ArticleAAPS PharmSciTech2024
Conventional vs Mechanistic IVIVC: A Comparative Study in Establishing Dissolution Safe Space for Extended Release Formulations.
Article in AAPS PharmSciTech, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Exploration of IVIVC Deconvolution Methods in a PBPK Platform: Case Example with Tofacitinib.The AAPS journal · 2026Trial
- Model-Integrated Bioequivalence (MIBE) in Generic Drug Research: Can We Ease the Bioequivalence Burden?Pharmaceutics · 2026Review
- Leveraging Model Integrated Bioequivalence (MIBE) to Address Regulatory Concerns and Waive Repeat Bioequivalence Studies-A Case Study with Clopidogrel.Journal of clinical pharmacology · 2026Article
- A Semi-Mechanistic Physiologically Based Biopharmaceutics Model to Describe Complex and Saturable Absorption of Metformin: Justification of Dissolution Specifications for Extended Release Formulation.AAPS PharmSciTech · 2024Article
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
The use of in vitro-in vivo correlation (IVIVC) for extended release oral dosage forms is an important technique that can avoid potential clinical studies. IVIVC has been a topic of discussion over the past two decades since the inception of USFDA guidance. It has been routinely used for biowaivers, establishment of dissolution safe space and clinically relevant dissolution specifications, for supporting site transfers, scale-up and post approval changes. Although conventional or mathematical IVIVC is routinely used, other approach such as mechanistic IVIVC can be of attractive choice as it integrates all the physiological aspects. In the present study, we have performed comparative evaluation of mechanistic and conventional IVIVC for establishment of dissolution safe space using divalproex sodium and tofacitinib extended release formulations as case examples. Conventional IVIVC was established using Phoenix and mechanistic IVIVC was set up using Gastroplus physiologically based biopharmaceutics model (PBBM). Virtual dissolution profiles with varying release rates were constructed around target dissolution profile using Weibull function. After internal and external validation, the virtual dissolution profiles were integrated into mechanistic and conventional IVIVC and safe space was established by absolute error and T/R ratio's methods. The results suggest that mechanistic IVIVC yielded wider safe space as compared to conventional IVIVC. The results suggest that a mechanistic approach of establishing IVIVC may be a flexible approach as it integrates physiological aspects. These findings suggest that mechanistic IVIVC has wider potential as compared to conventional IVIVC to gain wider dissolution safe space and thus can avoid potential clinical studies.
Indexed as
Identifiers
38806735What 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.