ArticlePharmaceutical nanotechnology2025
Preparation,
Article in Pharmaceutical nanotechnology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Nose-brain axis: A bridge from the nasal cavity to the central nervous system.Neural regeneration research · 2026Article
- Formulation of Self-Emulsifying Microemulsion for Acemetacin Using D-Optimal Design: Enteric-Coated Capsule for Targeted Intestinal Release and Bioavailability Enhancement.Pharmaceutics · 2025Article
- Thermosensitive Mucoadhesive Intranasal In Situ Gel of Risperidone for Nose-to-Brain Targeting: Physiochemical and Pharmacokinetics Study.Pharmaceuticals (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundLasmiditan (LAS) is a recently developed antimigraine drug and was approved in October, 2019 for the treatment of acute migraines; however, it suffers from low oral bioavailability, which is around 40%.
objectivesThis study aimed to improve the LAS bioavailability via formulation as nanoemulsionbased
methodsTwo successfully prepared nanoemulsion (NE) formulas, a and b, were selected for the incorporation of different percentages of pH-sensitive
resultsThe results showed that NEIGs 2 and 5 could be selected as the optimized NEIGs as both achieved 100% permeation within 20 min and then released within 25 and 35 min, respectively, thus achieving 3.3 folds with higher permeation percentages as compared to the AQS. Both NEIGs 2 and 5 exerted comparable release and permeation values as the corresponding NE a and b with more residence time in order to overcome the normal nasal physiological clearance. The values of C-max, Tmax, and AUC0- ∞ for NEIG 2 and NEIG 5 were 8066 ± 242 ng/ml, 0.75 ± 0.05 h, 19616.86 ± 589 ng. h/ml, and 7975.67 ± 239 ng/ml, 1.0 ± 0.05 h, 17912.36 ± 537 ng. h/ml, respectively, compared to the traditional AQS, which is equal to 4181.09 ± 125 ng/ml, 2 ± 0.2 h, and 8852.27 ± 266 ng. h/ml, respectively. It was discovered that NEIGs 2 and 5 had better intranasal delivery of LAS and could significantly (p < 0.05) achieve a higher value of permeability coefficient (3.3 folds) and 2.5 folds improvement in bioavailability when compared to AQS. The NE a, NE b, NEIG2, and NEIG5 formulations showed good stability at various temperatures. According to the nasal ciliotoxicity study, the nasal mucosal membrane, which was treated with NEIG 5, showed irritation with a bit of damage. However, damage was not observed when it was treated with NEIG 2, indicating the biocompatibility of the last one to be selected as the optimum formula.
conclusionNEIG 2 and NEIG 5 are promising new intranasal formulas with a faster onset of action and greater bioavailability than the oral dosage form (AQS). Finally, the selected optimum gold formula that will be ready for further clinical study is NEIG 2.
Indexed as
Identifiers
38173066What 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.