ArticleInternational journal of pharmaceutics: X2023
3D printing of amorphous solid dispersions: A comparison of fused deposition modeling and drop-on-powder printing.
Article in International journal of pharmaceutics: X, 2023. 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.
- Pharmaceutical Manufacturing with Additive Technology: A Key Driver of Industry 4.0 Integration.Recent advances in drug delivery and formulation · 2025Review
- Article
- Development of Mathematical Function Control-Based 3D Printed Tablets and Effect on Drug Release.Pharmaceutical research · 2024Article
- Beyond Color Boundaries: Pioneering Developments in Cholesteric Liquid Crystal Photonic Actuators.Micromachines · 2024Review
- Status of Polymer Fused Deposition Modeling (FDM)-Based Three-Dimensional Printing (3DP) in the Pharmaceutical Industry.Polymers · 2024Review
- Development of 3D-Printed Bicompartmental Devices by Dual-Nozzle Fused Deposition Modeling (FDM) for Colon-Specific Drug Delivery.Pharmaceutics · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Nowadays, a high number of pipeline drugs are poorly soluble and require solubility enhancement by e.g., manufacturing of amorphous solid dispersion. Pharmaceutical 3D printing has great potential in producing amorphous solid oral dosage forms. However, 3D printing techniques differ greatly in terms of processing as well as tablet properties. In this study, an amorphous formulation, which had been printed via Fused Deposition Modeling and drop-on-powder printing, also known as binder jetting, was characterized in terms of solid-state properties and physical stability. Solid state assessment was performed by differential scanning calorimetry, powder X-ray diffraction and polarized microscopy. The supersaturation performance of the amorphous solid dispersion was assessed via non-sink dissolution. We further evaluated both 3D printing techniques regarding their processability as well as tablet uniformity in terms of dimension, mass and content. Challenges and limitations of each 3D printing technique were discussed. Both techniques are feasible for the production of amorphous formulations. Results indicated that Fused Deposition Modeling is better suited for production, as the recrystallization tendency was lower. Still, filament production and printing presented a major challenge. Drop-on-powder printing can be a viable alternative for the production of amorphous tablets, when a formulation is not printable by Fused Deposition Modeling.
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.