8233-5864

Funding

Alberta Innovates - Technology Futures AIF200900279
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Routes of drug administration and the corresponding physicochemical characteristics of a given route play significant roles in therapeutic efficacy and short term/long term biological effects. Each delivery method has favorable aspects and limitations, each requiring a specific delivery vehicles design. Among various routes, oral delivery has been recognized as the most attractive method, mainly due to its potential for solid formulations with long shelf life, sustained delivery, ease of administration and intensified immune response. At the same time, a few challenges exist in oral delivery, which have been the main research focus in the field in the past few years. The present work concisely reviews different administration routes as well as the advantages and disadvantages of each method, highlighting why oral delivery is currently the most promising approach. Subsequently, the present work discusses the main obstacles for oral systems and explains the most recent solutions proposed to deal with each issue.

Indexed as

biological barriersco-deliveryoral deliverysustained deliverythroughput

Identifiers

PMID30893852
PMCPMC6471246

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.