Trial reportThe AAPS journal2021
Assessment of Drug Delivery Kinetics to Epidermal Targets In Vivo.
Trial report in The AAPS journal, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 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
7 citing papers in PubMed, 17 citations in OpenAlex.
- Pharmacokinetic Relevance of In Vitro Skin Models: Absorption, Cutaneous Distribution, Metabolism, and Clearance-like Removal in Dermal and Transdermal Drug Testing.Pharmaceutics · 2026Review
- Cutaneous pharmacokinetics of a volatile drug post-application to the skin.Drug delivery and translational research · 2026Article
- Refining Bioequivalence Assessment of Topical Drug Products for Local Action: A Comparative Analysis of Tape Stripping Methodologies.Pharmaceutics · 2026Review
- Dual-Cross-Linked Alginate Hydrogels as a Strategy to Improve the Antifungal Properties of Posaconazole.Pharmaceutics · 2025Article
- Quantification of Chemical Uptake into the Skin by Vibrational Spectroscopies and Stratum Corneum Sampling.Molecular pharmaceutics · 2023Article
- Raman Spectroscopic Tools to Probe the Skin-(Trans)dermal Formulation Interface.Molecular pharmaceutics · 2022Article
- Assessment of dermal bioavailability: predicting the input function for topical glucocorticoids using stratum corneum sampling.Drug delivery and translational research · 2022Article
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 at 2 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
It has proven challenging to quantify 'drug input' from a formulation to the viable skin because the epidermal and dermal targets of topically applied drugs are difficult, if not impossible, to access in vivo. Defining the drug input function to the viable skin with a straightforward and practical experimental approach would enable a key component of dermal pharmacokinetics to be characterised. It has been hypothesised that measuring drug uptake into and clearance from the stratum corneum (SC) by tape-stripping allows estimation of a topical drug's input function into the viable tissue. This study aimed to test this idea by determining the input of nicotine and lidocaine into the viable skin, following the application of commercialised transdermal patches to healthy human volunteers. The known input rates of these delivery systems were used to validate and assess the results from the tape-stripping protocol. The drug input rates from in vivo tape-stripping agreed well with the claimed delivery rates of the patches. The experimental approach was then used to determine the input of lidocaine from a marketed cream, a typical topical product for which the amount of drug absorbed has not been well-characterised. A significantly higher delivery of lidocaine from the cream than from the patch was found. The different input rates between drugs and formulations in vivo were confirmed qualitatively and quantitatively in vitro in conventional diffusion cells using dermatomed abdominal pig skin.
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.